Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Reinstate 6.0 Judging system?

  1. #1
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    25

    Reinstate 6.0 Judging system?

    Reinstating the 6.0 judging system is probably a long shot, but I feel it would give a more accurate result. True it was very harsh especially if you made a mistake in the short program, but I feel the "new" system is even more corrupt and allows for judges to cheat behind a curtain. No one "really knows" where the judges are from, it just says ISU.
    I do agree with the placements in tonight's performance in the pair's event but I do have a problem with the GOE scores. VOLOSOZHAR / TRANKOV's throw triple loop was awarded with GOE +1 and +2. How can that be when she put her hand down? Also with little bobbles here and there, how do they get a Performance/Execution score of 10? It is a joke when you see someone land a jump with great flow and height and they don't get the GOE that they deserve just because they are not the favorite.
    The PCS scores are even more of a joke, as we have seen in Patrick Chan's case where he still won the gold at last year's world championships after having a bad skate. Denis Ten deserved to win. Also for Yu Na Kim during the 2010 World Championships after the Olympics. In her short program she missed 2 elements--the spiral and the layback spin, but was still awarded 60+ points leaving her in 7th place. In the 6.0 scoring, she probably would of gotten a 4.6-4.9 for missing the 2 elements. She eventually ended up second even with a fall and missed jumps in her free because her PCS scores boosted her placement.
    They really need to find a better system. I feel the skaters should also have to perform ALL the different jumps. If they are at a high level, they should be able to do ALL of them. Not like Mao who cannot perform the Lutz properly so she doesn't include it in the program or Yuna who doesn't have the triple loop in her programs. If they are at the top of their sport, they should have mastered all the jumps. Just my opinion I guess.

  2. #2
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    39
    My main concern with the 6.0 system is that there were only 4-6 skaters that could conceivably get onto the podium at a given competition. In COP you could potentially have like 10 skaters all hovering around a ~65-70 score and give plenty of opportunity for skaters to come back from behind. In the 6.0 system way too many times competitions favored reputation instead of the actual performances delivered on a single night. Of course this still happens in COP, but it's mainly only the PCS that gets fudged. In COP if you fall, there are clear, transparent deductions that show up in your scores. In the 6.0 system we never knew which mistakes didn't/did make their way into the technical mark.

  3. #3
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by fredtx121 View Post
    ...but I do have a problem with the GOE scores. VOLOSOZHAR / TRANKOV's throw triple loop was awarded with GOE +1 and +2. How can that be when she put her hand down? Also with little bobbles here and there, how do they get a Performance/Execution score of 10?
    Well, the throw itself was huge with so much height (likely too much) and covered a large amount of ice. I don't have a problem with +1. There are other things that go into a throw besides "ice flow out"... And component scores are not related to technical things like "did she put her hand down" Otherwise, you're knocking her twice for the same thing.

    The bigger issue I have with the scoring is that you get credit for a completely failed jump. S/S beat Pang/Tong by about 5 points overall. S/S got about 5.3 points for their Throw 3A. HOW?? She landed on her butt. That's also how Chan survived his falls -- he still got points. You shouldn't get points for something like a fall. A touchdown, a two-foot, an under-rotated -- YES. But not a fall. It should be ZERO points. There was no way in the world Savchenko was landing that Th3A. Why in the world does she get credit for a completely failed jump? I know, I know -- she made it around 3 times. But it's not called air spinning. It's called a JUMP. *Facepalm*

    The judges find ways to boost their favorites NO MATTER WHAT. GOE, component scores, etc. They FIND A WAY. Any system you come up with will have flaws. The one thing I'd like to see is the old factored placements. Keep the points, but give them a "placement" based on their skate. Like the old days. Double factors for the FS.

    That way you have to win the FS to win the Gold if you're top 3. Pang/Tong would have got the 3rd in the Free Skate, and thus won the bronze. Your "margin of victory" should not carry over. It's so ridiculous. Once that portion of the event is over, it's over. This also would have stopped Chan from winning the Worlds, since Ten won the FS. You shouldn't get to have a 10 point or 5 point or whatever cushion coming in, after the SP. You won the SP -- you get the 0.5 factored placement. But you still have to win the FS in order to win. Much more drama.

  4. #4
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by BrentWolgamott View Post

    The bigger issue I have with the scoring is that you get credit for a completely failed jump. S/S beat Pang/Tong by about 5 points overall. S/S got about 5.3 points for their Throw 3A. HOW?? She landed on her butt. That's also how Chan survived his falls -- he still got points. You shouldn't get points for something like a fall. A touchdown, a two-foot, an under-rotated -- YES. But not a fall. It should be ZERO points. There was no way in the world Savchenko was landing that Th3A. Why in the world does she get credit for a completely failed jump? I know, I know -- she made it around 3 times. But it's not called air spinning. It's called a JUMP. *Facepalm*

    The judges find ways to boost their favorites NO MATTER WHAT. GOE, component scores, etc. They FIND A WAY. Any system you come up with will have flaws. The one thing I'd like to see is the old factored placements. Keep the points, but give them a "placement" based on their skate. Like the old days. Double factors for the FS.
    Well said. I agree with you about the failed jump. Yes if you fall you deserve zero points. A one point deduction on a fall is very lenient in my opinion. I also agree that if they were to change anything with this scoring system, that it should count on how you placed in the short and free programs. Pang and Tong's free performance definitely deserved the bronze over the Germans.

  5. #5
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    127
    I think how judges are selected and the fact that the scores are secret are what is problematic, not the scoring system proper.

  6. #6
    - * - blue_idealist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,750
    Quote Originally Posted by Near View Post
    I think how judges are selected and the fact that the scores are secret are what is problematic, not the scoring system proper.
    Yes, keep the system but show the judges' scores (on television AND in the protocols). If some people are bored by seeing all the numbers all over their screen, they don't need to look.

  7. #7
    LEAVE EDMUNDS ALONE!!1!
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Axis of Evil
    Posts
    2,508
    Nostalgia/selective memory.

    Both judging and results under 6.0 were far far worse.

    As for the 'X deserved to win/beat Y' comments, if you disagree with a specific result, it's the judging system that's wrong and needs to be changed?

  8. #8
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    28
    well I'm just watching these Olympics cause I'm Spanish and we happen to have a Spanish skater with a shot at a medal, but let me tell you, from the outside the whole "not awarding an element you perform to your butt" really sounds pretty reasonable.

  9. #9
    LEAVE EDMUNDS ALONE!!1!
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Axis of Evil
    Posts
    2,508
    Quote Originally Posted by onodian View Post
    well I'm just watching these Olympics cause I'm Spanish and we happen to have a Spanish skater with a shot at a medal, but let me tell you, from the outside the whole "not awarding an element you perform to your butt" really sounds pretty reasonable.
    But the price you would pay for that is everybody playing it very safe because of much higher risk.

  10. #10
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,827
    Eh they have the same judging system in gymnastics and no one is screaming it means the death of gymnastics. And people forget about all the kvetching about ordinals when they were in place. And there was PLENTY of kvetching.

  11. #11
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Ziggy View Post
    But the price you would pay for that is everybody playing it very safe because of much higher risk.
    Either that, or you'd just have people trying jumps they can actually reliably land. From what I see, right now (and again I never really watched FS) my impression is people are just throwing quads like buying lottery. There's just too little to lose, and the reward is great in comparison to the actual risk.

  12. #12
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by WeakAnkles View Post
    Eh they have the same judging system in gymnastics and no one is screaming it means the death of gymnastics. And people forget about all the kvetching about ordinals when they were in place. And there was PLENTY of kvetching.
    Ok, this I can talk about, since it's what I follow, and let me tell you, there's a LOT of cries about the death of artistry and gymnastics regarding the scoring system. It's actually very interesting to see the parallelisms with FS.

  13. #13
    LEAVE EDMUNDS ALONE!!1!
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Axis of Evil
    Posts
    2,508
    Quote Originally Posted by onodian View Post
    Either that, or you'd just have people trying jumps they can actually reliably land. From what I see, right now (and again I never really watched FS) my impression is people are just throwing quads like buying lottery. There's just too little to lose, and the reward is great in comparison to the actual risk.
    Yes, I wouldn't mind that at all. But after Lysacek won Olympic gold without any quads in 2010 and much less quads were being performed in general, everybody cried about the sport moving backward, blah blah blah and the ISU increased the quad values massively. I think that's more of a problem than partial credit for falls. Quads are worth so many points - even with a fall - you just have to attempt them to remain competitive.

  14. #14
    Custom Title mmcdermott's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by onodian View Post
    Ok, this I can talk about, since it's what I follow, and let me tell you, there's a LOT of cries about the death of artistry and gymnastics regarding the scoring system. It's actually very interesting to see the parallelisms with FS.
    The artistry in gymastics started to go long before they changed the scoring system. Which is what people tend to forget with skating too - the scoring system changed what, 12 years ago? (sorry, I don't know exactly when they started using IJS). A lot would have changed over that time period anyway.

  15. #15
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    28
    Sooo, judging from the men's FS, I'd say the balance is tipped enough towards difficulty in this quad... I find it representatively ridiculous that Fernandez should have actually jumped his second 4S to his *** if he wanted to get a bronze medal.

Posting Permissions

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