Judging controversy

Spun Silver · Feb 11, 2007

In defense of Joannie

chuckm said:
So many skaters are mechanical and don't show much affect, so I think the judges are happy to see a skater who looks as if she's enjoying what she's doing.Joannie Rochette, OTOH, looks as if she's enduring a trial by fire. She never looks as if she's doing something that gives her pleasure.

Joannie's FS program does not suit her, and that in turn compromises her ability to sell it. I think she needs a different choreographer. Wilson's choreography has worked extremely well for Buttle, but he is naturally more musical than Joannie, and she is unable to make the most of the difficult choreography. She is overwhelmed by it, and that leads to the lack of confidence.

I don't think this is quite fair to Joannie. Few skaters are as happy as Emily. Joannie has a cooler, more reserved temperament, which is fine by me.

I'm not keen on her current LP but look at 2005 Canadian Nationals. This is not a skater who is either unmusical, overwhelmed by difficult choreography, or a poor match for David Wilson. This is a superb athlete going all out and mastering a big program both technically and artistically. It's a little too soon to give up on her, IMO. Go, Joannie!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17uTwCAUtrw

mylastduchess · Feb 11, 2007

:sheesh:

chuckm said:
In the first place, I do not have to justify anything.

If you actually looked at the PCS scores, and if you read my entire post, you would see that Jeff got higher PCS scores in Skating Skills, Transitions and Choreography. I said Evan deserved his higher scores in Performance/Execution and Interpretation because he skated with great confidence, intensity and expression while Jeff held back in those areas because he was not confident of his technical elements.

Jeff himself said after the competition that he had not skated his best. In the GoldenSkate Day 3 article in this forum, Buttle said:
"Overall tonight, it wasn't obviously the skate that I wanted...The jumps went pretty good except for the Axels. I just didn't commit to them. I definitely need to go home and train harder and try to make up for lost time."

"I don't think I was as aggressive as at Nationals in the long program"..."Definitely in the end I was feeling the altitude"

The PCS does not per se reward "artistry" but the artistry of this particular performance. While Jeff has great artistry, this performance was not one of his best, and he was the first one to admit it.

Well then I guess the difference in the PCS jeff won like choreography(a david wislon masterpiece) has miniscule difference over Evan's overused Carmen...

gio · Feb 11, 2007

hockeyfan228 said:
What CoP does is make the marking transparent, something that was impossible under the 6.0/OBO system, except when judges clearly didn't take off the mandatory deductions in the SP.

Oh, yeah very transparent!!! But where???? We can't associate the judges with the marks given!! Yes, very transparent!!! :scratch:

gio · Feb 11, 2007

6.75 for Jeff??? It is better that I don't comment!!!
I'll say just this = IMO, he is one of the most artistic male skaters!!!

yelyoh · Feb 11, 2007

As I wrote on another thread, if a skater (if this case Evan) uses a recycled program from the year before (or before that) with virtually no changes then that skater should not be given as much credit relative to the skater who comes in with a new program (if this case Jeff). If the older program (from the Evan skater) is a better program (then say the Jeff program) then it should be rewarded for being a good program but given deductions for being recycled. The Evan type skater should be given deductions on choreoraphy, interpretation and performance. I say a one point deduction on those three components. Jeff's choreography is more intricate that Evan's and is therefore more of a challenge to pull off much the same as doing a more difficult jump. If the more difficult jumps are rewarded when pulled off then so should the chor be when it is more challenging and the interp and perf when executed.

As far as Emily's PC scores, she is showing the same joie du vivre when she skates as Tara did during the 98 Olys. Sell it with a big smile, and attack, and the PC scores will skyrocket.

Yes, Joe, we should have separate panels. I think the COP is moving in the right direction but is very far from the ultimate destination of fair judging. Of course, that begs the question of whether or not fair and/or accurate judging was ever the goal.

sussweden · Feb 11, 2007

Interpertation for me is to show emotions and to skate the way so it goes with the music not skaitng with attach and joy if the music isn´t reflecting this (just a comment in general not to any specific performance here). Tes and Pcs will reflect eachother a little (and maybe not in all components) but not som much as it does in the comps I see.

"Funnily enough, it's working better for Dance, not perfect, but generally better than for Singles especially."

agree!

/Lena

Joesitz (RIP) · Feb 11, 2007

When you look at the breakdown of what the Performance Component Scores are all about, do you honestly believe all those 12 judges are capable of taking into account each item and evaluating it?

My steadfast answer to all this is to get a separate panel of judges who have some sort of artistic background whereby they understand flow, music, rhythm, pacing, speed, and how well that is all packaged.

Throw out the Technical Assistant. Who says he can not err? Let the Tech judges decide on the elements.

Joe

gio · Feb 11, 2007

Joesitz said:
My steadfast answer to all this is to get a separate panel of judges who have some sort of artistic background whereby they understand flow, music, rhythm, pacing, speed, and how well that is all packaged.

Throw out the Technical Assistant. Who says he can not err? Let the Tech judges decide on the elements.

Joe

Good ideas, Joe!!! :clap:

I hope that someone of the ISU reads our threads!!!

chuckm · Feb 11, 2007

mylastduchess said:
Well then I guess the difference in the PCS jeff won like choreography(a david wislon masterpiece) has miniscule difference over Evan's overused Carmen...

Maybe it was a minuscule difference, but that was because Evan executed his choreography aggressively, with attack and confidence, while Jeff wasn't able to give his best to the choreography because he was too wrapped up in his technical concerns. Jeff alluded to that in his comments about his performance.

If great choreography isn't well performed, it isn't going to get the highest possible scores. Jeff didn't deliver to his potential so some of the effect of his choreography was lost. Maybe Evan's choreography is simpler, but he made the most of it with his performance. Capisce?

Bravura skating is always going to have the edge on lackluster skating, regardless of the talents of the choreographer.

kittycat26 · Feb 11, 2007

chuckm said:
She also gets the high PCS scores because she shows enthusiasm and the dreaded "spunk" . So many skaters are mechanical and don't show much affect, so I think the judges are happy to see a skater who looks as if she's enjoying what she's doing.

It sounds like the Tara Lipinski effect to me. I unfortunately was never a big supporter of the view that spaz and spunk should equate to heightened second mark scores. Unfortunately it is a view the judges have embraced, and Lipinski and the Hughes sisters are pinnacles of evidence of this.

julietvalcouer · Feb 11, 2007

Chuckm, can we just form a support group? Give me committment and enthusiasm over cautious "art" (so-called) any day.

Personally I think Emily gets a lot of hate because she's also not an anoerxic waif, but you're absolutely right--people like to watch confident people. This includes the judges. At last year's nationals, I happened to turn on Ladies SP when Emily was skating, and my first thought was "Who's that, because wow, she's on fire?" She wasn't classicaly graceful, but she looked like she was having a great time. This year, there's much the same response for me (despite my urge to take a pair of scissors to that messy ponytail.) I much prefer it to Kimmie's overthinking.

chuckm · Feb 11, 2007

kittycat26 said:
It sounds like the Tara Lipinski effect to me. I unfortunately was never a big supporter of the view that spaz and spunk should equate to heightened second mark scores. Unfortunately it is a view the judges have embraced, and Lipinski and the Hughes sisters are pinnacles of evidence of this.

Hughes sisters? Sarah was never anything like Emily as a skater. Sarah was a consistent workhorse, who landed all of her jumps most of the time, even though she had flawed technique. But Sarah was not a great performer, the only exception being her Olympic FS. Sarah had no pizzazz, while Emily is all pizzazz, with usually flawed technical content. Even in her 4CC skate, Emily left out the money combinations and landed just 3T2T, thrown in on the fly.

What Sarah and Emily both share is confidence in their skating, and that does count with the judges.

Emily's enthusiasm helps her with the judges, but that still won't make up for lack of content. As long as Kimmie can skate as confidently as Emily (but without the ta-da) AND perform the more technically difficult elements under pressure, she will come out on top. And that's as it should be.

slutskayafan21 · Feb 11, 2007

Just out of curiosity, has Emily beaten Meissner since the 2005 World juniors? It seems to be ABC and Fox have been trying to hype the rivalry either way, anytime I have seen those two in a competition together.

chuckm · Feb 11, 2007

Some will point to the fact that Emily beat Kimmie in the SP at 2006 US Nationals and at the 2007 4CC SP, but that doesn't mean much in the scheme of things, since being behind in the SP seems to fire Kimmie up in the FS.

But no, Emily hasn't beaten Kimmie in a competition since JW 2005, and they've gone head-to-head at 2005 US Nationals, 2005 Campbell's, 2006 US Nationals, 2006 Olympics, 2006 Worlds, 2006 Skate America, 2007 US Nationals and 2007 4CC.

R.D. · Feb 11, 2007

slutskayafan21 said:
Just out of curiosity, has Emily beaten Meissner since the 2005 World juniors? It seems to be ABC and Fox have been trying to hype the rivalry either way, anytime I have seen those two in a competition together.

Fox? You mean ESPN, right?

chuckm · Feb 11, 2007

I just read an article somewhere (sorry I forget where) about Emily's performance, and how she expects to add the 3/3s in for Worlds. Question: if she left out the 3Z2T and 3F2T at 4CC, how can she be planning to upgrade them to 3/3s for Worlds? The one and only combo she did at 4CC was 3T2T!

R.D. · Feb 11, 2007

wow, if that's true kudos to Em as I was just saying in the other thread that she would need to step it up on jumps. But sadly I think those will be left on practice ice.

attyfan · Feb 11, 2007

silver.blades said:
The only thing less transparent under the CoP than the 6.0 is who gave which marks to whom. Other than that everything is very obvious and clear. When someone is over marked or undermarked, EVERYONE knows. (unless of course opinions clash )
If the ISU could just do away with anonomous judges this system would be much improved. And the judges need a crash course in how to mark the PC.

But opinions do clash -- appparently, Jeff's PCS scores on the same category ranged from 6.75 to 8.00. Wouldn't it be significant if the 6.75 was given by (a) a judge who is giving low marks to everyone or (b) the American judge?

R.D. · Feb 11, 2007

You know, I'm really not sure I see the point of hiding the judges' identities (or not correlating the marks with the judges who gave them out). There is still controversy and that's not going to stop. I don't see how this can benefit skating in the long run. If the ISU thought that it would help to remove the "subjectivity" boy were they wrong. The only reason I could think of is if they have something to hide.

Mathman · Feb 11, 2007

The supposed rationale was that if the judges were anonymous then they wouldn't have to go along with the deals brokered by their federations.

For instance, suppose we had had the benefit of secret judging at Salt Lake City. Gailhauget calls up LeGougne and says, OK, I just got off the phone with Piseev and the deal's on.

LeGougne could have said, "Oui, boss," but then doublecrossed him by voting for Sale and Pelletier anyway, hehe, and no one would have been be the wiser.

In this way, fair judging would have prevailed.

Something like that. :scratch:

Judging controversy

Spun Silver

mylastduchess

Guest

gio

gio

yelyoh

sussweden

Joesitz (RIP)

gio

chuckm

kittycat26

Match Penalty

julietvalcouer

chuckm

slutskayafan21

Match Penalty

chuckm

R.D.

chuckm

R.D.

attyfan

Custom Title

R.D.

Mathman

Similar threads

Connect with us