Skating Skills in the PCS scores? Baffling?

Jaana said:

I have felt quite many times that skating skills have been used by judges for a skater with a reputation to be held up in a programme where she/he did not do as well as might have been expected.

Click to expand...

Actually, that might be a plus rather than a minus. Setting aside 'reputation" per se, what about the skater who skates really, really well, but falls on a couple of jumps (Sasha Cohen at the Olympics, for instance). The way the CoP divides the score into "Elements" versus "Whole Program" gives the judges a way out.

On the TES side Sasha loses points for not completing the elements, and she gets a further mandatory fall deduction, just as she should.

On the Program-as-a-whole side, the judges have a chance to say that, nevertheless, she demonstrated pretty good skating skills -- if in fact the judges believe that she did.

So when this happens, I don't think it is necessarily holding famous skaters up. Instead it might be simply be rewarding them for what they did well and punishing them for what they messed up on.

Mathman said:

Well, I think these questions are more about the Performance side of the scoring system -- the Performance, Choreography, and Interpretation component scores.

Click to expand...

Not sure what you are driving at here. All the subheadings in the Skating Skills definition give the skater One and Only One grade.

Since this thread is about the Skating Skills component, I would have to say that I think trained and experienced ISU judges are quite a bit better qualified than high school drummers and average fans in this area. To quote again from the ISU rules, I don't think the average fan is prepared to evaluate the extent to which a skater has demonstrated a "command of the skating vocabluary (edges, steps, turns, etc.)" or "ease of transfer of weight resulting in seemingly effortless acceleration."

Click to expand...

Those Venezelan kids from the wrong side of the tracks are part of a world wide acknowledged great orchestra. Music students of any age know music even high scool drummers. Do you believe All those judges know more about music than those who studied it? If the edges, steps and turns are skated to the music then the average fan knows about them. They may not know the makeup of the choctaw v. the mohawk but if they get into the Sport, they know as much as the judges. And the skating fans, former and present know those items by experience - not by a seminar. Would you trust a judge more than what Paul Wylie would say?

I, for one, would find myself at a loss to decide which of two skaters showed greater "clarity of technique." Even in such categories as "flow over the ice," and "varied use of power," I think I would get a lot better at spotting these things if I went to all the training seminars, etc., that ISU judges must participate in every year.There's a lot of stuff to look for, to be sure. But I bet most of the judges DO know all the headings and sub-headings and try their darnedest to come up with a balanced and appropriate score for each of the components.

Click to expand...

You probably would, but it doesn't mean every attendee at a training seminar comes away with perfect knowledge. Check out the variations in the scoring. If they all got smart after a seminar why are the GoEs so different among the judges (not talking about collusions).
Indeed, it is difficult to keep all those factors to score one grade in the Skating Abilty category. Technique, for example, can be covered in the many elements of the Technical score. I would suggest the category be limited to the basics - which are not covered exactly in the Tech. It would also covere Juvenile. Novice and Juniors.

The idea of just giving out one combined component score -- I think it would be better to have two, like the old 6.0 system. One for Tech, comprising the current Skating Skills and Transitions, and one for Presentation, combining Performance/Execution, Choreography, and Interpretation.

Click to expand...

I believe the point of the CoP was to eliminate subjectivity. I would not consider this suggestion viable.

Although...there is something to be said for keeping the Transitions mark separate. One of the criticisms of the 6.0 system was that it encouraged skaters to do programs that were just cross-over, cross-over, cross-over, triple jump, over and over. The separate Transitions mark gives an opportunity for a specific reward for more "in-betweens." (Just my opinion.)

Click to expand...

I Agree, but so much of the CoP forces skaters to do things which are not choreographically correct. Transitions should be a topic of its own.

Jaana said:

I have felt quite many times that skating skills have been used by judges for a skater with a reputation to be held up in a programme where she/he did not do as well as might have been expected.

Click to expand...

Very good point, but I do not believe it was planned that way.
I think we all should check the protocols in some competition like Senior Ladies GP Skate Amercia, and see how the judges handle Skating Ability.

Joesitz said:

Not sure what you are driving at here. All the subheadings in the Skating Skills definition give the skater One and Only One grade.

Click to expand...

In the post that I was responding to, as well as the post above, you wrote about rhythms, music, piano lessons, drummers, timing, the difference between a concerto, a symphony, a tone poem and the Beattles, a great international orchestra, and skating to music. All this made me think you were referring to the three Program Component Scores on the Performance side of the equation, rather than about the Skating Skills component.

There is One and Only One program component titled (perhaps confusingly so) "Skating Skills," but this program conponent score has nothing to do with moving to music, artistic expression, or anything like that.

Would you trust a judge more than what Paul Wylie would say?

Click to expand...

I would trust both a trained and experienced ISU judge and Paul Wylie more than I would trust an average fan to judge a figure skating contest.

I believe the point of the CoP was to eliminate subjectivity.

Click to expand...

Mr. Cinquanta wants us to believe that. But in fact, setting aside Speedy-talk, it is impossible to eliminate subjectivity because the scoring system must take note of quality as well as quantity.

Mathman said:

In the post that I was responding to, as well as the post above, you wrote about rhythms, music, piano lessons, drummers, timing, the difference between a concerto, a symphony, a tone poem and the Beattles, a great international orchestra, and skating to music. All this made me think you were referring to the three Program Component Scores on the Performance side of the equation, rather than about the Skating Skills component

Click to expand...

Sorry for not being clearer.

There is One and Only One program component titled (perhaps confusingly so) "Skating Skills," but this program conponent score has nothing to do with moving to music, artistic expression, or anything like that.I would trust both a trained and experienced ISU judge and Paul Wylie more than I would trust an average fan to judge a figure skating contest.Mr. Cinquanta wants us to believe that. But in fact, setting aside Speedy-talk, it is impossible to eliminate subjectivity because the scoring system must take note of quality as well as quantity.

Click to expand...

I see a breakdown of other factors in the CoP. I do not see any breakdwown in the scoring of Skating Ability except the descriptive subheads which I was directed to and to which we all already knew from the 6.0 System.

This category, Skating Skills, imo, it is totally subjective. there is nothing to grade any of the subheads without saying 'well, there are other subheads which he was given proper credit'. We will never know which. So much BS. It leads to bias, let's face it.

Trusting Paul and that former Italian lady who complains about the CoP so often does not change the scores of those who attended a seminar. Dorothery Hamil would also shed more light on this. Again it is rampant subjectivity, and should be dropped from the scoring pads. Or keep it for basic skills.

Can you show me where it is NOT subjective or at least less subjective than the 6.0 system?

I think we are both on the same side in this argument, Joe. Yes, the judging of a figure skating contest is, when you get right down to it, subjective.

Always has been, always will be.

Edited to add. I do not, however, think this is a bad thing. Or a good thing. It's just a thing.

Subjectivity is not the same as whimsy. In judging the quality of something, we cannot just pull out a yardstick or a stopwatch. We must pass judgment.

Sort of like in real life.