Nothing is absolute, of course as there are always some exceptions and some bad calls. I heard that Judy Blumberg (USA) will be on the tech panel at Worlds this year. Marie Bowness (CAN) is scheduled to be the tech controller.
Ice Dance judges
- Thread starter FSGMT
- Start date
Nothing is absolute, of course as there are always some exceptions and some bad calls. I heard that Judy Blumberg (USA) will be on the tech panel at Worlds this year. Marie Bowness (CAN) is scheduled to be the tech controller.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
I like that,I think they are both more strict callers.
Even if this judging culture is as prevalent today as it was pre 6.0, if a skater in an earlier group skates lights out or definitely of a higher standard that what they expected from a skater/couple from a lower group they will be rewarded.
A good side to judging in the points system compared to 6.0 is that it is considerably easier for fluctuation of rankings to occur because every element is judged and if you make a mistake , the price is heavy!!
A good side to judging in the points system compared to 6.0 is that it is considerably easier for fluctuation of rankings to occur because every element is judged and if you make a mistake , the price is heavy!!
Technical Controllers must be judges, and for Worlds and other ISU Championship events, the TC must be an ISU Technical Controller.
There are only 18 ISU Technical Controllers for Ice Dance, and Canada doesn't have any. Karen Butcher and Leanna Caron are International Technical Controllers for Ice Dance, which means they can be a TC at a "B" International, but not at an ISU Championship.
Marie Bowness is an ISU Technical Specialist, not a Technical Controller. She is certified to act as a TS at ISU Championship events.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Country
-
At least with IJS you can look at the protocol sheets and SEE exactly where a skater gained or lost points.
Two perfect-looking performances with similar technical content... What was the difference between 1st and 2nd? Ah... the 1st skater lost a little GOE on the 3Flip, but overcame it because the 2nd only had a Level 3 diagonal step.
OK, so maybe the PCS aren't so clearly defined, but it's still a huge step up from the only public notice of scoring being "5.7"
ETA: Ooops... just realized this was an Ice Dance thread... so 3Flip example not relevant... but you get the idea.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-206192-223415-177357-0-file,00.pdf
"SPECIAL REGULATIONS & TECHNICAL RULES SINGLE & PAIR SKATING and ICE DANCE 2012, as accepted by the 54th Ordinary Congress June 2012,"
Page 62 and following
Who has the most "power" could be debated. The Technical Specialist calls the levels. If the tech specialist & assistant tech specialist disagree on the level, the Tech controller has the deciding vote, and is perceived as the "boss" of the panel, but for my money, the tech specialist has the most power over the final score.
"SPECIAL REGULATIONS & TECHNICAL RULES SINGLE & PAIR SKATING and ICE DANCE 2012, as accepted by the 54th Ordinary Congress June 2012,"
Page 62 and following
Who has the most "power" could be debated. The Technical Specialist calls the levels. If the tech specialist & assistant tech specialist disagree on the level, the Tech controller has the deciding vote, and is perceived as the "boss" of the panel, but for my money, the tech specialist has the most power over the final score.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
One thing I like about IJS is that a fan can look all this stuff up on the internet. I daresay if we were still on 6.0, that you could look stuff up too nowadays, but it is possible to find out why most calls went the way they did by looking up the rules, and reading the questions that ISU members have forwarded for answers (those are also on the ISU website).
However, it is a fact, that there are some calls that I still don't understand, and they are usually of the sort, "If even I can see something went wrong with that step sequence, why was it called level 4????) Since your competitors can't question your score, if you luck out with the tech panel, it is now more clear to me why an inexplicable inflated call can be left to stand. There is no real mechanism to correct too high a level given by a tech panel; after all, what competitor would complain their score was too high
However, it is a fact, that there are some calls that I still don't understand, and they are usually of the sort, "If even I can see something went wrong with that step sequence, why was it called level 4????) Since your competitors can't question your score, if you luck out with the tech panel, it is now more clear to me why an inexplicable inflated call can be left to stand. There is no real mechanism to correct too high a level given by a tech panel; after all, what competitor would complain their score was too high
Similar threads
