Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 135

Thread: Figure skating needs CPR

  1. #31
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,741
    Quote Originally Posted by Robeye View Post
    Mathematically, I must disagree that 1) the SP is relatively overvalued, and 2) that the system enables insurmountable leads. Let's look at each of these things individually:

    1) SP Relatively Overvalued?. In terms of time elapsed and the quantity of elements and component features judged, the point value of the SP, as a general principle, is pretty proportional to that of the Free Skate, e.g. at a rate of roughly 1 to 2. Therefore, unless one wants to argue that somehow those things in the LP should be inherently and relatively more valuable for qualitative reasons (which would then be disproportionately penalizing SP features), I don't see the logic in this premise.

    I suppose one could skew the relative weightings significantly in favor of the LP, such that, for example, a 3Lz in the LP (in the first half) is worth more than a 3Lz in the SP, to make the event "more exciting" with a nail-biting finish. I don't find this persuasive; I mean, why have the SP at all, then? But it could be done. However, let's be clear: this would be a judgment to fulfill a value agenda.

    In no way does it demonstrate that the system of giving proportionally equal weightings to SP and LP scores (which is the current system) is either unfair, or that it systematically results in insurmountable SP leads (other than for reasons related to what the skaters themselves managed to do, or not do, on the ice).

    The difference between this situation and the figures/free skate dichotomy of yore is that, the SP and the LP are essentially like items; it would be like playing 3 innings of a game one day, and then 6 innings the next. Should a run on the second day be counted as 2 runs, just because it would add a certain frisson to the finish? In the latter case, school figures and the free skate are qualitatively different, and people essentially made the judgment that they they didn't particularly care to have these draftsman-like tracings on ice dictate the winner.

    2) Insurmountable Leads in the SP? I'll leave Patrick aside and address Yuna's history only: a 3 or 4 point lead going into the LP is only insurmountable if the leader is cleaner and/or has a higher points ceiling than her competitors. It has nothing to do with the SP being relatively overvalued (see above). I would be willing to surmise that if we did a quantitative analysis, it would show that, as a percentage, Yuna's average SP lead is no larger than her average LP lead. In fact, if we look at her latest World performances, her LP point differential was actually quite a bit higher than for her SP.

    In the SP, Yuna's score (69.97) was about 4.7% higher than Carolina's second place score (66.86).

    In the LP, Yuna's score (148.34) was almost 10.4% higher than Mao's second place score (134.37).

    I would argue that Yuna was relatively underscored in the SP, for various reasons (she was skating in an early flight, she hadn't skated in a major competition all year, actually for almost two years, etc.). Let's even bend over backwards to "normalize" the case, and say she didn't get the infamous "e" on her 3F, and her PCS was judged to final flight standards. Call it 73 to 74 points? Revealingly, the average percentage differential for this range would be right around 10% when compared to Caro's SP score, exactly in line with her LP differential.

    In other words, at worst, Yuna's SP lead was proportionally far smaller than her LP lead. At best, it was merely equal to it.

    That's one of the benefits of looking at the hard numbers. Unless there is some funny business going on, a close scrutiny, more often than not, reveals the internal consistencies and logic.
    I dont think this is even close to being on topic though if we wrote this much and with such complexity we might even lose die hard skating fans lol.

  2. #32
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by Skater Boy View Post
    I dont think this is even close to being on topic though if we wrote this much and with such complexity we might even lose die hard skating fans lol.
    Well, there was definitely thread drift, and I was interested in responding to the ideas in the particular post in question.

    Are you saying that indulging in geekiness is now not allowed even on a specialty figure skating fan forum?

  3. #33
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,325
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    But how does an average fan know which skater "outskated" another? Either they had to have been educated somehow, or else they just made up their own criteria out of thin air.

    Suppose you have never seen figure skating before. And then you come across a competition on TV, or at a local rink with a friend who knows what's going on. You're curious, so you ask "What is this sport about? What are the skaters supposed to be doing, and how do they decided who's best?"

    Imagine that your friend, or the TV commentators, give one of the following explanations:

    1) Skaters skate around and do tricks, like jumps and spins and steps. The jumps are worth the most. Whoever does the hardest tricks best without falling down wins.

    2) Skaters are supposed to perform a dance to the music, use the different technical skills they can do on the blades. They get points for some of the difficult skills, but the most important thing is the overall performance.

    3) Figure skating is based on different ways of using the human body to control the blades on the ice. The most important things are the edges on the two sides of the blades and the way they make curves around the ice. The specific technical skills are mostly about turning and curving, at speed, and changing between one edge and another. The speed and the strength of the curves are the most important qualities. The most difficult ways to get from one edge to another, or back to the same edge, are to jump up in the air and turn around three or four times in the air before coming down on a backward outside edge. So those jumps are worth the most. But you have to be good at all kinds of different skills -- six different kinds of jump takeoffs, spins on both feet in different positions, and curves and turns and steps that use different parts of the blades and travel and turn in different directions.

    Each of those definitions has some truth to it. And each is missing something. So if you learn about the sport from someone who favors one of those definitions, in many events you're going to have a different expectation of who outskated whom than if you had started with a different definition. (That's not even getting into questions of how results from two separate programs should be combined.)
    On a multiple choice test the longest answer is always the right one.

    As for who skated best in the opinion of the less knowledgable fan, I think if one skater did a bunch of big jumps, and another gave an emotionally satisfying musical interpretation, while a third dazzled with his blade work, that fan would come away from the contest saying, "Well the judges liked this guy's performance the best, but the other two were pretty good, too, in different ways." In fact, this is the best kind of competition to watch -- everyone was good, each by his own measure.

    But when someone has multiple falls and other mistakes that even the most casual of fans can't help but notice, that detracts alike from the glory of the big jumps, the effectiveness of the presentation, and the demonstration of blade-to-ice skills.

  4. #34
    #TeamAUS
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    1,565
    To clarify with a person's response to my post, I admit it was wrong of me to use the term 'top skaters.' I believe a reduction in the PCS for mistakes should be mandatory across all higher levels of skaters (senior and junior levels- for smaller levels, I think it should not apply). There has to be a greater emphasis on achieving a clean program over going out of your depth and faulting.

    Besides, if you fall or stumble on elements you are not demonstrating control over your edges (Skating skills), linking footwork in between the elements is compromised, the program is not being performed or executed properly, a skater on their bum is not choreography and the interpretation is interrupted by these mistakes.

  5. #35
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,325
    The more I think about it, the more clear it seems to me that figure skating has a unique burden among spectator sports. In other sports, if you root for the home team and they get beat, you might go away sad but you won't be angry. What makes you go away angry is when the game turns on a controversial (and in your opinion wrong) referee's call.

    In figure skating, everything is a referee's call. By it's very nature figure skating will always be the king of wuz-robbing, whatever the scoring system.
    Last edited by dorispulaski; 05-05-2013 at 10:36 AM.

  6. #36
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    As for who skated best in the opinion of the less knowledgable fan, I think if one skater did a bunch of big jumps, and another gave an emotionally satisfying musical interpretation, while a third dazzled with his blade work, that fan would come away from the contest saying, "Well the judges liked this guy's performance the best, but the other two were pretty good, too, in different ways." In fact, this is the best kind of competition to watch -- everyone was good, each by his own measure.

    But when someone has multiple falls and other mistakes that even the most casual of fans can't help but notice, that detracts alike from the glory of the big jumps, the effectiveness of the presentation, and the demonstration of blade-to-ice skills.
    However, the degree to which falls detract will depend in part on what we understand is the goal of the sport.

    If the goal is to do the hardest stuff possible without falling, then obviously the falls would disqualify that person from winning.

    If the goal is to present a seamless performance, with some risky preferred but not required, then obviously the falls and stumbles would seriously detract.

    If the goal is to do the hardest stuff possible in an allotted time, with credit only for what is successfully executed during that time, then the failed elements would be ignored and the difficulty of what is completed successfully would be privileged.

    Of these three options, the first is clearly far from the truth of how the sport has ever been organized, so anyone who thinks that's what the point is has clearly been misled (or never led at all and made up their own rules in their head with no knowledge).

    The second and third are each closer, but each leave out important aspects. And they contradict each other.

    The rules can also be adjusted to favor one direction or another. So if we're calling for rule changes, which direction should they go. After 2010, many (skaters, coaches, and some fans) called for rule changes that would better reward and encourage greater attempted difficulty, specifically quad attempts. The results made it easier to win with quads and also falls -- especially for one particular skater who has become a lightning rod of resentment. Unintended consequence.

    So now the pendulum swings toward calls to penalize falls more severely. That is probably needed, but it has to be done carefully, with more thought into the effects of any rule change in a variety of likely situations, not just the situation that allows that one resented skater to win so often.

    Quote Originally Posted by GF2445 View Post
    To clarify with a person's response to my post, I admit it was wrong of me to use the term 'top skaters.' I believe a reduction in the PCS for mistakes should be mandatory across all higher levels of skaters (senior and junior levels- for smaller levels, I think it should not apply). There has to be a greater emphasis on achieving a clean program over going out of your depth and faulting.
    So lack of falls/major errors should count for more than what is actually attempted and completed in the rest of the program? I.e., "Whoever does the hardest stuff possible without falling wins" -- but how difficult the successful stuff was and how well the successful stuff was done should take a back seat to the presence or absence of falls?

    Also, the size of the penalty needs to be considered carefully.

    For example, consider a single competition that includes the six skaters with the following jump content:

    Anna: 3Lz+3T, 3F+2T+2T e, 3Lz, 1Lo (pop), 2A+3T, 3S, 2A

    Beatriz: 3A (fall), 3A+2T, 3Lz, 3F+3Lo, 3F+2T+2Lo, 3T (fall), 3S

    Catherine: 3Lz+2T e, 3F+2T, 3Lz e, 3F, 3Lo<, 3S<, 2A+3T+SEQ

    Diana: 3T+2T, 3S+2Lo, 3T, 3S, 2A, 2F+2Lo+2Lo, 2Lz (all clean)

    Elena: 3F<< (fall), 3Lo<, 3T+3T (fall), 3F<, 2A+1Lo+3S, 3S, 2A

    Fabia: 3S<+1T, 3S<<, 3T<<, 2A, 2A+2T, 2F+2T+2Lo<, 2Lz

    To the naked eye, Catherine landed the most triples -- 7 -- with the the fewest obvious errors. Should she win, or should Anna and Beatriz get more credit for attempting greater difficulty and executing with mostly greater quality?

    Should the fall penalties be set large enough so that Beatriz couldn't beat Anna in this situation even if she replaced one of the triples she fell on with a successful double and only had one fall?

    Diana had an easier jump layout, but she executed everything she attempted with no mistakes. Is two falls from Beatriz enough to put her behind Diana if Diana had good quality on everything?

    Should Elena's program with three successfully landed triples (one in combination with a failed triple), two landed/somewhat cheated triples, and two falls challenge Fabia's with zero rotated triples?

    What if Diana was slow and cautious and did nothing but skate around with bad posture, telegraphing her jumps, with easy spins and steps only to the minimum required? Should it then be possible for an energetic, charismatic, well, choreographed and musical performance from Elena to beat her despite the falls?

    Should the number of visible errors be the deciding factor? Should the number of triples landed be the deciding factor? or should there be room for other qualities of the jumps and other qualities besides jumps to make the difference?

    Is it more important to make sure that Beatriz is punished for her falls and prohibited from winning this event? Should the punish-Beatriz rules be indifferent to how they affect lower-ranked skaters, e.g., whether Diana or Elena or Fabia earns the coveted last top-10 spot at Junior Worlds?

  7. #37
    Wicked Yankee Girl dorispulaski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Staring at the ocean and smiling.
    Posts
    15,946
    Being unfairly judged (and predetermined) has not damaged the attendance at professional wrestling.

    If you're going to have pageantry, have pageantry: have clearly characterized heroes & villains (including the judges), overdone costumes, and commenters who try to build excitement in the show. Sell little action figures. Of course, you can't do that on the Olympic track competitions, but a pro circuit based on the same premise could do quite well.

  8. #38
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,325
    Quote Originally Posted by dorispulaski View Post
    Sell little action figures.
    :banana:

  9. #39
    Miserere Nobis
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Texas Darling
    Posts
    1,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    :banana:
    Hey, I'd buy a Brian Joubert action figure

  10. #40
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    564
    I've said this before elsewhere. The problem is that the scoring needs to be accessible without "homework". Contrasts to other sports are valid here.

    In baseball, you can be an expert fan and understand statistics and pitch selection and what a "hit and run" play is and you can enjoy all the pre and post game analysis of such things. And that's great. I'm that girl. I love to watch on television where I can clearly see where the pitches are at. But then there are people like my husband. He likes to sit in the sun at a stadium with a beer and watch a game and hasn't the slightest clue what an ERA is or the difference between a slider and a fast ball. And he doesn't care. He does know what an out is. And he knows when a run scores. That is all he needs to know to actually enjoy the game and know who is winning or losing. And baseball needs both of us to keep selling tickets.

    Or there is football. You can understand the difference between an option offense or a spread offense and recognize when the defense is blitzing and when they are not. But you don't need to know any of that to recognize when your team does or does not score a touchdown. Again...at our house, we watch college football and I know all of those things and when a team might be better off passing and when they should run...husband knows when they score a touchdown. He doesn't need to know the rest to enjoy watching our favorite team. Once again, football needs both of us for ratings and ticket sales.

    Then there is skating. In order to understand who wins and loses under the current system, you have to understand the difference between a 1/2 and 1/4 cheated jump and a level 2 vs. level 3 footwork sequence and recognize the subtlety of superior vs. merely excellent edging (which you can rarely get a sense of on a television broadcast) and don't forget that the entire thing is multiplied by a factor or some such algebraic equation. For broadcasters to adequately explain this, we would barely be able to hear the music as the evaluation would be constant (and we have a level 3 spin with 6 rotations which will give her a .07 multiplied by xy to the 18th power advantage over our previous performer....). If math is not your passion (and even if it is--Mathman must like math and he is not enthusiastic) and you are not really a skating fan anyway and don't know who the performers are, you're going to change the channel. Or if you stay and watch, you're going to see a skater make multiple mistakes and be given a gold medal and all the explanations in the world aren't going to make sense because our general perception of sports is that excellence wins. The excellence that we can see. No one pitches a perfect game and loses because the opposing pitcher's wind up was a more textbook pitching form.

  11. #41
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,893
    Quote Originally Posted by louisa05 View Post
    I've said this before elsewhere. The problem is that the scoring needs to be accessible without "homework". Contrasts to other sports are valid here.
    So what would be the answer?

    If the goal is to sell tickets by producing an entertainment product that casual viewers can easily understand, then skating would need rules that rewards only things that casual viewers can see for themselves and that severely penalizes every mistake that casual viewers can see for themselves.

    Anything that requires actually knowing the difference between one edge and another would have to be irrelevant. Which means that that sport would not be figure skating.

    If the ISU wants to make money from casual fans, they could invent competitions of jumping and dancing on ice using figure skating skills that rewards only successful jumping and entertaining performance.

    There might sometimes be close contests between skaters who demonstrated different mixes of jumping skills and performance skills, or different styles of performance, so there might still be times when people would disagree with the results. But there would be a lot less confusion about how someone won.

    Put in a rule that any fall disqualifies the skater, and there would never be a winning performance with a fall. Getting up and continuing the program would not be allowed -- someone comes out with a hook and drags the skater off the ice. That would be entertaining and easy to understand.

    Of course there could be days when the ice is bad, or everyone at the event is recovering from food poisoning or flu, or it's just one of those days, and every single skater in the event ends up falling at some point in the program. Sorry no one got to finish their programs, and no one was left standing so there's no one left to win. Doesn't matter who was best of all the programs with falls, because programs with falls are not allowed to win.

    Or allow one (or two) fall(s) with only a deduction and don't disqualify the skater until the second or third fall. So then there would never be a winner with "multiple falls," but at least it would be likely that some skaters would make it through the program without being disqualified.

    The sport that cares more about edges and difficulty and quality would be only for participants and aficionados. It would still be in the Olympics, but fans of the commercial sport who buy tickets to fan-friendly events and watch them on TV but don't care about edges would find the Olympic sport arcane and boring in comparison.


    Quote Originally Posted by dorispulaski View Post
    If you're going to have pageantry, have pageantry: have clearly characterized heroes & villains (including the judges), overdone costumes, and commenters who try to build excitement in the show. Sell little action figures. Of course, you can't do that on the Olympic track competitions, but a pro circuit based on the same premise could do quite well.
    Yes. A pro circuit -- whether run by or ignored by the ISU -- can make its rules as fan friendly and edge-indifferent as it likes.

    But it still couldn't guarantee that the participants would never ever fall unexpectedly. So it couldn't have both predetermined results and a no-wins-with-falls rule.

    The results could always stick to the predetermined script regardless of who fell or anything else about how each skater actually performed that day. And then when the performances don't match the script, fans could enjoy outrage at the injustice of pre-scripting the results and laugh at how badly reality matched up with the script.

    Or there could be predetermined scripts and choreography (including choreographed falls) designed to support results that tell a satisfying story. But if a pre-scripted ends up falling by mistake, there could be built in penalties guarantee a change in results.

    Or forget about live events and build in reskates to guarantee that a predetermined winner will provide an (edited) video performance that fits the script.

  12. #42
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,325
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    Anna: 3Lz+3T, 3F+2T+2T e, 3Lz, 1Lo (pop), 2A+3T, 3S, 2A [38.0]

    Beatriz: 3A (fall), 3A+2T, 3Lz, 3F+3Lo, 3F+2T+2Lo, 3T (fall), 3S [44.3]

    Catherine: 3Lz+2T e, 3F+2T, 3Lz e, 3F, 3Lo<, 3S<, 2A+3T+SEQ [33.94]

    Diana: 3T+2T, 3S+2Lo, 3T, 3S, 2A, 2F+2Lo+2Lo, 2Lz (all clean) [30.5]

    Elena: 3F<< (fall), 3Lo<, 3T+3T (fall), 3F<, 2A+1Lo+3S, 3S, 2A [26.4]]

    Fabia: 3S<+1T, 3S<<, 3T<<, 2A, 2A+2T, 2F+2T+2Lo<, 2Lz [18.2]
    I told Anna not to put that loop into her program!

    To the naked eye, Catherine landed the most triples -- 7 -- with the the fewest obvious errors. Should she win, or should Anna and Beatriz get more credit for attempting greater difficulty and executing with mostly greater quality?
    Anna and Beatrix should be ahead of Catherine. The "quality and difficulty" (especially the quality) should be evident even to the untutored fan.

    Should the fall penalties be set large enough so that Beatriz couldn't beat Anna in this situation even if she replaced one of the triples she fell on with a successful double and only had one fall?
    Beatriz should win if she hit the triple toe at the end -- or maybe even if she bailed with a double.

    Diana had an easier jump layout, but she executed everything she attempted with no mistakes. Is two falls from Beatriz enough to put her behind Diana if Diana had good quality on everything?
    No. It's between Yuna and Mao (oops, I mean Anna and Beatriz). Diana is out of the picture.

    Should Elena's program with three successfully landed triples (one in combination with a failed triple), two landed/somewhat cheated triples, and two falls challenge Fabia's with zero rotated triples?
    Elena is better. At least she tried.

    What if Diana was slow and cautious and did nothing but skate around with bad posture, telegraphing her jumps, with easy spins and steps only to the minimum required? Should it then be possible for an energetic, charismatic, well, choreographed and musical performance from Elena to beat her despite the falls?

    Should the number of visible errors be the deciding factor? Should the number of triples landed be the deciding factor? or should there be room for other qualities of the jumps and other qualities besides jumps to make the difference?
    That is why this exercise in inconclusive. I think the points awarded by the IJS for the different elements is OK as is. What is not included in this study are precisely things like, was Diana slow and lumbering while Fiona zipped around the ice with panache and grace -- in other words, who skated the best. That question is not addressed by looking at base values for jumps and deductions for elements on errors. What about all the huge positive GOEs that Anna deserved on all of her jumps? That is not reflected in this study.

    Is it more important to make sure that Beatriz is punished for her falls and prohibited from winning this event? Should the punish-Beatriz rules be indifferent to how they affect lower-ranked skaters, e.g., whether Diana or Elena or Fabia earns the coveted last top-10 spot at Junior Worlds?
    I think the "punish Beatriz" should come in mainly with the program components. As exquisitely as Beatriz skates, and as much as she looks like the Blue Fairy come to turn Pinocchio into a real boy, the falls should affect the scores for interpretation, choreography, and presentation/execution.

    About the top ten at junior worlds question, strange as it seems my gut reaction is that it does make a difference. It is not necessarily wrong to have a double standard, one for those who aspire to call themselves champion of the world, and another for everyone else. (I don't know how this can be worked into the rule book, though.)

    By the same token, I predict that the judges will be tougher on falls at the Olympics than at lesser events. Events like junior worlds are for the participants and their parents. The Olympic Games are for the whole galaxy. (My granddaughter once asked me what five worlds Michelle Kwan was champion of, and guessed Mercury, Venus, Earth, Moon and Mars.)
    Last edited by Mathman; 05-05-2013 at 01:24 PM.

  13. #43
    Six Point Zero Krislite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Yunaverse
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    [...]

    For example, consider a single competition that includes the six skaters with the following jump content:

    Anna: 3Lz+3T, 3F+2T+2T e, 3Lz, 1Lo (pop), 2A+3T, 3S, 2A

    Beatriz: 3A (fall), 3A+2T, 3Lz, 3F+3Lo, 3F+2T+2Lo, 3T (fall), 3S

    [...]
    Hmmm...it seems Beatriz got off easy on her 3Flutz and questionable rotations while Anna got a bogus edge call on her 3Flip.

  14. #44
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    That is why this exercise in inconclusive. I think the points awarded by the IJS for the different elements is OK as is. What is not included in this study are precisely things like, was Diana slow and lumbering while Fiona zipped around the ice with panache and grace -- in other words, who skated the best.
    Exactly. So we can't define "who skated the best" purely by what jumps they each landed, or by how many times they fell or didn't fall.

    Everyone agrees that falling should have a negative impact on the scores. But how severe? How should fall penalties balance against all the other good things the skater does in the program?

    About the top ten at junior worlds question, strange as it seems my gut reaction is that it does make a difference. It is not necessarily wrong to have a double standard, one for those who aspire to call themselves champion of the world, and another for everyone else. (I don't know how this can be worked into the rule book, though.)
    It's easy enough to write different rules for different disciplines, for seniors vs. juniors, for short vs. long program.

    What's not so easy is to write different rules for Olympics/Worlds ladies' long program vs. Grand Prix ladies' long program vs. senior B ladies' long program.

    And even harder to write different rules for the medal contenders vs. the top-10 contenders vs. those who hope to make it past the short program cut at the same event.

    The general public doesn't care about the latter group (unless it's their own home country skater -- or a star skater having a bad day/bad year a la Lu Chen 1997 -- fighting to make the cut). But the skaters care and the federations care. So the rules need to be fair at those levels as well as at the medal levels. Therefore when we look for rule changes to fix problems at the world medal level, we also have to consider how those changes would affect all skaters who compete under the same rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by Krislite View Post
    Hmmm...it seems Beatriz got off easy on her 3Flutz and questionable rotations while Anna got a bogus edge call on her 3Flip.
    Ha, I considered adding those calls and then decided it would just complicate the argument.

  15. #45
    Custom Title heyang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    3,207
    I think this may have been suggested in other threads, but it would be helpful to cite a 'maximum score'. The skaters would have to "declare" what elements that they will do with perhaps the opportunity to enhance 2 elements. i.e. Skater B could declare 3A with option to 4S. His max score is established. It would help the casual viewer to understand if the skater was as successful on all elements - same thing is done on gymnastics vault.

    It helps the casual viewer to differentiate between a clean program with less difficulty vs a more difficult routine with a fall.

    I'm thinking I might be a bit more curious next season about how total points compares to using the points in each program as ordinals.

    I have to say that not everyone go the ordinal system either. I remember having to explain why Sarah Hughes won the gold medal when she wasn't in the top 3 after the SP at the Olympics.

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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
  •