01-25-2012, 10:36 AM
Mathman gave Chan 9.0 and I gave him 9.25 for his artistry. Those are high scores, Skatefiguring. Your posts came right after ours, so what exactly were you arguing about if it wasn't about the scores? Even if it was just a general impression of yours, most of the points you made could apply to Plueshenko's artistry or even Stojko's as well. "It's hard to do quads and perform at the same time, so I deserve high marks for artistry"---something Stojko might have said to himself. "It's hard to do all those difficult transitions and sell the program at the same time, so I deserve a high mark for presentation and interpretation."---It sounds like a copy of Stojko's logic.
A pianist's interpretation skills and technical skills are correlated positively but not perfectly. And the higher the level, the weaker the correlation. Some seasoned performers find Mozart's simple concertos challenging because there is no quick finger to hide the interpretation. I often wonder if there are no quick feet, can Patrick still create the so-called magic? Can he skate to Buttle's "easy" programs that oozed an unearthly feel? Or Lambiel's and Dai's elegant dance?
I think highly (9.25) of Chan's artistry, so it is redundant to tell me that his level is "beyond the capacities of most" and make a big argument about it. I'm talking about the best against the best, not the best against the vast average.
Honest atheleticism and pure quality skating do not always translate into honest performance (interpretation). They are correlated but not identical.
Last edited by skatinginbc; 01-25-2012 at 10:39 AM.
01-25-2012, 10:41 AM
What was that?
Originally Posted by skatinginbc
01-25-2012, 10:45 AM
That was just a rough term for his Performance and Interpretation scores at the National if you demand an essay on it.
01-25-2012, 11:06 AM
I already stated that my post wasn't about particular scores, by judges or posters, but a general statement and reaction to a general perception and judgement on Chan's artistry, which is not a program component, but is always the last resort criticism of his skating. I usually don't respond to such criticism because it is subjective, which is why I usually stick to supportable facts and numbers to refute false claims and declarations, leaving out debatable issues even when they are false or highly exaggerated. I felt for once to voice my opinion too on this subjective perception.
As for judges, they have their criteria to go by, officially and personally. Some of them are experts in artistic fields. Obviously they view Chan's performances highly, whether in absolute or relative terms. They want to reward him, so a 10 may be something expected to be thrown out but help leave the overall score high, or, who knows, maybe they feel that relative to other skaters already scored, Chan's performance is worth 20 but they can only give out 10 max.
01-25-2012, 11:29 AM
I beg to differ. I think the general perception and judgement on Chan's artistry is that it is improving by leaps and bounds.
01-25-2012, 11:59 AM
That is simply not true!
Originally Posted by let`s talk
If you extract those jumps out of his program and see only the jump content like how Stojko has done this time, yes, there is not much difference between his program and the programs years ago in Stojko era. But if you put all these jumps into a program as sophisticate as Patrick Chan's, no one has ever skated a clean program like that ever before.
I won't deny national bonus points from Canadian Nationals, as I won't deny any national bonuses from Japan Nationals, US Nationals, Russian Nationals, French Nationals, ... There is a reason why national scores won't be recorded as ISU record. Chan knows that. Everyone knows that. But NO ONE could deny that Chan has given over all the best skating ever under CoP scoring system. So the highest score ever is warranted reguardless whether it is over 300 or not.
01-25-2012, 12:12 PM
I actually thought the choreography was outstanding. There did not seem to be any busy work just for the sake of being busy (or earning CoP points).
Originally Posted by skatinginbc
To me, the key to figure skating choreography is to weave the technical elements, especially the jumps, into the fabric of the full program. I thought Patrick/Lori did really well in this regard. The program held my interest throughout (very rare ).
I have always suspected it, looking at some of the protocols these days.
Originally Posted by SkateFiguring
01-25-2012, 12:50 PM
Patrick's CH is outstanding!!! I'd give him 10 for it!
01-25-2012, 01:11 PM
I think in general that judges should be more stingy with positive GOEs. A GOE of zero (absent mistakes) means that the jump was satisfactory in every respect. I believe that when the CoP first came out the instructions to judges were just something like, if the jump really blows you away, give it some positive GOE.
Originally Posted by jettasian
Now, though, the criteria seem to be pretty well defined. If you get six out of the following eight bullets, that is supposed to be a +3 GOE. The criteria do not require anything to be spectacular or amazing, just that the skater does this, that and the other.
Applying the bullets to Patricks solo 4T and 3A, I get something like this:
1) unexpected/creative/difficult entry. (Maybe; the entry was short, but not especially creative or unexpected)
2) clear recognizable steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element, (Sort of; not so sure about the immediately part)
3) varied position in the air / delay in rotation. (no)
4) good height and distance. (satisfactory, not exceptional.)
5) good extension on landing / creative exit (very good, not mind-blowingly good)
6) good flow from entry to exit including jump combinations / sequences. (yes)
7) effortless throughout. (yes)
8) element matched to musical structure. (pretty good)
So adding up the bullets, a generous judge might give him 7 out of 8 (+3GOE), and a stingier judge maybe only three for a +1. I guess that is why we have 9 judges (8 in this case).
01-25-2012, 01:17 PM
Mathman, care to demonstrate with videos quads and 3As that that you deem better according to each bullet point? Will be much appreciated.
01-25-2012, 01:34 PM
This was never the case. There was always specific criteria for GoE, both plus and minus.
Originally Posted by Mathman
01-25-2012, 02:05 PM
01-25-2012, 02:58 PM
^^^^ I believe judges see and appreciate the difficulties and the skills more than most people. They are awed. At this Nationals, Patrick delivered more than they could expect and ask of any skater or human of today. In that sense it was perfection, or beyond relative or current standard of perfection.
We are impressed when somebody juggle 10 objects without dropping any. But a juggler performing the same while riding a unicycle is even more impressive. But we would not ask of anybody to juggle 10 object while riding a unicycle across a wire, high above ground, in gusty high wind and pouring rain. Judges probably see something similar when Patrick is near flawless. And if this juggler drops a ball, most will forgive him, just as when Patrick does fall during a program, his marks suffer, but he still performs above the current standard, especially when others don't bring their highest standard.
I want to add to what cannot be faked - power, and skating huge. Patrick does his artistry on speed, deep edges, and in the flow, with elegance, sophistication, and power. I see none other who could have all these qualities together in a performance. Many can do cute, sexy, beautiful, fun, funky, dramatic, moving, etc.; they may have elegance, sophistication, or power but not together to make it grand. Patrick can do grand. His skills set him apart, like in all crafts and arts. It's nonsense to discount his performance by discounting his skills. His style may be imitable but not the performance. It's beyond anybody else's capability today.
Last edited by SkateFiguring; 01-25-2012 at 03:01 PM.
01-25-2012, 03:10 PM
The lengths you will go to in an effort to discredit this skater make your posts hysterically funny. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.
Originally Posted by let`s talk
01-25-2012, 03:19 PM
It has been so totally predictable that it's at best mildly amusing. From somebody calling Patrick's Aranjuez blah, I should expect some flair, with drama and humour and a little real bite. -3.
Originally Posted by Dragonlady