Globe and Mail: Figure skating judging system still has flaws | Golden Skate

Globe and Mail: Figure skating judging system still has flaws

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
“The system is a lot of hot air,” Johnny Weir said, “They try to make it as complicated as possible so you can’t see what goes on behind closed doors. The system is just smoke and mirrors.”---Oh, no. There goes his chance of a comeback. I see from the mirror behind the closed door that a fiery smoke cloud is prowling toward him from every secret corner.

This is my take on the new system: Its true beauty is not so much in maintaining fairness of the game as in diluting responsibility--taking away individual and organizational accountability and thus nobody to be blamed, almost like the justice system. The infamous O. J. Simpson trail outraged a lot of people but the law stands as it was, the jury and attorneys still live happily forever, and no heads roll because of that. The complex system is to maintain stability, to prevent the possibility of a judging-related incident that could crumple the whole organization or society. All we can say now is something like "the Tech Panel sucks" or "the judges are giving away GOEs like candy" as if it is due to luck or as if it happens to be a raining day. One can hardly pinpoint if there is indeed corruption going on any more. That is good, I guess, in terms of restoring the lost credibility in Salt Lake City or protecting the ISU interest if said in plain language.
 
Last edited:

brightphoton

Medalist
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
I never know why the word "complex" is applied to Code of Points. There are only 3 operators, addition, multiplication, and subtraction: x number of points for this, multiply by 1.y, subtract 1.0 for falls, etc. And it's not like it's difficult math either, like Laplace transforms or non-trivial integration.

ARGGGhhhh :bang: :bang: :bang:

Johnny Weir said:
“They try to make it as complicated as possible so you can’t see what goes on behind closed doors,” Weir said. “The system is just smoke and mirrors.”

This quote fits much better with 6.0.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
I think it is the sheer volume of numbers that makes it seem complex. If a person wanted to become knowledgable in the scoring system, just memorizing the base values for all the elements, the bullets for positive and negative GOEs, and the specific guidelines for the program components, would be an off-putting task.

As Imaginary Pogue put it on another thread, 6.0 scoring is not easier to understand, but it is easier to enjoy in ignorance.
 

brightphoton

Medalist
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
6.0 was a black box. In goes a skater, out comes ordinals and a number like 5.5 or whatever. It's only less complex in terms of obvious parameters as input. But if you really think, what is going inside that machine, you realize you don't know and there's no way to find out. People suspect there are a lot of parts but it's all hidden so no one really knows.

Code of Points is that black box's revealed inner parts, all its inner workings laid open for all to see. Lo and behold, there are a lot of parts! But they fit together logically, and if you took the time to examine each part, you'd realize there's no magic and no hidden processes.

edit:
But I just thought of an idea. You can treat CoP as the same black box as 6.0 was. Solely look at the results and never look at the protocols. And if you disagree with results, you can say, hey, why did Skater A score less than Skater B? uhhhh ... judges trading votes?

The above is not necessarily a bad thing. That's what I do with gymnastics CoP. For me, their new system is just like the 10.0 system. I have no idea what's going on with either one, only the scales are different.
 
Last edited:

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
In order to have his words taken more seriously by the media, and in order to be in somewhat closer to the center of the figure skating stage, Johnny Weir announced his return.:rolleye:
 

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
COP system can be tweaked to "right" the course to address the major criticism. They can just as easily adjust the rewards for artistry as they did for quads. The resulting change would be just as quick and effective. However, the status of figure skating as a sport has to be considered and weighed carefully, especially as an Olympic sport, without which the general public would forget its existence.

In Asian countries at least, COP is natural to skating fans who are more knowledgeable about the technical aspects of figure skating than fans under 6.0. Protocols are anxiously waited for and analyzed. New fans are earnest to learn and catch on quickly with no complaints of its complexity.

Solutions come from improving the system, not from returning to the archaic 6.0. If there had never been a 6.0 system, would anybody today design a scoring system this way at all? Would it even occur to them? Why number 6? How could judges be expected to correctly remember and compare every skater? How could they leave slots appropriately? That would just be pre-judging.

Today's fans demand justification for every individual mark on every element and component, poring over and debating about parts and all of the protocols. They will never stand for judges' simple verdict on one skater's presentation over another's. That time has passed.
 

KKonas

Medalist
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
In order to have his words taken more seriously by the media, and in order to be in somewhat closer to the center of the figure skating stage, Johnny Weir announced his return.:rolleye:

Feeling as he does about the judging system, one has to wonder why Weir wants to return to this business of "smoke and Mirrors."
 

louisa05

Final Flight
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
I never know why the word "complex" is applied to Code of Points. There are only 3 operators, addition, multiplication, and subtraction: x number of points for this, multiply by 1.y, subtract 1.0 for falls, etc. And it's not like it's difficult math either, like Laplace transforms or non-trivial integration.
.

Multiply by 1.y....and thus we have algebra.

Do you have any idea how difficult that is for some of us? It is downright unappealing to try to quantify all of that for ourselves.

I was never taught how to multiply in school. Literally never taught to multiply by a teacher. I was left sitting at a desk at age 8 trying to do division worksheets without understanding multiplication and told I was just being "stupid" when I said I didn't know how to do the problems. And then I was punished for not completing the work.

My story of bad teaching is not that unusual. Your language usage indicates that you like mathematics and understand complex higher math. Great for you. Some of us don't. Instead, we get nauseated by the prospect of deciphering long lists of numbers.

My point, by the way, is not to defend IJS or 6.0. My point is that your disdain for people who have problems with math and numbers is unfair and does not take into account what our experiences, or just our gifts and talents, may be.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
But I just thought of an idea. You can treat CoP as the same black box as 6.0 was. Solely look at the results and never look at the protocols. And if you disagree with results, you can say, hey, why did Skater A score less than Skater B? uhhhh ... judges trading votes?

The above is not necessarily a bad thing. That's what I do with gymnastics CoP. For me, their new system is just like the 10.0 system. I have no idea what's going on with either one, only the scales are different.

I think this is exactly what the great majority of skating fans do. If we look at the posts of the competition threads in this forum , a good many of them go, "What?! They gave her 112.13 for that?! I thought she deserved only 105 at best!"

louisa05 said:
Do you have any idea how difficult that is for some of us? It is downright unappealing to try to quantify all of that for ourselves.

I am good at multiplying (at least my calculator is :) ), but I agree 100%. Knowing when to apply all the multipliers is the biggest hindrance to figuring out the numbers on the protocols.

Along with the GOEs that are factored in different ways for each element.
 

emma

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
^ this! Seriously, I don't understand the factors or mutlipliers and just stopped trying; I do look at the protocols, love to see the break down of elements, but can't really do the math and really don't try.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Feeling as he does about the judging system, one has to wonder why Weir wants to return to this business of "smoke and Mirrors."

I think that 6.0 was good old-fashioned "pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain" smoke and mirrors.

The current system is new-fangled "click here to display a million numbers -- don't you see how that proves mathematically that I am right?" smoke and mirrors.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Feeling as he does about the judging system, one has to wonder why Weir wants to return to this business of "smoke and Mirrors."

It's like a pet dog who has lost two of its legs. No longer able to move with much joy and freedom but you still can't get rid of it.
 

pangtongfan

Match Penalty
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Weir's comeback will be a disaester. If he has to qualify (I am not sure on the rules) I wouldnt be surprised to see him eliminated in Regionals or something. With all the brides he has burned he will get the Mira Leung treatment from anyone involved in the USFSA.
 

pangtongfan

Match Penalty
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
^ Oh, come on. Just because Johnny married a man doesn't mean he wants to burn all the brides.

I was not referring primarily to that at all (although sadly I expect even that is still a hinderance to some degree). It is more his tell all book, his complaints about judges and other skaters since he retired, his complaints about the USFSA especialy since 2010. If he comes back he will be burned. Add to that he brings nothing new to the table that many other skaters both in the U.S and abroad cant do at this point (in amateur skating, in pro skating I am sure he is unique and stands out) and it makes it even easier to virtually ignore him, as at this point it is highly unlikely he is so much better than even current U.S skaters they HAVE to reward him. Unless he came back armed with quads, more challenging choreography than ever before, COP maxed elements and programs, and skated lights out, he will be shuffled to the middle or back of the pack. Best case scenario would be a 7th place at Nationals I would guess. Atleast Evan if he returned could hope to return to the top 2 at Nationals, albeit I dont see him coming anywhere near his former #1 in the World stature.

That isnt my hope at all btw, I am just a realist.
 
Last edited:

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
pang, just to clear it up, you said "burn all brides" not "burn all bridges." Spun was just spinning off the quote.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Why number 6?

I don't know if this is historically accurate as it applies to figure skating, but judging from 0 to 6 is perfect from the point of view of cognitive psychology. Many studies have confirmed that humans can correctly place items into six or seven comparative categories, but no more.

That is why the program component scores have come in for such criticism. There are forty-one different grades that you can get, from 0.00 to 10.00, graduated in quarters of a point. It is beyond human capacity to distinguish between a performance that deserves 5.50 and one that deserves 5.75.

Not only that, but statistically speaking the sampling errors swamp the thing that is being measured.
 

ImaginaryPogue

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
But isn't 0 to 6 actually 0.0 to 6.0, which is sixty grades, compared to 40s for PCS? And given that judges have to judge dozens of performances at a time, how can they correctly place them relative to each other if we can only do six/seven comparative categories? Or am I misunderstanding what you're saying.
 
Top