What do you like/not like about the ISU judging system?
Like: I like the way they distinguish between a downgraded quad and a plain triple. Both receive the base value of the lower jump. However, if you really go for a quad toe, but it’s underrotated, the “box” for that jumping pass is designated “4T<” and it does not count as a 3T for Zayak purposes.
On the other hand, if you just don’t feel right on the jump and decide to bail, doing a simple 3T instead, then you get a further penalty, because you run into problems later on if you had planned something like a 3Lz/3T or 3F/3T.
Don’t like: It seems to me that the penalty for underrotation is much more severe than the penalties for other equally bad errors.
If you underrotate your triple Lutz by more than 90 degrees, you end up with 1.9 points for a double (or less, depending on GOE).
But if you do the worst Lutz of all time, with a terrible flutz, a goofy air position, and a fall on the landing, you still get 2.0 points provided you somehow make it around two-and-three-quarters times.
Do like: everything with regards to ice dancing where the judging has improved 5x over.
Dont like: everything with regards to mens, womens, or pairs. I dont like even one thing about the new system in any of the events outside of ice dancing.
Did I make my feelings clear enough.
I don't like the way its making everyone in singles look like they are doing the same stuff. Everyone has the same jumps spins & spirals. No one really stands out as an idividual anymore. Skating is becoming boring.
Since I've decided to be a more overall positive person, I shall start with what I like:
I like that techinal difficulty is rewarded and skaters are being pushed to do more in terms of steps and transitions. I also like that more athletic skaters are no longer penalized for having stronger jumps vs. looking pretty on the ice (yes, I'm one of those who has never gotten over Elvis not winning the olympic gold medal)
I don't like is that falls don't count as heavily as w/ 6.0 ala Jeff B's faux quad. I also don't like that all long programs look alike... esp. the ladies and the spins look awful. Gimmie a fast, blurry scratch spin without the wacky positions anyday. Same with spirals... One more doggy at hydrant sprial and I just might lose it! I also don't like the lack of clean skating. Since when did skating cleanly become an afterthought?
Mr. Michelle Kwan
Not like: That Speedy is in charge of it.
Beliver in Sasha's Perfect Program
i dislike that it is making tha skaters change position every second in a spin... so every spin becomes a combo... and when the positions are not done well the spin gets slow and labourus.
I like the way that it has pushed the ladies to do triple triples... i don't think that they got enough credit before and that's why almost nobody did them reguaraly. I like that now each program has to have a spiral sequnece and step sequence instead of the just do whatever you feel like of the 6.0 system... you just didn't see as as many spirals and step sequences.
Vancouver 2010, 247.23, Bronze
I like: ppl actually skate/ move more.
I don't like: awarding all those wooden tech skaters with PCSs they absolutely don't deserve. I know, they constantly work on their artistic side, the result is pathetic though, most of the time.
I like that they downgrade a jump that has not been completed. I do not like that they do not upgrade an overrotation. Joubert has a tendency to overrotate from what I noticed.
I don't like any attempt of an element as reason to give partial credit. either the skater does the jump by definition or the jump failed to score. No problem, the skater has many other elements to make up for it. Of course, zooming total points will decline.
technical ability should be taken out of the PCS scoes.
All judges must write an explanation of their scores and meet in a Press Conference after a championship.
In theory, I think this kind of system can do a very good job of rewarding skaters appropriately for exactly what they do best, well, not so well, and so on much more accurately than just ranking with two marks.
In practice, I don't think it's there yet. Primarily because 1) the well-balanced program rules for the LPs and some of the level descriptions are much more restrictive than they need to be and reward skaters as much for following the rules as for what they actually do, and 2) the judging community is still figuring out the appropriate strategy for awarding program component scores.
I think 1) could be solved by rewriting some of the specific rules -- I have my own suggestions and I'm sure many others do as well. Some of it just depends on what the rule-makers and the technical committee want to reward and their opinions may not necessarily agree with mine. But each year some of the rule changes move in directions I'd like to see (while others may move further away).
2) will take experience and continued training and discussions about how to conceptualize each mark separately and developing a consensus about the standards expected for 4.0, 6.0, or 8.0 in each. Already, though, I think TES and PCS are judged much more independently than the technical and presentation marks were under the old system.
So it's still very much a work in progress and I'm hopeful that as the new system evolves it will find ways to accommodate flexibility and precision at the same time.
Meanwhile, I think the best thing about the new system in its current state is the detailed feedback in the protocols, so skaters can see exactly what they are and aren't getting credit for.
For example, when the latest changes to the singles/pairs rules came out, with 8 revolutions in position without change added as a spin feature and loops added to the list of turns counting toward varied/complex footwork, I wondered whether anyone had been reading some thoughts I'd typed up.
Originally Posted by gkelly
Vancouver 2010, 247.23, Bronze
I too would love to see it happen.
Originally Posted by Joesitz
~ Figure Skating Is My Passion ~
I am from the old school of figure skating. To me a six is still a perfect mark. I don't know how to gage "perfection" under the new marking system. Figure skating is still the same no matter how it is judged.
There is a lot of truth in that. It is so rare that points make the difference between a winner in CoP, and a judges' Ordinal. However, there is, at least, a reason for debate with CoP.
Originally Posted by Ladskater
I absolutely do not like anonymity of the judges and the non-accountability to the public. And calling Cinquanta "speedy". I know it's a nickname due to his previous speed skating but the nickname connotes something cute and likable neither of which he is.
I always thought the name "Speedy" sounded more sly and slick than cute and cuddly.
Originally Posted by Jo1
Actually, I kind of like the guy. He inherited a sport whose popularity was in decline due to global societal trends far beyond anyone's control (ice princesses -- out; Serena Williams -- in). He inherited an unwieldy organization of bickering special interests whose culture and history of cheating, corruption and back-room shenanigans was so ingrained that everyone just took it for granted.
Although he is the CEO, he serves at the pleasure of the very National Federations that he is supposed to rein in. He is expected somehow to stir up public interest in a sport that the public has become apathetic about, and to keep the sport solvent when there is no money coming in and little prospect of things improving in the future.
Maybe Mr. C. will figure out a way to latch on to Apolo Ohno and use his new fame as a ballroom dancer to stir up interest in speed skating.
PS. I agree about anonymous judging.