Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Quad Neg GOE value different from Pos GOE?

  1. #1
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    66

    0 Not allowed!

    Quad Neg GOE value different from Pos GOE?

    In the scale of values table regarding all quad jumps in singles, the GOE values for positive levels is 1, 2, and 3 while the GOE for negative levels is -1.2, -2.4, and -4.0. The quads are the only jump in which the positive levels and negative values are different. What is the thinking here? Why not have the negative values be -1.0, -2.0 and -3.0? In other words, why should you be punished more for a bad quad than you are rewarded for a good quad?
    Last edited by Dan; 02-20-2016 at 07:27 PM.

  2. #2
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    272

    0 Not allowed!
    It's probably to discourage skaters who can't consistently land their quads to try them in competition. If you don't land it, you get a hit hard. But if you do, they don't want to make it all about the quad(s), so the added points from the positive GOE isn't as much as the ones deducted from a negative GOE. Basically limiting people from chucking quads all over the place (for safety too) and try to avoid the Jin Boyang's in the world of skating.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan View Post
    In the scale of values table regarding all quad jumps in singles, the GOE values for positive levels is 1, 2, and 3 while the GOE for negative levels is -1.2, -2.4, and -3.6. The quads are the only jump in which the positive levels and negative values are different. What is the thinking here? Why not have the negative values be -1.0, -2.0 and -3.0? In other words, why should you be punished more for a bad quad than you are rewarded for a good quad?

  3. #3
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    66

    0 Not allowed!
    I made a mistake. It's -4.0 for a negative level three, not -3.6 as I originally posted. I have since edited the original post to correct this.

    This also makes quads the only jumps where the negative levels don't have the same difference between each level. 1.2, 1.2 and 1.6 in this instance for the negative levels. We're only talking of tenths of points...not enough to encourage and discourage anything in my opinion. I get what you are saying coucouo84 but to do what you suggest seems like it would require differences of whole points, not tenths I think. After all, we've got men scoring 300 or more points. Are a few tenths really significant enough to be discouraging?

  4. #4
    May the ice decide sabinfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Ann Arbor
    Posts
    5,157

    2 Not allowed!
    In principle, I'd agree with you. The positive/negative spectrum should be equal for quads.

    However, the judges application to GoE on quads seems to counter-act the unbalanced spectrum. Take Fernandez's opening 4T at Euros this year:

    https://youtu.be/3Bne2gdszU0?t=36 (0:36 mark)

    Fernandez was obviously off-balance on this jump, resulting in a sketchy landing with a hand down to the ice. Judges rewarded this with +GoE.

    To me, this would clearly be negative GoE due to the obvious mistake -- probably a -1 at least (certainly no higher than 0, but even that would be questionable). However, the judges collectively graded this quad as executed positively and performed well. That tells me that in order to receive negative GoE, a skater might have to fall on the ice (or double-foot the landing?)

    Either way, as long as a skater can land a quad on one foot without their entire body hitting the ice, they shouldn't need to worry about negative GOE's.
    Last edited by sabinfire; 02-20-2016 at 09:06 PM.

  5. #5
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    66

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by sabinfire View Post
    In principle, I'd agree with you. The positive/negative spectrum should be equal for quads.

    However, the judges application to GoE on quads seems to counter-act the unbalanced spectrum. Take Fernandez's opening 4T at Euros this year:

    https://youtu.be/3Bne2gdszU0?t=36 (0:36 mark)

    Fernandez was obviously off-balance on this jump, resulting in a sketchy landing with a hand down to the ice. Judges rewarded this with +GoE.

    To me, this would clearly be negative GoE due to the obvious mistake -- probably a -1 at least (certainly no higher than 0, but even that would be questionable). However, the judges collectively graded this quad as executed positively and performed well. That tells me that in order to receive negative GoE, a skater might have to fall on the ice (or double-foot the landing?)

    Either way, as long as a skater can land a quad on one foot without their entire body hitting the ice, they shouldn't need to worry about negative GOE's.
    The ISU has very specific guidelines on what gets a positive or negative GOE on a jump. The guidelines do NOT mention anything about the number of revolutions (quads versus triples for example). These guidelines are spelled out in this very long document here. http://static.isu.org/media/207718/1...-2015-2016.pdf Page 12 has the positive GOE guidelines for jumps while page 14 has the negative GOE guidelines for jumps. Now you can look at Fernandez's video and see what you think.

    In short, the judges look for these 8 things when considering positive GOE for a jump.
    1) unexpected / creative / difficult entry
    2) clear recognizable steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element
    3) varied position in the air / delay in rotation
    4) good height and distance
    5) good extension on landing / creative exit
    6) good flow from entry to exit including jump combinations / sequences
    7) effortless throughout
    8) element matched to the musical structure

    If the judges see 2 of these 8 factors, that jumps gets a GOE of 1. If they see 4 of these 8 factors, that jump gets a GOE of 2. If 6 or more of these factors are seen then the jump gets a GOE of 3.

    The following factors will give a jump negative GOE. I don't know what happens if both positive and negative factors are seen in the same jump. That seems to be the case in Javier's jump in your video.
    SP: Combo of one jump final GOE must be
    -3
    Downgraded (sign << )
    -2 to -3
    SP: No required preceding steps/movements
    -3
    Under-rotated (sign < )
    -1 to -2
    SP: Break between required steps/movements & jump/only 1 step/movement preceding jump
    -1 to -2
    Lacking rotation (no sign)
    including half loop in a combo
    -1
    Fall
    -3
    Poor speed, height, distance, air position
    -1 to -2
    Landing on two feet in a jump
    -3
    Touch down with both hands in a jump
    -2
    Stepping out of landing in a jump
    -2 to -3
    Touch down with one hand or free foot
    -1
    2 three turns in between (jump combo)
    -2
    Loss of flow/direction/rhythm between jumps (combo/seq.)
    -1 to -2
    Severe wrong edge take off F/Lz (sign “e”)
    -2 to -3
    Weak landing (bad pos./wrong edge/scratching etc)
    -1 to -2
    Unclear wrong edge take off F/Lz (sign “!”)
    -1 to -2
    Poor take-off
    -1 to -2
    Unclear wrong edge take off F/Lz (no sign)
    -1
    Long preparation
    -1 to -2
    Last edited by Dan; 02-20-2016 at 10:32 PM.

  6. #6
    May the ice decide sabinfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Ann Arbor
    Posts
    5,157

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan View Post
    Page 12 has the positive GOE guidelines for jumps while page 14 has the negative GOE guidelines for jumps. Now you can look at Fernandez's video and see what you think.

    Touch down with one hand or free foot
    -1
    Hmm... I'd guess that Fernandez should get -1? He had a touch down with one hand. It's not common for skaters to receive positive GOE for hitting the ice (other than the blades) on a jump landing, as far as I can recall?

    But as I stated above, I'd give that a -1 myself. Not sure how the judges interpreted it though.

  7. #7
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    66

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by sabinfire View Post
    In principle, I'd agree with you. The positive/negative spectrum should be equal for quads.

    However, the judges application to GoE on quads seems to counter-act the unbalanced spectrum. Take Fernandez's opening 4T at Euros this year:

    https://youtu.be/3Bne2gdszU0?t=36 (0:36 mark)

    Fernandez was obviously off-balance on this jump, resulting in a sketchy landing with a hand down to the ice. Judges rewarded this with +GoE.

    To me, this would clearly be negative GoE due to the obvious mistake -- probably a -1 at least (certainly no higher than 0, but even that would be questionable). However, the judges collectively graded this quad as executed positively and performed well. That tells me that in order to receive negative GoE, a skater might have to fall on the ice (or double-foot the landing?)

    Either way, as long as a skater can land a quad on one foot without their entire body hitting the ice, they shouldn't need to worry about negative GOE's.
    Also, six judges gave Javier's opening 4T at Europeans a level 0, two gave a level 1 and one gave a -1 so it wasn't very clear I think. I see two of the positive bullets (unexpected entry and good height and distance) and a hand down so I would give that a +1 and -1 or level 0 GOE. The unexpected entry is questionable because it is really just the long curved entrance and jumping the width, not length of the ice.

  8. #8
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    4,861

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan View Post
    I don't know what happens if both positive and negative factors are seen in the same jump.
    From ISU Communication No. 1944, at the top of the page with the Updated Guidelines for marking +GOE of Single/Pair Elements (positive aspects):

    The final GOE of an element is calculated considering first the positive aspects of the element that result in a starting GOE for the evaluation. Following that a Judge reduces the GOE according to the guidelines of possible errors and the result is the final GOE of the element.
    I.e., first add, then subtract.

  9. #9
    No longer Newbie, call me Specs :)
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    6,454

    1 Not allowed!
    It looks to me like the judges are super generous to whoever is the best of the field in these later competitions.
    Fernandez, Yuzu, Evgenia, Satoko, I guess, are the top of the singles disciplines and judges favor at the moment. It helps that they are also the most consistent of the field presently so their scores have built and built without interruption this season.

    I mean, it's a bit annoying to me that the judges are lenient in GOEs with the best skaters, because they are each good enough to win on their own merits with out any kind of helping along by the judging panel.

  10. #10
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    66

    2 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by sabinfire View Post
    Hmm... I'd guess that Fernandez should get -1? He had a touch down with one hand. It's not common for skaters to receive positive GOE for hitting the ice (other than the blades) on a jump landing, as far as I can recall?

    But as I stated above, I'd give that a -1 myself. Not sure how the judges interpreted it though.
    I think it is an odd situation when you meet the guidelines for both positive and negative GOE. I think that is the case here. The hand is definitely down. Certainly he doesn't have good flow out of the jump and that is not good extension on the landing. I don't hear the music change at all since long before the jump so I don't think it is with the music. No special footsteps precede the jump so its not that. And he doesn't do a variation in the air so its not that. If you have to put your hand down then its not effortless, although before the hand down it looked pretty easy for him. That leaves just the two things that I mentioned height/distance and entry to give a +1 in my opinion. I can't see how two judges got to +1 with a hand down. That would mean they saw 4 of the 8 factors and its just not there that I can see. IOW, you have a very good point. Fortunately, that's why they have 7 other judges to balance out the two that overscored this one.

  11. #11
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    66

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    From ISU Communication No. 1944, at the top of the page with the Updated Guidelines for marking +GOE of Single/Pair Elements (positive aspects):



    I.e., first add, then subtract.
    That's what I thought but I couldn't find words to that effect. You are my IJS God. Thank you so much. Now can you answer my question that started this thread? Why would they give +1, +2, and +3 for positive GOE for quads but -1.2, -2.4 and -4.0 for negative GOE for quads.

  12. #12
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    4,861

    1 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan View Post
    Now can you answer my question that started this thread? Why would they give +1, +2, and +3 for positive GOE for quads but -1.2, -2.4 and -4.0 for negative GOE for quads.
    To my knowledge the reasoning has never been stated publicly in writing.

    The GOE prorating for various elements has changed over the years, for quads more often than other elements.

    My guess is that because the base values of these elements are so high, they don't want skaters to earn almost all those points with serious mistakes -- hence the larger -GOEs. For the +GOEs, the extra points don't need to be so large because the big reward is already in the base values.

    I.e., we'll give you a lot of points for rotating 4 times in the air, but if the jump as a whole is bad we're going to take enough of those points away that it won't be worth more than a strong triple.

    As to why the increment between the -2 and -3 values is larger than between -1 and -2 or between 0 and -1, I'd guess because -1 or -2 means a flawed jump, whereas -3 usually means a serious failure, which should get a serious penalty.
    Last edited by gkelly; 02-21-2016 at 12:51 PM.

  13. #13
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    66

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    To my knowledge the reasoning has never been stated publicly in writing.

    The GOE prorating for various elements has changed over the years, for quads more often than other elements.

    My guess is that because the base values of these elements are so high, they don't want skaters to earn almost all those points with serious mistakes -- hence the larger -GOEs. For the +GOEs, the extra points do need to be so large because the big reward is already in the base values.

    I.e., we'll give you a lot of points for rotating 4 times in the air, but if the jump as a whole is bad we're going to take enough of those points away that it won't be worth more than a strong triple.

    As to why the increment between the -2 and -3 values is larger than between -1 and -2 or between 0 and -1, I'd guess because -1 or -2 means a flawed jump, whereas -3 usually means a serious failure, which should get a serious penalty.
    What you say makes great sense to me. From a consistency point of view though it just "jumps" out at me when looking at the tables, pun intended. Do you know where one might get an explanation from either the USFSA or ISU? Or how about a judge? Do they give such explanations to mere humans?

  14. #14
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    4,861

    1 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan View Post
    What you say makes great sense to me. From a consistency point of view though it just "jumps" out at me when looking at the tables, pun intended. Do you know where one might get an explanation from either the USFSA or ISU? Or how about a judge? Do they give such explanations to mere humans?
    Judges wouldn't necessarily know. They just award the pluses and minuses -- they have no say in how much they're each worth.

    I'm not sure who exactly determines the Scale of Values. Probably the ISU technical committee (singles & pairs in this case, or the ice dance technical committee for ice dance values). But I know a lot of coaches and quad-jumping skaters and their federations have been lobbying for higher base values on quads at least since 2010 if not 2008, and others probably lobbying in favor of larger penalties for failures on quads to offset those values.

  15. #15
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    66

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    Judges wouldn't necessarily know. They just award the pluses and minuses -- they have no say in how much they're each worth.

    But I know a lot of coaches and quad-jumping skaters and their federations have been lobbying for higher base values on quads at least since 2010 if not 2008, and others probably lobbying in favor of larger penalties for failures on quads to offset those values.
    They did adjust the base value of the 4T after the 2010 Olympic controversy of Evan Lysacek defeating Plushenko without a quad. (Please let's not open that can of worms here in this thread). The 4T went from 9.8 in 2010 to 10.3 now. The negative level one GOE was also changed from -1.6 in 2010 to -1.2 now. They must have some reasons for the way these Scale of Values are. Its a shame we can't know what those reasons are. You can verify these changes by looking at Stephane Lambiel's opening 4T in his detailed score sheets from Vancouver. Are people still lobbying for even more changes than this?

Page 1 of 2 1 2 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
  •