Performance/Execution mark. Should it be changed?
This is something I have been thinking about for a while, and I think the PE section in the PCS should be reevaluated. This is why:
Example: Skater A performs the program very well, but the execution of the elements are poor. On the other hand, Skater B does not perform the program very well, but the execution of the elements are very good. How does one score these two skaters?
I think the current categories should be changed to Performance/Interpretation, and Execution. To be clear, execution would not just be spins, jumps, and steps, but the overall feeling/cleanness of the program. I think this is more fair to the skaters because a good performance doesn't mean you executed everything very well (e.g. Takahashi at Skate America), and good execution (Ando, Flatt) doesn't mean you performed very well.
What do you think?
An interesting question and I wish I knew the answer. Maybe someone can explain it.
Chan had the second highest P/E at SC, and yet he fell four times.
What does the performance stand for in the CoP?
And what is this execution about? Is it about executing the performance components or the elements - or all of it?
Is it a form of built in reputation scoring since it seems to reward the best skaters in areas where they are already scoring points?
If a skater executes their jumps well they will get points. Is it really necessary to reward them for it again?
Likewise if they show good choreo and IN they get points for that. Is the performance score simply rewarding them again?
Last edited by janetfan; 11-15-2010 at 12:19 AM.
I think people should read the descriptions and criteria for all the different components and settle down.
Originally Posted by SkateSkates
Yeah, me too. It's a silly rule.
Originally Posted by janetfan
I just think everyone constantly freaking out about Performance/Execution mark scores for flawed programs needs to calm down. It really ought to be called the "Standing Up Straight, Pointing Your Toes, Smiling, And Looking At The Audience" mark, but "P/E" is a much nicer abbreviation than "SUSPYTSALATA".
Oh, I'm totally going to start calling it Suspytsalata. What language is that?
it's no secret that a Fall by a skater with little or no Reputation, will get hit hard in his/her/their PC scores.
The standard Tech deduction should be re-evaluated as to show the element being judged had a serious fault. A -1, imo is no more than a wrist slap, and the cause of the Fall is without a doubt faulty skating skills, and should be reflected as such.
We are accepting a sloppy Sport where the intention of the Sport was to be musically beautiful.
Justification on past performances is not in line with the Rules of the CoP.
Originally Posted by Joesitz
I thought the intention of the sport was to show control of blade edges on ice.
Doing it beautifully and/or in time to music is more difficult than doing it any-which-way, so therefore beauty and musicality are rewarded.
Still, it's a sport. Skaters take risks, attempting difficult skills on a slippery surface. Sometimes they won't execute them as beautifully as anyone would like. The sport can still acknowledge the difficulty of the attempt and the aspects that were executed successfully while giving less reward for less than beautiful execution.
I agree that the problem is, it is not cleal what "execution" ought to mean.
Originally Posted by SkateSkates
I understand "performance. Give 'em the old Raz-ma-taz, make them laugh, make them cry, and always leave them wanting more. Since each of the five program components counts only ten per cent of the total score, I think it is perfectly appropriate to give a ten per cent bonus for the Al Jolson or Gene Kelly effect. (This also includes the exquisitely beautiful performances where you leave the arena bawling like a baby from the sheer soulfulness of it all.)
But "execution?" The whole shebang is "executing" your progam (in the sense of "carrying it out," not in the sense of marching it to the guillotine. ). This is already what is marked in Choreography and in Interpretation. You do not receive points in Choreography because of what your hired choreographer put on paper. You receive points for successfully executing the intent of the choreography in your performance.
Likewise, you do not deserve extra points because Beethoiven was great composer. You earn points in Interpreatation by conveying the spirit of Beethoven's music to the ice by the execution of your program.
My preference would be to bundle all three, Perforance, Choreography and Interpretation, into one mark, worth 25% of the total.
Originally Posted by Mathman
Definition: is the involvement of the skater/couple/teams physically, emotionally, and intellectually as
they translate the intent of the music and choreography.
Execution: is the quality of movement and precision in delivery. This includes harmony of movement
in Pair Skating and Ice Dancing.
Physical, emotional, and intellectual involvement
In all skating disciplines each skater must be physically committed, sincere in emotion,
and equal in comprehension of the music and in execution of all movement.
Carriage is a trained inner strength of the body that makes possible ease of movement
from the center of the body. Alignment is the fluid change from one movement to the
Style and individuality/personality
Style is the distinctive use of line and movement as inspired by the music.
Individuality/personality is a combination of personal and artistic preferences that a
skater/pair/couple brings to the concept, manner, and content of the program.
Clarity of movement
Clarity is characterized by the refined lines of the body and limbs, as well as the precise
execution of any movement.
Variety and contrast
Varied use of tempo, rhythm, force, size, level, movement shapes, angles, and, body
parts as well as the use of contrast.
The skater radiates energy resulting in an invisible connection with the audience.
And what of the skating skills?
Some could make a strong case that Patrick has superior SS and his choreo is more complex than a skater like Joubert or Plushenko.
A counter argument is that Joubert and Plushy are better performers and do a better job of drawing the audience into their programs. Part of it is from the way they interpret the music ....at times
Another area of contention is that despite Patrick's SS he does not seem anywhere near Dai when it comes to interpretation or performance.
Can a skater show good choreo without good skating skills?
Can they show good choreo without being as extroverted - maybe Jeremy comes to mind.
However one thinks the TR should not be as subjective as we see because it feels like something that is more defineable. It gets credit in the tech and the pcs just as SS does and P/E does.
It is also pretty obvious that no matter how we mark these various components judges will have different preferences.
I think they all work together - and the argument about Jeremy vs Joubert in the pcs sort of proves this.
When seniorita points out the crowd appeal of Joubert she is not being a fan because what she says seems true.
Other fans call Joubert's high pcs hogwash saying he can't touch Jeremy on the artistic components.
Perhaps combining some of the components is a good idea. Regardless it feels more connected to me than the current system admits.
Joe's point about "entertainment" is denied by those not willing to see skating for what it really is - which is sports entertainment. It is about so much more than 'blades on ice."
Last edited by janetfan; 11-17-2010 at 11:50 AM.
I'm going to describe three programs. Let's say these are junior ladies competing in a short program at a club competition for which they have paid a three-figure entry fee. If they do really well in both programs, they might get considered for a JGP assignment.
Jessica has quite solid edges with good control, pretty good speed, and average difficulty in the in-between skating. She lands 3S+2T and 2A solidly with good flow; she also attempts a 3Lo but slightly underrotates and falls. Her spins have solid basic positions and centering, medium speed, no extreme flexibility positions. She skates to a generic action movie soundtrack and moves in time with the general musical phrasing, but there is not a lot of subtlety in the music and she doesn't try to find much detail in her interpretation. Jessica has good posture and strong but not exceptional positions. She looks up at the audience often and maintains a pasted-on smile.
Sadie skates with similar speed and difficulty, but her edges are a little more wobbly throughout and her posture and extension are a bit floppier. She lands her 3S+2T one foot, but underrotated; she only executes 2Lo, which is fine, and 1A out of and into spread eagles, which is nicely executed but not according to junior SP requirements. Her spins are about the same speed, with more creative but less stretched positions and moderate traveling. She skates to a romantic song in waltz rhythm from a musical comedy -- she fully embodies the character from the show, expressing not only details of the musical rhythm but also the character's emotional journey through nuanced upper body gestures and facial expressions, and she makes frequent eye contact with the audience.
Louann's basic skating is slightly slower and scratchier, with less fluid edges and stiffer knees. She lands 3T (downgraded)+2T, 2A (underrotated), and 2Lo, all on one foot but telegraphed and kind of clunky on the landings. Her spins have interesting thematic positions with changes well timed to the music, but they're kind of slow and the positions a bit stiff. She uses more difficult turns in her transitions and step sequence than the other skaters, but at much slower speed. She also does a lot of posing in place between elements. When she needs to gain speed for the jumps, she uses many simple crossovers with arm movements to the music. The steps and poses are very creative, thematic, and exquisitely timed with the Leroy Anderson novelty music she has chosen to skate to. She continually engages the audience with eye contact and mischievous facial expressions.
I would expect Louann to earn the highest scores for Choreography and Interpretation (probably higher on CH than IN), with Sadie second on those components (probably higher on IN) and Jessica third. But I think clearly the order for Skating Skills should be Jessica - Sadie - Louann. For Transitions we'd need more details.
What do we think about the Performance and Execution?
Jessica executed everything very nicely except for the one fall on the difficult jump that no one else tried. But she didn't really perform in an artistic sense.
Sadie and Louann both performed on an entertaining show for the audience, but technical weaknesses in their elements, skating skills, and body positions keep them from meeting the Carriage and Clarity of movement criteria as well as Jessica did. And despite staying on their feet, they deserved many more negative GOEs on the elements.
So how should these three skaters compare in their PE scores?
Would those differences be reflected if the three components of PE, CH, and IN were all collapsed into one score? Or would they all average out to the same number?
Which of these skaters would you most want to see qualify for national or international competition at the junior level and why? Which would you most want to see skate an exhibition program in a show?
Which scores, if any, should be based on entertainment value?
I think this two category should be ditched and multiply the remaining three with higher multiplier or what ever number needed. IMO these two are already accounted in the GOE for the elements. At least the PCS will be more fair and given out for actual ability of the skaters and what they non jump wise.
It would be nice if all those bullets were judged separately. The question is how are the officials judging these bullets? From what was explained to me some time ago, the judges do not have to consider ALL the bullets - just the ones they choose to and the choice is for different skaters as well. We just get a score for Interpretation based on selected bullets. This "beautiful sport" is not fair. And what there is of beauty lies with a few skaters - certainly not below the senior level, and not below the world standings at the senior level. We should not confuse beauty with precocious children as in a Pagaent. Let's keep the Sport at a Grown Up level. Beauty, need I remind anyone is in the eye of the beholder.
Originally Posted by wallylutz
As for judging falls beyond the -1 penalty, a Fall in a program screws up that program in more ways than one., that is Technically, Musically, Choreographicly, etc. Sad because many of my favorites do Fall but I do not believe in going back to a previous no-fall-program to justify the present one. There's always another comp coming up to be judged anew.
I think the intention of the CoP was to score based on what you see is what you get.
Originally Posted by mathman
Thank you for quoting the rule book to me. (Actually, I have this page bookmarked, too.)
Originally Posted by wallylutz
You did not, however, address the question of this thread. The question is not, what are the rules? It is, rather, should the rules be changed, and if so, how?