- Joined
- May 15, 2009
With Chan bouncing around on the Ice and others skating tall, the audience is confused except for Chan fans. The Chan fans look to that one item in the scoring system called Skating Ability which is a remnant of the 6.0 system. With Senior skaters, who's to say that one Rocker is better than another. The scoring item, Skating Ability is to hold up favorites for possible podium finish. A judge can say one skater has better basics than another and it is usually a favorite who is experiencing a melt down. We've seen it all before many times. This does not happen to the group outside the top five.
Much of what is covered by those bullets in Skating Ability should be, if they are not already, covered in the scoring system called Interpretation. One's skating ability is quite clear when considering interpretation.
I agree but would say one's skating abilty was rightfully broken into two categories - technical and presentation.
Is the choreography mark for the skaters or the choreographers?
Did Wilson beat Tat in Vancouver?
What about Carroll and Mishin? Wasn't Evan's 3/5 jump layout the decisive factor in his victory over Plushy and his 5/3 jump layout?
Does that seem like the best way to determine who is the Olympic champion :think:
Dumping on the casual fans is not the answer because there will be no GP series without casual fans filling the seats at these events. Or in some cases watching the broadcast.
Without a large enough fan base skating would cease as we know it. I reject the elitist views as folly.
I am often puzzled when fans say "what does 5.8 mean?"
Do these same fans realize that thousands more wonder "what does 179.5 mean?"
To me it is possible but difficult to use a CoP for the tech aspects of skating. I utterly reject this system for use on the artisitic components because they are too subjective.
It is comparative and although it still can lead to disagreements atleast we can understand when judge #1 ranks Evan first. The same is true when judge #2 ranks Plushenko first.
In a judged competition where music IN and choreography play such an important role a comparative system is going to work better.
Here is the deal - did I prefer Yuna or did I prefer Mao. Do not give me a bunch of mumbo-jumbo about SS, PE, IN, CH and TR. Tell me in a straight ahead manner who you thought had a better presentation/artistic skate that night. And tell me so I can see it clearly and let me know your name and what federation you are from.
Presentation Marks:
5.8 for Yuna and 5.7 for Mao. What does that mean? There is no doubt what that means.
My question is what does 179.5 mean? And how are the components being judged? Are they really telling us that Patrick's CH is worth more than Rippon's? Or that Oda's IN was a point better than Javi?
It all works together........it is why Kwan perhaps struggled under the CoP - not only with a bad hip - but because there is no mark in the CoP for what Kwan could deliver on the ice. There never will be a mark for that because it is a matter of the heart and not a number. It is how all of the components COMBINED can produce something special. It is the Janet Lynn factor which unfortunately seems to be fading away. Patrick does not have it and it doesn't matter in the CoP.
If a judge preferred Michelle over Sasha he showed us by placing her first with his ordinal.
Simple direct and it drew fans in because they got it. Irina could be a better technical skater than Michelle at times but rarely a better artistic skater. The overall effect of Irina's skating did not have the same emotional impact we felt from Michelle. There is no mark for that in the CoP and as a result the skating has become more mechanical looking as skaters only goal is to score the most points possible.
So we settle for a "choreographed smile" accompanied by awkard looking spins and spirals and footwork that looks like a snake has been dropped down the skaters shirt.
Last edited: