Men - Free program | Page 19 | Golden Skate

Men - Free program

Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Agreed. I think this kind of blatant misjudging is probably more common at lesser competitions, namely ones leading up to GPF. I recall at last seasons' competitions, there was similar controversy in the overscoring---namely of Joannie Rochette. Bottom line is: judges will bend the rules to have their top skaters eligible for GPF.

That is the part that I don't understand about the "politics and bias" theories. The judges in the men's event were from Spain, Germany , Russia, Canada, USA, Japan, Sweden, Italy and France.

What possible motive would any of these judges (except Canada) have for inflating the scores of Patrick Chan?

Why would any of them want to cheat to insure that Chan makes the Grand Prix Final, rather than Oda (Japan), Rippon (USA), Fernandez (Spain), Preaubert (France), Gachinski (Russia), Berntsson (Sweden) or Bachini (Italy)?
 
Last edited:

mishieru07

On the Ice
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
What possibly motive would any of these judges (except Canada) have for inflating the scores of Patrick Chan?

I'm not a believer of conspiracy theories but it could be a case of vote swapping. Federations push only for their strongest skaters who have the best shot at medalling and trade votes with other countries, such as in the SLC scandal. You
scratch my back, I scratch yours. Or maybe outright bribery in some form; political support for people seeking for higher posts (eg technical committees).

But really, i've never really understood PCS scores anyway so I prefer to think that the judges see what I don't. People have remarked that Chan does look much more impressive live; maybe a poster who has seen him skate live can comment?
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
But really, i've never really understood PCS scores anyway so I prefer to think that the judges see what I don't.

A lttle bit off topic, but that is what is wrong with the CoP. The audience is no longer allowed to feel like they are involved in the competition. We just have to sit on our hands until the judges tell us whether the program we just saw was good or bad.
 

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
A lttle bit off topic, but that is what is wrong with the CoP. The audience is no longer allowed to feel like they are involved in the competition. We just have to sit on our hands until the judges tell us whether the program we just saw was good or bad.

not really, we still boo when we don't like it, and hte ISU goes back and tweaks. Expecting this judging system to work straight out of the gate like so many believed was unrealistic. It's more complicated than just doing "you're first, second, third"

maybe they should just do away with judges all together and just stand all the skaters out on center ice and go to each one and allow the audience to clap for the one they liked best. Because THAT would be SO MUCH MORE fair :rolleyes:
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
not really, we still boo when we don't like it, and hte isu goes back and tweaks. Expecting this judging system to work straight out of the gate like so many believed was unrealistic. It's more complicated than just doing "you're first, second, third"

maybe they should just do away with judges all together and just stand all the skaters out on center ice and go to each one and allow the audience to clap for the one they liked best. Because that would be so much more fair :rolleyes:

thank-you
 

museksk8r

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 31, 2006
Country
United-States
Exactly! 6.0 had major problems. COP has major problems. Any judging system that employs such different subjective opinions to decide outcomes is going to have major problems/disagreements. I don't believe this sport can exist without controversy. Gymnastics is the same way. I think for an athlete to decide to participate in this sport, he/she HAS to be prepared to face heartbreaking results and expect what is perceived to be unfair outcomes. He/she has to have an intense love for the sport itself because the system and the politics involved will really challenge their patience and faith. It's really the same way for us as viewers.
 
Last edited:

Jaana

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Country
Finland
I'm not a believer of conspiracy theories but it could be a case of vote swapping. Federations push only for their strongest skaters who have the best shot at medalling and trade votes with other countries, such as in the SLC scandal. You
scratch my back, I scratch yours. Or maybe outright bribery in some form; political support for people seeking for higher posts (eg technical committees). ?

I think that would only work, if (same or even various) judges from same countries would be in each of the GP events? And that is never the case, I believe, as the judges come from so many different countries... On the other hand of course everything is possible, LOL.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
maybe they should just do away with judges all together and just stand all the skaters out on center ice and go to each one and allow the audience to clap for the one they liked best. Because THAT would be SO MUCH MORE fair :rolleyes:

No, that would not be a good system. But I do think that, from the point of view of the audience, figure skating competitions are not as satisfying emotionally as they used to be.

Part of the reason, in my humble opinion, is what mishieru07 said. When we don't agree with the results, now we tend to say, "well, I'm a big dummy and the ISU knows all, so I'll just flip the channel."

Under the old system, I was still a big dummy, but for some reason I didn't flip the channel as much.
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
No, that would not be a good system. But I do think that, from the point of view of the audience, figure skating competitions are not as satisfying emotionally as they used to be.

Part of the reason, in my humble opinion, is what mishieru07 said. When we don't agree with the results, now we tend to say, "well, I'm a big dummy and the ISU knows all, so I'll just flip the channel."

Under the old system, I was still a big dummy, but for some reason I didn't flip the channel as much.

And if popularity is the goal..... then we need to solve this. Of course, I hope popularity isn't the goal.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
That is the part that I don't understand about the "politics and bias" theories. The judges in the men's event were from Spain, Germany , Russia, Canada, USA, Japan, Sweden, Italy and France.

What possible motive would any of these judges (except Canada) have for inflating the scores of Patrick Chan?

Why would any of them want to cheat to insure that Chan makes the Grand Prix Final, rather than Oda (Japan), Rippon (USA), Fernandez (Spain), Preaubert (France), Gachinski (Russia), Berntsson (Sweden) or Bachini (Italy)?
isn't Dore the number 2 Man in the ISU and wouldn't it be nice if we pleased him said the judge to the score sheet?
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
And if popularity is the goal..... then we need to solve this. Of course, I hope popularity isn't the goal.

I agree, that is the key question. I think that the ISU is more and more drawing a circle around itself to keep outsiders out.

That's OK...I guess...

Edited to add: But it would also be nice for skaters if they got to perform in front of full houses, and on network TV, and if they could attract sponsorships so that their parents wouldn't have to fork out a hundred thousand dollars a year to keep them on the ice. And it would be nice if there were more opportunities for touring and performing after their competitive careers are over.

So I don't think we should be so quick to dismiss "popularity" as mere pandering to the unwashed masses.
 
Last edited:

mishieru07

On the Ice
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
A lttle bit off topic, but that is what is wrong with the CoP. The audience is no longer allowed to feel like they are involved in the competition. We just have to sit on our hands until the judges tell us whether the program we just saw was good or bad.

Haha I've always felt this way, even under 6.0! I know you love Michelle Kwan but I must confess I don't understand why Shizuka Arakawa didn't get a single 6.0 for Artistic Impression for her FS at 2004 Worlds, for example. I thought Shizuka absolutely sold her programme and was phenomenal. What I like about the IJS is the objectivity of it, at least technically. I still don't know to this day what deserves a 5.4 or a 5.6 on technical elements. Artistry has been and will always be subjective, regardless of what system is used.

As a dancer though, I fully understand that some things cannot come across on a screen as well as live. Things like stage presence and charisma. Not quite the same as watching through a screen! I don't always agree with the PCS and occassionally wonder if the judges are on a high but they are professionals, not me.

Eh I'm more inclined to think a lack of emotional involvement is due to the IJS structure. We do tend to see fairly generic programmes (arabesque spiral, biellmann, side split catch foot anyone?), especially when in the early years when they had so many required elements and the skaters were struggling with the transition! It has gotten better and I do have many favourites who have skated wonderful, emotionally satisfying programmes. Crappy judging hasn't really stopped me from enjoying skaters - Akiko is a good example. I just take things with a huge pinch of salt.
 

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Well, first of all, I should state that #8 is an awful criteria for determining the GOE of a jump and needs to be removed from the rules. The placement of a jump in relation to the music is part of choreography and interpretation. It should have absolutely no bearing on scoring the QUALITY of the jump itself. Spins and footwork are different because they last longer (and they also never have to be the same, whereas a Quad or Triple Axel or Triple Lutz, etc, is ALWAYS pretty much the same thing) so it makes more sense that one aspect of judging those elements, especially with footwork, is tied to their musicality.

That aside, if #8 is to be used to give an extra bonus to the GOE of a jump, it should only apply when the jump is used to interpret the music in an extremely special way. Patrick Chan's Quad did not have any special relation with the music.

I disagree. I think it is used as a bullet to assess if the jump is executed right on the beat (the planned timing--no delay, no rush into the jump), not about interpretation or choreography at all.

You said No to 4) good height and distance but Tracy Willson commented on his good height ("he made the quad look like a double, the speed, the height, and the ease"). I believe you are an established skating expert as she is, and she is potentially biased as you are. So one canceled the other. It is really a judgment call. It can go either way and deserves no protest. I would give the judges the benefit of doubt because they watched the jump live in the actual competition. You were not in the competition, were you? Judging from a TV angle can be very skewed.

It is so ridiculous that some posters even assigned No to #6) good flow from entry to exit including jump combinations / sequences and 7) effortless throughout. It just shows how biased and self-serving one can be to express their vested interest.

I know the quad is only one element of the whole thing. But I am no skating expert and don't know about the rules very much. It is the only element someone lay out the guidelines for me, and through the guidelines I can see some people are watching through colored glasses and crying through their predetermined assumption.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
What is wrong with the CoP? The simple answer is to restudy it, and change much of its structure. Aside from the unnecessary GoEs, which the public is not fully equipt to understand, there is the confusion between the CoP Program Component and the 6.0 Performance scores. They are not the same, and it puzzles many fans who enjoy the contests, particularly if they were used to the 6.0 system. They are not about to study the CoP.

Mishieru - I also danced 100 years ago both on procenium stages and in the round stages. FS is like in the round since it is in an Arena. What fans who watch on TV see the skaters as being in procenium setting because that camera never leaves their body, but if you see LIVE skating, one does not get that procenium look from the skaters.

I agree that emotional involvement is lacking in many skaters, but that is due to their lack of life experiences and age. There is much more emotional involvement in Ice Dance. I think with a partner there is more emotions. For the Single skater, a Coach will show them how to mimic emotion.
 
Last edited:

bekalc

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
IJS is soo not subjective. Not when the judge still gets to decide to give one person a 9 for P/E execution and another person a 7. Not when the judge gets to decide to give one person Plus 2 GOE for their jump and another 0 GOE for their jump. Pleeease at the concept that IJS is objective.
And what ticks me off is that IJS clearly doesn't punish people very hard for major mistakes. You want to mention gymnastics, well as far as I'm concerned gymnastics as a sport is in much better shape. Yes there are issues and subjectivity. But the gymnasts still have to deliver. He Kexin is the best bar worker in the world-by far. But when He Kexin fell on bars at event finals-He Kexin LOST. It didn't matter that He Kexin has this wonderful high release. It didn't matter that she had this great form. She didn't deliver she lost.

In gymnastics the only way gymnasts can make up for major mistakes is if they have this HUGE difficulty, and also if their competitors have these huge major issues of their own. Its not because someone has a nice toe point on bars, or a nice swing for example. There are issues in the sport, but the scoring makes FAR more sense. Than the scoring of Patrick Chan's SP.

This whole thing is turning me of from the sport because its freaking clear that actual execution of your programs doesn't even matter in figure skating.

Laughing at the concept of major glaring errors being punished in skating when fall on a rotated quad- SIX POINTS.
 
Last edited:

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
I don't see this debate as Nationalism. I see it as the age old debate about what matters more: jumps or overall skating. The CoP is designed to reward what you do, not penalize you for things like jumps. It's ridiculous to suggest that Kevin Reynolds should beat Chan because he had 2 quads, as someone else has said.

Who has said Kevin Reynolds should have beaten Chan in the LP? I certainly didn't; Kevin Reynolds' FP was lacking. He most CERTAINLY deserved to win the SP, though. By a wider margin than what was actually scored.

A good example of how this isn't nationalism. Alissa (although falling) had the best program of the night, and absolutely deserved to win the women's event. She also got a standing ovation from the Canadian crowd.

That's not a good example at all. Crowds are always going to give applause to great performances. We are talking about judging and politics. Patrick Chan is "money in the bank" for Skate Canada and seen as one of the best skaters in the World. He often gets overscored because judges have a tendency to score based on reputation rather than what actually happened on the ice. The judging system also doesn't punish the mistakes he made harshly enough.

You'd have to be very uninformed to think skaters don't get a bit of a boost when skating in their home country, BTW. It is financially better for the ISU to have skaters place higher when skating in their own countries. Why? Because it increases ticket sales. When people see their countrymen doing well, it makes them want to invest in the sport more. Look at Evan Lysacek at 2009 Worlds. He scored drastically lowered than Patrick Chan all season long. Then suddenly at Worlds, in the USA, in Los Angeles no less, Lysacek's scores suddenly jumped up. Chan and Lysacek both skated cleanly in the SP, but Lysacek was scored higher.

I can see where BoP and Mathman are coming from, but I stand by my view. The risks of doing a quad are so high and if the possible points one could lose from falling/under-rotating it as opposed to landing a nice 3Lz with difficult entry and good GoE are considerable, then it would be smart to go for a safer layout. We need to reward people sufficiently for attempting quads and triple axels.

No, it wouldn't be smart to go for a safer layout if you NEED to do a Quad to defeat your competitors. Quads were EVERYWHERE in 6.0 and that was when a fall meant the element was worth basically nothing - even if it was a Quad. I already wrote a whole post on why people often stopped doing the Quad under CoP - underrotations were punished far too harshly and the value of the Quad in relation to other jumps was too low. Those problems have been fixed under the rules for this season (Quad combinations are still undervalued, though). We are instead left with the problem of BAD Quads being overvalued.

Everything boils down to cost-benefit analysis.

Yes, exactly. Another term is "risk/reward". As of right now, there is very little risk in attempting the Quad. If you fall, you're still ahead. You're getting FAR more points than if you hadn't done the jump at all and instead slotted in a Double Axel (which is the jump you perform in the LP if you're not doing a Quad, since every Male LP already attempts 8 Triples regardless of the Quad).

If two programs are equal in all other regards, the skater who does an 8 Triple + Double Axel program shouldn't automatically lose to the skater who does 8 Triples + a fall on a Quad. THAT is the problem with the current rules.
 

Tigger

Final Flight
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
I would like to thank all of you for making my Birthday yesterday. Really, I'm not kidding about that.

Reading all of the hysterical postings in here, and I do mean hysterical, has been most entertaining. Dear Lord on High...This is only a sport. A game. But the way some of you are going on, you'd think it was life or death.

Oh and one more thing...I've noticed that most of the posters who are going on...and on...and on...and ON are fans of a certain skater. A certain skater who we all had to put up w/winning events he really had no business winning. Who didn't even have a thimble of the talent Patrick and Adam both posess in spades. Of that certain skater boasting about how great he was when no, he really wasn't, but we had to listen to him and his fans gush ad nauseam and rub in our faces.

Sucks to be on the other side, don't it?

Thank you for providing me w/many laughs last night. I very much enjoyed myself. :biggrin:
 

chuckm

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Country
United-States
Skaters, 99.9 percent, will never be able to do 4 revolution jumps even when they train all their lives.

Your stats are WAY off. Of the 24 men who skated the FS at 2010 Worlds, 10 attempted quads---and some of the 10 men landed more than one quad. That's 41.6%. And there are other men who didn't go to Worlds who have landed quads.

At NHK, 15-year-old Yuzuru Hanyu landed a beautiful, clean quad in his first attempt.
 
Last edited:
Top