Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP

  1. #1
    thvudragon
    Guest

    Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    www.iceskatingintnl.com/c...altext.htm

    Utter crap if you ask me. Many of his statements are outright WRONG. Read it for yourself, it's quite a work of fiction .

    TV

  2. #2
    Lanechka
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    I agree. Crapola!

  3. #3
    sk8ing lady2001
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    I couldn't agree with you more.

  4. #4
    DonnaML
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    I totally disagree with your acessment. He has hit the head on all that is wrong with the CoP. It will totally change the sport. As a fan of 50 years standing, I personally will hate it and it will do nothing to change the judging,only make it worse. Look what has happened to Gymnastics.

  5. #5
    Joesitz
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    Rossano - Who is he? Who was he? Who does he hope to be? I'll read this more carefully some other time.

    <em>"Gone are the days of the Michelle Kwan second mark." </em> I presume this will give the edge to Carolina.

    Joe

  6. #6
    thvudragon
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    <blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I totally disagree with your acessment. He has hit the head on all that is wrong with the CoP. It will totally change the sport. As a fan of 50 years standing, I personally will hate it and it will do nothing to change the judging,only make it worse. Look what has happened to Gymnastics. [/quote]
    Well, if it were up to you, figures would still count for 80% of the score, and there would be no Short program. Of course things are going to change.

    Also, if you knew anything about the CoP at all, you would know that many of the hypotheticals that he proposes are already answered in communication 1207, something I'm sure Mr. Rossano conveniently ignored. For example, Mr Rossano asks
    <blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>When does a combination become a sequence, or a sequence two solo jumps?[/quote]
    This is answered, on page 22 of ISU communication 1207 in the following.
    <blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>A jump sequence may consist of any number of jumps. Between the jumps, there can be turns, simple jumps, but NO STROKING. Only ONE rotation on the ice from the landing of the previous jump to the entry of the next jump is allowed [/quote]
    seems quite clear to me. There are many others, but I won't dwell on those yet.

    Joe, Mr. Rossano gave this presentation at a PSA meeting apparently. I forgot his position exactly.

    TV


  7. #7
    DonnaML
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    I did not say that changes should not be made just not these changes. The code of points is not good for the sport. BTW do not put words in my mouth. I have watched this sport evolve over the years and for the most part the chganges have been good. School figures were good for the sport but not for 80% of the score. I and many others would like to see them return,perhaps for qualifing. Better than the present, let them be 20%, the short 30% and the Long 50%. Too much of the code of points is slanted towards jumps and not enough toward the other aspects of skating. Rossano also said that it is a changing animal so what is today it won't be tomorrow. You seem to think that your take on this report is the only one . So you are sarcastic to me because I disagree with you. I do know a lot about skating from both watching and participating, I am now aged and handicapped so I can no longer skate. But I did for 45 years.

  8. #8
    mpal2
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    He has gotten a little dramatic, but I thought he also had some valid points.


    <strong>The system is expensive and complex. So much so the ISU is ignoring its rule that requires two redundant systems for its scoring systems.</strong>

    That is a very valid point. Anyone who works with computers knows that backup, backup, backup is critical.

    <strong>New officials. The judges still judge, but their role is more like that of a clerk. The referee job is split in two.A new position is created. The Technical Specialist, also referred to as the Caller or Spotter...The single Caller judges enough points to move skaters around by several places. The Caller must display an extraordinary perfection of judgement in order not to corrupt the results. Far more than an individual judge.</strong>

    This area has always been disturbing to me. The caller decides what's in the program, with a Technical Controller double checking him. Under the new system, there are only 2 people determining the base score of a skater. Yes, that would scare me if I were a competitor.

    <strong>"The point values will define the sport. Competitors are not going to waste their energy on things that earn few or no points and will naturally concentrate on the things that earn the most points. Where did the point values come from?"</strong>

    I agree with that question. I don't think I've heard an explanation of how the base points were decided.

    <strong>Jumps executed in the second half of a program get an extra 10% credit. Not difficult spins or fast one-foot footwork though. Just jumps. </strong>

    Who ordered the jumping beans?


    <strong>There is no such thing as a failed element. A fall can earn up to the full base mark of the element. A fall on triple Axel earns up to 7.5 points – equivalent to about 2-3 places. A fall on quad Lutz (and we’ve seen a few of those) can earn 11 points which is more than an adequately executed quad toe loop and as much as an outstanding quad toe loop. This is a complete reversal of current rules and practices. No other sport rewards failure. Why is skating going to start now?</strong>

    Exactly. Why is skating rewarding failure? Big risk means big reward or big failure. It's life. Why should a failed attempt be worth more than successful elements?


    I haven't completely rejected the Code of Points itself, but I'm still against the way the ISU has introduced the Code of Points. I just think there are too many issues left unresolved and unexplained to make it a reasonable scoring method for the 2003/2004 Grand Prix Series.

    PS: Edited to make the quotes stand out better.

  9. #9
    Dave Amorde
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    Dr. Rossano has a phD in Mathmatics, is an active skating judge, and a member of the Glacier Falls FSC in Southern California. He knows his stuff, and many of his criticisms are right on the money. How important any of those points are to you is your own decision to make. In addition, whether good or bad, there can be no denying that CoP is a major upheaval of the sport. Considering that this whole movement gained momentum solely because of the events in SLC, it seems like the ISU is swatting flies with a cannon. Whatever.
    Skaters with the talent and training to be successful at the international level have devoted their entire lives (and their families') to the sport. They deserve to have this process marched through with a bit more caution. CoP may eventually become the greatest thing to happen to freeskating (though I doubt it), but the current rush to implement it virtually assures that the competitors will pay a heavy price for it over the next few years.

  10. #10
    mpal2
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    Just adding a couple more points.

    1. Redundant systems - I can't stress the importance of backup systems. We have 3 test instances at work which we regularly use before trying anything in the live system. I killed all 3 test instances, had to wait a week for the refresh and then killed a 4th test instance before I got what I needed.

    2. The Caller and Technical Controller - It does help that skaters turn in the planned elements of their program, but sometimes improvisation happens.
    points were decided.

    3. Determination of base marks - I may have missed the article that explained the basis of the base marks. If anyone has the link, I would apprecate it.

    4. Only jumps executed in the second half of a program get an extra 10% credit - I wonder if putting spins first instead of at the end of the program should be harder. There is a reason why the scratch spins are usually the last element of the program. Maybe the skaters are used to the feeling though.

    5. Failed attempts still receive points - I can understand more points for the harder elements, but failure to complete is failure to complete. It isn't good enough.



  11. #11
    Shallah.K
    Guest

    I don't like the rush to use CoP


    first off they should have a firm set of rules of how to deal with cheating. The 6.0 system does not drive judges crazy and force them to cheat so changing from 6.0 to CoP for that reason is not a good one IMO.

    Second if CoP is an improvement in judging they need to repeatedly and openly test it so the skaters know that all the bugs are worked out and that when compared to the existing system the results are at least as good if not better.

    Thirdly they are only giving judges a few classes in CoP when it took them years to get the former system down to second nature. Judges have to prove they know what they are doing through years of trial judging before they can judge major competitions. It is unfair to the judges to expect them to be able to have a totally new system memorized in this short of time. It is unfair to the skaters with tens of thousands of $$$ on the line. How many people would enjoy having their work evaluated by a halftrained supervisor who's mistakes could mean the difference between a good paycheck or nothing?

  12. #12
    Ptichka
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    <blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>"The point values will define the sport. Competitors are not going to waste their energy on things that earn few or no points and will naturally concentrate on the things that earn the most points. Where did the point values come from?"[/quote]
    Half the score is still presentation. Not just that, but it is now divided into its 5 parts: Skating skills, Transitions, Performance/Execution, Choreography, Interpretation.

    Transitions are defined as follows (skipping over ice dance):
    • Difficulty and quality of steps linking elements.
    • Creativity and originality of steps linking elements
    • Originality and difficulty of entrances and exits of elements

    "Choreography" is defined as follows:
    • Harmonious composition of the program
    • Conformity of elements, steps and movements to the music
    • Originality, difficulty and variety of program pattern
    • Distribution of highlights
    • Utilization of space and ice surface

    Also, "Performance/Execution" includes "variation of speed". I think that should do plenty to encourage various elements.

  13. #13
    thvudragon
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    Actually, Presentation is not half of the total score. If a skater performs perfectly, lets say MK's TRV at worlds, Tech would be higher.

    Many people say testing is needed, I think that's what the GP series is for, It's being tested. Also, I think parallel testing would be a bad idea, because we would have endless wuzrobbeds. I'm going to wait for the GP season to really make a strong opinion of the CoP. I think people should wait.

    TV

  14. #14
    SammieJ
    Guest

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    <blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><strong>Dr. Rossano has a phD in Mathmatics, is an active skating judge, and a member of the Glacier Falls FSC in Southern California. He</strong>[/quote]

    Yes, and doesn't he work for NASA, or did? I read an article on his work with comets (I think it was) on the NASA web-site once.

  15. #15
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,356

    Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP


    <blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Many people say testing is needed, I think that's what the GP series is for, It's being tested. Also, I think parallel testing would be a bad idea, because we would have endless wuzrobbeds. I'm going to wait for the GP season to really make a strong opinion of the CoP. I think people should wait.[/quote]

    ITA. People should wait. So far most criticises I've heard could be improved by adjusting the points assigned to the elements or critirias. I'm glad ISU make the first step to test it out at GP events. No system was perfect when it first born. Give them time to improve.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Article on the Marshall's Challenge
    By R.D. in forum 2004-05 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 04-20-2005, 10:01 AM
  2. IMHO, easier for Michelle to improve under COP than 6.0 system
    By apache88 in forum 2004-05 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 03-22-2005, 03:08 PM
  3. Now that you've seen it
    By ChiSk8Fan in forum 2004-05 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 03-06-2005, 09:51 AM
  4. Pairs Make Painful Transition to COP?
    By dorispulaski in forum 2004-05 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-10-2004, 12:35 PM
  5. Suggested Revisions to 6.0 System Submitted by Austrailia
    By IndieBoi in forum 2003-04 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-05-2004, 10:35 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •