11-11-2013, 02:26 PM
Yeah, that was my nitpick with Johnny too... I think he could have explained the components better. But in due time, I hope!
Originally Posted by emma
11-11-2013, 02:35 PM
I'm in heaven ... watching Tessa and Scott DANCE
Originally Posted by Mrs. P
Thanks, MM. I like your explanation much better than Weir's.
Originally Posted by Mathman
And thanks as always to Mrs. P as well. Love that you keep pulling out new hats for us : Suze Orman + Entertainment Weekly + Nate Silver ... can't wait to see what's next. (I hope that my general idea of Suze Orman's turf is semi-accurate; the truth is that I don't know much about her.)
I am not a financial whiz, but I guess I was wishing that Weir had likened planned elements to "projected earnings," if anything. Especially because I got the impression that the score tracker on-screen display seemed to start at zero for each skater, and then to add points along the way -- as opposed to giving initial credit for the total value of all planned elements and then subtracting as the skate proceeded. (I glanced at the score tracker only a few times, so I hope I am not mistaken.)
Another quibble of mine is that IIRC, Weir implied that reputation judging is an official part of the scoring system for components. During Takahashi's FS, I could swear that Weir said (I'm paraphrasing) something about DT's polish and superior presentation also giving him a bigger pre-skate bank account.
But again, my overall reaction to Weir was positive. I like Lipinski too.
11-11-2013, 02:42 PM
Haha, I'm a woman of many hats, whee!
Originally Posted by golden411
Yeah, I agree the projected earnings would be the right equivalent to base value, i.e if everything goes to plan, this is what he expected to earned.
But I agree with MM. The simplest way to explain it is look at past TES. Javier has the capacity to score 90+ in technical elements while Adam at his best has only earned 82, therefore has a slimmer margin for error.
11-11-2013, 04:10 PM
I don't remember whether he said that or not; however, although reputation scoring isn't official, it plays a role in scoring, and I can't see why the commentators should pretend it does not. The coaches at my rink definitely talk about reputation scoring as a fact--an unfortunate and annoying fact, but something the skaters have to learn to live with.
Originally Posted by golden411
I also think that it is quite inevitable that the judges, as well as avid skating fans, have higher expectations of skaters who have proved themselves in the past. It only gets problematic when that skater performs below expectations, but the lower-than-usual quality is not reflected in the PCS scores (and sometimes in GOE).
Personally, I think Johnny is doing a great job. I feel like he would prefer to let the audience enjoy a good performance without commentary and comment before the skate and during the replays. I like Terry, but he definitely prompts Johnny to speak during the performance (maybe he has orders to do so?). I loved to hear that Akiko is as lovely off-ice as she is on-ice
11-11-2013, 06:06 PM
Referring to golden411's 'quibble'....it's entirely possible he was referring to reputation judging; but I didn't hear it that way. I thought he was trying to say how Dai's superior skills mean he can get those higher component scores. Obviously, he didn't say it clearly enough and perhaps he also was implying or thinking about reputation inflation. Or implying that many of the components seem to track together closely without the kind of variation some of us wish to see based on the component parts and the skate that day. Anyway, I'm just saying I'm not sure what he meant but I didn't hear it quite the way you did.
But saying that, I think that there are things for Weir to work through or improve on in his commentating; But, I just can't hide how much I'm liking the commentary, liking it enough that I"m not even complaining about how they didn't show dance (well, guess I am complaining about that a little, but you know what I mean!).