Nebelhorn Results | Page 5 | Golden Skate

Nebelhorn Results

Norlite

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Ahh. I've reread all information.

I was incorrect in my original post. Only the Tech Specialists / Ass't Tech Speciallist (caller) is a paid member of the panel. The Tech Controller is a qualified ISU official. And, of course, referee's and judges, as always.

Jan Hoffmann might be a long-time judge, but he also won an Olympic silver medal in 1980, and World golds in '74 and '80, silvers in '77 and '78, and bronzes in '76 and '79. I think that qualifies him as an "ex-skater." I don't see anywhere in the ISU rules that disqualifies current judges from being referees or tech specialist/controller.

The fact that Tech Speciallist is a paid position, disqualifies him from being one. Either that, or give up his eligible status, therefore giving up his right to continue to be a judge. It's either / or. Can't be a judge and / or referee and be ineligible. (it's always been that way)
he can, however be a Tech Controller, since they are not paid.

That is why the ISU decided to recruit callers from the ranks of former high level skaters and coaches. No need to worry about eligibility requirements.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Look - There are the old system and the new system. Both systems are ripe for corruption. That hasn't changed.

I believe a judge should have the capacity to look at a skater's program and judge it accordingly. His scoring and ranking should be made public. Even the judges of a boxing match make their decision known when there is no knockout.

The Sport is rank with subjectivity - understandably - but so what? Let's take a look at that subjectivity. It can be seen in the 'old' system. The 'new' system is involved with secrecy. This is fact!!

With all it's faults I would prefer the old 6.0 and make improvements within that scheme.

Joe
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Norlite said:
Ahh. I've reread all information.

I was incorrect in my original post. Only the Tech Specialists / Ass't Tech Speciallist (caller) is a paid member of the panel. The Tech Controller is a qualified ISU official. And, of course, referee's and judges, as always.

The fact that Tech Speciallist is a paid position, disqualifies him from being one. Either that, or give up his eligible status, therefore giving up his right to continue to be a judge. It's either / or. Can't be a judge and / or referee and be ineligible. (it's always been that way)
he can, however be a Tech Controller, since they are not paid.

That is why the ISU decided to recruit callers from the ranks of former high level skaters and coaches. No need to worry about eligibility requirements.
1. Norlite, I am a novice in this judging business, and I am trying to keep up with your posts on this subject. In the first sentence of your second paragraph --this disqualifies him from being one WHAT? A judge? What does "eligible status" mean? Eligible to be a judge or to come back to competitive skating? What is a "qualified ISU official?" (1st paragraph). Who determines the "qualifications."

Are you saying that to be a judge you cannot receive any money from doing something else in the sport?

2. I am very pleased to see people like Jan Hoffmann and Alexei Urmanov selected for these positions (I am not familiar with Bruno Marcotte). Hoffmann and Urmanov not only have impeccable
technical qualifications, but they are men of established integrity.

3. Did you all notice this article in praise of the "success" of the CoP (from the list of articles on GS main page):

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/FigureSkating/2003/09/06/178270-ap.html

My favorite part: "ISU officials believe the new system will make it almost impossible for judges to cheat."

Mathman
 

Norlite

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Yes Mathman,

ISU officials (and officials mean judges, referees, not people such as elected executives or hired executives such as administrators) must retain the same eligible status as athletes.


Jann Hoffman cannot become a Tech Specialist because it is a non-sanctioned paid position. He would lose his position as a judge.

In the first sentence of your second paragraph --this disqualifies him from being one WHAT?
A caller.
My statement about him losing his eligibility was to hockeyfan who said she saw no reason why he couldn't be the caller.

"qualified ISU official?" (1st paragraph). Who determines the "qualifications."

Qualified simply means they are 1. Eligible. 2. certified to judge at the level in question by taking the appropriate clinics and exams. 3. A member in good standing with their federation and the ISU
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Mathman - Do you believe this?:

The gospel acoording to Speedy

"Work remains to be done but the New Judging System is ready and is a remarkable step forward for figure skating," said ISU president Ottavio Cinquanta.

"It works in favour of the skaters, informs the public and drastically reduces the risk of problems related to subjective judging," he added.

Skaters receive marks in five areas: skating skills, transitions, performance/execution, choreography and interpretation.

At the end of each program, the skater will receive a segment score compiling the technical and artistic scores. The sum of all these grades is the overall competition score determining the winner."

Hogwash! Can you believe 14 Judges are not going to pad those 5 skating areas? and we will never know what judge gave what skater what score in any of these 5 areas!!! Whoa!

Joe
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
(Responding to Norlite) Wow, I didn't know that. That's something right there that maybe ought to be changed. Why shouldn't someone like, say, Katarina Witt, be eligible to be a judge if she goes through the training and works her way up through the ranks like everybody else?

Why do you think they have this rule? Do you think it is just an anachronism held over from the days when "amateurism" was considered virtuous and "professionalism" low class?

Mathman
 
Last edited:

Norlite

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Why do you think they have this rule? Do you think it is just an anachronism held over from the days when "amateurism" was considered virtuous and "professionalism" low class?

Yes, I just think that's the way it has always been done. Also for the athletes, it gives the federations a little control, I guess for the judges too. They can't work for a rival organization this way.

I guess it gives the same type of control a company like Microsoft would have with conflict of interest rules, like not being able to work for Microsoft and Apple at the same time.

Or even other sport organizations. I'm sure baseball must have some kind of rule saying their umpires must be "eligible" or whatever to keep them from going off and working for whoever else in the same field

About Katt Witt- I totally agree. Maybe in time.................
 
Last edited:

Norlite

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I have a variety of information. We have been discussing this at our rinks all summer.

Much is explained in ISU communications 1207 and 1224. I have some info from my federation, and some I received from my daughter's coach, who has skaters that must prepare for the CoP this year. In some info the tech specialist is referred to as a "professional" which in skate talk, means "paid" ( as in professional coach) All other newly created officials are referred to as "qualified ISU judges and referees". which are eligible volunteer members.
 

bleuchick

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Isn't Jan Hoffman the same person who posted on the FSU over the summer....something that I found a bit weird coming from an organization with a huge public relations problem...but hey...anything is possible at times like this. He did a fine job of describing the COP to the fans though.

Would I want him to be a technique specialist?. No. Btw, this has nothing to do with his accomplishments and expertise but more to do with his status(a judge) in the ISU. I am sorry but I am having a hard time keeping track of 14 anoymous judges right now. Enough with present and former judges.
 

Norlite

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
No, that was Joe Inman. And it is wonderful for him to try and help everyone understand this new judging system.

It is not a *secret* you know. ;) ;)

Seriously.
 
Last edited:

bleuchick

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
while we still at the subject...

So the federations pays the judge, what do they get in return from the ISU? Money. There gotta be some agreement between the federations and the ISU.

what stops the ISU from hiring their own judges rather than going through the federations. They are sort of doing it now with the Caller, Tech Specialist etc. Why not go all the way and pay judges.
 

Norlite

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Judges are not paid. They are volunteers as are all skating people (club level right up to federation boards), with the exception of office staff, and coaches.

They do, of course, get all their expenses paid while working, but they all have day jobs too.

For the ISU to "hire it's own judges" it would take an amendment to the rulebook voted on by the membership (federations) at a Congress, and the federations are not willing to do that, at this time.
 

Norlite

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
More numbers for Mathman-

I just noticed they have now added (Sept. 7th) each judges individual scores for each skater. (without identifying the judge of course. )
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
This is me, salivating. Boyoboyoboyoboy! This will keep me entertained for weeks. I will have to write to the ISU and tell them to stop giving us so much information about the judging!

Oh, where to begin, where to begin? I think I'll start with a correlation study to measure the amount of agreement or disagreement among the judges with respect to the bonus marks for individual elements.

Wowser! We could ask for nothing more, except to identify the judges by name and country.

Hehehehehehehehehehe.

Mathman
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Mathman - I love your point for a correlation study between the judges. Do you think THAT kind of information will be given out by the new system?

If honesty is there, this system isn't as bad as I make it and it will be workable, particularly for the technical moves in figure skating. The skater will get credit for what s/he does.

I would just like to see how much credit each judge gave so and so for his/her triple axel. I doubt those grades will all be the same, and as we all know it doesn't take more than one tenth of a point to decide a winner.

Joe
 

Norlite

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Joesitz said:
I would just like to see how much credit each judge gave so and so for his/her triple axel. I doubt those grades will all be the same, and as we all know it doesn't take more than one tenth of a point to decide a winner.

Well it's there, judge by judge.
 

hockeyfan228

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I just looked at Men's SP and LP scores, and it seems to me that the judges are relatively consistent in scoring executed planned jumps and some of the spins. They seem to be inconsistent when scoring a missed jump -- 2Lutz, 1 Axel -- but I'm not sure if that's for under-rotation, popped, or a combination of both. I think that the ISU will need to come up with a consistent standard for scoring the over-/under-rotated jumps. It's possible that some judges are taking it out of the GOE (double whammy), and some are expecting the devaluation by the caller -- i.e. from 3L to 2L -- to take care of it. Also, there seem to be variations in the CCoSp scoring more than some other spins. For the program elements, while most judges are relatively consistent among elements, they can be pretty far apart from each other, by 3 or more points on occasion. Sounds like more seminars to me.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Hockeyfan - Very interested in seeing more detailed results. I did see the results from the USFSA which showed the breakdwown of the components for each skater but nothing about the breakdown from each judge for each skater. So could you give me a link to see the breakdown?

I can understand the problem with a missed jump. Should the judge take off for the failure or should the Caller? That would be something that needs ironing out.

I hope this gets ironed out before we sit in Dortmund in deep discussion. In the meantime, I'll go with your suggestion of seminars.

Joe
 
Top