Reinstate 6.0 Judging system? | Golden Skate

Reinstate 6.0 Judging system?

fredtx121

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 13, 2014
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.
 

tokugawaice

Rinkside
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
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.
 

BrentWolgamott

Rinkside
Joined
Feb 7, 2014
...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.
 

fredtx121

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 13, 2014
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.
 

Near

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 25, 2013
Country
Canada
I think how judges are selected and the fact that the scores are secret are what is problematic, not the scoring system proper.
 

blue_idealist

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
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.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
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?
 

onodian

Rinkside
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
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.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
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.
 

WeakAnkles

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
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.
 

onodian

Rinkside
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
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.
 

onodian

Rinkside
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
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.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
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.
 

mmcdermott

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
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.
 

onodian

Rinkside
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
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.
 
Top