Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 86

Thread: ISU Communication 1861: Updated Rules for Singles and Pairs Skating

  1. #31
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by DDepardieu View Post
    I guess the 1Lo would get nothing. But then are those 3lz and 3s going to be treated as single elements?
    It's confusing, isn't it?
    I thought this combo would be a new trend in both men and ladies.

  2. #32
    Love popcorn, hate horendous costumes Meoima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    North of the world
    Posts
    5,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Sandpiper View Post
    I'm really worried about this too. With such a big difference in points (but fuzzy difference in action, as the debate on Adelina shows) between ! and e, it'll be a very easy method to hold someone up and punish someone else.
    Yeah, personally I think they should start over with the PCS inflation, but it seems at this rate they will just throw out any PCS points they want. Now it's turn for the TES to get confusing.

  3. #33
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    8
    At this point, I'm scared of what would happen in June. NO MORE CONFUSION PLEASE. it's a hard knock life being a FS fan as it is. Geez can't believe I'm analyzing charts and numbers years after school.

  4. #34
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,209
    At this point, I'm not sure even the judges understand the rules. I guess the skaters can only get an early start to the next season, test out their programs, and watch where the marks fall.

  5. #35
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,927
    It looks like most of the changes will affect the technical panels -- and the way skaters and coaches plan their programs to earn the best possible TES.

    It doesn't look as though there are many changes that affect what the judges do. A few changes to awarding GOEs. Also the new deduction for too many dance lifts in pair programs.

  6. #36
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,220
    This stuff is really confusing.


    The problem with these rules is that a lot of the marking is left to the discretion of the judges:
    - whether an edge call is "e" or "!"
    - whether a position is "aesthetic"
    - whether a flying jump or whether a spin entrance is "difficult" enough to get a level
    - So, what constitutes "difficult entrance" into a spin? Backwards entry is no longer considered that.

    While I agree with edge calls getting deductions, a triple flutz is much harder to execute than a triple salchow. Thank god at least "intent" is considered.

    These 50% and 70% deductions seem to be an attempt to get skaters to really clean up their technique instead of just do a flutz and take the minor hit in GOE. But to remove 30% of a jump's BV just because of a slight wrong edge versus a severe wrong edge is giving too much power to the tech specialist.

    I feel especially bad for the guy who has to ring up the progressive score in the top left.

  7. #37
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,927
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    This stuff is really confusing.

    The problem with these rules is that a lot of the marking is left to the discretion of the judges:
    - whether an edge call is "e" or "!"
    - whether a position is "aesthetic"
    - whether a flying jump or whether a spin entrance is "difficult" enough to get a level
    - So, what constitutes "difficult entrance" into a spin? Backwards entry is no longer considered that.
    Most of these are left to the discretion of the TECHNICAL PANEL.

    Judges have no say in whether the call is e or !, so they will have less discretion than in 2013-14.

    Judges have no say in any of the level calls, including whether a spin entrance, flying or otherwise, is "difficult."
    Technical panels determine all the features to call the levels. Judges never even know which level was called (unless they read the published protocols after the fact).

    The aesthetic quality of the spin positions has always been part of GOE judging, and now it will be more important highlighted for a few kinds of attempts at spin features. So yes, that is one of very few places where judges will have more responsibility.

    While I agree with edge calls getting deductions, a triple flutz is much harder to execute than a triple salchow. Thank god at least "intent" is considered.

    These 50% and 70% deductions seem to be an attempt to get skaters to really clean up their technique instead of just do a flutz and take the minor hit in GOE. But to remove 30% of a jump's BV just because of a slight wrong edge versus a severe wrong edge is giving too much power to the tech specialist.
    Yes, and yes. This will give power to technical panels to have a significant effect on how many points skaters can earn for these jumps. It will be important for all technical specialists and controllers to work with similar understandings of what constitutes "severe" wrong edge and to apply that understanding consistently to all skaters.

    I feel especially bad for the guy who has to ring up the progressive score in the top left.
    Doesn't it just happen automatically when data from the scoring computer is received by a program that calculates the running totals?

  8. #38
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    524
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    This will give power to technical panels to have a significant effect on how many points skaters can earn for these jumps.
    I find this worrying. If somebody wants to cheat... the technical panel is surely the easiest target? They have the power to remove or award huge swathes of points, before the judges even get a look in. And it might only need a single member of the tech panel, to rig a competition.

    Increasing the tech panel's power and influence on scoring... when they are so few... sounds bad...

  9. #39
    Love popcorn, hate horendous costumes Meoima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    North of the world
    Posts
    5,286
    Quote Originally Posted by YesWay View Post
    I find this worrying. If somebody wants to cheat... the technical panel is surely the easiest target? They have the power to remove or award huge swathes of points, before the judges even get a look in. And it might only need a single member of the tech panel, to rig a competition.
    Increasing the tech panel's power and influence on scoring... when they are so few... sounds bad...
    The judges only look at the tech panel's decision? Can they question back if they see some unreasonable calls?

  10. #40
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,209
    Well, I predict this will only make figure skating more confusing for casual fans, as favoured skaters with falls constantly win over unfavoured skaters who have jump errors but stay on their feet.

  11. #41
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,927
    Quote Originally Posted by Meoima View Post
    The judges only look at the tech panel's decision? Can they question back if they see some unreasonable calls?
    The judges never see the level calls during the competition. For spins and steps, the judges are only responsible for evaluating how well the elements were done and how they fit into the program as a whole (e.g., choreography) -- the difficulty is not their responsibility under IJS. There are so many details for tech panels to learn and remember that no judge is also going to keep track of the features at the same time that they're judging the quality, unless they are also technical controllers or technical specialists and have done those tasks so often that it has become second nature to them.

    The judges do see the <, <<, e, and ! calls at the end of each program, and they may also see the new s and ss calls. For the jump calls, they are required to reduce the GOE from what they would have given without those errors, and for << or e calls they are required to give negative GOE (no higher than -1).

    If the judge saw an error that wasn't called, that judge is welcome to reduce the GOE more severely, based on what they actually saw.

    If they did not see an error that was called, they can be more generous with their GOE reductions. E.g., if the judge thought "That was a great lutz! I would give it at least +2, maybe even +3" and then the tech panel calls it as ! and <, the judge can still give it +1.

    If the tech panel called e and <<, the base value would only be 50% of the total, but the judge could remain generous, awarding all the positive bullet points before reducing down to -1, rather than -3 as would be expected for both those errors and

    However, there isn't any mechanism for one judge or even all the judges to say "That jump looked fully rotated, or close to it, and the takeoff edge looked correct. We have replay too, we reviewed it, and we didn't see the errors at all, or didn't see them as being severe. The calls really should have been ! and <, if anything, not e and <<, and therefore the skater should have gotten full base value. You were wrong, tech panel -- go make the change officially and give that skater back the points she deserved."

    The best the judges can do for a skater in that situation is to give the highest appropriate GOE for the element, and not to penalize at all in PCS. If a jump with an e call is nonetheless beautiful, judges can also take that beauty into account under the Performance/Execution component.

  12. #42
    Love popcorn, hate horendous costumes Meoima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    North of the world
    Posts
    5,286
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    The best the judges can do for a skater in that situation is to give the highest appropriate GOE for the element, and not to penalize at all in PCS. If a jump with an e call is nonetheless beautiful, judges can also take that beauty into account under the Performance/Execution component.
    Thank you very much for your explanation. I hope the tech specialist will not use this chance to downgrade their unfavourite.
    I can image Shin Amano being utterly happy right now.

  13. #43
    Size 7 Knife Boots Sam-Skwantch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    At the Rink
    Posts
    3,599
    If anyone involved with broadcasting reads these threads..this is for you. Please hire @Gkelly to your broadcast staff. Lets set up a spot down at ice level, supply all camera angles used, supply one headset, and let the analysis and explanations begin.

  14. #44
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5,220
    Yes, I meant the technical panel in terms of who gets the power in discerning if the requirements of an element are achieved.

    I think there are going to be a lot of pissy people next season.

    Murakami must have ditched her lutz by now. Imagine getting 50% for an "e"< ... that's some bs.

    I also find some of the scenarios weird... like, how can a Layback Spin achieve a level 4, and then get 50% deducted?! So a level 4 spin with 50% deductions is worth as little/less than a level B spin with no deductions?

  15. #45
    Custom Title FSGMT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    2,959
    Quote Originally Posted by CanadianSkaterGuy View Post
    These 50% and 70% deductions seem to be an attempt to get skaters to really clean up their technique instead of just do a flutz and take the minor hit in GOE. But to remove 30% of a jump's BV just because of a slight wrong edge versus a severe wrong edge is giving too much power to the tech specialist.
    Agree with your whole post, but this part especially

    I think that this will lead to more and more skaters (I'm thinking about Murakami, Nagasu, Cesario, Pogorilaya for example) presenting either the flip or the lutz, not both, since their BV could be really affected: a clean 3S/3T/3Lo will receive a lot more points than a 3Lz with the "e" now...

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 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
  •