More on the Code of Points | Golden Skate

More on the Code of Points

RealtorGal

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
I really do like the code of points. However, I am surprised and, frankly, confused by how QUICKLY the judges are entering their scores for so many different categories! I could understand such speed under the previous system--after all, how long does it take to punch in "5.8"?

Just wondering... :D
 

Emilieanne

Rinkside
Joined
Sep 3, 2003
I would think that maybe they are evaluating each item on an "as it is done" basis. That's the way it seems to me...
 

tharrtell

TriGirl Rinkside
On the Ice
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Rgal - Sasha was awarded 197 points for all three of her GP events, but she didn't give the same performance three times. Maybe they new in advance what they were going to award and that's why they can enter the scores so quickly??
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Realtor Gal - Yup. I'm with you. The concept is great but in actuiallity I think it is impossible. It causes a 'rush to judgement' and that breeds conspiracy theories. Why not have the judges take their notes home and watch the competition again on video and then come to mark all those categories sensibly?

Joe
 

SusanBeth

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Joesitz said:
Realtor Gal - Yup. I'm with you. The concept is great but in actuiallity I think it is impossible. It causes a 'rush to judgement' and that breeds conspiracy theories. Why not have the judges take their notes home and watch the competition again on video and then come to mark all those categories sensibly?

Joe

Seriously??

I can just hear it, ''The judges will retire for the evening to await the highest bidder.''

I don't think anything will ease people's doubts but years of solid judging.

At this level, the judges are familiar with the skaters and their programs. That would tend to speed things up. It would be interesting to see how long it takes them to rate a newcomer.
 

Skate Sandee

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
I thought the judges have a list of all the skaters planned elements. That would presume they have a number attached to each element ahead of time on the paper, and just to the - or + as the caller relays it to them. I would think that would make it easy to tally up the program component marks quickly.

Of course I have no idea how they can come up with the presentation part.
 

hockeyfan228

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Joesitz said:
Realtor Gal - Yup. I'm with you. The concept is great but in actuiallity I think it is impossible. It causes a 'rush to judgement' and that breeds conspiracy theories. Why not have the judges take their notes home and watch the competition again on video and then come to mark all those categories sensibly?

Joe
It could be like a piano or ballet competition, where they lock the judges away without food or toilets and with audio tapes and their notes and they fight it out until they gain consensus on the placements.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
tharrtell said:
Rgal - Sasha was awarded 197 points for all three of her GP events, but she didn't give the same performance three times. Maybe they new in advance what they were going to award and that's why they can enter the scores so quickly??
But Sasha did not get the 197 points with the same points awarded for the same things. For example, in her SP at Lalique, she had upgraded her spiral sequence from a Level 2 to a Level 3 by adding a change edge and another change before the fan spiral. In her Lalique LP, her Component scores were in the 6's and 7's rather than 7's and 8's, which also happened to skaters at Cup of China, lower Component scores for all skaters, which was explained as the judges being tutored by the ISU in how to more accurately score the Components. So for her LP in Lalique, Sasha had higher Element scores in some areas because she had added more difficulty (seperentine instead of straightline footwork; more difficulty on one combination spin) but she had lower Component scores. Had Sasha received the same Component scores at Lalique that she had at SA and Skate Canada, she would have had over 200 points. With the way the two high and two low scores are thrown out for each Element and Component, plus the scores of two random judges thrown out, IMO there is just no way that the judges can know in advance what scores they are going to give a skater.

I'm no schooled judge in the COP but just for the heck of it, I set up a piece of paper so I'd just have to mark in the Element score and the Component score. It simply is not hard. In fact, if I were a judge using the computer system plus having a caller, I'd find it easier than the 6.0 system. To me, the 6.0 system now seems so clunky and inaccurate. As was demonstrated with Elena Liashenko, she not only moved up from 7th to 1st at Cup of China, but did so skating first in the last flight.

Let me put it this way: When you first started on the Internet, didn't it seem incredibly fast? Like "How will I ever understand all this?" Now it's like "Hurry UP!" Or typing. When I learned to type on a manual typewriter (some of you may not even know what I'm talking about, lol), I could type about 50 words per minute. On an IBM Selectric, about 75 wpm. On a computer keyboard, on a good day, 120 wpm. Part of it was the technology and part of it was just practice. Or heck, think gameshows like "Jeopardy." At least the judges know what they're going to see. Remember, judges can and do watch practices.

No doubt the COP definitely needs improvements IMO, but as far as entering the scores, I see no problem. Remember, the judges are not watching their "favorite skaters" (okay, some are, lol) the way a fan does. They're doing a job and concentrating on specific elements one after another. True, it's fast and it makes me think the judges really should get paid. My only concern is that at large competitions like Nationals and Worlds, the judges are going to be mentally exhausted by the time they get to the fina skaters. But once you understand the COP and have the technology to help you (I just had a piece of paper with the Elements and Components listed), it really is not hard. I just wish people would look at the Detailed Results before they make comments like the above--and you know how much I respect you and your opinions, Tharttell, so I'm thinking maybe you were kind of joking, yes?;)
Rgirl
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
SusanBeth - Sometimes I should use the :laugh: sign to explain my humor. But my feelings about 'rush to judgement' remain.

rGirl - Sasha has fabulous perfect spirals. How could she upgrade them? Sometimes, the edging is off, but the spiral positions are textbook plus. I think the three similar scores for Sasha or any skater for that matter, shows that the judges have preconceived marks for the skaters. Not exactly a new idea among skeptics, like me, but brought forth into the new system. Let's face it, it makes life easier.

We'll have to agree to disagree on whether the fast markiing down of elements as they shoot by the eyes. Of course, waiting for Liashenko to do her lutz, a judge has time to examine the technique closely without rushing to a mark. But some skaters have intricate moves in the fields as well as tricky footwork flashing by. Are the judges busy marking the computer with their eyes away from skater? Possibly, imo.

As I've said before, I'm not against the CoP. I think it needs a serious discussion by a serious representative group (not just cronies of Speedy), at the end of the season, and it definitely needs tweeking. I would give it another two GP years before putting it into the Olys.

It is the Olympic Committee which is demanding reform of Figure Skating judging. Speedy is more interested in eliminating any uproar of fans on judging results (secret judging is a must) or out Figure Skating goes from the Olympics. think about the position Speedy is in.

Joe
 

nymkfan51

Medalist
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Joe ... for Sasha's spiral, I believe she added the COE ... although she really didn't stay on that edge more than a second or two.

And I agree with Rgirl ... I like this system, but hope they will be forthright in addressing the things that need to be changed. All in all though, I think it gives alot more credit for things other than jumps ... and to me that is all good!
 

chuckm

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Country
United-States
Sasha also skidded a bit on the COE, and yes, she didn't stay on it long. Changing the edge is a little bit risky for her, because she often doesn't have good edge control.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
I agree. Sasha did attempt a serpentine spiral that did not quite make it. Maybe the judges gave her extra credit for the attempt. She is not the only one. I think my Bebe, too, attempted a serpentine spiral and didn't quite make it. It's very difficult to hold a spiral on a solid edge and continue the speed; to change edge on it just makes it all the more awesome. Kwan is a master of the serpentine spiral because of her edges

Joe

I just realized there is another thread on Sasha's spiral so I'm moving my last paras to there.
 
Last edited:

elingrace4eva

Rinkside
Joined
Aug 5, 2003
I really like the COP system too. It took a little getting used to, but I'm beginning to see where the scores are coming from. Plus, it truly is more fair. I mean, look at the ABC Winter Challenge. Judges put Sasha in third, even with her 3 falls, and her double foot, and her step out. Even if she got 6.0s in presentation, this program is not a technically 3rd place program. Under the COP, this never would have happened, so it really does make things more fair.

My opinion
Kat
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
"Of course, waiting for Liashenko to do her Lutz, a judge has time to examine the technique closely without rushing to a mark." -- Joe
Joe, I can't let that go by without a :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

BTW, I know someone named Lutz and he pronounces it Lootz (oo pronounced as in look). Does anyone know what the correct pronounciation of this name is?

Mathman
 
Last edited:

thvudragon

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Mathman said:
Joe, I can't let that go by without a :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

BTW, I know someone named Lutz and he pronounces it Lootz (oo pronounced as in look). Does anyone know what the correct pronounciation of this name is?

Mathman
In my Art Hist. class, there's a painter by the name of Lutz, pronounced "Lootz." I think though, I like lutz, not lootz, better.

TV
 

moyesii

Rinkside
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
elingrace4eva wrote:
I really like the COP system too. It took a little getting used to, but I'm beginning to see where the scores are coming from. Plus, it truly is more fair. I mean, look at the ABC Winter Challenge. Judges put Sasha in third, even with her 3 falls, and her double foot, and her step out. Even if she got 6.0s in presentation, this program is not a technically 3rd place program. Under the COP, this never would have happened, so it really does make things more fair.
Sasha Cohen received the lowest tech marks in this group:
3. Sasha Cohen
5.3 5.3 5.2 5.0 5.4
5.7 5.7 5.7 5.5 5.6
4. Jennifer Robinson
5.1 5.4 5.4 5.2 5.4
5.3 5.5 5.6 5.4 5.4
5. Jennifer Kirk
5.3 5.3 5.3 5.4 5.2
5.4 5.4 5.5 5.5 5.4
But she received the highest presentation marks. If these same judges marked these skaters under CoP, what makes you think the results would have been "more fair"? The tech marks would have been about the same, but the judges would have inflated the presentation components, but then I guess that at least you could "see where the scores are coming from". :rolleye:
 

moyesii

Rinkside
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Thank you for the links, giseledepkat. It is an interesting read. Marie Hughes seems to be impartial. Also, she was annoyed by the fact that they rushed through the entire presentation and didn't give a lot of time for people to ask questions or to ponder on any one thing for too long. :laugh:

Here are some interesting sections from the report:
Supposedly a benefit of CoP is that you have comparable statistics between events. Again Charlie was frank that this isn't working out as planned. There have been problems with inconsistent calling and with the program components not being marked properly. Until those are fixed, comparing marks between competitions won't be possible.
They mentioned once again that skate order doesn't matter. Once again I rolled my eyes. This is such a canard. It's human nature to 'loosen up' with your marks as a competition goes on. This won't change under CoP... Under the current system, if a judge is doing their job, all that skating early means is that if the first person to skate the Short Program should be in first place, they will be in first place with lower marks than if they skated last.
By their own admission, skating skills and transitions are part presentation and part technical. Now, personally I think skating skills are 100% technical and transitions are about half and half but for the sake of the discussion, I'll accept their definitions. So if skating skills and transitions are worth a maximum of 10 points each and are about half technical and half presentation, then a skater can get a maximum of 60 points for things that used to be called technical and a maximum of 40 points for things that used to be called presentation.

I pointed this out. I expected people to nod their heads. I wasn't sure what the official response would be but it doesn't matter because instead of people nodding their heads, pretty much every judge in the room who was involved some way in CoP, plus quite a few other people, argued with me!
I know how she feels! :laugh:
In the new system, the computer will compare each judge's marks to the results and deviations will be measured and penalized. I believe Charlie said 'harshly' penalized but my notes don't show this. However, they haven't figured out the formulas yet and what is considered punishable deviation. So I guess we'll see what actually happens.
Another item that was brought up was how great it was that a skater could move up from sixth or seventh to first with a great short program. At this point, the meeting was kind of breaking up and since I don't happen to think having cumulative marks is automatically horrible, I didn't bring up the fact that there has been less movement overall with CoP (so far) than there would have been with factored placements.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2003
Originally posted by Chuckm:
Sasha also skidded a bit on the COE, and yes, she didn't stay on it long. Changing the edge is a little bit risky for her, because she often doesn't have good edge control.
Sasha did a change-edge spiral all last season and did fine. True, she only held her CE in her SP at Lalique for about a second, but first time out this year, plus she'd made significant changes to other parts of her SP and LP. As for Sasha often not having good edge control, I disagree. Her catch-foot turning spiral is one of the most beautiful examples of edge control I've seen and the reason her edges are more difficult to hold on her arabesque spiral is precisely because her leg is so high. (There was an excellent biomechanical anaylis of this by Mzheng and others last season.) I would agree that her edges are not as strong as Michelle's or Irina's, or even Shizuka's or Suguri's, but then Sasha shines in areas they don't, such as flow and dance ability. Of course I'd like to see Sasha improve her edges, but to say she often doesn't have good edge control--just not true from what I see.

As for the assertion that at IFSC Sasha's Component scores simply would've been elevated to make up for her poor Technical marks, the data we have from the GP series does not support this. As I said on another thread, given that Sasha fell three times and two-footed another jump, that means she would have received ZERO credit for three jumps ***Edited to add: FOUL BUZZER: THE PREVIOUS INFO ABOUT ZERO CREDIT FOR FALLS IS WRONG! SEE CORRECTIONS IN HOCKEYFAN'S SUBSEQUENT POST*** and would have received a mandatory deduction for the two-foot landing of -3. ALSO EDITED: As for the component scores, at SA, Sasha's LP Total Component Score was 68.88; at SC, 69.28; and at TL, despite having skated much better, 66.80. However, the judges had been giving all skaters lower component marks since Cup of China when the ISU notified the judges to pay more attention to EXACTLY what each component meant. After all, this is a process. Anyway, with three falls and a two-foot, all the judges would have had to give Sasha all 9s and 10s in her component scores and skaters like Jenny 6s and 7s in order to keep Sasha in 3rd. Remember, two judges don't even count, the two high and two low scores are thrown out, which leaves five judges' scores to determine the placements.

I love discussions and disagreements about the COP, but if people are going to make assertions about it, I think they should at least make the effort to understand it [EDIT: NOTE TO RGIRL: AND TO REMEMBER THE RULES!] and become familiar with the kinds of results skaters are getting. Otherwise just say, "I don't know enough about the COP to have an opinion yet." That I can understand and respect. After all, right now, there are a lot of areas regarding the COP about which nobody knows enough to have an opinion about yet and minor changes are being made as we speak. All the Detailed Results for all the GP events are up at the ISU website, ie, http://www.isufs.org/results/[initials of event, eg, sa, sc, cc, tll, cr, nhk, no space, 2003]/index.htm, eg, http://www.isufs.org/results/tll2003/index.htm. If you're going to accuse the judges of holding up a skater and always giving her the same scores no matter how s/he skates, then back it up with data from the Detailed Results. One of the reasons Sasha scored well at all three of her GP events is that she skated relatively well at all of them. Skate Canada was her worst and that was only the second time the COP was used. I don't think there was holding up but just lack of experience with the system. They're not going to get this thing right the first few times out, but it's still far better, IMO, than the kindergarten method of the 6.0 system. And at least in the ladies', men's, and pair's events I've seen so far (screwed up taping the dance finals until Lalique and haven't watched them yet) the I've felt the placements were either certainly correct or arguably correct. At least with evenly matched skaters, such as Pang/Tong and Petrova/Tikhonov, with the former winning over the latter at SA by only .12 points, you can see exactly how close it was--as can the skaters.

I do have some responses to some of the seminar statements, but it's late and I've griped enough for one night:)

One question I do have: I've heard Terry Gannon say that the judges can look at the video tape of any part of a skater's program to see if the skater hit the right edge on a jump or not. Yet I haven't heard anything about this on any websites or discussions about the COP. Anybody know if the judges are able to use video NOW or if this is something planned for next year?
Rgirl
EDIT: P.S. Thanks to HockeyFan for correcting my mistake about the COP and falls. I will now go to detention to study the ISU rules for the COP:)
 
Last edited:
Top