Alarming annual PCS inflation

PCS is a joke from the get go. I just realized the annual inflation is getting out of control. Based on Davis/Charlie's PCS score in Moscow, judges will soon run out of option.

1 Meryl DAVIS / Charlie WHITE USA 109.12 50.85 58.27 9.64 9.57 9.86 9.82 9.79 0.00 #7

Insanity.

Highest PCS in any discipline ever, fwiw. 60 is perfection.

When running of room, they can easily change the rule from a 10-point scale to a 12-point one. Isn't that convenient?

Is PCS a measure all-time greatness in terms of presentation, or is it merely a measure of whether a program fits the current criteria that the rules dictate? I say it's the latter and if so, then all of this griping is really overdone. Sometimes a skater or team really hits the mark of what the judges want to see. The judges themselves may have a different personal preference than what the skaters present, but that preference is irrelevant if it clashes with what the rules dictate. They are bound to uphold what the rules call for at the given time.

Plenty of arbitrary 6.0s were given out over the years that were arguable at best, especially at the 2004 Worlds. In that light, it's kind of silly that so many fans are getting so bent out of shape over a 10.0s in PCS now.

Realistically, I think this is more about one of two things. Either it's displeasure at the thought of D/W's current winning streak in particular (disguised as a dislike of their program, style, posture, eye contact, etc.) or it's a preference for a different approach to ice dance programs in general. Not every fan is going to be pleased with the current dominant skater or team every year they are watching the sport. Lord knows I had to sit through G/P, FP/M, N/K, Dom/Shabs in order to get to D/W and V/M. I'm sure there will be years ahead when I'll loathe future ice dance champs. That does not mean they won't deserve to win or win by massive margins. I'll just have to live with it when it happens. It's life. Pendulums swing.

jcoates said:

Realistically, I think this is more about one of two things. Either it's displeasure at the thought of D/W's current winning streak in particular (disguised as a dislike of their program, style, posture, eye contact, etc.) or it's a preference for a different approach to ice dance programs in general. Not every fan is going to be pleased with the current dominant skater or team every year they are watching the sport. Lord knows I had to sit through G/P, FP/M, N/K, Dom/Shabs in order to get to D/W and V/M. I'm sure there will be years ahead when I'll loathe future ice dance champs. That does not mean they won't deserve to win or win by massive margins. I'll just have to live with it when it happens. It's life. Pendulums swing.

Click to expand...

But isn't it possible that people are displeased about D/W's winning streak because they dislike their programs, style, eye contact, etc.? I mean, their approach to ice dance and their own abilities kind of dictate doing things in a certain way, and as you noted, not everyone will respond to that.

The subject of the rapidly rising PCS was brought up in one of the event threads - specifically, about how some of the current skaters in the men's were getting marks on par with Lambiel at his best. I do think the scoring, in dance especially, is getting out of proportion to what is being done on the ice. Having not watched D/W's performances at Rostelecom, I'd rather not comment about them directly.

AFAIR, wasn't there some criticism of COP vs. 6.0 because the idea of "perfection" had left the sport and was part of its brand.
At the time, the idea was floated that 10's in the PCS could be used the same way 6.0 was used in the past.

They couldn't, of course, jack the numbers up all in a night, but have been raising them gradually.

That appears to me to be what is going on. Now if it is the recipients of the 10's programs and skating you are unhappy about, that's a different thing, but the fact that D&W and V&M are getting 10's is not in itself annoying to me, provided they deserved to win the competition they won. Which in both cases is true.

But Buttercup, I think you just indirectly supported part of my argument. If, for example, a fan is critical of a current skater's score (PCS, GOE or otherwise) and justifies that criticism by bringing up a comparison to a past skater (e.g. Lambiel), they are not making a fair judgement based entirely on what is being done on the ice. They are instead making a comparison to a performance which is very likely being idealized and possibly remembered more fondly than is deserved under current standards. (For all his flair, Lambiel was always for more unsteady in places than people prefer to remember, even when he won.) As much as we'd like to think that COP provides us with some kind of absolute measurement that allows for cross-generational comparison, the same situational scoring inflation and suppression can and does occur. Isn't that why we always eventually decided that it is impossible to accurately compare skaters of different eras in all of the nostalgia threads? It's better to remember those skaters as great for their time and likely great in others if give a fair chance. But in the end it's all speculation and fantasy.

Also, rising PCS scores don't bother me so much in that they are far more defined in terms of what the categories mean than the old 6.0 presentation score. If the specific standard is met, it should be rewarded. It not an art critique for goodness sake. Sometimes we take these programs and ourselves as fans far too seriously for our own good.

Regarding your other point, I acknowledge that D/W are not everyone's cup of tea. What irritates me is the implication by some fans that they must be universally adored in order to justify their scores. (There's also the underlying assumption among many that V/M are or should be universally adored as virtual deities without question.) This is, of course, utterly ridiculous. Even Torvill and Dean don't float everyone's boat. They may be romanticized in that way, but there have always been a minority of fans who thought Bolero was either a blatant violation of the rules or relatively lacking in traditional difficulty. Their 94 FD was also bit of a mish mash of steps and sections from Mack and Mabel, Barnum and some of their exhibitions (the original version from Euros was actually far more original in content). It was also completely delightful. If it had been a show program, it would have obviously been the best. But since it was an amateur competition and the routines I mentioned were iconic, it was not hard for the judges to pick up on the borrowed moves. They were victims of their own success in a way. Of course fans were outraged, but the decision was justifiable if you take sentiment out of the equation. Davis and White fantastic skaters and very good dancers. But ice dance is skating first, so their placements are justified even if some prefer a team with more natural dance appeal.

I look at all skating, even ice dance, as a sport first. As such, the actual skating must be good for me to care and the definition of good includes what the judges are looking for in concrete terms, not the abstract ideal of what fans prefer. The presentation, theme, music, costumes, etc. are secondary to me. I realize that other fans have the opposite approach and need all the fuss and feathers in order to draw them in. That's fine. But if the skating is poor or not difficult and they don't care, then they are not watching skating as a sporting effort, but as an artistic one. I think some fans have trouble making that distinction. As an example, Belbin loved R/T's program from an aesthetic standpoint but was highly critical of its execution and its content to an extent. I don't need a program to make me cry or write tribute poetry to enjoy it. That's what movies and books are for. Of course if the program does induce deep feeling in me, so much the better. Still I can be satisfied with a high quality technical program any day over a high drama, yet empty routine.

This reminds me a lot of the early 90s when popular sentiment was largely behind the rise of the Duchesnays to becoming world champs. Fans adored them and didn't understand why they were always behind K/P and U/Z early on. They and the press put HEAVY pressure on the judges to reward what they saw as exciting and innovative ice dance over staid Soviet ballroom. Eventually the judges buckled under the pressure and overlooked the Duchesnays' shortcomings. Of course back then fans were far less educated about good basic skating skills and even less educated about how that factored into ice dance. In hindsight, while their programs were undeniably entertaining and crowd pleasing, the underlying skating quality was far below K/P, U/Z, G/P and at times some of the mid level teams especially in Isabelle's case. Also, as I've said before, their programs from 88-91 were largely recycled pro routines previously done by T/D. However in a pre-youtube era, that detail was usually missed if not overlooked. Ironically, today K/P are experiencing something of a late period of appreciation by fans who finally are giving them the due they missed out on when competing.

Lastly, a 6.0 or a 10 doesn't necessarily have to be an indication of personal preference for the style of program. They can also be a reward for achieving the goal of the program as the judge sees it or the rules define it. At 1990 worlds, the Czech judge gave both K/P and the Duchesnays a 6.0 for presentation. Obviously, the latter had the more moving program and had the crowd reaction to boot. But K/P's My Fair Lady was a perfectly done as a FD can be (old fashioned or not). It was justifiably rewarded as such by the same judge regardless of crowd backing. Also, ironically K/P got five 6.0s in 1989 at worlds for a perfectly done, but rather subdued, Threepenny Opera that did not quite connect with the audience. Then the next year, the Duschesnays got the same number of perfect marks for the Missing for very different reasons. Some fans may find this maddening. I am not bothered by it in the slightest as long as it's justifiable.

jcoates, you really do sound as if anyone who doesn't agree with the D/W's PCS is a crank annoyed with their winning streak, though. I have to admit, I don't get how a judge can give them two 10s for a flawed skate, like with the SD at CoR. Do you think that the interpretation/timing of that dance was worth a ten? Or that the linking footwork/movement a 9.75?

Fine, lets use a different example of PCS inflation. Virtue/Moir, at last year's Worlds, got four tens and one 9.75. From ONE judge (fwiw, there was not a Canadian judge on the panel). As much as I love that program, I can't justify that kind of result. Can you?

Since the Olympic season, it's clear that the judges are getting more comfortable using the upper registers of scoring. The ISU wanted records at the Olympics, and by gum it was going to get them (Shen/Zhao, V/M, and D/W all scored tens at the Olympics). But at the same time, the seems to rob what the scoring of what it means. 6.0 bugged me because it was inherently meaningless. I don't want to see COP go down the same track, especially when in the same event, the PCS seems more capricious (W/P vs B/S, etc). Personally, D/W aren't the reason I love ice dance, nor the reason I watch. If the scoring here is justified, it's just more likely that I'll stop.

I brought this topics not because I dislike D/W. To be honest, I don't watch ice dancing at all.
To me, the annual inflation in PCS is just stupid.Is the entire concept of IJS supposed to eliminate the subjectivity of 6.0? The die hard fans' usual defense of IJS is that the previous 6.0 was meaningless, IJS is so objective blah, blah, blah. Once judges start to give out 10 in PCS like candies, and I suppose it will come soon, will IJS's die hard supporters come up with another explanation for their beloved system?

IJS or not, it is still a very corrupt system.

ImaginaryPogue said:

jcoates, you really do sound as if anyone who doesn't agree with the D/W's PCS is a crank annoyed with their winning streak, though.

Click to expand...

Funny, a lot of people have the same impression towards many of Chan's fans (and I HATE to bring him up, but the comparison does apply, IMO). :think:

Where was all the griping last year when V/M were receiving 10s then?

museksk8r said:

Funny, a lot of people have the same impression towards many of Chan's fans (and I HATE to bring him up, but the comparison does apply, IMO). :think:

Click to expand...

I think some people are cranks. I don't think everyone who dislike's Chan's PCS are cranks. I also don't think the situation is that congruent, though.

jcoates said:

Is PCS a measure all-time greatness in terms of presentation, or is it merely a measure of whether a program fits the current criteria that the rules dictate? I say it's the latter and if so, then all of this griping is really overdone. Sometimes a skater or team really hits the mark of what the judges want to see. The judges themselves may have a different personal preference than what the skaters present, but that preference is irrelevant if it clashes with what the rules dictate. They are bound to uphold what the rules call for at the given time.

Plenty of arbitrary 6.0s were given out over the years that were arguable at best, especially at the 2004 Worlds. In that light, it's kind of silly that so many fans are getting so bent out of shape over a 10.0s in PCS now.

Realistically, I think this is more about one of two things. Either it's displeasure at the thought of D/W's current winning streak in particular (disguised as a dislike of their program, style, posture, eye contact, etc.) or it's a preference for a different approach to ice dance programs in general. Not every fan is going to be pleased with the current dominant skater or team every year they are watching the sport. Lord knows I had to sit through G/P, FP/M, N/K, Dom/Shabs in order to get to D/W and V/M. I'm sure there will be years ahead when I'll loathe future ice dance champs. That does not mean they won't deserve to win or win by massive margins. I'll just have to live with it when it happens. It's life. Pendulums swing.

Click to expand...

That's true. For example, I loved G/P, FP/M, N/K (especially), and D/S. Now, I have to go through D/W and V/M's unattractive skating and wait until someone new comes that I will love in the future.

Why especially for N/K?

ImaginaryPogue said:

Why especially for N/K?

Click to expand...

Personally, I loved their energy, speed, and artistry. Although they were over the top sometimes, they were very good actors on the ice. Just my personal preference.

jcoates said:

Is PCS a measure all-time greatness in terms of presentation, or is it merely a measure of whether a program fits the current criteria that the rules dictate? I say it's the latter...

Click to expand...

I guess I am on the other side. If you give 10's for merely dotting all the i's and crossing the t's, then how will you score a truly inspired performance?

skateflower said:

To me, the annual inflation in PCS is just stupid.Is the entire concept of IJS supposed to eliminate the subjectivity of 6.0?

Click to expand...

There's no way to get rid of all subjectivity when a large part of the scoring is, by nature, based on human evaluations of qualitative variables. E.g., if "edge quality" is important (and it is and always will be as long as figure skating remains figure skating -- it's one of the fundamentals of the sport), then humans need to perceive and evaluate it. Judges can be as honest and unbiased as we like, but they're always going to be human beings subject to the limits of human perception. That kind of subjectivity is unavoidable.

But other technical aspects of the performances are less subjective. You either rotated a quad or you didn't. You landed it on one foot or you didn't. You rotated a twizzle four times or you didn't. You achieved a sitspin or camel/spiral position that meets the minimum definition of the position and held it for the minimum length of time, or you didn't.

Those kinds of details can be determined objectively, with the use of video replay where necessary.

So instead of leaving it up to each judge to notice (or not notice) each of those details and rely on their own opinions as to how much each one matters, the IJS assigns a separate set of officials to keep track of the definitions and to determine, with video replay, exactly what each skater executed. Every skater who executes a move that meets the same definition gets the same base mark for that move. That's a level of objectivity that didn't exist under 6.0.

Of course, different skating insiders (and fans) have different opinions about how much various skills should be rewarded or whether they're important enough to reward at all. Thus we have debates over rules for what's required in each program, rules for defining each kind of element including what features add to the levels. People continue to disagree, and as the consensus of opinion shifts on certain points, the rules get changed.

The rules in the latest ISU documentation may be much more objective than the 6.0 guidelines, as long as they're in effect, but they're not written in stone and remain subject to change.

And the grades of execution are based on detailed guidelines but ultimately each judge's subjective evaluation of each element.

IJS or not, it is still a very corrupt system.

Click to expand...

Subjective, as noted above, is not the same thing as corrupt. Totally honest individuals will sometimes differ in their perceptions and will often differ in their opinions about what's most important.

No system is corrupt in and of itself. Any system can be used corruptly if the people using it are corrupt.

The PCS will always be subjective. Perfectly honest judges will often disagree with each other on just which of the very good skaters was very best, or even when they agree on who, they might disagree on how much better (on a scale of 0-10 with quarter-point increments). Subjectivity without corruption.

The skating community as a whole might determine that it's better for public perception to be generous with judges using the top of the PCS scale especially at the Olympics than to be stingy with the scores, focused on the negatives more than the positives. So the use of the 0-10 scale might shift in the direction of using more of those higher scores for the very best current skaters who really stand out even from the next best. As long as the decision to encourage use of higher scores is based on principle and not on the specific skaters who would receive them, that's recalibration, not corruption.

Any individual judge or group of judges might also be corrupt. That's an unfortunate fact of human nature. The hope is that by giving objective base marks for technical elements and by breaking down all the subjective decisions into separate scores by element and component, so that scores do not equate to votes for placements, there will be less incentive for judges to act from corrupt motives and less room to control the final results if they do.

It may or may not be successful. Watching from the outside, we're not really in a position to tell the difference between corruption vs. decisions we disagree with, under any judging system.

Just watched D/W's free skate on youtube. Gosh, I didn't realize they were this horrible. Unpolished lines, no unison, elevator music, what a hot mess. If this kind of performance is worth 10 points, I'm wondering how would judges rate those great dancers in the past such as Grishuk and Platov? 20 points?

I can't believe PJ got D/W into her top 10.

skateflower said:

Just watched D/W's free skate on youtube. Gosh, I didn't realize they were this horrible. Unpolished lines, no unison, elevator music, what a hot mess. If this kind of performance is worth 10 points, I'm wondering how would judges rate those great dancers in the past such as Grishuk and Platov? 20 points?

I can't believe PJ got D/W into her top 10.

Click to expand...

LOL Comparing Die Fledermaus to elevator music - really? Sometimes it's just better to say nothing than say something so ridiculous.

Pogue, to address you first comment in post #8, no I don't think all critics of D/W are cranks. I thought I made that clear when discussing the fact that some fans take the opposite approach to expectations than I do. There are some who do fall into the crank category, particularly on skating forums. I think you can name a few here without any effort. The constant griping and alarmist reactions to one out of line instance of scoring this weekend was just over the top IMO. So to answer your first question, no I did not think they deserved a ten or a 9.75 in the categories you mentioned. I still thought they skated their elements far above anyone else. As I also noted in the event thread, I was impressed with how quickly they got back on form. The audience certainly appreciated them and had completely forgotten about the stumble by the end. From that perspective they were clearly the best. BTW, I completely understand the point of view among most fans who complain of inflated scoring. They want close competitions and chances of movement among teams. Fair enough, but judges can't award close scores just to emotionally satisfy the audience.

As to V/M's four tens at worlds last season, I actually had no issue with their scores there. (Remember I consider myself a fan of them also, though not to the same degree as D/W. That's something increasingly less common among fans.) Objectively, they captured the character of the latin dance they were going for terrifically. Also, there was a distinct step up from the previous teams in terms of this actually fitting the ISU wish for less drama and character and more dance. In that regard, I was fine with them getting some 10.0s. I am not absolutist in that regard. A 10 can justifiably be given for different reasons IMO. That's why there is a judging panel to account for range of opinion rather than a single judge resolutely adhering to a rulebook definition of a 10.

You and many others for whom this PCS discussion is an issue seem to be looking at or desirous of the 10 being an absolute defined concept or score which can be coolly applied regardless of the judge in question. How is that possible when human beings are the ones doing the judging? That's not a nod to emotion, but to subjectivity. You might as well have the computer doing the judging on it's own if that's that you want. There is certainly less room for subjectivity than with 6.0. (BTW, though she did not directly address the PCS complaint re: B/S vs W/P, Belbin did comment that the former carry really good speed through their elements while sacrificing posture and some control, while the latter tend to slow down a touch in footwork sequences in an effort for cleanness. Since we know speed affects GOE and PCS, that might explain the discrepancy.)

I've now seen you make two comments about abandoning ice dance if D/W either become dominant over V/M or if their current scoring trend continues to become justified. How else should I take comments like that? Honestly, it distresses me. Are we just supposed to watch skating to see our favorites win? If they are beaten or surpassed, do we just take our toys and go home? I just don't get that line of thinking. In every sport I watch athletes whom I adore have at some point been passed or found a thoroughly equal opponent. Sometimes I like both and have trouble separating my feelings (i.e. Nadal/Djokovic). At other times, my loyalties remain unchanged. Still when my side loses, even consistently, I don't throw up my hands and walk away (except with the Redskins; 20 years of futility is all I can take; it's like the 80's took place in another dimension). I know you are frustrated by their current success apparently outpacing V/M, but if Tessa and Scott have not thrown in the towel, why should you? Also, who's to say other teams wont come along and capture your attention and imagination. I loved D/W from the off after years of enjoying other teams. While their impact was immediate, their rise within the top ten was slower than V/M's. That was frustrating for me, but I chose to take the long view rather than looking for instant gratification. I knew that with hard work and perseverance, they would rise. W/P seem to be taking that sort of mindset to heart. Except perhaps the French, no top ten team has had more recent disappointments. Yet that seems to make them work that much harder. I admire that. They still have room for growth. Who knows? They could garner 10s of their own in the future especially since their self-confidence is obviously growing rapidly.

BTW, Skateflower's post in #18, dripping with vitriol and hyperbole (Die Fledermaus as elevator music??? Really?.) just absolutely made my point.