Great site shows Protocols with Videos

[janetfan]

Yes, that is a wide range of opinion. It is subjective and subject to error. But I don't see how it's more subjective than 6.0.

In 6.0, some judges might think, for example, "Two different quads really sets him apart. So what about the falls at the end" and put him ahead of several skaters with no falls and no quads. Other judges might think "Two falls is a really messy program and need to be penalized. I'm not that impressed by the quads. Kind of tilted in the air, a tiny stutter on the landing . . . I wonder if they were even fully rotated." and put him behind those skaters. Would ordinals from, say 3rd to 10th reassure you about the objectivity of 6.0? We just accepted that it was necessarily subjective, and that's why there were 9 judges on the panel.



So if they both did nice 2A, they could both get +1 for it. Or +2 if it was really nice -- I think Kwan sometimes deserved that especially earlier in her career.

But what about Lipinski's 2A? I could easily see different judges giving both positive and negative GOE for the same jump: good speed in and out, but no "step up" and not much lift off the ice. Depends what each judge values more. And in 6.0, they could have been thinking of her 2A as a plus or a minus in terms of the overall score (relative to everyone else who also landed a clean 2A).

It is hard to disagree with your logic.
Let's get back to "judges are human"

I don't see how it is possible for humans to ACCURATELY process so much information (yea, it feels "nitpicky") in a couple of minutes.

Now if the judges and Tech panel took even 15 minutes to studiously review each performance I would find CoP more believeable.

To be honest I think they are going on a first impression and even the angle from where the judges are sitting could be the cause of a totally wrong mark.

If a system wants to measure on a more accurate, even scientific basis then what they do now feels like the opposite of that.

[prettykeys]

I'm shocked that Mao Asada received a << on her 3A in her FS. There is no way that it was that underrotated.

[Krislite]

I am shocked that the beauty of Mao's skating (check her PCS) was not considered as good as Alena.

I watched in "shock and awe and HORROR" at the way Alissa's spins were judged.

"The new system is every bit as inaccurate and political as the former system."

Skating is perhaps the "ultimate sport" for non-thinking and non-sporting NERDS.

I remain convinced most of you are clueless and believe CoP results as being equal to the "Ten Commandments."

Perhaps it is a matter of belief.

I choose to believe what I can see with my own eyes.

Rachael Flatt is NOT a better skater than Mirai in a system that "SUPPOSEDLY" judges every aspect of their skating fairly.

Many thanks to Toller Cranston for setting the record straight.
"Shock and awe and horror" is as close to a perfect description of watching CoP judging as I can imagine.

Considering the judging controversies over every major competition including this Worlds, I think it's misleading to say "most" think of CoP judging as the "ten commandments". Just try and gather a consensus on the results of any major competition. I doubt you can. (The only one who seems to vehemently defend most CoP results in these boards is wallylutz, which makes sense since he is an ISU judge.)

As for Alena vs. Mao's PCS, that's Russian politics for you, which I don't think can be avoided under any judging system.

[Joesitz]

Hernando is correct. The GoEs are purely subjective despite the 'how to' score them guidance. The 6.0 also had the same schooling for judges, and finally the suspected cheating came to light. No one is saying outrightyet that there is cheating going on in the CoP. Give it time.

Michal is from a nonBigSix Federation and Hernando's example is a good one. A clean quad doesn't even get a O score. Probably because he didn't look difiant enough and raise his fist upon completion of the jump. The boys have different styles, or didn't some judges know that.

[SkateFiguring]

Joe, you keep insisting on COP being a total subjective crap. I started a thread showing videos of jumps with their marks in ascending orders. The same thread drift happened into the same arguements as in just about every thread. But I didn't see anybody argue about the jumps' marks not reflecting their qualities in the order they are rated, i.e. the COP scores awarded/received are appropriate in relation to other jumps in the same competition. Isn't that what matters as far as scoring individual elements are concerned?

[Mathman]

I for one do not see anything to be outraged about in the fact that different judges evaluated Brezina's quad differently. In fact, in general I would be more suspicious if all the judges agreed all the time.

Four judges thought the jump was just dandy and gave +2 GOE.

Three judges thought the jump satisfied the required definition for the element and gave 0 GOE (or else saw some extra good points balanced by some flaw in execution).

Two judges saw a flaw somewhere and gave it -1.

After throwing out the higest and lowest, the average of these opinions was +0.71. That seems about right to me, reflecting the consensus.

Should it have been +0.86 instead? I am not going to have a heart attack over it.

[seniorita]

Maybe in the future you will be able to see protocols as the skaters skate live, on your screen. :D
Cause I was watching Mao sp and I couldnt figure out how she got so low marks, even with the ur axel I was not counting well.

[seniorita]

Two judges saw a flaw somewhere and gave it -1.

The problem is when the rest of audience doesnt see the flaw. Did you see his quad? what flaw it had to get a -1? It was gorgeous. I dont want judges to agree in everything, but from +2 to -1, it is like one says it is sunny today and the other says it rains, have an umbrella.
What feedback did Brezina got about his quad?Isnt TES supposed to be a little less subjective and clear? Goe is like pcs.

[janetfan]

I for one do not see anything to be outraged about in the fact that different judges evaluated Brezina's quad differently. In fact, in general I would be more suspicious if all the judges agreed all the time.

Four judges thought the jump was just dandy and gave +2 GOE.

Three judges thought the jump satisfied the required definition for the element and gave 0 GOE (or else saw some extra good points balanced by some flaw in execution).

Two judges saw a flaw somewhere and gave it -1.

After throwing out the higest and lowest, the average of these opinions was +0.71. That seems about right to me, reflecting the consensus.

Should it have been +0.86 instead? I am not going to have a heart attack over it.

Looking at it from your POV (which obviously doesn't include Nagano ) I guess you are right.

What difference does a point here or a point there make in CoP skating.

Thinking back to Vancouver did a point here or there matter for Plushy? And having very accurate PCS certainly didn't matter as Evan could have had a few less and what difference would it have made

How in the world can a guy as smart as you think a few points here and there don'tt matter in CoP skating

Points are everything and the only thing in CoP skating.

But then again, Yuna winding up only 2 measley points short of winning means nothing to you since you are a Miki fan.

[Mathman]

^ A point here and a point there can be the difference between winning and losing.

That said, I do not see how it is possible to achieve unanimity among a panel of judges no matter what we do. The CoP is not a magic mind meld that robs people of their opinions, their preferences, their biases, their convictions. The CoP does make people have better eyesight (even in slo-motion), keener attention, or better training.

I think it is foolish to believe that the CoP or the PoC or the PDQ or the 6.0 or the 9.3 can turn figure skating into something other than a judged sport.

[SkateFiguring]

There are reasons qualifications are required of judges, technical elements are assigned base values, there is a tech panel to focus on qualifications of elements, there is a large panel of judges to evaluate the qualities of elements and components, and the high and low scores of the panel are thrown out. No one is absolutely right. So the final scores are always a general agreement of these experts.

Self appointed armchair judges are much less trained and much more biased. Just look at the big variation of points/opinions they are giving here! Yet each believes in his/her absolutely astute and correct judgement. Honestly, I trust them less.

[Mathman]

Did you see his quad? what flaw it had to get a -1?

Yes. The landing was slightly forward, causing him to swing his free leg through with a tiny bit of wildness. Then after the landing he was still off-balance a little and had to correct by stepping down hard and awkwardly with his left foot.

So, how do you score that?

Four judges said, forget all that, IT WAS A QUAD! and gave him +2

Two judges said, well, overall it was fine, taking the good with the bad, and gave him a 0.

Two judges were more picky about the landing and gave him a -1.

His opening triple Axel, on the other hand, was superb. Nothing to spit hairs about there . All the judges gave him +2 or +3. There was nothing about the jump to invoke a difference of opinion.

[seniorita]

So, how do you score that?

You know i m the worst at scoring.
Actually did you see all this in Brezina in real time or replay? Cause I must be the blindest judge ever, I didnt see all the wombling and all that in his quad toe, I saw great height and distance and effortless skate after the exit it, would make more sense to mark his salchow like this because of his one leg in the landing but still the distance it covered and the height❤

[Joesitz]

Joe, you keep insisting on COP being a total subjective crap. I started a thread showing videos of jumps with their marks in ascending orders. The same thread drift happened into the same arguements as in just about every thread. But I didn't see anybody argue about the jumps' marks not reflecting their qualities in the order they are rated, i.e. the COP scores awarded/received are appropriate in relation to other jumps in the same competition. Isn't that what matters as far as scoring individual elements are concerned?

SkateFiguring - That's just my take on Fans bowing to the voice of a Higher Power or better known as the CoP. The GoEs are as subjective as the PC scores. There is little difference between the 6.0 and the CoP except the names of the judges are secret. IMO, the CoP would have more clout if the judges were known and they explained their decisions in some cases. Most of the judging is NOT quantifiable and therefore similar to 6.0. It is not a foolproof method of finding a winner, and in the case of Chan, did you need a system?

Relating to the scores as appropriate in relation to other jumps is a comparison judgement. JMO.

[Mathman]

Actually did you see all this in Brezina in real time or replay?

Replay. I had to play it over and over to get all the details straight in my mind.

I am not a trained figure skating judge. I hope that the judges are better at seeing things like that in real time than I am.