Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 69

Thread: ISU Congress- Decisions bring new rules

  1. #46
    Forum translator Ptichka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,430
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckm View Post
    Not quite fair to single out Azerbaijan. They sent only one man and one dance team to Worlds, and the dance team IS world class (even though neither partner has ever set foot in AZE).
    True. I only used Aze as a first example to pop into my mind, not because it's worse than others.

  2. #47
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    820
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Not exactly. As I understand the proposal, all ten judges will be seated, all ten will think they are scoring the event, but one will be selected by the computer with the designation "substitute." His or her scores will not be included, unless one of the other judges has to drop out.

    So basically, the idea is to toss out only one judge's scores (out of 10) instead of three judges' scores (out of 12.)

    The justification offereed by the Russian federation was: (a) to save money, and (b) to provide for a substitute judge within the current framework.

    This was the propsal. I don't know whether it was passed or not.
    It occurs to me to wonder if it will be the SAME judge for all competitors? If not, there is still the same fluctuation in consistency because a different set of judges will be used for each skater.

    I think they should designate one randomly selected judge as the "substitute" at the start of each event and the one so designated would remain the same for all the competitors in that event. That would keep the same judges judging all skaters.

  3. #48
    Custom Title dwiggin3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    765
    Quote Originally Posted by Tinymavy15 View Post
    I wonder if they will delete the OD or the CD. I would remove the OD. The CD seems necessary to show the traditional patterns and the basics etc.. the OD just seems like a mini freedance. then again, the OD if more TV freindly. the CD seems like figures.... not very interesting to the average viewer.

    If they did get rid of the compulsories, that would help Tanith and Ben... not in time for the olympics though.
    I agree. If you are bound and determined to streamline dance, cut the OD and keep the CD and FD.

  4. #49
    Forum translator Ptichka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,430
    I believe the original plan called for somehow combining OD an CD - a segment that's more rigid than the current OD, but more flexible than the CD.

  5. #50
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,101
    Quote Originally Posted by merrybari View Post
    It occurs to me to wonder if it will be the SAME judge for all competitors?
    Yes, its the same judge for all competitors. A different judge might be designatted for the long program and for the short, however.

  6. #51
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Here is the official announcement of what was actually passed at the congress.

    http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=980

    The last change is interesting.

    For edge calls on Lutzes and flips, the tech specialist will call "e" in the case of a very long and severe wrong edge. In that case the judges must give a -1 to -3 GOE on the element.

    In the case of a shorter or less obvious wrong edge, the tech specialist will use a new symbol, "!" instead of "e." In this case the judges will use their discretion about how to factor the wrong edge into their GOE score.

    To me, this last thing is redundant. The judges can "use their discretion" about bad edges whether the tech specialist calls anything or not.

    If anything, I would rather something like this to be used for underroations. A downgrade for an egregious underrotaion and something to call the judges' attention to an milder underroation, short of a downgrade.
    there's no way to deal with something already passed by the ISU. Many posters wil never argue these and just go along with them. They may discuss them if someone disagrees, but they will stick by the ISU.
    The GoEs are not written in stone. They are subjective scores and have a powerful influence on the PCS scores. None of these new amendments have relevance to any real change but to affirm the right of the Technical Panel and the Countries which have skaters involved in the discipline. In fact they made it worse. Now the Tech Panels will judge the error as to whether it was a big error or a baby error. It's like saying on a test that 6+6=11, not correct but close enough to get some credit.

    The question of underrotations since many GS posters disagree with the call, should have Instant Replay for the in-house and TV audiences. Other sports have it, why not figure skating. This would keep not only the Tech Panel sharp but be a god-send to the skater when taped. Also there would be less disagreements on the Boards.

    The penalites for such errors when you think of them as attacking the name of a jump (flutz and Lip) and the ever popular underotations are so disparaging.

  7. #52
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    820
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Yes, its the same judge for all competitors. A different judge might be designatted for the long program and for the short, however.
    Thanks for the clarification. That makes sense.

  8. #53
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185

    Judges for the SP and Different for the LP

    To me if one judges the SP and another judges the LP then it implies that all judges are equal. Looking at protocols, I do not think so.

  9. #54
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    46
    Originally Posted by chuckm
    Not quite fair to single out Azerbaijan. They sent only one man and one dance team to Worlds, and the dance team IS world class (even though neither partner has ever set foot in AZE).




    I realize that facts can "get in the way" of a good story line. But Fraser & Lukanin went on a state-sponsored trip post-2006 Olympics. Then this year they performed in Azerbaijian for the first time in Averbukh's ice show, which was basically arranged by the Azerbaijain skating federation. So they have both been twice now.... not exactly living there, knowing the language, etc., but nevertheless facts are facts. They've been there. Twice.

  10. #55
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    156
    Then where are Fraser & Lukanin originally from then? all I know is that they train in New Jersey with Morozov.

  11. #56
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,101
    Quote Originally Posted by KayMil01 View Post
    Then where are Fraser & Lukanin originally from then? all I know is that they train in New Jersey with Morozov.
    Kirstin is from the U.S., born in Palo Alto, California. Igor is Russian (Ekaterinburg) -- from his name I would suppose his ancestry is Finnish. Lukanin has also competed for Germany.

    Here is a nice article about them from the Golden Skate archives.

    http://www.goldenskate.com/articles/2002/121502.shtml

  12. #57
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    820
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz View Post
    To me if one judges the SP and another judges the LP then it implies that all judges are equal. Looking at protocols, I do not think so.
    This is true, but to me it's more important that they be consistent within the event with the same pairs of eyes and viewpoints for all skaters the same.

  13. #58
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    27,101
    Quote Originally Posted by merrybari View Post
    This is true, but to me it's more important that they be consistent within the event with the same pairs of eyes and viewpoints for all skaters the same.
    Well, all this is moot since, as far as I can see from the ISU announcement, this proposal by the Russian federation did not pass.

    Personally, I don't see anything wrong with having 9 out of 10 judges working the SP and a different 9 out of 10 doing the SP. The way it is now, out of the 12 judges in the SP (9 of them count), four are eliminated for the LP and replaced by four different judges. Then there is a separate draw among the new twelve as to which 9 will count.

    I don't mind mixing things up between the SP and and LP, but the whole random draw is foolish, to me. I like the Russian plan better than the current draw of 9 out of 12.

    From a statistical point of view, best would be to have all 12 judges' votes count, trimming the highest and lowest. If a judge gets sick in the middle of the contest, go with the remaining 11. Under ordinal judging you needed an odd number of judges to avoid ties, but that is not a factor in add-up-the-points judging.

    About GOEs being subjective, to me that's the nature of judging. That's way we have judges in the first place, to offer their judgment about whether the skater gave a good performance or not. IMHO this applies equally well to judgments about individual elements and to judgments about the program as a whole.

    I do not see what the sport thinks it gains by trying to replace judges with a computer.

  14. #59
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,581
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    Personally, I don't see anything wrong with having 9 out of 10 judges working the SP and a different 9 out of 10 doing the SP.
    That was exactly the case under the old system.

    About GOEs being subjective, to me that's the nature of judging. That's way we have judges in the first place, to offer their judgment about whether the skater gave a good performance or not. IMHO this applies equally well to judgments about individual elements and to judgments about the program as a whole.
    Exactly. It's primarily a qualitative sport, so it has to be measured at least in part by qualitative judgments.

  15. #60
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    Exactly. It's primarily a qualitative sport, so it has to be measured at least in part by qualitative judgments.
    So the Technical is not measured by definitions. It is measued according to the qualitative sport. Why then are there underrotations defined? If it's qualitative then let the jump be judged on whatever landing the skater executes the jump. No need to give it a careful definition. The jump is just measured on the landing, and no need to downgrade it. It's qualitative, and should be marked accordingly..
    Last edited by Joesitz; 07-04-2008 at 05:57 PM.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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