I used to love the COP

doubleflutz · Oct 31, 2010

Tonichelle said:
I think the two hands are less awkard looking than the one hand tano... which seems to just wave wildly above the head.

I think it depends a lot on who is doing it, how they're doing it, and what they're trying to convey with it. All the little novice/junior girls who stick their arms up in the air on every. single. jump. because it's an easy way to get +GOE are painful.

With elite skaters, though, I think a 'tano done well can look very balletic and elegant - it is a classical ballet arm position, after all. Or even very masculine and sharp, depending on how the arm is held, something that could be appropriate in a male Carmen program or something flamenco. Obviously, it comes down to execution.

There are programs where the double-fist could work artistically, too; it's not innately bad. I just don't think those are programs Rippon is likely to be skating. It's the jarring mismatch that bugs me, not necessarily the move itself. Of course, if he started doing the variation with his hands not clasped, sort of ballet-style, like some ladies do laybacks, that would look wonderful! I suspect that would be even harder, though, both in terms of keeping the arms upright in a good position, and making it harder to draw in and rotate. I think the arm position he uses now probably helps to compensate a little bit. An open one would probably be even more difficult.

Tonichelle · Oct 31, 2010

Even Boitano's arm flings around wildly at times... when it's done perfectly it looks good, but that doesn't happen all the time.

doubleflutz · Oct 31, 2010

Blades of Passion said:
It's nice that the jump has become a trademark for him but I don't think it is especially great technically. He jumps small, lands a bit short, and doesn't have beautiful outflow. Yeah, the air position is extremely difficult, but it's not one of the best Lutzes out there. I'd give +1 GOE for his best efforts at it and +0 for the times when the rotation and outflow (and even straightness of air position) have been clearly compromised.

+1 GOE to whatever other GOE you'd give his lutz (which for me would usually range from 0 to +1, depending), or +1 overall? I'd agree with the former, but not the latter. Although I guess it's a matter of six of one, half dozen of the other. The arm variation definitely doesn't automatically transmute his jumps to being +3 GOE quality, no matter what some of the judges at Skate Canada seem to think. Personally, I think if he does the best lutz he's capable of AND does the arm variation (with the caveat that yeah, it will probably suffer a little on the height department no matter what), he should be getting +2 GOE.

janetfan · Oct 31, 2010

Mathman said:
I am not necessarily a fan of difficulty for difficulty’s sake. As Doubleflutz wrote wrote, an extra feature which adds difficulty but does not support the choreography or interpretive theme is a mixed blessing.

What was so compelling about Janet Lynn’s performances was that the technical elements were woven into the warp and woof of the program so seamlessly that they seemed utterly effortless, pleasing beyond expectation, even – in retrospect – inevitable in their harmony with the rest of the program.

My, you really are walking on the sunny side of the street tonight.

The Alissa factor? She sure had me smiling ........even the Lion's won

Don't forget Janet used to jump with an arm raised over her head - she did it at 14 at the '68 Olympics.

brightphoton · Oct 31, 2010

Poodlepal said:
So bring back 6.0. At least you got those cute flag icons.

You know what I hated about the 6.0 system? It's when the scores and placements came up, all the commentators would say things like "oh, of course the East German judge marked her lower" or "we can expect that the British judge will mark our ladies higher."

Or even the "Her marks have to be lower because she's skating earlier. There has to be space for other skaters." For heaven's sake, give the lady the score she deserves.

6.0 is ambiguous. Why did she get a 5.4 and not a 5.6? I dunno, she didn't skate very pretty, maybe? I bet the French judge marked her down because of her nationality! With CoP, you can look at the protocol and know exactly what a skater did well on and what she needs to improve on.

Gymnastics left 10.0, and skating has left 6.0. Good riddance.

Hikaru · Oct 31, 2010

Joesitz said:
Falls, unfortunately, do not show much skating skills. No?

That's exactly what I think as well. Any skater can have wonderfull skating skills (great use of the edges, speed, good technique in execution of elements, etc.) BUT if in a competition you make mistakes, at that very moment, the skating skills cannot be graded as great.

janetfan · Oct 31, 2010

brightphoton said:
With CoP, you can look at the protocol and know exactly what a skater did well on and what she needs to improve on.

.

Yes, it is easy to see there is nothing Patrick needs to improve on. Under the miracle of CoP scoring he can fall three times in an SP and still get very good marks.

I guess the judges thought his falls were very good. :rolleye:

Tonichelle · Oct 31, 2010

janetfan said:
I guess the judges thought his falls were very good.

he got full rotation on the buttspin (my dad's favorite move, ranks right up there with the waxel).

janetfan · Oct 31, 2010

Tonichelle said:
he got full rotation on the buttspin (my dad's favorite move, ranks right up there with the waxel).

I like the "waxel" :laugh:

And what did the CoP tell Javi - that he is second rate even with two clean skates?

doubleflutz · Oct 31, 2010

brightphoton said:
Or even the "Her marks have to be lower because she's skating earlier. There has to be space for other skaters." For heaven's sake, give the lady the score she deserves.

That's actually a good thing about 6.0. The scores were just placeholders for rankings, they weren't supposed to represent some sort of absolute measure of quality, that stays constant across competitions. As long as no one who came after a skater actually skated better, their placement would hold and they would get the medal they deserved, barring the psychological affect of skate order, but that happens no matter what, 6.0 or COP.

6.0 is ambiguous. Why did she get a 5.4 and not a 5.6? I dunno, she didn't skate very pretty, maybe? I bet the French judge marked her down because of her nationality! With CoP, you can look at the protocol and know exactly what a skater did well on and what she needs to improve on.

Except COP marks are not necessarily very informative on that score, even when it's being marked correctly, which it seldom is. What makes one skater's triple axel worth +1 GOE (amazing speed in and flow out) may be different from another skater's (huge height and great air position); there's no way to tell that from the protocols.

At the same time, let's say through the magic of time travel, in one competition Alissa Czisny at her best and Lucinda Ruh at her best, perform the exact same spin variation, for the exact same number of rotations. They probably both deserve +3, and yet there's no way in the scoring system for the judges to give Lucinda points for being as amazing as she really is. Unless they start bending the rules, and just scoring things according to their overall impression of skaters, which they pretty much have done for most of COP's existence, and is also pretty much a perfect description of what 6.0 is supposed to do.

The only really good thing about COP is the tech panel, the addition of levels, and the way elements are identified and added up in terms of their base value. Everything else is based on a pretense that doesn't really work for judging a subjective sport: that you can rank everything a skater does on an absolute scale of values, and that for any given program and set of technical elements, there is a "best" it could ever be performed. No way.

miki88 · Oct 31, 2010

The reason I prefer 6.0 over CoP is not because one is fairer over the other, but I felt the judging on 6.0 didn't take itself half as seriously as the present system. At times, the judges even basked in the obvious bias of the system and that provided great entertainment.

NorthernDancers · Oct 31, 2010

While I believe the CoP system will continue to undergo tweaking, especially with PCS, I don't expect it will go away. That's wishful thinking for a bygone era which isn't as good as some remember. There are just way too many good things about CoP for skaters and the sport as a whole. Skaters have a way to track their own growth, improve their skills, and know exactly where they stand. For the skaters at all levels, from Juvenile up to Senior, the report card is the first thing they go to get after a competition. It's not just about beating others, but about improving themselves. And let's face it....in a sport where only a handful of skaters ever reach the national or international stage out of thousands and thousands, it has to be about passion for the sport and personal improvement. For the sport, there is clear criteria and a much better credibility to the system. Is it perfect? Not really, but it is a ton better than what was in place before.

I do think the ISU and local federations right down to the local club level should start an education campaign for fans to help explain how the CoP system works. A lot of the angst on these boards would be relieved if people understood the system better. It would be REALLY interesting if a judging panel and tech specialists held a forum after a competition to explain how they arrived at their marks as part of that education plan.

Kimmie Fan · Oct 31, 2010

Mathman said:
I am not necessarily a fan of difficulty for difficulty’s sake. As Doubleflutz wrote wrote, an extra feature which adds difficulty but does not support the choreography or interpretive theme is a mixed blessing.

Exhibit A. Denney/Barrett's ugly 'butt' up in the air death spirals. <shudder>

gmyers · Oct 31, 2010

I think the factor of PCS should be reduced. Why is Ice dance the only one in which different PCS are worth different percent?Maybe if the factor of PCS was reduced in the short and long Patrick Chan's score in the SP wouldn't have been an astonishing success story in skating. I was wrong he did get all -3's for his falls on his two jumps but on his step sequence his negative GOE was from -1 to -3 as I learned that a judge must reduce the GOE from wherever they were leaning like no judge was at +3 so he got no base values but some judges were at +2 so they were the ones that went down to -1. There was some GOE manipulation in TES on the step sequence not on the jumps. Some judges went nuts with Chan's 3/3 combo. It wasn't that great. There need to be reforms so a three fall short program doesn't produce an astonishingly great score.

brightphoton · Oct 31, 2010

doubleflutz said:
Except COP marks are not necessarily very informative on that score, even when it's being marked correctly, which it seldom is.

Now, now.

doubleflutz said:
The only really good thing about COP is the tech panel, the addition of levels, and the way elements are identified and added up in terms of their base value. Everything else is based on a pretense that doesn't really work for judging a subjective sport: that you can rank everything a skater does on an absolute scale of values, and that for any given program and set of technical elements, there is a "best" it could ever be performed. No way.

When we see lots of skaters consistently getting +3 on lots of elements, the standards will change next year, so not as many get the +3. As far as I am aware, most skaters are lucky to get a +1 or even +2 at most for elements.

doubleflutz said:
At the same time, let's say through the magic of time travel, in one competition Alissa Czisny at her best and Lucinda Ruh at her best, perform the exact same spin variation, for the exact same number of rotations. They probably both deserve +3, and yet there's no way in the scoring system for the judges to give Lucinda points for being as amazing as she really is.

Yeah, it's too bad Ruh can't get a level 34 with a +948 GOE. Although, I don't remember her getting a 8.4 under the 6.0 era either. You couldn't give Lucinda any spinning points in 6.0 because there was no spinning component. She was such a poor jumper than she lost loads of points on the technical element anyway, so 6.0 never had to worry about rewarding her sufficiently.

bekalc · Nov 1, 2010

Northern Dancer, there is no way that the ISU is going to "educate me" into liking a system where an excellent skater like Chan can have a 3 fall advantage over good skaters like Oda and Rippon. To me that says that the actual performance of a skater doesn't matter one IOTA.

The more I learn about how PCS are "suppose to be judged" the more disgusted I am about this sport. Because its clear they are setting it up where outcomes are essentially predetermined. And is if Patrick Chan has that much of a cushion over good skaters like Oda and Rippon. Or where Yu-na at Worlds can get higher PCS than Mao in the long because everyone likes Yu-na's program better and it has more choregraphy and transitions. Who cares if Asada skates lights out and Yu-na is lackluster and messy.

I'm not one who wants to see it just a jump contest. I'm not one who thinks one fall your out. But when you get to multliples.

And the idea that a FALL on a triple axel gets you 5 something points and a Fall on a Quad 6 points is the most ridiculous and insulting thing I've ever read as a fan. I was all for those jumps finally getting worth more. But I never wanted falls to get rewarded like that. That takes away the advantage of actually landing it.

If they want to make it so PCS has nothing to do with performance than at the very least they need to go to mess up an element-no points.

janetfan · Nov 1, 2010

bekalc said:
The more I learn about how PCS are "suppose to be judged" the more disgusted I am about this sport. Because its clear they are setting it up where outcomes are essentially predetermined. And is if Patrick Chan has that much of a cushion over good skaters like Oda and Rippon. Or where Yu-na at Worlds can get higher PCS than Mao in the long because everyone likes Yu-na's program better and it has more choregraphy and transitions. Who cares if Asada skates lights out and Yu-na is lackluster and messy.

I'm not one who wants to see it just a jump contest. I'm not one who thinks one fall your out. But when you get to multliples.

And the idea that a FALL on a triple axel gets you 5 something points and a Fall on a Quad 6 points is the most ridiculous and insulting thing I've ever read as a fan. I was all for those jumps finally getting worth more. But I never wanted falls to get rewarded like that. That takes away the advantage of actually landing it.

.

Good points - and there is a strong pre-determined feeling that seems to be getting stronger.

Chan mentioned practices - but since when do good practices determine a skater's score :eek:

Do good practice quads and 3A's matter? If I was judging it might have the opposite effect -making it more obvious a skater making mistakes in the competition - did not perform up to their capabilties.

2010 Worlds is a good example - it shouldn't have mattered that Yuna was the new OC - in the LP I thought Mao outskated Yuna.

"I watched with shock and awe and horror. I find the new marking system to be stupendously flawed -- as political and as inaccurate as the former one."
Toller Cranston

"I mean, listen, we talkin about practice."
Allen Iverson

lavender · Nov 1, 2010

janetfan said:
Good points - and there is a strong pre-determined feeling that seems to be getting stronger.

Chan mentioned practices - but since when do good practices determine a skater's score
Do good practice quads and 3A's matter? If I was judging it might have the opposite effect -making it more obvious a skater making mistakes in the competition - did not perform up to their capabilties.

2010 Worlds is a good example - it shouldn't have mattered that Yuna was the new OC - in the LP I thought Mao outskated Yuna.

I still don't get that. I don't know what they were watching. Mao definitely outskated Yu na at worlds (short and long). Cheating is still alive and kicking.

The things that comes out of Chan's mouth just baffles me more and more. I really wish he would just say nothing.

museksk8r · Nov 1, 2010

bekalc said:
If they want to make it so PCS has nothing to do with performance than at the very least they need to go to mess up an element-no points.

The penalty for falling needs to be increased. A mandatory 1 point deduction just doesn't cut it. In gymnastics, exercises with a fall are generally 3 to 4 points less than exercises without a fall. Someone falling 3 times in one exercise in gymnastics would be completely out of the game . . . 9 to 12 points back from a clean routine.

What was really embarrassing for the US commentary was when Michael Weiss was explaining that skating is unlike basketball and much more difficult because skaters would be out of the game if they missed 50% of their jumps only to see Chan do just that, falling 3 times, and still remaining in medal contention whereas shooting 50-60% of your baskets in bball is pretty good.

gkelly · Nov 1, 2010

museksk8r said:
The penalty for falling needs to be increased. A mandatory 1 point deduction just doesn't cut it. In gymnastics, exercises with a fall are generally 3 to 4 points less than exercises without a fall. Someone falling 3 times in one exercise in gymnastics would be completely out of the game . . . 9 to 12 points back from a clean routine.

But in gymnastics there aren't points for standing on the beam between tricks or running on the floor to set up a tumbling pass or vault. The setups aren't part of the sport, they're just ways to get into the judgeable moves.

But in skating, what happens in the process of getting from one trick to the next is skating. That's the first, most important thing that's being judged, and the tricks are the second most important. So there's plenty of room for skaters to build up enough points with their skating to make up for a few errors on the tricks. Gymnasts don't have that opportunity because of the different nature of the sport.

Falling off the beam or bars or rings means that the routine has completely stopped and the gymnast has to remount or be lifted back onto the apparatus to continue. That's a much more significant disruption than falling on the apparatus (ice or floor), getting back up, and continuing immediately.

A fall in skating would probably be more comparable to a fall in floor excercise or a "landing" a trick on rings or beam or bars on the wrong part of the body, losing momentum, and having to regenerate it before going on to the next trick but without falling off.

So for both reasons, it doesn't make sense to say that falls are more costly in gymnastics than in skating and therefore skating needs to change to be more like gymnastics.

Nor should gymnastics change to be more like skating in that sense either. The sports are too different in terms of the importance of the basic interaction with the medium and the effect of falling.

I used to love the COP

doubleflutz

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll

doubleflutz

janetfan

Match Penalty

brightphoton

Hikaru

janetfan

Match Penalty

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll

janetfan

Match Penalty

doubleflutz

miki88

NorthernDancers

Kimmie Fan

gmyers

brightphoton

bekalc

janetfan

Match Penalty

lavender

museksk8r

gkelly

Similar threads

Connect with us