http://www.iceskatingintnl.com/current/content/kiss and cry.htm
This article was written by someone I know. Comments?
This article was written by someone I know. Comments?
I agree with the article basically. And the point of the article is really completely different from whether or not CoP makes sense, it has to do with the ancilliary drama of the kind any successful sport needs.
For all its flaws, the presentation of marks was superbly dramatic under real 6.0, especially in international competitions when the judging wasn't considered something shameful that required anonymity and judges nationality was shown.
A partial fix:
Break down the TE scores into jumps, spins and footwork (three is better than nothing) and then present the PC scores one by one.
Or, alternately, show the TE and PC scores by judge ....
The biggest problem is that the numbers still don't mean anything to most viewers (I still can't say for sure what good SP and LP scores are). One way around this might be to give the scores against theortetically perfect marks.
Figure out what the absolute highest TE score possible is and flash that next to the score the skater gets.
But I even remember during the interim judging period between SLC and CoP also sucked real bad. Seeing a bunch of marks and knowing that some of them (which?) wouldn't be used was just stoopid.
To me, that right there is the problem. A sport should not be in the business of telling the fans "what they need to do." That's backwards.What fans need to do is to take the time to find out what the scores mean.
To me, that right there is the problem. A sport should not be in the business of telling the fans "what they need to do." That's backwards.
Quite a few TV networks already have the score to beat displayed when skaters are in the kiss and cry (doesn't that feature in US broadcasts?). Really, if people are watching an event and some unknown skater gets an 88 in her LP, Caroline Zhang gets a 104, Carolina Kostner gets a 118 and then Mao Asada gets 125, it's not exactly rocket science who did well and what's going on. If Jeremy Abbott's PB is displayed as 220 and then he gets 238, then it should be obvious that he did well. If Brian Joubert's SB is 86 for an SP and he can only manage a 74-75 (GPF), that's not great. This is not difficult math (note: I randomly chose names; this does not reflect my views on these skaters' talent or on the fairness of CoP judging).BINGO! It should be intuitive to fans what a good score is and what the skater needs to move onto the podium. As it is, the casual fan has no clue what is good and what is not and so is turned off --> lowered ratings overall --> less skating on TV --> lowered ratings, etc
A partial fix:
Break down the TE scores into jumps, spins and footwork (three is better than nothing) and then present the PC scores one by one.
Or, alternately, show the TE and PC scores by judge ....
Figure out what the absolute highest TE score possible is and flash that next to the score the skater gets.
But I even remember during the interim judging period between SLC and CoP also sucked real bad. Seeing a bunch of marks and knowing that some of them (which?) wouldn't be used was just stoopid.
IMHO, no matter how sternly we lecture the paying fans about why they should enjoy figure skating competitions under CoP judging, they don't.
IMHO, no matter how sternly we lecture the paying fans about why they should enjoy figure skating competitions under CoP judging, they don't.
To me, that right there is the problem. A sport should not be in the business of telling the fans "what they need to do." That's backwards.