## View Poll Results: Will the Code of Points turn skating on its head?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
• YES, the podium finishes will be completely altered.

5 11.90%
• No, we will still pretty much be able to figure out who will win the medals.

4 9.52%
• Too early to tell.

19 45.24%
• No, because the judges will be able to manipulate the other 5 components (besides the technical score).

0 0%
• I predict they'll toss it out completely within a couple of years.

4 9.52%
• Blah blah blah... Who cares? I just want to watch the skating.

8 19.05%
• Other

2 4.76%

1. 0

## Code of Points

I know this system is still in its infancy, but it will be interesting to see how (and if) the Code of Points will really affect the podium placements.

2. 0
Who cares? I'm just in it to watch the skating!

3. 0
I just want to watch the skating, but if COP does alter the finishes, it will only be during the GP circuit.

4. 0
Now that the CoP has one competition under its belt (the Nebelhorn Trophy), my greatest fear is that too much power and responsibility is invested in the "caller." Already people are saying that Amber Corwin got screwed because the caller said that her triple flip was so underrotated that it was only a double, so she did not get credit for a triple jump, no matter what the opinions of the other judges were.

This kind on thing really could stand the finishing order on its head.

Mathman

5. 0
In gymnastics, scores can be protested and later altered. At the most recent Worlds, the judges themselves made an error in recognizing an element on the women's vault. The score was later changed to reflect that mistake.

Is there a procedure in place to challenge the caller if he/she incorrectly identifies an element or if there is a controversy? For example, is it an overrotated double flip or an underrotated triple flip?

Herein lies at least one weakness with the CoP. Skaters from Country X will always say that the callers from Country Y incorrectly name their elements and vice versa. However, I'm not ready to throw out the baby with the bath water just yet.

6. 0
Originally posted by Mathman
Now that the CoP has one competition under its belt (the Nebelhorn Trophy), my greatest fear is that too much power and responsibility is invested in the "caller." Already people are saying that Amber Corwin got screwed because the caller said that her triple flip was so underrotated that it was only a double, so she did not get credit for a triple jump, no matter what the opinions of the other judges were.
Really? People are saying she was screwed? From what I've read from the people that were at the event, her flip was poorly done and / or cheated, and from people who are familiar with her skating ( I am not) that this is a common problem with her.

I went with to early to tell.

7. 0
I'm fascinated by the detailed scoring (see Paula's posts) that the judges must go through to calculate (yes calculate!) a final result. If they can do it, then I'm all for it.

As to The Caller, well let's wait and see. It would appear, imo, s/he is in a position to be corrupt, but will that happen? We'll never know.

In the case of Amber, again let's wait and see, if others were also marked down for under or over rotations. I can't believe she was singled out by whomever the Tech Specialist was. Law of averages say many skaters over under rotate.

Joe

8. 0
Well, I don't think this is the answer to the great "Salt Lake" fiasco. The scoring system wasn't the issue. Also, it seems too much like gymnastics scoring and I don't think that is a positive direction for figure skating to take at all. LOL, but, we'll see! I must not have been home when Speedy called to ask my opinion!

9. 0
I think we'll be able to tell who will win once we become more familiar with the code and what the judges are looking for.

The callers are skaters -- apparently Bruno Marcotte and Alexei Urmanov were both callers in Nebelhorn. They will have received training as well.

I think it's really unfair to the majority of these volunteers who get painted with the 'corrupt' brush just because there have been a few (count on one hand?) bad apples.

As for CoP, hard to say after Nebelhorn where you're dealing with essentially "2nd-tier" skaters; a truer sense of how things will play out will happen once the GP event get under way. I'll watch SA on TV, and be in the stands for SC -- should be a good way to see how things are going to work...

10. 0
It's ways too early - let's wait until the top ten skaters compete against each other. It might be a good idea to repeat the poll in a few months, in december or so.

11. 0
I didn't vote because I don't know enough about it yet, but I do like that it appears that flawed skating will be penalized. I am hoping that this is consistant no matter the skater.

12. 0
I just want to watch the skating! hehe!

13. 0
Originally posted by Joesitz
I'm fascinated by the detailed scoring (see Paula's posts) that the judges must go through to calculate (yes calculate!) a final result. If they can do it, then I'm all for it.
Actually, I think (though I could be wrong) that the judges do NOT have to do any calculating. They just punch in how well a certain element has been executed -- the computers figures out all the calculations.

Supposedly, one of the advatanges is that the judges will NOT do the calculating, thus limiting the possibility of manipulating the scores.

14. 0
Originally posted by Norlite
Really? People are saying she [Corwin] was screwed? From what I've read from the people that were at the event, her flip was poorly done and / or cheated, and from people who are familiar with her skating ( I am not) that this is a common problem with her.
I will rephrase that. I don't know what people who were at the event are saying about this. What I should have said was:

Given that Amber's triple flip was poorly done and/or cheated, should it count as a porrly done and cheated triple flip (credit for a triple flip, with -3 bonus points), or as a fairly successful double flip? Under the old system each judge would have to decide for him/herself. Now this determination is left to the caller and tech specialist.

I don't know whether this is good or bad, but it seems like it could be an important difference in a close contest.

Mathman

15. 0
Hmm...well there is, I believe, some criteria for this, although I can't search and find it now.

Something like (and this is only an example) quarter turn or less--cheated flip, more than a quarter turn-- over-rotated double.

Yes, judges could ignore all these guidelines before.(who would know??) Which is why many, many times you saw a skater with horrible cheats, or flutz's or lips (which technecally means they didn't really *do* the jump) medal just because they didn't actually fall.

A problem, by the way, that you never saw 10 years ago. Skaters now who could very easily be technically superb, don't really need to give it their all, because they know they won't get dinged for it. This is a particular problem among the ladies.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

#### Posting Permissions

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