Comments from Judges?
I'm still catching up on the GPF, but per usual there is consternation about the the scores. Especially in the PCS. My background is in dressage (equestrian) and the scoring there is similar in someways - each move is given a numeric score and then there are composite scores based on the overall quality of the horse and rider. After that the judge writes some comments - 3 or 4 sentences - to explain the scores. Coming up through the levels (never got too high), I valued the comments as good constructive criticism.
Can we expect ISU judges to do the same? Would it help?
Wicked Yankee Girl
I believe the skaters do get comments, but unless the skaters themselves talk about them, they are not publicized. At least, that's my memory of how it goes. Certainly, at national events. I'm less sure about how this goes internationally.
it's pretty much how you say. normally judges only give notes if either the federation or coach asks for them, though.
Originally Posted by dorispulaski
Thanks for the info! I think that's too bad they don't get published. Anything that shines more light into the judging seems to the good.
There are no official comments as part of the judging. Nothing written down in sentences -- nothing to publish.
Judges just have time to award the component scores and confirm their GOEs as soon as the program is over, and then it's time for the next competitor.
Skaters coming up through the lower levels do get written comments on their skating tests. That might be more comparable to the comments you got coming up through the levels in dressage.
For comments on competitive performances, if a skater (via coach or federation) requests feedback, then the judges can hold onto their notes and use them to talk to the skater about the performance afterward, but it's not automatic.
Judges also give feedback to skaters from their own federation through official or unofficial monitoring sessions, not specifically based on a competitive performance. I suppose a skater could request feedback from a foreign judge as well if they can set up a time to get together and skate for that judge -- don't know how the politics of that might work.
Under 6.0 there was only judges' notes, in shorthand that varies from one judge to another, and two scores per performance. Skaters could request critiques after some competitions, but it was private and not comparative -- judges could tell the skaters what they rewarded or penalized or would like to see more or less of in that skater's performance, but they weren't allowed to talk about any other skater in the competition and how they decided between another skater and the one they're talking to.
With IJS protocols now we all can see how each judge marked each individual element (although not why) and which general areas of components that judge thought were stronger or weaker for that skater (but not the specific reasons). So we do get more information, but not detailed explanations of the judges' thought processes.
If the judges had to write 3 or 4 sentences for each skater immediately after they finished skating, for up to 24 skaters at a time (often more in short programs), that could add an hour to the amount of time it takes to hold each phase of each major competition. You can't expect the judges to remember enough about every skater to write meaningful comments after the whole event is over. Is it worth slowing down the competitions to build it in for every skater at every event, or scheduling a critique session for every skater in a room somewhere after the fact?
What kind of comments would be appropriate to share with the skaters, comparable to what you say you got in dressage?
Would the comments need to be different if also published to the general public?
At the rink. Again.
Typically skaters will schedule a critique for those kinds of comments. Basically, judges will come in, watch the program and give feedback (less formalized than Champs Camp) or the coaches will invite a TS/TC to come in and critique levels.