How Important is Music in Scoring CoP

Having watched 5 lyrical male skaters in a recent competition, I am wondering what happened to the Candeloros?, the Plushenkos, the Yagudins, the Stoikos and even the Eldridges? Are the more macho skaters now passee?

Lyrical skaters which I've seen in that competition tend to skate with nice flow but with little change of tempo except for crechendos(sp). The winner of that competition, btw, did have more change of rhythms throughout his routine, but the points he made up on the Technical, ruled out any necessity for music scoring.

My theory is that CoP with its point scoring (and lack of musical interest) has skaters executing all the elements with tender care and not focusing on the dance of the single figure skaters. (I would think it also applies to Pairs and Dance as well.)

I do recall that Musicality is mentioned in passing for scoring PC, but does it really? For a Sport which requires music, it is the most ignored factor in the CoP way of scoring.

well in the case of Evan Lysacek you have to actually SKATE WELL in order to make the final... he got hit with a lot of URs

Joubert was in the final and he is anything but lyrical (or artistic for that matter).

and I thought you said skaters aren't dancers? aren't you trying to have it both ways with this?

As to your first point (predominance of lyrical males), aren't you forgetting Joubert? But even granting your point, it's a strength of COP IMO that every movement has been turned into a point-getter so the men are encouraged to stress many elements besides jumps. I don't see a problem here (apart from rewarding falls but that's another story).

I don't understand what you mean by this phrase:

CoP with its point scoring (and lack of musical interest) has skaters executing all the elements with tender care and not focusing on the dance of the single figure skaters.

Click to expand...

If the males are as lyrical as you say, how is it that they are not dancing? I certainly think of skaters like Chan and Takahashi, Weir and Abbott as dancing. The first three are truly great dancers, and Abbott is getting there.

Maybe with CoP dancing skills are seen as a nice extra - something to boost the impression a skater makes AFTER he's made sure to rack up points via the elements. But some skaters are good at racking up points without being good dancers, and in CoP they don't necessarily need them. Others are natural dancers and do it in addition to (or in spite of) having to master CoP elements.

It (musicality, dancibility) seemed to work for Sean Sawyer.

My point is, if you see skaters focusing on CoP and its point gathering, do you really see musicality in the scores?

If you look at John Curry on youtube, you will see how a dancer/skater moves from one element to another without suddenly taking some added care to get his element just right according to CoP. For me, that stops the dance of the single skater and we do not need music for these elements. Curry's programs do not advertise 'watch this trick' but each element is executed as part of the whole choreographed program in conformity with the music. Some present day skaters do emphasize the whole choreographed musical program, but I don't want to open this thread to skaters who do, although one in particular is from Switzerland, and many Pros have well choreographed musical programs who emphasize the music theme rather than the elements of skating which they are quite capable of doing. Can these eligibles do it as well?

Since fans rave about having music in the Sport, I don't see where it is scored. BTW, ballet-like arms are just poses while moving. Why not emphasize musicality to the PC line up as an equal to all the sub headings of the PC line up and not as part of one? I would even think of music as a Technicality in the Tech scores because you have to use it. I should think that it is all important to justify the need for music in figure skating.

Joesitz said:

If you look at John Curry on youtube, you will see how a dancer/skater moves from one element to another without suddenly taking some added care to get his element just right according to CoP.

Click to expand...

Yes, but John Curry was unusual for his time as well. Look at Jan Hoffmann or Vladimir Kovalev or Sergei Volkov or Terry Kubicka or David Santee ca. 1976, and compare them to the skaters you see today. They'll be better at some skills and worse at others, but I don't think you'll see a big difference in the average level of musicality 33 years ago or today.

gkelly said:

Yes, but John Curry was unusual for his time as well. Look at Jan Hoffmann or Vladimir Kovalev or Sergei Volkov or Terry Kubicka or David Santee ca. 1976, and compare them to the skaters you see today. They'll be better at some skills and worse at others, but I don't think you'll see a big difference in the average level of musicality 33 years ago or today.

Click to expand...

I've noticed that myself in the last year watching stuff on Youtube... competitive skating was just as "boring" in some ways as it is now (ie more about the competition than the entertainment value) as it should be.

Joesitz said:

My point is, if you see skaters focusing on CoP and its point gathering, do you really see musicality in the scores?...

Since fans rave about having music in the Sport, I don't see where it is scored....Why not emphasize musicality to the PC line up as an equal to all the sub headings of the PC line up and not as part of one? I would even think of music as a Technicality in the Tech scores because you have to use it.

Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, music is explicitly mentioned as part of four of the five Program Components.

In Tech, it seems to be part of the GOEs only for step sequences. Of the "buttons" for positive GOE is

Good timing according to the music.

Click to expand...

For spirals, the list of GOE criteria includes

Highlights the character of the program.

Click to expand...

For the five Program Components, only Skating Skills does not mention music explicitly. For Transitions the wording is

Transitions ...(include) the use of blade, body, head, arms, legs as dictated by the music.

Click to expand...

The other three mention music prominently in the definition of the component, as well as throughout the judges' guidelines.

Performance/execution. Definition: The involvement of the skaters physically, emotionally and intellectually as they translate the intent of the music and choreography....

Style and individuality/personality: The distinctive use of line and movement as inspired by the music...:

Click to expand...

Choreography/composition. Phrasing and form: movement and parts are structured to match the phrasing of the music.

Click to expand...

Interpretation/Timing. Definition: The personal and creative translation of the music to movement on ice.

Click to expand...

The several subheading are

Timing: Effortless movement in time to the music...through sureness of rhythm, tempo, (etc.)

Expression of the music's style, character, rhythm....as motivated by the structure of the music: melody, harmony, rhythm, color, texture and form.

Use of finesse to reflect the nuances of music...(by) bringing subtel variations to the intensity, tempo and dynamics of the music..

Click to expand...

So I would say that it is certainly the intent of the CoP to reward skaters who are able to bring musicality to their performances.

How exactly this intent is translated into the judges' scores that we see on the protocols is another question.

Ginask8s said:

It (musicality, dancibility) seemed to work for Sean Sawyer.

Click to expand...

Right On! It also worked for the "Eman" -Emanuel Sandhu as well.

I am not sure if I am understanding this question, but music has always been an important part of figure skating. Even under the old 6.0 system music and musicality counted with the judges. There are two different types of skaters mentioned here - athletic and artistic. Even with the Sojko and Plushenko type of skaters, musicality is important as is music choice - in fact this is important for any skater. Figure skating has not changed that much over the years when it comes to music. I would disagree with the statement that music is ignored under the new judging system. Music is still a major part of a skaters program.

I think that music plays an important role in PCS.

When Miki skated to the same Giselle as Nakano, her PCS, esp. transition mark, was very low.

In her new program, she had no more transitions or choreos than she had at her SA Giselle performance. But still received a decent PCS. I think it is because the stronger music naturally suited her powerful skating better and therefore the paucity of transitions and chores was less noticeable.

COP limits the ability of the skater to skate to the music. So wouldn't it be unfair if they get punished for not skating to music by the judging system that at the same time is the one that limits the ability to skate to the music?

Example: the number of revolutions. In spins, lifts, twizzles... I rewatched some older pairs programs recently and noticed that Shen/Zhao had a really effective way of doing the death spiral in their programs. In the Nutcracker program the second one they did was perfectly to the music, well integrated into the rest of the program - but under COP it wouldn't have counted, because it was short of revolutions. But at this point of the music more revolutions would have looked simply ridiculous.

Who was the ice-dance guy who said after last Worlds that he managed to add the last twizzle despite the fact that the music was already on to the next element? Charlie White? That's another good example.

Spiral sequences are one of the best examples. I am always complaining about all that lyrical-baby-blue-princessy music among the ladies (and to a a lesser extend among the pairs) - but the question is: Can you do an effective spiral sequence to e.g. the Presto of the Summer of Vivaldi's four seasons? No, not with the requirement that you have to hold this and that position for that long. The music is fast-paced and dramatic. At last Worlds Asada didn't hold her positions long enough in the spiral sequence and she was criticised for it - but if you rewatch those programs you'll see that she actually skated to the music and therefore her spiral sequence was too short.

Spins are also a problem, often the required number of revolutions make it impossible that the music at that point suits the spin. Sometimes the music may ask for a quick scratch spin - but nobody will do it, because a simple scratch spin means level 1 and one spin box used.

So I guess that lyrical skaters have an advantage, they look pretty on ice, their movements look elegant and fluent - the music provides a nice background.

By the way, I would never say that Verner is a lyrical skater, nor is Abbott in my opinion. Abbott is a dancer, he skates to Tango, Waltz, lyrical pieces and Santana - he was an ice dancer and I think you can really see it, his Waltz program from last year is a favourite of mine, though I wished he had found his consistency back then because there is no clean version of that Waltz.

Believe it or not, I would say it's very important. I've skated my program for judges before with two sets of music (one I prefer which is a bit "different" for figure skating, and the same program only slightly different during the transitions and step sequence to match the music better that was more typically classical). My PCS scores were DRASTICALLY different and much higher for the program that was skated to the more typical music, even though looking back on the videos and even the feeling I had during and after skating was that I skated the "strange" program much better. As far as TES scores, I didn't notice any real difference worth mentioning... just PCS.

bethissoawesome said:

Believe it or not, I would say it's very important. I've skated my program for judges before with two sets of music (one I prefer which is a bit "different" for figure skating, and the same program only slightly different during the transitions and step sequence to match the music better that was more typically classical). My PCS scores were DRASTICALLY different and much higher for the program that was skated to the more typical music, even though looking back on the videos and even the feeling I had during and after skating was that I skated the "strange" program much better. As far as TES scores, I didn't notice any real difference worth mentioning... just PCS.

Click to expand...

That's really interesting and seems like the same phenomenon happened to Miki with her LP music change (though Giselle may be a typical classical, but a very difficult one).

MM - Your list of music references for the descriptions of musicality are scattered about on paper. Are they actually judged in reality? or is it just another case of full faith and trust in the system and all the judges follow these descriptions along with all the other descriptions for scoring?

My feeling is that music plays an enormous part in Figure Skating, and I don't think anyone would want it not to. However as said above it is judged by scattered notes, and does not play all that big a role as other Headings in the Definitions of the Program Components.

My suggestion is: To move all those notes to a separate Heading called Musicality and let it be judged as Skating Skills, Transitions, etc are.

Can you imagine? "She got a level 1 on her Musicality" But if that is what she deserved, that's what she should get.

It is a musical sport, so let's really include it separately in the scoring and judge it on the skater's musicianship. Failing this, what is the rationale for using music?

Joesitz said:

MM - Your list of music references for the descriptions of musicality are scattered about on paper. Are they actually judged in reality? or is it just another case of full faith and trust in the system and all the judges follow these descriptions along with all the other descriptions for scoring?

Click to expand...

The question in bold above cannot be answered by anyone except the judges. Do you know any? Have you spoken to them, do you know if they do? If not, then mistrust and scepticisim about the judges is a different side of the same coin that places trust in the judges that they are judging fairly and correctly.

Joesitz said:

My feeling is that music plays an enormous part in Figure Skating, and I don't think anyone would want it not to. However as said above it is judged by scattered notes, and does not play all that big a role as other Headings in the Definitions of the Program Components.

Click to expand...

Jo - can you tell us why you think this? Again, unless you are a judge, or know judges and have spoken to them, how can you know how the judge came to the conclusion that the marking of the PCS in each category came about because of other more important headings than musicality? I just don't understand how you can conclude that :scratch:

Joesitz said:

My suggestion is: To move all those notes to a separate Heading called Musicality and let it be judged as Skating Skills, Transitions, etc are.

Can you imagine? "She got a level 1 on her Musicality" But if that is what she deserved, that's what she should get.

Click to expand...

To be honest i think you are deliberately making a joke, however, if Musicality became a separate PCS heading - you wouldn't be awarded levels like the elements are - that is part of the TES. Personally i'd be happy to see a heading covering just musicality, butit comes down the same issue - provided that the judges give it the correct mark rather than simply giving it a number in the same range as the other PCS. If the judges are not marking each heading correctl then scrap the heading - have one big nebulous concept of the PCS and let them award one mark as a place holder if that is all they are doing now...i suppose that's for another thread though!

Joesitz said:

It is a musical sport, so let's really include it separately in the scoring and judge it on the skater's musicianship. Failing this, what is the rationale for using music?

Click to expand...

The rationale for using music is skating has been encompassed in the rules for ever. MM pointed out all of the instances where the music is relevant to the current skating rules. You, however, are skeptical that the judges actually mark these things, but have nothing to substantiate that skepticism. I'm all for adding a separate heading of musiaclity that could encompass the choreography - suitability of movement/lines to the music etc, would it bein addition to the already existing headings or would one go?

Ant

antmanb said:

I'm all for adding a separate heading of musiaclity that could encompass the choreography - suitability of movement/lines to the music etc, would it bein addition to the already existing headings or would one go?

Click to expand...

The Interpretation component is all about the skater's musicality. One whole program component out of the five. Rename it Musicality in your mind if that helps.

The way the program is laid out in relation to the musical sections and phrases is part of the Choreography component, but there are other aspects of that component that don't relate specifically to the music.

gkelly said:

The Interpretation component is all about the skater's musicality. One whole program component out of the five. Rename it Musicality in your mind if that helps.

The way the program is laid out in relation to the musical sections and phrases is part of the Choreography component, but there are other aspects of that component that don't relate specifically to the music.

Click to expand...

Feel free to tell Joe that then, it was his suggestion not mine, i was merely looking into his idea in a bit more detail. I think the headings of the PCS are fine, i just don't believe the judges can actually mark all five heading properly and don't. Whether or not they are swayed by more musical skaters or not is beyond anyone's comprehensin but the judges.

Ant

The component that I have the most trouble with is Choreography. Since this is a separate component from Presentation and Interpretation, it ought to be possible for a judge to say, "that was great choreography (7.50 for the choregrapher's vision!), but unfortunately the skater did not perform the choeography very well and was not able to use the choreography to interpret the music (5.50 for Presentation/Execution, 5.25 for Interpretation).

This obviously never happens. I agree with Joe's basic idea that it is unreasonable to expect the judges really to apply all the different bullets for these three PCSs and come up with a defensible weighted average type of score for each, which would be in the spirit of the IJS. I think it would be OK to have one "gestalt" score for the three "2nd mark" components.

It is interesting to me that of the five component scores, Transtitions is almost always the lowest across the board. I think this is because it is the easiest to quantify. The judges can tell the difference between "many and difficult transitions and moves in the field," "adequate connecting moves," and "what transitions?" This requires less pure judgement than trying to decide the precise level (should it be 6.50 or 6.75?) at which the performer "radiates energy" or exhibits "originality of purpose."

Mathman said:

The component that I have the most trouble with is Choreography. Since this is a separate component from Presentation and Interpretation, it ought to be possible for a judge to say, "that was great choreography (7.50 for the choregrapher's vision!), but unfortunately the skater did not perform the choeography very well and was not able to use the choreography to interpret the music (5.50 for Presentation/Execution, 5.25 for Interpretation).

Click to expand...

Can you give examples of performances for which you would give scores that disparate for Performance/Execution, Choreography, and/or Interpretation?

Oksana Baiul's showtunes long program and Evgeny Plyushenko's Carmen (among others) come to my mind as programs for which I thought the skater's interpretation was far superior to the choreography.

gkelly said:

Can you give examples of performances for which you would give scores that disparate for Performance/Execution, Choreography, and/or Interpretation?

Click to expand...

Maybe Slutskaya, 2005-06 season?

At 2005 Worlds she got 8.43 in Performance/execution and deserved every point of it.

I didn't see anything to write home about in the choreography (but she still got 8.21)

At Cup of Russia she got 8.10 in performance/execution (again deserved) and 7.90 for choreography (??). BTW, one judge gave her 5.75 in choreography and also 5.75 in transitions, which I thought were about right.

Then at the Olympics she did the same choreography with a stinko performance -- and only very slightly lower scores in both.

It seems like if you skate the same program twice, once well and once poorly, the choreography mark ought to be the same, but not the preformance/execution. I doubt that this is often the case. We do not see wild swings in performance/execution with steady choreo marks across different competitions.

It is harder at the elite level to separate the choreography from the interpretation. But I would imagine that it is the rule not the exception at the lower levels that the coach/choreographer has a wonderful idea for a program that the tone-deaf skater doesn't have a clue about how to perform.

Maybe Shen and Zhou, 2003 Worlds, would be an example where the interpretation of the skaters outshone the rather ordinary choeography by quite a bit. Michelle Kwan both outperformed and out-interpreted her choreography after 2002 (The feeling Begins, for instance.) Some of Lori Nichol's work with Fumie Suguri went the other way, I thought.