01-27-2010, 08:06 PM
Here's what I think:
1. Obviously we have judges for a reason. This is not a popularity contest, there are rules, there is protocol, and the judging must adhere to those rules.
2. If they are going to slam some skaters for UR, they need to be consistent and call every UR from every skater. Otherwise the protocol is not applied fairly and it skews the scoring.
3. The tendency of judges to hyper-inflate the points for non-jump elements from skaters who consistently jump well needs to stop. Rachael should have been docked hard for some of those horrid spin positions. They were not even average.
4. Scott should not have declared Mirai the winner on National television before he knew the results. That's just basic common sense for all commentators.
5. IMO, Mirai should have won. But in the end, all this arguing isn't going to change a thing, and the same two skaters would be going to the Olympics regardless. Flatt and Nagasu both deserve to be Olympians.
01-27-2010, 08:53 PM
Originally Posted by Dark-Eyes
Base value (the value of the element before GOE) of non-jump elements (spins, spirals, footwork) is dependent on the LEVEL of the element as determined by the tech team. There are specific requirements for each level.
For spins, the level is assigned based on the number of position changes during the spin and the number of rotations achieved in each position. There are also specific requirements of where the feet and leg positions must be relative to the trunk. The value of the spin gets higher with each level achieved. But how 'pretty' the spin looks to observers has nothing whatever to do with the level attained. Rachael received level designations of L4, L4 and L3 for her spins in the FS (Mirai got all L4s).
For the spiral, level is based on the number of positions achieved and the time spent in each position. Again, how 'pretty' the spiral looks to observers has nothing whatever to do with the level. Rachael and Mirai both received L4 for their spirals.
For footwork, level is based on the number, direction and complexity of steps plus the movement of head, upper body and trunk during the length of the step sequence. Both Rachael and Mirai received L3 for their step sequences.
GRADE OF EXECUTION
In addition to the base value of the non-jump element, each judge then evaluates the element for execution and style (and this includes how pleasing the element is to the eye) and rates the element by assigning Grade of Execution from -3 to +3.
Judges would not give negative GOE unless there was a fallout or loss of balance on a spin or spiral, or a stumble in the steps. Neither Rachael nor Mirai had any errors on those elements, so neither one got -GOE.
But while Rachael got mostly 1s and 0s for her spins and spiral, Mirai received hardly any 0s, and mostly 1s, 2s and even a few 3s. Rachael got higher GOEs on her footwork than Mirai, but overall, Mirai outscored Rachael on non-jump elements combined by about 2.5 points.
The bottom line is that all elements in a program are evaluated according to specific technical requirements, and a skater cannot be penalized for not being as flexible as another skater.
The problem for skaters who excel at the non-jump elements but aren't as good at jumps is that there are only 5 non-jump elements in a Ladies program, but there are 7 jump passes. Furthermore, the jumps tend to be worth more than the non-jump elements. A less-proficient jumper who could achieve L4 in every non-jump element AND received +3 GOE from all the judges might be able to edge out a great jumper who had average non-jump elements. But I've yet to see that.
01-27-2010, 09:17 PM
Originally Posted by chuckm
01-27-2010, 10:01 PM
There are also specific requirements of where the feet and leg positions must be relative to the trunk. The value of the spin gets higher with each level achieved.
This refers to features such as the hair cutter (where the skate must be near to or touching the head), the sit spin (where the knee must be at the same level with the lower part of the butt), the change of foot/edge held through a minimum number of rotations, etc. These requirements deal with the LEVEL of the spin, and have NOTHING to do with how pretty the spin looks. As long as the technical requirements are fulfilled, the spin achieves the level according to the number of difficult positions attained and held. LEVEL is assigned by the tech team.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, which is why the panel of judges assign the grade of execution and can award more points for flexibility, extension, looks. The final GOE is an average of all the judges' GOEs with the high and low thrown out.
Incidentally, dark-eyes, it would be helpful if you read the WHOLE post instead of singling out one sentence and reaching an erroneous conclusion.
Here are the detailed rules for evaluating elements:
Changes for 2009-2010:
Basic Rules 2008-2009:
Last edited by chuckm; 01-27-2010 at 10:10 PM.
01-27-2010, 10:36 PM
^ Still, I think honesty compels us to point out that the judges at U.S. Nationals really liked Rachael's performance (so did I), compared to the judgement of international officials.
Rachael skated lights out in the long program at Skate America, too. Her progrm components were more than five points lower there than at nationals -- a full point lower in every one of the five compoments.
Also, even the briefest glance at the GOEs shows that Rachael got pretty much straight zeros across the board for almost every element. At Nationals, half or more of her GOEs were positive.
Nothing wrong with this. Why shouldn't the USFSA judges like their champion? Still, we can't get all self-righteous about what one skater or another deserved according to the ISU rules. The judges at Skate America interpreted the same rules less generously.
Last edited by Mathman; 01-28-2010 at 09:26 PM.
01-27-2010, 11:28 PM
I've been looking for protocols that show the GOEs, levels, etc. Anyone have a link?
01-27-2010, 11:42 PM
Originally Posted by MFarone
Click on Detail
I think you need to have an account on IceNetwork to access this page.
01-28-2010, 09:02 AM
Double bingo - let's not forget the most mediocre of spirals can also get level 4.
Originally Posted by Dark-Eyes
Actually Chuck's posts were helpful especially to older 6.0 fans.
Mirai needs to sove her ur problem which may take a while even with hard work.
Let's also give Rachael and her coach credit for knowing how to use the system. And let's not forget Rachael has worked hard to get the level four spins and spirals.
The CoP is not about beauty and does not reward beautiful skating the way 6.0 did.
It is more about execution and meeting the rule requirements.
There are very few skaters who can excel at CoP and deliver beautiful skating.
Yuna is the best at it. Mao used to but edge calls and stricter urs have made it more difficult for her..
It appears that if Mirai can fix her urs she can join the elites as one of the select few capable of beautiful positions and presentation with CoP's version of correct technique.
Last edited by janetfan; 01-28-2010 at 09:49 AM.
01-28-2010, 09:38 AM
The Spokane Arena had about 7500 for the ladies FS. All of the top finishers got standing ovations. Mirai might have gotten a little more of a rousing standing ovation than the others. The Spokane audience was very supportive and enthusiastic with all of the skaters at all of the levels. I was listening to the technical specialist David Kirby (who was not actually working the event) on my Skatebug radio. I only remember him mentioning an underrotation for Mirai on one jump - and I really thought she took first. When the scores came up, I knew it had to be more than one underrotation.
Originally Posted by Joesitz
I enjoyed Rachael more at this Nationals than any previous competition I've seen her at. She really put some personality into the presentation and really sold the program. Ashley really sold her program and racked up a lot of points, but I didn't like all the 2A sequences.
I'm not a Sasha fan but thought she did ok in the SP. I was surprised there was no edge call on the lutz (she flutzed in practice). The combo was very tight but I don't think she 2footed. The free skate was another matter. I now believe she was injured during the fall and her free skate was really sad. This was the sixth time I've seen Sasha at Nationals and I haven't ever seen her 2foot so many jumps. The fall looked really painful. Her footwork was kind of slow and not very impressive (don't know what level it got). I think she is finished with competition - JMO.
Thanks for the link to the protocols.
01-28-2010, 04:02 PM
That is not entirely true.
Originally Posted by janetfan
The tech team is concerned with requirements being met to assign levels. It is not their job to deal with aesthetics.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The judges are the beholders in figure skating, and they can reward beautiful skating with high GOEs on the elements, and high component scores for the performance.
They can also reward clean athletic skating in the same way.
01-28-2010, 11:46 PM
Levels and GOE
Listening to David Kirby on the Skatebug radio in the Spokane Arena really helped me understand the levels. I also realize that I can not possibly count rotations in each spin, length of each spiral position, etc. and still enjoy the performance. I have a skating buddy who can do that, I just can't. It was nice to listen to Mr. Kirby count the positions, etc. and watch at the same time. Fluff was not present while the skaters were doing their programs.
I still find the GOEs hard to understand. I went to look at the protocols today and am puzzled for instance by Ashley Wagner's sp 3lutz fall which had GOEs of -2 and -3. I thought a fall always meant a -3, but maybe this has been changed. Also her layback spin, level 3 had GOEs ranging from +2 to -1 which I don't understand.
Sasha SP had scores on her 3lutz/2t of +1 to -2. I don't get it. If the GOEs were 0 and 1 or 2 and 3s I could understand it - but the spread really confuses me.
Any help understanding this is appreciated!
01-29-2010, 01:09 PM
As far as this bingo thing goes, I understand that Dark-eyes' interpretation of the rule is not actually what is meant by it, but I think it should be. The point is that if the rules are going to state that there are requirements of where the feet and legs must be relative to the trunk, then it should be more clearly defined. Many people could probably get a foot somewhere near their head, but it sure wouldn't be pretty. For instance, I am persistently bothered by the number of skaters who do poor, I mean really poor cannonball sit positions. This really extends to quite a number of the top skaters. The free leg should be absolutely straight and parallel to the ice, with the head at the knee of the free leg, and the back well stretched, not rounded. You can notice that Sasha Cohen and Mirai Nagasu both display excellent examples. "But," you might say, "those two are far more flexible than most skaters so it's unfair to say that that should be the standard." But, the cannonball sit is a position that requires quite a bit of flexibility to do properly, so merely bending the torso forward and pulling the knee of the free leg up to the head regardless of the leg position, in my book, should not meet the requirements of that spin position. And besides, if the judges have GOE to award points for aesthetic qualities of the element, or how fast or centered a spin is, then shouldn't they also be justifiably using the GOE to deduct points for poorly executed elements of certain levels? I know this happens in extreme cases, but it should be viewed just like an under-rotated jump. The skater has more or less achieved the requirements to be considered a cannonball sit, but the execution of that position is poor and will be given a negative GOE. I believe there is still a provision in the rules that positions demonstrating full split positions in spiral sequences will count towards achieving a high level. However, skaters are still able to reach L4 sequences without this attribute. But, isn't executing a change of edge spiral while maintaing a full split position considerably more difficult than doing so with the leg held just above the hip? Of course, and so shouldn't that be considered not only better executed, but more difficult? A spiral is not required to be in a full split position to be considered a spiral, though most would argue that a spiral achieving that is better executed than one that does not. I'd say that is not necessarily false, but that it is unquestionably more difficult. Obviously we can't have levels that can increase ad infinitum, but if that's the case, there should be much greater discrepancies in the GOE marks between skaters like Rachel and Mirai or back in the day, skaters like Irina and Michelle.
Originally Posted by janetfan
01-29-2010, 08:25 PM
As far as spirals are concerned, level depends on edging and the number of difficult features. If the change of edge comes at the right distance from the start of the spiral, the spiral will get an extra level. The split position, which makes Sasha's and Caroline's spirals memorable, is just one of a number of 'difficult' features, but it is NOT required. Each of the difficullt positions must be held for a minimum time in order to get the desired level. A level1 spiral is worth only 1.80 base points, while a level4 is worth 3.4 base points.
In addition to the base points awarded per level, judges award (or subtract, if the skater has a balance break or a wobble), grade of execution points. Beautiful spirals will receive higher GOE than those which are not particularly aesthetic. Rachael, Mirai, Ashley, Sasha and Caroline Zhang all achieved L4 spirals, but the points awarded were different for each lady: Caroline 5.54, Sasha 5.26, Mirai 4.97, Ashley 4.69, Rachael 4.11.
01-30-2010, 08:18 AM
it's olympic season :D
Something I thought interesting about the final scores was that the highest total score (base value + GOE) for a jumping pass was Bao's 3T+3T, outscoring Flatt's 3F+3T significantly... it goes to show you that sometimes doing something simple you know you can do well is the better choice than just going for the difficulty and keeping your fingers crossed. Definitely something Mao could learn from... (although I think she is more interested in the record books than medals. general viewers tend to remember skaters with the "big jumps" more than medalists imho).
01-30-2010, 01:37 PM
A 3t-3t combination isn't exactly "simple" though. It's worth more than a 3lz-2t and most ladies don't attempt it in programs meaning they probably can't do it consistently enough to put it in a program. It might be the easierst 3-3 combination but it still is a 3-3 combination and therefore easily prone to UR calls.