Patrick Chan in a Jumping Competition

gkelly said:

I stand by my statement that the IOC would not support a move toward a more subjective judging system if it's presented as such, i.e., an attempt to privilege fan appeal over technical evaluation.

I agree with SkateFiguring and doubleflutz about the reasons for reducing and eventually eliminating school figures. Don't forget there were also other scoring changes such as the introduciton of factored placements introduced to address some of the same problems but that did not change the judging per se.

I'm sure there will be further adjustments to the scoring system and eventually some change as significant as the elimination of figures or the switch from ordinals to absolute scores. But I do not expect changes designed to make the Olympic track sport more subjective.



Different fans, different feelings. But how does it feel to the skaters?



I recognize that not all fans feel the same way. But I think that new generations of fans who learn to understand skating through detailed protocols will eventually outnumber those who learned to look at results in terms of tech content vs. artistry seen through a rubric of nationalism because that was the only information available in the 6.0 protocols.

From a fan point of view, detailed protocols with individual judges identified would be the most informative.

Click to expand...

Do you have any facts to back up your opinion?
You are sure you can predict the future direction of all Olympic sports :think:

But I diasgree with your opinion and even if you can't see it the CoP wih it's micro managing of skatng, with it's all-inclusive subjectivity that extends to the tech panel and even the the elements with GOE is a very subjective system that has been implemeted by ISU.

You just won't admit that CoP is highly subjective but it is there for all to see.

Figures were eliminated mostly for money. They were expensive particularly for the smaller federations and TV had no interest in them. More freeskating = a growing fan base with bigger crowds at the arenas and a winfall of TV money.

Another point you bring up frequently is that skaters and coaches love the CoP. Is that your opinion? I can post some comments from top coaches who do NOT like the CoP along with never ending quotes from legends of the sport who dislike the CoP.

I think you like the CoP gkelly. Are you so sure Frank Carrol and his skaters like it? Does Lambiel like it? What about Johnny?
You are presenting your personal opinions here but I have no doubt some skaters and coaches like the CoP. Probably the Colo Springs gang likes it.

Sasha had some natural abilties that were rewarded by the CoP but at Natls last season she said she did NOT like the CoP and said how much she hated counting the rotations as she was spinning.


I hope skating has a future generation of fans but now it is at a low point in the USA. As to IOC and ISU your opinions are fine but history shows without too much doubt both organizations follow the money. They always have and always will.

I appreciate reading your posts but we have much different opinions. I agree with you about results being as controversial in the 6.0 era as we have seen in the last 4 years.

I always hoped the IJS wouldmake it better but so far that doesn't seem to be the case.

Hernando said:

Do you have any facts to back up your opinion?

Click to expand...

Which part?

But I diasgree with your opinion and even if you can't see it the CoP wih it's micro managing of skatng, with it's subjectivity that extends to the tech panel and even the the elements with GOE is a very subjective system that has been implemeted by ISU.

You just won't admit that CoP is highly subjective but it is there for all to see.

Click to expand...

I think that skating is a qualitative sport and will always include some subjectivity in its scoring. I think that there is less subjectivity under IJS than under 6.0, and that that is a good thing. I expect -- i.e., I predict -- but I don't know the future any more than anyone else -- that future changes in skating scoring will be in the direction of more objectivity, e.g., sensors that can detect speed and maybe edge quality or correct takeoff and landing edges with more accuracy than the human eye. There will need to be significant technological advances to make that possible and cost effective, but I think it's more likely that we'll see something like that introduced into skating judging during the 21st century than that there will be a return to one subjective score for all of the technical merit.

I make no claims about any other Olympic sport.

I also think that some of the current rules about well-balanced program requirements and level definitions go overboard in trying to standardize elements to the point that programs become more similar in content and construction than is necessary for the sake of fairness. I think the system is more robust than the rulemakers give it credit for. It could help fan appeal if the rules could be tweaked to encourage more freedom and variety in free programs. I have often posted my thoughts on that subject here.

Another point you bring up frequently is that skaters and coaches love the CoP. Is that your opinion? I can post some comments from top coaches who do NOT like the CoP along with never ending quotes from legends of the sport who dislike the CoP.

Click to expand...

That's not what I said.

I've seen and heard comments from top skaters and coaches and from local skaters and coaches and judges both in favor and against the new system. I think opinions tend to be mixed, both between those who have a strong preference toward one system or the other and within individuals who like some things better about the new system and some things better about the old, or who like the new system in principle but not all of the details.

If the ISU did a survey of all currently active international-level skaters and coaches about which system they preferred and if the majority indicated a strong preference for the 6.0 system, then I think they should consider changing back, or changing to a hybrid or totally new system that restores whatever those stakeholders liked best about the old system.

In the absence of such a survey, the evidence is only anecdotal. Individuals disagree.

Also, opinions as reported in the media are often simplified to show one side or another rather than to allow the more thoughtful coaches, etc., to present their more nuanced opinions about both the strengths and weaknesses of each judging system. At least here at Golden Skate we have the opportunity to write long posts addressing more sides of the issues.

In post #80 I said "But how does it feel to the skaters?" I don't attempt to speak for all of them. I don't have data on how many prefer one system or the other. My main point is that if fans disagree with each other but have a statistical preference for 6.0 and if skaters disagree with each other but have a statistical preference for IJS, then the skaters' preference should prevail over the fans'. But unless there's some kind of study about what the most skaters prefer, we can only speak in ifs.

I appreciate reading your posts but we have much different opinions. I agree with you about results being as controversial in the 6.0 era as we have seen in the last 4 years.

I always hoped the IJS wouldmake it better but so far that doesn't seem to be the case.

Click to expand...

My impression -- speaking only for myself -- is that the new system is fairer and more transparent in the sense that skaters can see what they're getting credit for and where they're losing points. It doesn't remove all subjectivity, but I think it does reduce the scope for subjectivity/personal preference and politics to drive results.

On the other hand, sometimes the scale of values and the specific rules end up driving results in ways that knowledgeable observers including judges on the panel disagree with because they believe that certain skills or subjectivity qualities should be weighted differently than that year's rules. Hence the constant tweaking of base values and GOE values for quads and triple axels, last year's change (long overdue IMO) in how moderately cheated jumps and half-loop sequences/combinations are scored, etc.

What I don't like about the system as it currently exists is some aspects of the well-balanced program rules for the freeskate and some details about the level features and base values vs. GOE values. I'd like to see those rules rewritten to encourage more variety and more reward for quality over quantity. But I think it could be improved more effectively within the overall framework of the current system than by throwing it out completely and going back to 6.0 or starting from scratch.

Like all Sports, Figure Skating made money for the Organizers. While studying how to maximize their profits, they realized that a figures contest did not make money. Eliminating it, helped at the time, but times have changed now, at least in America, we are down to a handful of avid skate fans who care about the championships. I have seen nothing that will bring this interest in figure skating back to the days of glory.

^^^^ What it takes is a charismatic beautiful American World Champion who wins more than once. OTOH, Korea may lose its fervor for figure skating when Yuna retires unless there are a few successful Korean skaters to follow. (It takes a few regular stars to replae one Yuna who has it all.) There is not enough love for the sport itself in either country but star power and nationalism will always prevail.

US has expertise in star making and it has a talent pool. Selection, nurture, and media savvy will do it. Add politicking, which US is great at too. Television and other media clamour over superstars for rating and profits.

In some sports, even non winning beauties generate attention, interest, and media coverage.

gkelly said:

Granting the advantage to Weir in terms of execution, in what ways did you think he was more creative?

Click to expand...

I, too, think that Johnny was more creative than most skaters with his choreography and performance. I'll list just a few of my reasons for thinking thusly: He went out of his way to pick music and programs that fit him, and that he could express genuinely from the heart, especially for the Olympic season. He has listed himself as one of the choreographers for many of his programs over the past several years, and though I don't know how much of a hand he had in the actual choreography, I tend to think that he probably weighed in on each of the choreographers' ideas and added some of his own. It was probably more of a true collaboration than is usual. Additionally, he almost always chose a story or a theme to work with and portray through his movements and expressions, and he almost always worked to weave the elements into that story, though the requirements for spins seemed to be a difficult part for him to deal with as he often said he hated having to assume so many strange positions for points. Beyond the spins, however, I think that he tried to make each movement part of the theme, and he discarded pieces that did not enhance his theme. I think that may have been what hurt his scores the most- he chose not to include transistions that did not enhance the mood, theme, or story of his program, and thus he got hammered for programs that were less technically difficult.

From what I've seen, the Canadians love CoP(makes sense, since they created it), the Americans hate it, and the Russians don't seem to like it much either. I've never seen much opinion from Asians on it(though for the Koreans, at least, CoP's been there as long as they've been interested in the sport so they probably more view as just being the way things are; you view these things differently if you never got a chance to become attached to 6.0)