Judging the "Old-Fashioned" Way

Joesitz said:

Thanks for the link. Tell me what is the value difference between an extra rotation on a jump, and jumping with an extra barrel?

Click to expand...

You can find that on page 913 of the CoB (Code of Barrels) manual.

gkelly said:

Imagine that you have been hired as part of a consulting group charged with the task of improving the position of international figure skating in the global market...

Click to expand...

Well, this is a huge blockbuster of a post, but I will dip my oar in with a few generic impressions.

First, if I were hired by someone (as opposed to giving free advice over the Internet ), the person that hired me would already have answered the big questions that you raise, and my job would be to come up with a specific strategy.

Second, the way the commission is posed seems to me to push the discussion toward the first point of view, rather than #2 or #3.

"Improving one's position in the global market" means money. In comparison, I think that if we want to champion the Olympic ideal or to honor history and tradition, our tack should be rather "What profiteth a man if he gain the whole world but lose his soul." (If not, indeed, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get to heaven." )

Olympic sports do not make big money, so "higher, faster, stronger" is out, along with waxing nostalgic about the purity of Peggy Fleming's edges. That leaves strategy #1: Find out what the buying public wants and supply it.

Unfortunately, there is a pretty good chance that what the public wants is not figure skating. At this point people usually counter with, "Oh yeah? What about Asia?"

OK, what about Asia? Koreans love Yu-na Kim, not figure skating. China had a marvelous ladies champion in Lu Chen and three dominant pairs teams ,but skating is not big in China. Japan had a boom decade in the twenty-aughts, like the United States did in the 1990s. Is it over? We will have to wait and see. In the other 50-odd countries of Asia the sport hardly exists.

If the pessimists prove right, then we should make a virtue of necessity and fall back to positions #2 and #3, heads high, poor but proud. :yes:

Well, yeah, that's pretty much my point.

A lot of posters here and elsewhere seem to be decrying the current state of figure skating as an entertainment product for fans' enjoyments and believe that it would be better off if the scoring system

Of course, what we really have in real life is a mixture of all three, especially 1) and 3).

The ISU does have to fund its activities and can do more (and provide more product to fans) if it can sell that product to media outlets that are willing to pay big bucks. And so they, and USFS and other national federations, do sometimes make decisions that compromise the pure integrity of the sport or that are not in the best interests of the athletes as a group in order to produce a product that's more attractive to TV networks. For example, rigging the skate order to put the top-ranked skaters at the end, and putting a break between the nontelevised and televised portions of an event so they can show final groups of two different disciplines in one live broadcast; reducing the number of participants in the GP while allowing/encouraging the top skaters with the most audience drawing power to enter more than two events. Not to mention past failed experiments such as two long programs and head-to-head competition at the GP Final ~10 years ago.

Personally, although I understand the reasoning behind those decisions, I don't have to like them. Sometimes you just have to give in and give the guys with the checkbook what they want.

But for changes that do benefit the athletes or the integrity of the sport as such (IMO), I'm more likely to approve even if they don't help and maybe hurt popularity with fans.

Mathman said:

I think that is great feedback! The skater should work on increased height in his jumps, improve his speed with especial attention to effortless acceleration, work on spin positions and centering, and try to develop an individual musical style.

I do not see how attaching decimal numbers to those suggestions would be of especial use to the skater.

Click to expand...

What I was trying to convey is that getting a critique/feedback can be contradictory, one judge LIKES the style, speed, and flow, not the jumps but the spins were great in his/her opinion, the second judge thinks the skater looks labored, the choreography contrived, the jumps seem small and the spins just OK, the third judge thinks the spins are a liability, the style is generic and the jumps were completed OK. So, whose feedback do you value as your priority for what to work on in the next month before Regionals in that case or do you just walk away confused?
The advantage to protocols is that without a critique, you can see what the judges and tech panel "liked" or "didn't like" because you didn't get the level you thought, it got a "<" or "<<" or the majority of judges gave the element a negative GOE or that PCS category a lower score than all the others. It pinpoints areas for improvement and makes it easier to prioritize if there are just a few things that are poorly scored. The skater can also look across their score from a tech standpoint from competition to competition to see if they are "improving" on a troubled element or if they are just plain old inconsistent.

gkelly said:

But for changes that do benefit the athletes or the integrity of the sport as such (IMO), I'm more likely to approve even if they don't help and maybe hurt popularity with fans.

Click to expand...

Can you cite examples of "integrity" in figure skating?

Please start at the top with Cinquanta and feel free to work your way down the ladder to include various federation bosses.

It's easy enough to take the high road but I think you are skating over dangeroulsy thin ice.
Feel free to use bungee cords if it helps

I'm not talking about the moral integrity of individuals.

I'm talking about the sport as a sport. If its fundamental basis is the control of blades curving on ice, then I believe the rules should be designed to reward those skills above all others, with next priority to other skills that derive from and depend on the ability to control the blades on ice. So I applaud any scoring or format innovations that make it harder for politics, personal emotions, irrelevant skills, etc., to sway the results and disapprove of any that make that easier. I'll take each development on its own terms.

Of course, sometimes it takes a while for unintended consequences of rule changes to become apparent. And often we don't know what the intentions of the rulemakers were to begin with.

gkelly said:

I'm not talking about the moral integrity of individuals.

I'm talking about the sport as a sport. If its fundamental basis is the control of blades curving on ice, then I believe the rules should be designed to reward those skills above all others, with next priority to other skills that derive from and depend on the ability to control the blades on ice. So I applaud any scoring or format innovations that make it harder for politics, personal emotions, irrelevant skills, etc., to sway the results and disapprove of any that make that easier. I'll take each development on its own terms.

Of course, sometimes it takes a while for unintended consequences of rule changes to become apparent. And often we don't know what the intentions of the rulemakers were to begin with.

Click to expand...

I am always impressed and appreciative of your posts even when I disagree with them.

It's nice to talk aout the "purity" of skating but wasn't that thrown in the crapper after 1990 when figures were discontinued. :think:

Do you think level four CoP footwork which richly rewards wild arm flapping and herky-jerky torso bending comes close to matching the "purity" of school figures as a demonstration of blade control?

Are you asking me to believe CoP Olympic champion Evan Lysacek demonstrates the same blade skill we saw from John Curry, Toller Cranston, Peggy Fleming and many other great skaters from the past

Where does this "purity" you ask for exist within the CoP?
If you think more careful measuring of completed revolutions in the AIR is the same thing then I am speechless.

If you believe 8 revolutions on a spin that typically murders the music interpretation makes a spin more "pure" I am stunned by your logic.

If you believe rotating in the air three times and then falling and getting partial credit has any relationship to the origins of figure skating I must simply give up. :sheesh:

A bunch of unethical, money grubbing cads run ISU. Some have little or NO idea about what used to be considered very fine figure skating.

I seriously doubt that as long as figure skating is run by a former second rate speed skater the sport will move in the right direction.

As to purity, I guess that means wild arm flapping, posing and karate kicks demonstrate the best tradition of blades on ice in the grand tradition of figure skating.

Hernando said:

I am always impressed and appreciative of your posts even when I disagree with them.

Click to expand...

Thanks.

Let's try to get on the same page even if we ultimately disagree on what should be most important. I think it seems to you that I'm defending the status quo in all areas and it seems to me that you are attacking the status quo in all areas. Surely we can find more nuanced arguments addressing specific points without resorting to scattershot insults.

It's nice to talk aout the "purity" of skating but wasn't that thrown in the crapper after 1990 when figures were discontinued. :think:

Click to expand...

Not entirely. There have certainly been competitions in the last 21 years that were won primarily on the basis of skating skills, not jumps or "artistry."

My answer to all your questions below, as snidely worded, is "Of course not." I could come up with equally snide examples to argue against 6.0, or more examples against IJS, but what's the point? Why not take the issues seriously and look at them in detail?

Do you think level four CoP footwork which richly rewards wild arm flapping and herky-jerky torso bending comes close to matching the "purity" of school figures as a demonstration of blade control?

Click to expand...

Let's focus on this one.

We could look at pure skating between the elements as well, but just to stick to step sequences...

Under 6.0, how step sequences were judged really depended a lot on the individual judges.
Probably some judges put a lot of weight on the edges, speed, difficulty and variety of turns including turns in both directions, etc., of the step sequences and used them to distinguish skaters just as much as they used the jumps. Probably other judges just valued one step sequence was pretty much worth the same as the next as long as it met the requirements of covering the pattern, unless it stood out as exceptionally strong or weak in some way. Maybe some paid a lot of attention to the artistic aspects of the steps and less to the technical aspects.

And with more skaters reaching senior level by the end of the 1990s without ever having competed school figures, the technical content of the step sequences had declined considerably from what

In the interests of consistency and of encouraging the skills that were being lost, IJS brought new rules for step sequences that gave higher scores for more difficult content. There have been tweaks almost every year in the rules for what earns a higher level.

I don't think they've gotten the balance quite right yet.

Instead of just complaining about whatever we like least about the current state of step sequences, or the pre-IJS state of step sequences, how about figuring out how to use the system to encourage the values we want to see rewarded and discourage those that are detrimental.

I have my own ideas about what should be rewarded more, or what should be less rewarded or less de facto required, and about how to rewrite the step sequence rules to encourage what I value more.

For one thing, I'd like to see the GOE values changed so that improving the quality and musicality can be more valuable than increasing the difficulty.

Also changes to what's required and what's optional to earn higher levels.

But I don't think that going back to an anything-goes situation is going to improve the skating quality of the step sequences.

Joesitz said:

Thanks for the link. Tell me what is the value difference between an extra rotation on a jump, and jumping with an extra barrel?

Click to expand...

Well, barrel-jumping is a real sport. The difference between jumping 15 barrels and jumping 14 is that 15 wins and 14 loses.

Maybe a better comparison would be decathlon. A competitor gets 850 points for running the 100 meters in 11.05 seconds, 908 points for putting the shot 16.92 meters, and 760 point for pole vaulting 4.5 meters.

Put a little music with that and voila! :yes:

By the way, in researching this post I found this incredible website where you can enter your times and distances in each event and it computes your points for you.

http://www.usatf.org/statistics/calculators/combinedEventsScoring/

I once saw Trixi Schuba skate an exhibition with her school figures. Her tracings were amazing. The figures were perfectly laid on top of each other, sort of like the old-fashioned Palmer penmanship.
Her free skating was at a much lower level, both technically and artistically; however, she had amassed such a huge lead with the figures that she won the two World titles and Olympic gold medal. She won fairly and squarely with the scoring rules of that time.

Peggy Fleming also was a brilliant school figures skater, and she combined that with a beautiful, lyrical balletic style. She was the complete package.

IMHO, the endless hours of practicing the school figures enabled the skaters to develop good balance, carriage, and line. You had to be skate clean, precise figures to score well, and the judges also scored the skaters for their carriage and speed in tracing the figures.

Admittedly, this was not a spectator sport, and that probably contributed to the demise of the school figures.

In my view, "figure skating" is the right name. It combines the historical beginnings of the sport, and it's nice to remember history.

silverpond said:

In my view, "figure skating" is the right name. It combines the historical beginnings of the sport, and it's nice to remember history.

Click to expand...

I agree. :yes: I think the idea of "figure" skating means using your edges to make intricate pattrns on the ice. This is still what underlies a skating performance, as opposed to hockey or speed skating, for instance.

Question for anyone who knows: Do hockey players and speed skaters use their outside edges?

Well, they do forward crossovers, so that would need outside edges. Not sure what else the hockey players do.

When the ISU realized that it needed more finances to run the sport, it decided to abollish school figures from the sport. The general public (mostly women) preferred what used to be called the Free Skate. The ISU was able to make connections with the various media and sold free skating to the sponsors. That worked well for the ISU until 2006 when a scandal threatened the sport from participating in the Olympics.

The CoP came into existence to show that the judging of the sport was on the up and up. For the most part that did work in favor of the sport as far as honesty goes, but if left a distaste for the general public's attitude to be forced into learning its new methods of scoring The general public rebelled as it did with school figures, and hence, the popularity of the sport declined. It is about money, in fact it's all about money.

The two questions which should be studied:

1. Should the CoP be redefined to make the scoring more simple for the general public to understand?

2. Should the sport continue to be a 'little' sport for only those who approve of the CoP as it now is?

For myself, I see no difference in the opinions of the judges in the 6.0 system and the CoP.

Joesitz said:

The CoP came into existence to show that the judging of the sport was on the up and up. For the most part that did work in favor of the sport as far as honesty goes, but if left a distaste for the general public's attitude to be forced into learning its new methods of scoring The general public rebelled as it did with school figures, and hence, the popularity of the sport declined. It is about money, in fact it's all about money.

The two questions which should be studied:

1. Should the CoP be redefined to make the scoring more simple for the general public to understand?

2. Should the sport continue to be a 'little' sport for only those who approve of the CoP as it now is?

For myself, I see no difference in the opinions of the judges in the 6.0 system and the CoP.

Click to expand...

In my opinion, the CoP scoring system was an attempt to deal with the public outcry over a number of questionable judging decisions. Coming to mind was the debacle at Salt Lake City, which resulted in two Olympic gold medals awarded to B & S and S & P. Of course, the very public negative comments made by the television commentators - Scott Hamilton ('"This is a farce") and Sandra Bezic ("I am ashamed of my sport") and by commentators from other television stations, not to mention the print media - played into this change. One can only imagine that corporate sponsors were ready to withdraw their lucrative commercial sponsorships, and television stations were ready to withdraw their coverage of figure skating, under such circumstances. For years, skating judging had been under the microsope, thanks to some questionable decisions - the former "Communist bloc" judges who always seemed to score skaters higher than those from the West. Most likely, Salt Lake was the straw that broke the camel's back.

That being said, I dislike the CoP. It seems to me that the skaters have to pack as many elements into their programs to pile up the points, so it's a matter of jump, jump, jump. I much prefer the old decimal system of 5.8, 5.9, 6.0. It was crystal clear that the programs earning the 6.0s were the best programs in the minds of the judges. I think many of us are still not that comfortable with the new judging system. I suspect many audience members have been confused, annoyed, and just plain fed up with this change. My two cents, for what it's worth.

^^^^
I think one has to realize that the elements in figure skating are FINITE. A Flip is a Flip is a Flip and adding a rotation to it does not change it's basic definition. It begins with a back inside edge takeoff and in the air rotates its optional turns to the one side and finally makes a landing on the same foot it toepicked with. There are different base values for the air rotations, but otherwise all Flips are the same in takeoff and landing. I jokingly mention that adding another air rotation is like adding another barrel in that other sport. It's still barrel jumping. It's still a Flip.

The CoP, imo, has not done much for the Tech portion of the sport. In fact, its base values preclude one foot axels, inside axels and walleys. It also limits repetitive leaps except for butterflies. The presentation under the CoP boils down to clean skating with the non restrictive elements. The 6.0 system allowd for the 'whole package'. Not every skater could achieve that, but it was not restrictive.

Your twocents is worth it.

Joesitz said:

^^^^
IThe CoP, imo, has not done much for the Tech portion of the sport. In fact, its base values preclude one foot axels, inside axels and walleys. It also limits repetitive leaps except for butterflies. The presentation under the CoP boils down to clean skating with the non restrictive elements. The 6.0 system allowd for the 'whole package'. Not every skater could achieve that, but it was not restrictive.

Your twocents is worth it.

Click to expand...

While I agree in principle that IJS has boiled down a holistic program into a bunch of stuff to gather points, I disagree about inside Axels and walleys (but not 1 foot Axels). I've actually seen a lot MORE inside Axels and walleys in programs now that they don't "count" toward the skaters' jump passes. In the Intermediate and Novice level, I see a lot of walleys (and reverse-rotation walleys) going into the jump out of steps in the SP (usually a 2F) because the Walley is clearly defined as an unlisted element in the rules (versus the nebulous status it had under 6.0 - it was the judges' discretion whether it was a jump or a connecting move, so some skaters were getting deductions from some judges under 6.0). Also, I've seen a lot of inside Axels as a start of or in the middle of step sequences at the Intermediate-Senior level because it's kind of a cool entry or break up to the turns and steps and is clearly defined as an unlisted element. I should mention that most of those skaters DO work with the same technical jump coach in this area and one of 2-3 choreographers, so that could also have something to do with it.

I don't think the leveled step sequence rules are right - whether you can look like you are swatting flies/having a seizure has no bearing on the technical and preentation skills displayed in the step sequence. The choreographic step sequence is closer - you still have the requirements for a minimum of 7 turns and 4 steps with a minimum of 3 types of turns and 2 steps but the idea is it is more judged on how it fits the program as opposed to how many times you hit the fly.

Joesitz said:

When the ISU realized that it needed more finances to run the sport, it decided to abollish school figures from the sport. The general public (mostly women) preferred what used to be called the Free Skate. The ISU was able to make connections with the various media and sold free skating to the sponsors. That worked well for the ISU until 2006 when a scandal threatened the sport from participating in the Olympics.

The CoP came into existence to show that the judging of the sport was on the up and up. For the most part that did work in favor of the sport as far as honesty goes, but if left a distaste for the general public's attitude to be forced into learning its new methods of scoring The general public rebelled as it did with school figures, and hence, the popularity of the sport declined. It is about money, in fact it's all about money.

The two questions which should be studied:

1. Should the CoP be redefined to make the scoring more simple for the general public to understand?

2. Should the sport continue to be a 'little' sport for only those who approve of the CoP as it now is?

For myself, I see no difference in the opinions of the judges in the 6.0 system and the CoP.

Click to expand...

Your questions are like:

Joe, do you

1) beat your wife on Sundays? or

2) beat your wife every afternoon?

You keep assuming the decline of the popularity of figure skating is due to CoP without ever establishing that as a fact. This is the most common logical leap or distraction used in all areas of interests, with elaborate and eloquent debates, analyses, experiments, etc, based on a simply announced but never examined premise.

As I have counselled some entrepreneurs, in business, as in life, it's more important to do the right things than to do things right. Most struggling small business operators work so much on what are within their control. They advertise, redecorate, etc and mostly they work harder, but forces they can't control are far greater, such as the economy, social trends, government policies, and the weather. It is much easier to work with the larger forces.

Effort to fight the larger forces are extremely difficult but possible when directed efficiently in a well studied and deviced plan with a clear goal/target. Without the real and clear goal, you may be sorely dissapointed after a successful and hard won campaign.

Back on figure skating and the scoring system, much depends on your goal. Is it just a single minded hatred for and determination to take down CoP, or is it to promote figure skating and increase its popularity? If latter, what is your real goal/motive? is it your pure love of the sport, or is it so you can watch more figure skating on prime time, free on your HD big screen, or so there are more accessible fascilities and opportunities for you or your kids?

To make it clear on topic, do you simply hate CoP personally and want to demonish it with assumption or pretext that it turns off the public and is singularly to blame for the decline of the sport in the US? If you truly are concerned with the future of figure skating in the US, then the causes and the solutions of the problems you see need to be examined and determined before all the actions and effort are to be taken. Look at the cycles, the economy, lack of star power, the USFSA, and the competitions for the public attention and money, and competitions are not limited to other sports.

Consider as well that the entertainment industry has gone through much evolution the last decade. The music industry has been struggling as sales have plunged from what they used to be, what with all the free downloads, legal and illegal, and primetime TV is filled with a few popular franchises and so-called reality shows, which take away jobs from writers and actors. Niche and specialty media are where "special interests" are catered to, at a cost.

I am never against improving the scoring system or adjusting it to evolve with the sport. What I question is the assumption that it turns the public off figure skating and fixing it will fill arena seats and bring figure skating back on hours of prime time network TV. Other judged sports have switched to similar numeral marking without all the controversies and blaming or crediting the scoring methodologies for the popularity of the sports.

I should not jump in to advocat that you be put in jail just because I see your wife with bruises one day. First I need to find out why she is bruised or, before condamning you, at least ask if you beat her and if yes, why?

skatefiguring, all that story about wife beating just to disagree with what you assume is my belief of the downfall of figure skating's popularity is due to 2006. There were many reasons for the downfall, it just culminated in 2006, and slowly got worse with CoP.

There are fans who are not ready to admit that the popularity has decreased 10 fold, so they are unable to contribute anything to bring the sport's popularity back up to the level of 2006. It's as though nothing has changed. The networks are clamoring to give complete coverage of all skating events. Movie companies are looking for the right skater to portray the Sonia Henie Story to the screen. yeah.

My wife beating, btw, is a private affair and not to be discussed openly.

Joesitz said:

My wife beating, btw, is a private affair and not to be discussed openly.

Click to expand...

OK, I won't bring it up again.

msskater - There are no base values for one foot axels, inside axels or walleys. If skaters are doing them, that's not getting them any points and I dare say they are not doing them above the one rotation level anyway but confining them to footwork. The risk of a 3Wally is probably more severe than a 3Lutz and with no points, it just aint worth it.