The most crowd-pleasing performance is not necessarily the performance that deserves the gold medal.
That is a very interesting point. Certainly, all things considered, it was utterly necessary for Joannie to win the bronze medal. I am sure the whole Olympic apparatus breathed a collective sigh of relief when she delivered a clean and excellent program. (Personally, I didn't see anything wrong with the jumps they dinged Rachael Flatt for, but what do I know?)Concern: Are everybody's jumps being scrutinized like this? Do they do it sometimes but not others? I always thought that if Mirai had skated earlier in the Olympics--and could potentially beat an underperforming Joannie or Mao, for example--they would have found something to pick on to keep her down. It was odd that she UR'd all season, but in the Olympics, out of medal contention, she didn't do it. But I may be paranoid.
In any sport it is always bad when the buzz afterward is on the officiating instead of on the performances of the athletes.
They say about skaters like that, "they have a one-fall, or a two-fall, advantage over the field" -- and I think they do, under either CoP or 6.0. Somewhere along the line, with the increased emphasis on jumping after the elimination of school figures, we forgot what the sport of figure skating is all about.
Perhaps there should be a slight bonus given for a clean performance. Under the current rules, a skater can fall doing a cross-over and get no deduction - but that fall takes something away from the overall performance. This is why the fans get annoyed - when they see one of these very rare clean performances not being rewarded.
The most upsetting scores are those scores which are win or lose based on the judges and tech panel. The skaters and their fans should not take offence on the outcome of a competition if such skaters showed their best that day.
The Tech Panel and the Judges know all to well what the competitors have shown in the past before a new competition. How much that affects their judgements, we do not know. I am sure they have developed a taste for styles which they like as well as the Fans have. Does that affect their judgements, we do not know.
What we all know, is that the changes in regulations from the 6.0 to the CoP are bigger than many Fans could imagine. Forget the jumps that get no points, e.g. the Walley, the Split Jump and the same jump to both sides. Some can be performed but at a personal cost. Forget the classical spins of yesteryear when you get more points for contorting your body. Pairs have become totally acrobatic and the line between it and Dance is getting more and more blurry. Still that emotional feeling some get may not be the same as the emotional feelings of the Tech Panel and the Judges. We don't know and one has to live with that.
The more important issue is the question of interest in the Figure Skating.
I think different fans . . . and probably different judges . . . have different priorities, so whenever a decision isn't an absolute knockout by a skater who appeals to all tastes, someone is going to be upset, regardless of "fairness."
Some fans find clean programs to be the most important aspect of an ideal winning program. So when a pretty good clean skate loses to a better but more obviously flawed skate, those fans will be upset.
Some think hardest jumps landed should be most important. So if the skater with the best jump content doesn't win, those folks will be upset.
Some are most interested in artistry. If a clean artistic program loses to less artistic but technically superior performance, it's disheartening.
Some are skating purists and want to see the best skater win, regardless of tricks and trappings. So if the winner is able to overcome weak skating skills on the strengths of jumps and/or charisma, the purists get upset.
No result is going to please everyone.
If the skater falls, s/he gets a 1.00 deduction off the total score.
If it happens on a crossover, that's the only penalty.
If it happens on an element, the skater gets negative GOE for the element (probably -3) and also gets the 1.00 fall deduction. (It's also likely that a jump with a fall will also be called as underrotated/downgraded and that a non-jump element with a fall will also get a lower level call than it would have if skated perfectly, but that's not always the case -- sometimes the fall happens after the skater rotated the jump sufficiently or completed enough features to earn the higher level.)
Last edited by gkelly; 04-19-2011 at 04:01 PM.
Last edited by Joesitz; 04-19-2011 at 04:05 PM.
The anonymity is a step backward in terms of public accountability. And that's not specific to IJS, it just happened to be implemented very shortly before the new judging system came in. Remember the "Interim System."
Everything else about the IJS is a step forward in accountability compared to 6.0.
Sure, there's room to make it even more transparent, but that takes more time, which would make the events move more slowly and be less exciting to watch live. So it's a tradeoff.
Perhaps there will be further steps forward in making the information about tech calls more accessible to interested fans in real time as technology advances.
I don't see why all of this is a condemnation specifically of the CoP. Under 6.0 judging, too, the ISU did not provide instant replays to the audience while the judges were mulling over their marks, trying to decide how much to take off a skater's score for various perceived errors.
For that matter, it is actually the television networks that provide the instant replays to the audience, not the officials or the league. In American football, the referee peers into an instant replay machine, but we don't get to see what he is seeing. Instead, we see the play over and over from various angles while the commentators tell us what they think.
In figure skating, they do the same thing. They show replays on the jumbotron and slow motion views of the jumps in question, with commentary, while the tech specialists are looking at their own replays.
Last edited by Mathman; 04-19-2011 at 07:49 PM.
6.0 as far as I know did not use secret replays of jumps to downgrade skaters. It they did it was never publicized. The tech panle did not exist as the skating was "judged" and not "measured."
And yes, NFL fans do see the exact replays the officials use for review. Every angle the ref sees we see.
It has always been shared as a way of keeping the fans interested not to mention the INTEGRITY of the game.
What a concept
Last edited by janetfan; 04-19-2011 at 06:03 PM.