Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 29 of 29

Thread: Olympic judges draw held in Oberstdorf

  1. #16
    ~high art~
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    636
    The judging panel does give lower PCS than usual (lol, might not be the right word) when skaters make major errors that interrupt the performance. Compare PChan's 13 Worlds free skate and 12 COR free skate.

  2. #17
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,080
    Quote Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy View Post
    Timing jumps exactly with the music is actually pretty rare. A fall mars maybe 2 seconds of a 4:30 minute program, so if 268 of 270 seconds of a program are skated beautifully why would you mark that below 270 seconds of mediocre skating?
    Precisely. Most falls are visually disruptive but they do not mess up the overall make up of the program if the skater quickly recovers. Generally, the skater will lose about 0.25-0.5 in PE scores per major error (since the performance and execution of said performance was marred), but it shouldn't affect skating skills, transitions (unless the fall was on a transition leading to a jump or out of a jump), choreography (assuming the fall or botched lift or whatever doesn't result in a "break" with usual choreo not being performed), or even interpretation, IMO... especially when there is essentially a double deduction in GOE and -1 points for a fall on an element.

  3. #18
    Six Point Zero Krislite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Yunaverse
    Posts
    1,551
    Quote Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy View Post
    Timing jumps exactly with the music is actually pretty rare. A fall mars maybe 2 seconds of a 4:30 minute program, so if 268 of 270 seconds of a program are skated beautifully why would you mark that below 270 seconds of mediocre skating?
    But those two seconds cannot be fully isolated from the other 268. A program is a whole. Once a big mistake like a fall is made, the impression and mood can be adversely affected beyond the actual fraction of a second the skater falls and gets back up.

  4. #19
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Krislite View Post
    But those two seconds cannot be fully isolated from the other 268. A program is a whole. Once a big mistake like a fall is made, the impression and mood can be adversely affected beyond the actual fraction of a second the skater falls and gets back up.
    As much as an entire 270 seconds of subpar skating?

  5. #20
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    759
    Even if a skater fell on every jump, every spin, every footwork sequence, heck, let's add in some falls while stroking, it still wouldn't add up to more than 15 or 20 seconds of a 270 second program.

  6. #21
    Six Point Zero Krislite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Yunaverse
    Posts
    1,551
    Quote Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy View Post
    As much as an entire 270 seconds of subpar skating?
    No, of course not. But the point reduction should not be proportional to the length of the actual mistake (which can be half a percent or less of the entire program). That's too little and doesn't truly reflect the way the mistake mars the performance.

  7. #22
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Krislite View Post
    No, of course not. But the point reduction should not be proportional to the length of the actual mistake (which can be half a percent or less of the entire program). That's too little and doesn't truly reflect the way the mistake mars the performance.
    I think dmd was more referring to, if a fall doesn't affect the choreography, transitions, or skating skills in the rest of the program - which all comprise much more than the fleeting moment of a fall - which obviously it doesn't unless it's a prolonged recovery, then it shouldn't adversely affect that. I agree with you that it does affect the mood beyond that fraction of a second, but that should be reflected in just the P/E.

    As far as breaking the interpretation, I hardly think a skater can be faulted for a fall on an element because when they perform a jump, they're not interpreting, they're executing a technical skill... so a fall shouldn't be counted against their interpretation, IMO... unless the skater stops caring and doesn't perform/sell their choreography or gets lazy on the edges of their transitions, but that depends on the skater. I mean, do skaters get extra interpretation marks for executing jumps properly?

  8. #23
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Krislite View Post
    No, of course not. But the point reduction should not be proportional to the length of the actual mistake (which can be half a percent or less of the entire program). That's too little and doesn't truly reflect the way the mistake mars the performance.
    I don't necessarily disagree with you, but my issue is this: if the judges are taking points away in places they shouldn't (ex: lowering SS because of a few falls which are penalized elsewhere), it means the judges think the skater's score is too high after the appropriate penalties are taken. Patrick is the wrong person to blame or roll one's eyes at because he simply is trying to maximize his score by earning more PCS with his programs. It's the judging system, not the skaters and not the judges, which is to blame when we don't like the outcomes.

  9. #24
    Six Point Zero Krislite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Yunaverse
    Posts
    1,551
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    I think dmd was more referring to, if a fall doesn't affect the choreography, transitions, or skating skills in the rest of the program - which all comprise much more than the fleeting moment of a fall - which obviously it doesn't unless it's a prolonged recovery, then it shouldn't adversely affect that. I agree with you that it does affect the mood beyond that fraction of a second, but that should be reflected in just the P/E.

    As far as breaking the interpretation, I hardly think a skater can be faulted for a fall on an element because when they perform a jump, they're not interpreting, they're executing a technical skill... so a fall shouldn't be counted against their interpretation, IMO... unless the skater stops caring and doesn't perform/sell their choreography or gets lazy on the edges of their transitions, but that depends on the skater. I mean, do skaters get extra interpretation marks for executing jumps properly?
    They're doing both. In fact, unless they are standing on the ice just doing poses, skaters are always doing both. When they are gliding, doing moves on the fields, steps, turns, spins or jumps--all set to music--skaters are simultaneously executing technical skills AND interpreting music. A program is a whole. Scores measure aspects that are separable only in abstraction. The way the technical elements are arranged in a program, their timing with the musical phrases, beats and rhythm make them an essential part of the presentation/interpretation.

    Presentation/interpretation isn't just how a skater's face contorts to express the theme, or how they extend their arms to the music. It's the movement of their whole body, from head to toe. These movements are all technical/skating in nature, with other bodily movements added (arms, head, etc.) for full effect.

    For example, when a jump is timed to a crescendo in the music, and a skater falls instead, that's a pretty massive failure in interpretation in my opinion. If an Ina Bauer or a combination spin were timed to climax of the program, and a skater stumbles, she has shown not only poor skills on that technical element/move, but a failure in interpretation for that particular passage in the music. If a skater has any fall, I would say she has demonstrated poor skating skills (not necessarily overall since for the rest of the program she may have shown outstanding skating). A fall is a total loss of control--and what is a more fundamental skating skill than maintaining control of one's edge?

  10. #25
    Tripping on the Podium
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    73
    I think a good example is when Ashley fell hard on a double axel at nationals. The fall definitely slowed her down in the following footwork section.

  11. #26
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,424
    If you fall down, that's just terrible. First rule of skating: don't fall down. Fall down twice, get off the ice.

  12. #27
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathman View Post
    If you fall down, that's just terrible. First rule of skating: don't fall down. Fall down twice, get off the ice.
    Twice is okay, if you're going for some risk. Fall down 3 times, you're gonna be hiding your head in shame. Fall down 4 times, get off the ice.

    Obviously, skaters can all do doubles and nobody would fall, but that wouldn't be much fun, would it?

  13. #28
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Krislite View Post
    If a skater has any fall, I would say she has demonstrated poor skating skills (not necessarily overall since for the rest of the program she may have shown outstanding skating). A fall is a total loss of control--and what is a more fundamental skating skill than maintaining control of one's edge?
    But a fall is already penalized one point. In addition, if the fall occurs during an element the skater also gets -GOE. Skating skills isn't intended to measure the ability not to fall, and deducting a fall in six different places seems a bit harsh. Why can't the skaters who lose to Chan just get better instead of trying to win by not falling?

  14. #29
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Krislite View Post
    They're doing both. In fact, unless they are standing on the ice just doing poses, skaters are always doing both. When they are gliding, doing moves on the fields, steps, turns, spins or jumps--all set to music--skaters are simultaneously executing technical skills AND interpreting music. A program is a whole. Scores measure aspects that are separable only in abstraction. The way the technical elements are arranged in a program, their timing with the musical phrases, beats and rhythm make them an essential part of the presentation/interpretation.

    Presentation/interpretation isn't just how a skater's face contorts to express the theme, or how they extend their arms to the music. It's the movement of their whole body, from head to toe. These movements are all technical/skating in nature, with other bodily movements added (arms, head, etc.) for full effect.

    For example, when a jump is timed to a crescendo in the music, and a skater falls instead, that's a pretty massive failure in interpretation in my opinion. If an Ina Bauer or a combination spin were timed to climax of the program, and a skater stumbles, she has shown not only poor skills on that technical element/move, but a failure in interpretation for that particular passage in the music. If a skater has any fall, I would say she has demonstrated poor skating skills (not necessarily overall since for the rest of the program she may have shown outstanding skating). A fall is a total loss of control--and what is a more fundamental skating skill than maintaining control of one's edge?
    A fall is indeed a loss of control, but there's a difference between a jump contributing to a fall rather than a stumble on a spin, footwork, or while stroking around.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

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