Coaches proposals 1-3: Judging, qualifying rounds, and general comments

gsrossano said:

I think the proposals should stand or fall on their own merit. Either they are good ideas or they are not. Just like the skaters, they should not be judged based on the reputation of the coach(s) invovled.

Click to expand...

In the best of all possible worlds, quite so. What I am trying to get a feel for, is whether this is an interesting academic exercise or a politically savvy attempt to change ISU policy.

Should I be getting all excited about a slew of imminent changes to the IJS? Should we start a letter-writng campaign to convince the ISU technical committee to give our favorite of these proposals a real hearing? (Does Mr. Cinquanta read Golden Skate? )

Mathman said:

What I am trying to get a feel for, is whether this is an interesting academic exercise or a politically savvy attempt to change ISU policy.

Click to expand...

Something in the middle.

Should I be getting all excited about a slew of imminent changes to the IJS?

Click to expand...

Imminent? No. These are too late to have much impact on next season. They have a longer term goal.

IMO, IJS still has some serious issues that need to be worked out, but what the TCs are doing is little more than rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. What these proposals are trying to do is push the TCs to make more substantive changes to improve IJS. Any effort in that direction will only happen after the congress. I hear that there are some in the ISU who are supportive of that.

Time (and politics) will tell.

Medusa said:

We discussed that before, but the best 15 skaters at 4CC are not as good as the best 15 skaters at Europeans. For example: the completed and landed jumps of No.16 at Europeans were: 1A - 3L - 3F2T - 3S - 3F - 3T-3T< - 2A, he also fell on a Triple Axel attempt --> overall points 160.37. The No.16 of 4CC landed the following: 3S2T1R - 2A - 2T - 2R - 3T1T - (2A - nearly -3GOE) - (3S - fall) - 2A --> overall he got 111.16 points. It just doesn't seem like a fair solution.

Click to expand...

Your first sentence is an opinion and that's ok, but are you looking at all the disciplines?

The judges have a tough job with this and I am all for eliminating skaters who don't make the cut for the SP. I would exempt the placements of l - 12 skaters from the previous Worlds unless a better method is introduced.

Joe

Joesitz said:

The judges have a tough job with this and I am all for eliminating skaters who don't make the cut for the SP. I would exempt the placements of l - 12 skaters from the previous Worlds unless a better method is introduced.

Click to expand...

If qualifying rounds are deemed necessary (50+ short programs being too many to judge in one competition), I agree that the points should not carry over and could see arguments in favor of exempting some skaters from qualifying. But not too many, or there would be hardly any spots available for the rest of the field to qualify for.

I think there are definitely better ways of identifying skaters who have proven themselves as not needing to qualify than using the results of one competition that took place a year earlier.

Top X in the ISU standings as of the close of entries would be one way to do it.

Another way would be to exempt that year's Grand Prix finalists . . . after all, they already had to do an extra competition that year and proved themselves to have been skating well enough in the fall season to qualify for the GPF. Also *medalists* (or possibly top 5 or top 6) from Europeans and Four Continents, which would have been the most recent major senior competitions . . . and would give an incentive for medal-worthy skaters to attend those competitions, esp. 4Cs . . . sure it's more traveling and competing than if they don't go, but they'd save themselves from skating an extra program at Worlds.

Junior Worlds fields are often larger than at Worlds, so qual rounds and potential exemptions would also be a consideration there. For exemptions from qual rounds, I would suggest JGP finalists from the current season and any returning *medalists* from the previous year's Junior Worlds.

If there were anyone who qualified for the senior GP final and then returned to Junior Worlds, I would also exempt them . . . but the only examples I can think of offhand are Mao Asada 2006 and Caroline Zhang 2008, and in both cases they were also (gold) medalists from the previous year.

I think it pretty much goes without saying that the judging secrecy is a travesty and needs to be abolished. It accomplished nothing except to make it easier for the judges to cheat without repercussion. And for god's sake, fire the damn judges who've been caught cheating, this is a serious offence, not a situation where they just need a time-out. It makes me sick that these people are still around and sanctioned. It casts a shadow of doubt upon every result of which they are a part.

I don't agree about the qualifying rounds. If you go back to qualifiers, it just means you're cutting at a different stage of competition than you are now (after the short). There is always, at some point in the competition, going to be a huge whack of competitors to judge, and it's tough. But it actually takes less time than it would with qualifiers, as qualifiers were always a repeat of the LPs, while now it's the short programs. And unless you're going to set the points back to zero after the qualifying round, I see little point in judging the long program twice, unless they're suggesting everyone should need 3 programs, totally excessive, IMO. I also disagree about exempting skaters from qualifying. At the beginning of the competition, at least, it should be a totally level playing field, where everybody has to skate for it.

Joesitz said:

Your first sentence is an opinion and that's ok, but are you looking at all the disciplines?

Click to expand...

No, I didn't - and that wasn't even my worst mistake. I totally forgot that, in contrast to Europeans, 4CC is more an optional competition. Patrick Chan and Johnny Weir e.g. weren't even at 4CC - federations tend to send not the World team, but lower ranking skaters (except for the Japanese, who, except for Nakano, sent their big guns this year). There are very few skaters who decide not to go to Europeans because of fatigue (except Lambiel ), and the World Team of the European countries is almost always the same as their teams for Europeans.

Using 4CC and Europeans (why don't we call it "1C" - it's way shorter) as qualifying competitions would actually make 4CC a "real" ISU-Championship and certain skaters wouldn't even think about not going.

rain said:

I also disagree about exempting skaters from qualifying. At the beginning of the competition, at least, it should be a totally level playing field, where everybody has to skate for it.

Click to expand...

I agree with this principle.

gkelly said:

If qualifying rounds are deemed necessary (50+ short programs being too many to judge in one competition), I agree that the points should not carry over and could see arguments in favor of exempting some skaters from qualifying. But not too many, or there would be hardly any spots available for the rest of the field to qualify for.

Click to expand...

I agree, and I am all for the elimination process. Whatever works in the interest of the Sport is fine.

I think there are definitely better ways of identifying skaters who have proven themselves as not needing to qualify than using the results of one competition that took place a year earlier.

Top X in the ISU standings as of the close of entries would be one way to do it.

Another way would be to exempt that year's Grand Prix finalists . . . after all, they already had to do an extra competition that year and proved themselves to have been skating well enough in the fall season to qualify for the GPF. Also *medalists* (or possibly top 5 or top 6) from Europeans and Four Continents, which would have been the most recent major senior competitions . . . and would give an incentive for medal-worthy skaters to attend those competitions, esp. 4Cs . . . sure it's more traveling and competing than if they don't go, but they'd save themselves from skating an extra program at Worlds.

Junior Worlds fields are often larger than at Worlds, so qual rounds and potential exemptions would also be a consideration there. For exemptions from qual rounds, I would suggest JGP finalists from the current season and any returning *medalists* from the previous year's Junior Worlds.

If there were anyone who qualified for the senior GP final and then returned to Junior Worlds, I would also exempt them . . . but the only examples I can think of offhand are Mao Asada 2006 and Caroline Zhang 2008, and in both cases they were also (gold) medalists from the previous year.

Click to expand...

OK. But I think your plans cover many skaters that you didn't want in the first place. Good try, though. I think we are all in favor of an elimination round or a qualifying round whatever. Gotenborg had skaters one doesn't normally see from some countries. However, they all can skate the quali round. It is the exemptions that may cause a problem especially with countries being allowed 3 skaters.

My concern, who ever has to skate the quali, it should not be before noon so as the contestants can have a breakfast and not rush to the arena.

Joe