I'm not sure if it's been brought up here or elsewhere, but here is my reaction to the judging and the scoring system in general even without having seen the men's LPs yet. Why doesn't the sport come up with some sort of system to give greater weight to the long program results? If I understand correctly, right now, points just accumulate. I think fans are used to the long program being more important than the short program and, by extension, they are tired of people who are not the best in the long program winning competitions.
I don't have a "perfect suggestion" for how to properly weight the long program, but perhaps one could start with the old ordinal system and work from there. If the ordinal system were in place, we all know that Denis Ten (1.0 for the SP and 1.0 for the LP) would definitely beat Patrick Chan (0.5 for SP and 2.0 for the LP).
Judges always have the power to mark in a way we disagree with, but I feel like this "accumulated point total" way of scoring is worse than the ordinal system. Also: it was hard for judges to rank skaters in the past in relation to others because of just two marks and there being a 6.0 cap for "perfection". Now, with so many different things being judged, judges theoretically "should" have the freedom to properly mark all components and then have the computer tabulate point totals without ordinals being such a heady thing.
Judging the elements separately doesn't seem so bad (TES is not "evil" in my mind compared to a 6.0 system) and I don't know that PCS is "worse" than giving some generic "artistic impression" or "presentation" mark out of 6.0, but I do think the way final results are tabulated is "wrong."
What do you think?
I don't have a "perfect suggestion" for how to properly weight the long program, but perhaps one could start with the old ordinal system and work from there. If the ordinal system were in place, we all know that Denis Ten (1.0 for the SP and 1.0 for the LP) would definitely beat Patrick Chan (0.5 for SP and 2.0 for the LP).
Judges always have the power to mark in a way we disagree with, but I feel like this "accumulated point total" way of scoring is worse than the ordinal system. Also: it was hard for judges to rank skaters in the past in relation to others because of just two marks and there being a 6.0 cap for "perfection". Now, with so many different things being judged, judges theoretically "should" have the freedom to properly mark all components and then have the computer tabulate point totals without ordinals being such a heady thing.
Judging the elements separately doesn't seem so bad (TES is not "evil" in my mind compared to a 6.0 system) and I don't know that PCS is "worse" than giving some generic "artistic impression" or "presentation" mark out of 6.0, but I do think the way final results are tabulated is "wrong."
What do you think?