Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: DiManno: Figure skating audiences alienated by esoteric judging system

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    311

    DiManno: Figure skating audiences alienated by esoteric judging system

    DiManno: Figure skating audiences alienated by esoteric judging system
    http://www.thestar.com/sports/articl...judging-system

    To hear skating autocrats tell it, the Code of Points system is the best thing since spandex.The reality is much different. The reality is a rink full of spectators booing Patrick Chan upon successful defence of his title Saturday afternoon. The reality is a fan base that can’t comprehend how Tessa Virtue and Scott Moir defeated defending dance couple Meryl Davis and Charlie White. The reality is collective befuddlement when marks are flashed on the scoreboard. I’ve covered figure skating for three decades and even I need remedial instruction on the eve of every major competition. It’s advanced math, it’s as arcane as the theory of relativity. Increasingly I’ve come to believe it’s a deliberately excluding — almost occult — contrivance.

  2. #2
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,634
    I wish they would somehow encourage more beautiful, held-out moves in addition to transitions. It just seems like the skaters feel like they always have to be doing something, which I guess they do because they will get lower transition scores otherwise. It's true the programs are more difficult now, and it's true that difficulty must be rewarded, but I wish they could somehow balance the difficulty with musicality. In particular, a few of the Russian girls do these hyper-flexibility moves that do not correspond to the music at all and just look like a point grab to me. If that's the future of the sport then I think audiences will continue to be alienated.

  3. #3
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    410
    Is easy to complain about CoP - I love to also. But you could just as easily had the same result under 6.0. Figure skating is a complex and nuanced sport, esp dance, no matter what system it's judged under.

    Sure it was easier to shout out "5.7!" after a skate then "164.68!" but it doesn't mean you're any closer to what the judges do. The article did little to further the debate and just reinforces the idea that skating is ruled by a handful of partisan bureaucrats - just like back in the 6.0 days.

    I do agree with drivingmissdaisy that long gliding moves, that sort of define what makes skating different then dancing are devalued to the detriment of the sport, and programs sometimes feel more like a checklist then a whole idea. I wish Ms. DiManno had looked at how CoP is changing the sport, and how it could be changed, rather then just complaining about it.

  4. #4
    Rooting for the divas with Kwanford Spun Silver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,880
    As a Canadian, she earns credibility in my book for questioning the wins of Chan and V/M. She obviously feels very strongly about the problems with the IJS. She's like Mathman without the math.
    Last edited by Spun Silver; 04-05-2012 at 10:00 AM.

  5. #5
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,008
    Same old, same old, same old...

    And there are some misleading infos in this article.

    Quote Originally Posted by ivy View Post
    Is easy to complain about CoP - I love to also. But you could just as easily had the same result under 6.0.
    exactly!

    Quote Originally Posted by ivy View Post
    I do agree with drivingmissdaisy that long gliding moves, that sort of define what makes skating different then dancing are devalued to the detriment of the sport, and programs sometimes feel more like a checklist then a whole idea.
    That was the reason I said the scoring system for ladies should be seperated from men.
    Last edited by Bluebonnet; 04-05-2012 at 10:12 AM.

  6. #6
    Rooting for the divas with Kwanford Spun Silver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,880
    Yes, but 6.0 was an obviously judged sport. IJS is supposedly a neutral scientific system. That's why audiences feel befuddled, IMO. It acts just like 6.0 but in a less honest way. We don't even get to heap burning coals on the individual judges' heads because we don't know who scored what. Linking judges to their scores would make the fans more involved. Making the tech call process more transparent would help too.

    Of course that means they are going to get booed from time to time, and I'm not sure they get paid enough for that. (They're expense-paid volunteers, right?)

    What a mess we're in!

    Slight sidetrack: I noticed on a Eurosport vid that they had access to the judges' scores while they were still in process. (They mentioned seeing the numbers move around.) I must have missed this in the past. Does that mean the judges are obviously playing with their scores to get the placements they want? If so, there goes the objectivity of ISJ.

  7. #7
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Spun Silver View Post
    We don't even get to heap burning coals on the individual judges' heads because we don't know who scored what. Linking judges to their scores would make the fans more involved. Making the tech call process more transparent would help too.
    As I've said before, I do not agree to open the nationalities of the judges like in 6.0 if that was your meaning of linking judges to their scores. Would designated numbers to the judges satisfy people's requirement for transparency? I think it's better to give numbers to the judges. If you are not satisfied with the scoring, you'd know number #3 judge and #5 judge were the "bad" one or something.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spun Silver View Post
    Slight sidetrack: I noticed on a Eurosport vid that they had access to the judges' scores while they were still in process. (They mentioned seeing the numbers move around.) I must have missed this in the past. Does that mean the judges are obviously playing with their scores to get the placements they want? If so, there goes the objectivity of ISJ.
    I believe, obviously I'm not an expert on IJS, the judges have to do this no matter what scoring systems they are in. Otherwise, how could they come up with the numbers? Which PE should be measured 8.25, and which should be measured 8.50? What's the difference between 0.25? They are all in the mind of the judges. Figure skating cannot get rid of subjectivity unless it could be measured by rulers and watches.
    Last edited by Bluebonnet; 04-05-2012 at 10:34 AM.

  8. #8
    Wicked Yankee Girl dorispulaski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Staring at the ocean and smiling.
    Posts
    15,979
    That was British Eurosport, wasn't it?

    I think what you're seeing is the review process? There is a provisional number after the performance is complete, but then instant replay reviews are going on, and the skaters' scores can change at that time?

    I would like to know the identity of the judges. Railing at the judges is a significant off season amusement on fan boards
    If you don't like the result, you would like to know who to blame.
    Last edited by dorispulaski; 04-05-2012 at 11:00 AM.

  9. #9
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Spun Silver View Post
    Yes, but 6.0 was an obviously judged sport. IJS is supposedly a neutral scientific system.
    Not really.

    A big part of the change in scoring system, as I see it, is to take the quantifiable parts and quantify them, as objectively as possible. But the qualitative parts are still subject to human perception and human judgment and always will be. Breaking down the scores can't change the nature of what is being scored -- but it can show us in more detail how each part of the program contributed to the score.

    In fact it shows us in so much detail that there isn't time to show it while the event is in progress. So you have to go out of your way to seek out the information, but at least it's available, which was never the case in 6.0.

    The anonymity in international senior events is another issue entirely that muddles up the discussion.

    That's why audiences feel befuddled, IMO. It acts just like 6.0 but in a less honest way. We don't even get to heap burning coals on the individual judges' heads because we don't know who scored what.
    If it's more fun to heap coals than to evaluate the skating itself, there's something wrong with the way the sport is sold to the public -- something wrong that started way back in the 6.0 era in the Cold War or before.

    Linking judges to their scores would make the fans more involved. Making the tech call process more transparent would help too.
    I agree that making the process more transparent would be more educational and involving. The trick is how to do so in real time, both live (ISU's responsibility) and on TV (networks' responsibility).

    For anyone willing to read the protocols after the fact, IJS is already a lot more transparent than placeholder scores that gave no information about how they were arrived at aside from who gave them.

    But for casual fans who only get to hear the total scores announced, it's not very informative.

    Of course that means they are going to get booed from time to time, and I'm not sure they get paid enough for that. (They're expense-paid volunteers, right?)
    I believe that is true of the technical panels as well as the judges, although there had been some talk of paying the tech panels more than that.

    Slight sidetrack: I noticed on a Eurosport vid that they had access to the judges' scores while they were still in process. (They mentioned seeing the numbers move around.) I must have missed this in the past. Does that mean the judges are obviously playing with their scores to get the placements they want? If so, there goes the objectivity of ISJ.
    I'd have to know what the Eurosport commentators actually said, and what they were referring to which they might not have made clear.

    My guess is that what they were referring to is that the technical panel reviews elements after the program is over, which may change the levels or underrotation calls or even which elements are identified and credited. Then the judges also have the opportunity to change their GOEs before submitting their marks if the element calls change.

    The technical panel members confer with each other during the reviews. The judges don't confer. They also don't know what the totals were for previous skaters or how their scores for the current skater compare. So they might change their mind about a GOE here or there or even a component here or there in the few minutes between when they first enter the scores and when they finalize them, but it's probably not going to make much difference overall.

    What can have a big effect is if the tech panel changes their mind about how to classify an element. Certainly if the commentators have access to technical scores in real time based on full base value for jumps and then the tech panel downgrades one or more jumps after the review, that can result in a significantly lower score.

    If the tech panel decides after review something like "that doesn't count as a combination spin with change of foot; the extra step at the change of foot makes it into two separate spins, the second one doesn't count because she already did a combination spin with the same code, and the last spin in the program doesn't count because it's the fourth spin element" then the skater is going to lose a lot of points because of that relatively small mistake changing feet in the spin.

    If you look at the protocols and you're familiar with the rules you could see what must have happened. The commentators aren't always that knowledgeable about the fine points of the technical calls (unless they're technical specialists themselves) and even if they know what happened when they think about it and look at the protocols, they may not have time to explain in real time.

  10. #10
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,330
    It is an impasse. The fans say "we don't like this." The ISU says "yes you do." Neither side will budge. They will just have to go their separate ways.

  11. #11
    Rooting for the divas with Kwanford Spun Silver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,880
    Thank you for the explanations.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    The technical panel members confer with each other during the reviews. The judges don't confer. They also don't know what the totals were for previous skaters or how their scores for the current skater compare.
    We know the totals for previous skaters, obviously the judges do too! They also know the PCS totals, right, since they're put up online in more or less real time at isu.org. Do you mean the protocols?

    In fact it shows us in so much detail that there isn't time to show it while the event is in progress.
    So you have to go out of your way to seek out the information, but at least it's available, which was never the case in 6.0.
    This is where I would start if I wanted to address the befuddlement that Ms DiManna is speaking of. Surely the geniuses at IN or NBC - esp. IN since it is a specialized network for skaters and serious fans - could come up with ways of presenting more scoring info. Think of baseball, the way they tuck all kinds of abbreviations around the corners of the screens in live time. Serious baseball fans learn the arcane rules but they don't have to go look up the details of the game - they are right there.

    Then again, maybe not. There are a lot of long numbers. : (

    P.S. I can't find the BE vid I was alluding to and for the life of me I don't even know which skater it was. One of the ladies....

    ETA: OK, got it. I just realized ESP meant Eurosport - I thought it was Espana, lol. Listen to the end of Murakami's FS.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy2v6YfCzng
    Last edited by Spun Silver; 04-05-2012 at 11:55 AM.

  12. #12
    Wicked Yankee Girl dorispulaski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Staring at the ocean and smiling.
    Posts
    15,979
    They said the same thing after Virtue & Moir skated.

  13. #13
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Brink of Insanity
    Posts
    667
    Quote Originally Posted by Spun Silver View Post
    As a Canadian, she earns credibility in my book for questioning the wins of Chan and V/M. She obviously feels very strongly about the problems with the IJS. She's like Mathman without the math.
    Please do not insult Mathman in that way. Mathman acutally understands and appreciates figure skating.

    DiManno has NO CREDIBILITY whatsoever as a skating writer. She claims to have been writing about figure skating for 30 years but her pieces are snarks on what a ridiculous sport it is. The last time Worlds was in nice she said Bourne & Kraatz would have a tough time getting past the Chinese with their big tricks. IOW, she didn't know ice-dance from pairs. She's also said the men watch figure skating to ogle skimpily dressed underage girls. This piece is no different.

  14. #14
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,330
    Quote Originally Posted by Spun Silver View Post
    ETA: OK, got it. I just realized ESP meant Eurosport - I thought it was Espana, lol. Listen to the end of Murakami's FS.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy2v6YfCzng
    OT, I really like this girl!

    Very interesting. It sounded like the tech specialists were revising her scores downward as they looked at replays.

  15. #15
    Rooting for the divas with Kwanford Spun Silver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    OT, I really like this girl!
    She's fierce!

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •