Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 28 of 28

Thread: Are Qualifying Rounds Really Necessary????

  1. #16
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,801
    Also in the Olympics there is no QR for men or ladies singles.

    The "qualifying round" for the Olympics is the previous year's Worlds plus a designated fall international to determine which countries get to participate in the men's and/or ladies' events, which are limited to 30 skaters per discipline before the Olympics even begins, and which have to stay home.

    There is a talk of eliminating the QR in ice dance.
    There isn't a qualifying round in dance. There's a compulsory dance or two, which is not the same thing at all as skating the free program another time, more comparable to the school figures. The CD competition is only broken down into two separate groups with separate panels if there are TOO MANY skaters for one panel to judge in one sitting.

    This happens a lot less often with dance than with singles. But in both cases, the logic behind dividing the groups before making the first cut is to keep the size of the field manageable.

    So it does not make sense to have a QR in the world championships. IMO all the skaters that qualify should be allowed to skate the SP. The top 24 can make it into the LP.
    Even if there are 45 skaters in the field at Worlds or 50 at Junior Worlds? (BTW, what's your opinion on qualifying rounds at Junior Worlds, which tends to be even larger than Worlds? Euros is smaller, and qual rounds have now been eliminated there.)

    Options for having that many skaters all skate the short program would be:

    1) Divide into two groups along similar lines to the current division for qual rounds, and take the top 12 skaters from each group.

    2) Divide into two groups and take the top 24 scorers no matter which group they happened to skate in.

    3) Put them all in one group and have one panel of judges sit and pay attention for 5 hours straight except for resurfaces.

    4) Put them all in one group and rotate the judges in and out to give them breaks, equivalent to randomly choosing different judges' scores to count for each skater, only when they're not being counted they don't have to sit and pay attention at all.

    Obviously under an ordinal system 2) and 4) would make no sense at all, but under Code of Points they could be feasible.

    It seems particularly ridiculous to make the skaters skate the same LP twice.
    Tell it to the juvenile girls at the larger US regionals.

    Juveniles don't skate short programs. When there are more than 72 skaters in an event, there are three rounds with cuts after each round to get the field down to one group for the final.

    Therefore, the skaters who make the cut have to skate the same free program three times to try to qualify for Junior Nationals.

    OTOH one may argue that it gives all the skaters skate the LP they have worked on. It is a nice consolation, but is it worth the effort?
    If you're using the LP to make the cut in the first place, it's not a consolation for having already failed to advance, it's an *opportunity* to try to advance.

    You can't predict for sure before the competition takes place who's going to make it and who won't, out of the large number of skaters who are always in the lower middle of a field of that nature, those who are usually well inside the middle or even occasionally contend for medals on good days but might be having an extremely bad day due to injury etc., and those who rarely or never beat any of the skaters in the other two categories but have improved a lot over the year and are ready for a breakthrough. The only way to find out which ones will earn the right to advance this year is to have them compete against each other. Doing it with a program that lets them show their best skills, at the competition venue so it doesn't involve possibly traveling to a third continent than where home is and Worlds is being held, seems the most efficient solution.

    I would venture to guess that the not so great skaters like that opportunity but for those expected to make it to the top it is nothing more than a practice round. Unfortunately the final results may depend on the QR, as it did for Suguri last year.
    It's certainly possible to exempt some skaters from having to qualify, as was done in the mid-90s (I'd rather see a fairer way of doing this than using last year's results at one competition) and not carrying over the qualifying results to the final round.

    The SP has all the required elements, which should make it easy to give points and determine who goes to the next round.
    Nope.

    Supppose that a skater's biggest strengths are jump sequences or combinations of three jumps; incorporating inside axels, split flips, and other 1- and 1.5-revolution jumps within their step sequences or transitions; and/or level-3 spins that rely on multiple changes of foot or flying entries along with changes of foot. None of these elements are allowed within the short program rules, so this skater would not get the opportunity to show what she or he does best in a short program context.

    Suppose they're really excellent at the easier triples and shaky on the harder ones. Whether they decide to take the safer route with the lower base mark or to risk falling on the same jumps everyone else is doing, they're already at a disadvantage compared to skaters who happen to be more consistent with the big-ticket jumps but with lower quality or lower consistency in general.

    Also, good skaters who might otherwise be medal contenders can screw themselves out of contention, or even out of advancing to the final, with two mistakes in a short program, whereas a long program with two mistakes could still be considered pretty darn good. Not that qual rounds would help these skaters if they don't count toward the final results, but this does prove that short programs are a lot less forgiving.
    Last edited by gkelly; 10-05-2004 at 09:30 AM.

  2. #17
    Go NJ Devils
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    Supppose that a skater's biggest strengths are jump sequences or combinations of three jumps; incorporating inside axels, split flips, and other 1- and 1.5-revolution jumps within their step sequences or transitions; and/or level-3 spins that rely on multiple changes of foot or flying entries along with changes of foot. None of these elements are allowed within the short program rules, so this skater would not get the opportunity to show what she or he does best in a short program context.

    Suppose they're really excellent at the easier triples and shaky on the harder ones. Whether they decide to take the safer route with the lower base mark or to risk falling on the same jumps everyone else is doing, they're already at a disadvantage compared to skaters who happen to be more consistent with the big-ticket jumps but with lower quality or lower consistency in general.
    The SP would be the equivalent of the compulsories in gymnastics -- the skills are "easier," but the athlete doesn't get a chance to perform the harder ones in the Finals, unless s/he's done well enough in what is considered the basics.

    If there's a minimum level of skill needed to compete for a medal (or top 10 or 12 or 18) at the World Championships, that is determined by the definition of the compulsories. It would be easy enough to say that the total attempted base jump level for Ladies must be a mimumum of 15.7 (2A, 3R/2R, 3F or any combination that meets or exceeds this number.)

    Under CoP, skaters are allowed to choose whatever level they want for a required spin, so if a spin is legal under CoP, and it fits into a required category, there's nothing to stop the skater from using the higher-level, more complicated spin (or spiral or footwork sequence.)

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    Also, good skaters who might otherwise be medal contenders can screw themselves out of contention, or even out of advancing to the final, with two mistakes in a short program, whereas a long program with two mistakes could still be considered pretty darn good. Not that qual rounds would help these skaters if they don't count toward the final results, but this does prove that short programs are a lot less forgiving.
    I'm not sure why a qualifying round necessarily should be forgiving in a sport.

    Also, as you pointed out, the qualifying round for the Olympics happens outside the Olympics, either through placement at Worlds or an outside qualification competition. That, in effect, makes the SP the qualifying round for singles at the Olympics. While that means that the Olympics judges have fewer skaters to judge against each other in the "first round," at Worlds, judging 40+ skaters' 4-4.5-minute LP's is far more tiring than judging 40+ skaters' 2.5-minute SP's.

    Under CoP, since the athletes have total scores, it is also possible to set a minimum score that must be achieved at an international (Junior or Senior) event in order to compete at all, thus achieving the same thing as Olympics qualifying. That would mean every country would not necessarily be able to send a competitor for every event, and the total number of competitors at Worlds might go down, leaving fewer to judge in the SP's.

  3. #18
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote:

    You can't predict for sure before the competition takes place who's going to make it and who won't, out of the large number of skaters who are always in the lower middle of a field of that nature, those who are usually well inside the middle or even occasionally contend for medals on good days but might be having an extremely bad day due to injury etc., and those who rarely or never beat any of the skaters in the other two categories but have improved a lot over the year and are ready for a breakthrough. The only way to find out which ones will earn the right to advance this year is to have them compete against each other. Doing it with a program that lets them show their best skills, at the competition venue so it doesn't involve possibly traveling to a third continent than where home is and Worlds is being held, seems the most efficient solution

    Give me a list of 40 skaters and I will pick out the top 18 finishers before the competition. And I will be 99 per cent correct. Not so difficult. However, I will enjoy watching the remaining skaters especially when they moved up from 32nd place last year to 29th this year. I suppose that would be a breakthrough.

    If competing with each other is not included in the SP, then what happened? The SP is a test of skills. That was the point of it in the first place. If those skills aren't their best, then what are those skaters doing there in the first place?

    I don't think the problem is with the skaters. It is with the judges. Are they up to it? Think of it, 45 ladies skaters, 8 of them skating to Carmen; 3 of them skating to Don Q, 4 of them skating to Malaguena, 2 of them skating to Warsaw concerto, 5 to various pieces of Swan Lake, shall I go on? Boooooring for the judges unless it's a top tier skater.

    I really don't think there is a perfect answer to the 'elimination' round but I feel there is a need for one whether it's an LP, and SP, or some other form. Boring judges are not going to be at their best.

    Joe

  4. #19
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,801
    Quote Originally Posted by hockeyfan228
    It would be easy enough to say that the total attempted base jump level for Ladies must be a mimumum of 15.7 (2A, 3R/2R, 3F or any combination that meets or exceeds this number.)
    That's a bit on the high side in terms of base scores and ignores quality.

    True, most of the skaters who attempt less than that are unlikely to get past the short program at Worlds these days, but it has happened, e.g., Mikkeline Kierkgaard at 2000 Worlds (and she was 2nd in her qualifying round, admittedly considerably the easier of the two groups).

    It would mean that a skater like Jennifer Don, for instance, who based on her results at other internationals last season would likely have gotten past quals but not past the short had she competed in Dortmund, would either have to attempt jumps in the short she had little prayer of landing or be disqualified before even skating a potentially clean or close-to-clean salchow and toe loop program that was capable of beating lower quality programs with harder jumps from other skaters at similar overall skill levels.

    Under CoP, skaters are allowed to choose whatever level they want for a required spin, so if a spin is legal under CoP, and it fits into a required category, there's nothing to stop the skater from using the higher-level, more complicated spin (or spiral or footwork sequence.)
    For the spin combination, the criteria for level 2 are

    Element includes three of the following features:
    • Spin performed with two difficult variations of different positions
    • Spin performed on both edges of one foot
    • Spin has at least three changes of position which may include final wind-up rotation
    • Beginning with flying or backward entry
    • Two changes of spinning foot (not for Short Program)
    • Execution of spins in both directions (clockwise and counter clockwise) as described above (1)
    For a skater who achieves level 2 in the long program by using two-plus changes of foot and/or flying entry as well as one or two of the other criteria, their skills would not allow them to achieve level 2 in the short program.

    Also, as you pointed out, the qualifying round for the Olympics happens outside the Olympics, either through placement at Worlds or an outside qualification competition. That, in effect, makes the SP the qualifying round for singles at the Olympics. While that means that the Olympics judges have fewer skaters to judge against each other in the "first round," at Worlds, judging 40+ skaters' 4-4.5-minute LP's is far more tiring than judging 40+ skaters' 2.5-minute SP's.
    Which is exactly why the qualifying rounds were judged in two groups by two separate panels.

    The proposal to prequalify some skaters through Euros and Four Continents could cut down the number of skaters trying to qualify *at* Worlds enough so that only one group and one judging panel would be needed. Or would you rather turn Euros and 4Cs into the only qualifying competitions themselves?

    Under CoP, since the athletes have total scores, it is also possible to set a minimum score that must be achieved at an international (Junior or Senior) event in order to compete at all, thus achieving the same thing as Olympics qualifying. That would mean every country would not necessarily be able to send a competitor for every event, and the total number of competitors at Worlds might go down, leaving fewer to judge in the SP's.
    That's possible. But how does that address the situation of, say, a Johnny Weir who didn't compete internationally last season before Worlds, or Stefan Lindemann, who competed poorly in the fall CoP events? They might have no results at all under the existing code of points,* or none that meet the cutoff, even though they could demonstrate in domestic events and after they got to Worlds the ability to score much higher than the cutoff level.

    *Surely the code will be revised from time to time, which might make last year's cutoff numbers much too high or too low for this year's code. Skaters who are new on the international scene or have been away for a year or two for whatever reason might not have the international numbers to meet the cutoff.

    Of course, one way to solve the problem would be to have the country's highest point total(s) for the discipline determine which countries get to enter one or more than one skater, but it's up to the national federation to determine which individual skater(s) to send, including perhaps surprise national champions who don't have international records at all yet, or not at the senior level or not with high enough marks.

    But that doesn't help someone who's the only skater at that level from his or her country who's now returning from injury or other derailment that prevented him/her from racking up an international record the previous season or earlier that season.

    And once again I ask, is it OK to hold qualifying rounds at Junior Worlds? If not, how do you decide who among the many young newcomers to international competition get to attend and who must stay home?
    Last edited by gkelly; 10-05-2004 at 04:06 PM.

  5. #20
    Go NJ Devils
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    That's a bit on the high side in terms of base scores and ignores quality.

    True, most of the skaters who attempt less than that are unlikely to get past the short program at Worlds these days, but it has happened, e.g., Mikkeline Kierkgaard at 2000 Worlds (and she was 2nd in her qualifying round, admittedly considerably the easier of the two groups).

    It would mean that a skater like Jennifer Don, for instance, who based on her results at other internationals last season would likely have gotten past quals but not past the short had she competed in Dortmund, would either have to attempt jumps in the short she had little prayer of landing or be disqualified before even skating a potentially clean or close-to-clean salchow and toe loop program that was capable of beating lower quality programs with harder jumps from other skaters at similar overall skill levels.
    I don't think a skater like Jennifer Don, with little difficult technical content are likely to make it through the qualis into the SP, either. She competed against very few skaters when she won last year, and won one of the first events to use CoP. The skaters and coaches are now more familiar with the system, there are far more competitors at Worlds, and younger skaters have stronger skills. How likely is it that a skater with her skill set would make it out of Nationals in the US, Japan, Russia, Hungary, Ukraine, or even France, Germany, or Canada to be eligible to compete in the first place?

    If it takes higher skills to be a top skater, I don't see why higher skills aren't required to qualify.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    For the spin combination, the criteria for level 2 are:
    Element includes three of the following features:
    • Spin performed with two difficult variations of different positions
    • Spin performed on both edges of one foot
    • Spin has at least three changes of position which may include final wind-up rotation
    • Beginning with flying or backward entry
    • Two changes of spinning foot (not for Short Program)
    • Execution of spins in both directions (clockwise and counter clockwise) as described above (1)

    For a skater who achieves level 2 in the long program by using two-plus changes of foot and/or flying entry as well as one or two of the other criteria, their skills would not allow them to achieve level 2 in the short program.
    I'm not convinced that one rarely-performed spin -- I don't remember a single one performed by any Ladies skater in Dortmund in the qualis or LP -- being out of contention for the Short Program is putting anyone at a disadvantage, unless it is the second coming of Lucinda Ruh. While I do think it's important to be sure there aren't a lot of unexpected results with an algorithm, creating one to capture a once a generation phenomenon is a rare goal for any system.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    The proposal to prequalify some skaters through Euros and Four Continents could cut down the number of skaters trying to qualify *at* Worlds enough so that only one group and one judging panel would be needed. Or would you rather turn Euros and 4Cs into the only qualifying competitions themselves?
    Not at all. I suggested that there be a points cut-off -- i.e., a certain minimum score gained at an international competition -- under CoP, it shouldn't matter which one, as long as the judges held the same qualifications -- just as in other sports there is an Olympic qualifying time, distance, or height that an athlete must reach in qualified competitions, or in skating, where some Federations dictate a specific placement at Euros that the skater must reach in order to qualify for Worlds, otherwise, National Champion or not, they aren't sent to Worlds. (Or, like in Germany, they must qualify through a skate-off.)

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    That's possible. But how does that address the situation of, say, a Johnny Weir who didn't compete internationally last season before Worlds, or Stefan Lindemann, who competed poorly in the fall CoP events? They might have no results at all under the existing code of points,* or none that meet the cutoff, even though they could demonstrate in domestic events and after they got to Worlds the ability to score much higher than the cutoff level.
    That was true last year, when there was no history, but there is history now. Lindemann came in 5th at Euros, which certainly, even under CoP would have qualified him, given the difficulty and quality of the programs he did there. Weir might have have incentive to compete at 4C's -- which he turned down last year -- in order to gain enough points to place.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    *Surely the code will be revised from time to time, which might make last year's cutoff numbers much too high or too low for this year's code. Skaters who are new on the international scene or have been away for a year or two for whatever reason might not have the international numbers to meet the cutoff.
    The gymnastics equivalent is revised every four years, with new cut-offs created. It would not be that difficult to adjust the cut-off or the skills needed to make the cut-off. Less than 10 years ago, a 3A and a 4T were optional skills for men. Now they are required to gain any reasonable results, with the possible exception of cheezefests.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    Of course, one way to solve the problem would be to have the country's highest point total(s) for the discipline determine which countries get to enter one or more than one skater, but it's up to the national federation to determine which individual skater(s) to send, including perhaps surprise national champions who don't have international records at all yet, or not at the senior level or not with high enough marks.

    But that doesn't help someone who's the only skater at that level from his or her country who's now returning from injury or other derailment that prevented him/her from racking up an international record the previous season or earlier that season.
    Your formula is possible, but not necessary, since the Euros and 4C's take place after Nationals in all cases, and a surprise National Champion could qualify at those competitions. Just like other athletes do by having a time or distance or height at an international event during the year.

    The skater a cut-off model hurts is a skater with no international competitions or qualifying scores within the last year*, who places high enough in his/her national championship, and is injured or ill and cannot compete at 4C's or Euros in order to qualify.

    *Or two, as the elements part of the score could be adjusted for the new weightings, just as last year's quads could be recalculated to reflect the new point values.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    And once again I ask, is it OK to hold qualifying rounds at Junior Worlds? If not, how do you decide who among the many young newcomers to international competition get to attend and who must stay home?
    Apologies for not addressing this earlier. I see no reason for Jr. Worlds to conform to the same rules as Sr. Worlds, or for there to be any attempt to limit the number of competitors. There are other Sr. Worlds rules that don't apply either, such as program length, well-balanced program definitions, etc.

  6. #21
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,801
    Quote Originally Posted by hockeyfan228
    I don't think a skater like Jennifer Don, with little difficult technical content are likely to make it through the qualis into the SP, either. She competed against very few skaters when she won last year, and won one of the first events to use CoP.
    I'm basing my estimate of her likely Worlds placement on both Nebelhorn and Four Continents (which used the interim system).

    Here are the borderline skaters from Worlds that I'm guessing Don would have been in the mix with:
    Worlds
    Final not Reached
    25. Julia LAUTOWA AUT 15 25
    26. Michelle CANTU MEX 15 26
    27. Mojca KOPAC SLO 14 27
    28. Sara FALOTICO BEL 13 28
    29. Daria TIMOSHENKO AZE 12 29
    30. Ji Eun CHOI KOR 14 30
    (16 in qual = tied for 31). Diane CHEN TPE


    Nebelhorn
    1. Jennifer DON USA143,07 1 1
    5. Daria TIMOSHENKO 62 5 7
    7. Amber CORWIN USA 117,87 3 8
    8. Sara FALOTICO BEL 113,64 12 5

    Four Continents
    13. Jennifer DON USA 19,5 13 13
    14. Fan ZHANG CHN 21,0 14 14
    15. Michelle CANTU MEX 23,0 16 15
    20. Diane CHEN TPE 30,5 19 21

    Of course there's no guarantee that Don would have beaten Timoshenko, Falotico, Cantu, and Chen at Worlds, or that she would have lost to them all. I'd say they're all at a somewhat similar level and the results will depend how they each skate and how that particular judging panel happens to rate them each.

    How likely is it that a skater with her skill set would make it out of Nationals in the US, Japan, Russia, Hungary, Ukraine, or even France, Germany, or Canada to be eligible to compete in the first place?
    Heh, these days she might well be able to get out of France or Germany, assuming she skated well when she needed to.

    If it takes higher skills to be a top skater, I don't see why higher skills aren't required to qualify.
    I wouldn't define that skill level purely in terms of jump content, though.

    Instead of making the cutoff be 15.7 worth of base mark (mid-level difficulty allowable for senior ladies) in short program jump content, if you want to set a cutoff, it would make more sense to me to set a cutoff score for the whole program, including jump and non-jump elements, grades of execution, and program components, and let the skater work toward that total by maximizing whatever their strengths happen to be.

    And if you're going to use scores from previous competitions to determine who meet the minimums to enter Worlds in the first place, better to use long programs or short-plus-long at whole competitions, to give a better picture of the skaters' whole skill sets and not just their short program jump content.

    The skater a cut-off model hurts is a skater with no international competitions or qualifying scores within the last year*, who places high enough in his/her national championship, and is injured or ill and cannot compete at 4C's or Euros in order to qualify.
    E.g., Rudy Galindo in 1996. Of course there was no Four Continents back then, much less Code of Points, but he did go to the one available international between Nationals and Worlds and withdrew after the short due to injury.

    That kind of thing might not happen to medal contenders every year, but chances are there would be at least one man or woman each year who would have been able to get past quals and maybe short program under the current system but wouldn't get to go at all if a good point total at a previous international event were necessary. And occasionally it would happen to medal contenders.

    In other words, no system is perfect. I don't see that the simple fact of holding a qualifying competition at the Worlds venue is such a problem that it needs to be scrapped in favor of some other system that will introduce different problems. I do think that the way cuts are made at Worlds and whether any established skaters should be exempted from the qualifying process should be open to discussion.

  7. #22
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz
    Quote:

    Give me a list of 40 skaters and I will pick out the top 18 finishers before the competition. And I will be 99 per cent correct. Not so difficult.
    Heh. Can't find you a list of 40 skaters, but here are links to rosters for this week's and next week's international events, with 15-29 men and ladies in the fields.

    http://www.finlandiatrophy.com/competitors/

    http://www.isufs.org/events/fsevent00007826.htm

    http://www.isufs.org/events/cat00004705.htm

    http://engelmann.co.at/ksm/2004/index.php

    (For the junior events, be sure not to include the substitute skaters with the S next to their names. Just consider the numbered skaters.)

    How about predicting who will make the top 10 one or more of these events. No need to predict which order, just who will make the "cutoff" for 10th place vs. who won't.

    If you're familiar with many of the names, I bet you will get at least half of them correct. And I bet you'll also get at least one wrong, so no better than 90%.

    And I bet I would not be 90% correct either. You know what they say, Ice is slippery.

  8. #23
    Go NJ Devils
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    Of course there's no guarantee that Don would have beaten Timoshenko, Falotico, Cantu, and Chen at Worlds, or that she would have lost to them all. I'd say they're all at a somewhat similar level and the results will depend how they each skate and how that particular judging panel happens to rate them each.
    Very true, nothing is guaranteed. Though if the judging had been decent in Dortmund, Finland and Ukraine would have had two places this year, and both of those skaters would very likely have beaten Don.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    Heh, these days she might well be able to get out of France or Germany, assuming she skated well when she needed to.
    I don't know, not with those girls throwing out 3/3's and several younger ones ready to take their place.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    I wouldn't define that skill level purely in terms of jump content, though.

    Instead of making the cutoff be 15.7 worth of base mark (mid-level difficulty allowable for senior ladies) in short program jump content, if you want to set a cutoff, it would make more sense to me to set a cutoff score for the whole program, including jump and non-jump elements, grades of execution, and program components, and let the skater work toward that total by maximizing whatever their strengths happen to be.
    This was my cynicism coming out, because the points that a skater can make up by doing high-level spins, spirals, and footwork passes -- and not that many were called last year -- is too little. It might make the difference between a skater like Don qualifying or not, but it seems to me that most of it would be a wash.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    And if you're going to use scores from previous competitions to determine who meet the minimums to enter Worlds in the first place, better to use long programs or short-plus-long at whole competitions, to give a better picture of the skaters' whole skill sets and not just their short program jump content.
    . That could work just as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    In other words, no system is perfect. I don't see that the simple fact of holding a qualifying competition at the Worlds venue is such a problem that it needs to be scrapped in favor of some other system that will introduce different problems. I do think that the way cuts are made at Worlds and whether any established skaters should be exempted from the qualifying process should be open to discussion.
    If you're exempting skaters from the qualifying process, why hold qualifications at all? Why not use the results from existing competitions to create the field? The ISU could hold a qualification skate if they wanted, with their own judges, outside of Worlds.

    Qualification rounds pack the schedule, the timing is off for the skaters -- skaters consider the earlier round a big disadvantage -- and the time and ice could be used for practice, which would give the competitors an advantage they don't have now. The rink folks could even respond to feedback like "the ice is too hard," which Kwan and other complained about in Dortmund, but could do nothing about.

    One reason that I really like Joe's suggestion that the number in the Finals be cut to the 10-12 range is that with 24 skaters, there isn't enough time to zamboni the ice for every group, and the final six (or four, in pairs) skate on really crappy ice.

  9. #24
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly
    Heh. Can't find you a list of 40 skaters, but here are links to rosters for this week's and next week's international events, with 15-29 men and ladies in the fields.

    http://www.finlandiatrophy.com/competitors/

    http://www.isufs.org/events/fsevent00007826.htm

    http://www.isufs.org/events/cat00004705.htm

    http://engelmann.co.at/ksm/2004/index.php

    (For the junior events, be sure not to include the substitute skaters with the S next to their names. Just consider the numbered skaters.)

    How about predicting who will make the top 10 one or more of these events. No need to predict which order, just who will make the "cutoff" for 10th place vs. who won't.

    If you're familiar with many of the names, I bet you will get at least half of them correct. And I bet you'll also get at least one wrong, so no better than 90%.

    And I bet I would not be 90% correct either. You know what they say, Ice is slippery.
    I was being facitious, but now that you've question my soothsaying abilities, I'll bet you a cookie I can predict those top 18 skaters in the finals at Worlds and be 99 per cent correct. I think you can too. That is not difficult. I believe you work for the ISU or you are a judge so you are familiar with all those skaters and probably know their names.

    I, for one, would like to hear about your proposal. Could you follow my outline below? and maybe give us an idea of where you are exactly on this topic?

    Do you believe there should be an elimination round of some sort?
    If no, then what would you propose to do with the Quali rounds now?
    If you want to keep the Qualis the way they are, then end of subject. (what is being discussed by the posters are just thoughts being battered around, and it seems these thoughts are not to your liking.)

    If yes,
    what kind of elimination round would you propose?
    If there are more than 30 entrants, what would be the cut off.
    Once the skaters who do not make the cut, would the:
    scores of the elimination round be eliminated too or kept as part
    of a three segment total score?

    It's just thoughts being exchanged. None of the posters have the power to influence the ISU. You can join in too with your thoughts on an elimination segment in the Worlds or other large participating competitions.

    If you like the way things are already set up, then that's ok too.

    Joe
    Last edited by Joesitz; 10-05-2004 at 11:43 PM.

  10. #25
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,801
    Quote Originally Posted by hockeyfan228
    If you're exempting skaters from the qualifying process, why hold qualifications at all?
    To get the field down to a manageable size to be judged in the final. With the Code of Points, that size may be larger than with ordinals.

    Why not use the results from existing competitions to create the field? The ISU could hold a qualification skate if they wanted, with their own judges, outside of Worlds.
    For some skaters and some officials, this would mean extra travel to a different competition in a different part of the world that they wouldn't have had to go to otherwise (or would have had the option, depending on finances, health, etc.) This is of course more of a burden on the Four Continents skaters than on the European ones, since the European championships and most of the B internationals are concentrated within Europe, whereas a 4Cs skater may have to travel from Asia to North America for the continental championship and then to Europe for Worlds.

    Countries with developing programs don't want to be told they're not welcome to participate in Worlds at all unless they jump through some other hoop at some other event in some other part of the world, which is why they'll vote against an exclusionary approach. I do think they have a point, and that participation at the world level raises the standard in these countries and in the world as a whole faster than only competing against skaters at their own level.

    One reason that I really like Joe's suggestion that the number in the Finals be cut to the 10-12 range is that with 24 skaters, there isn't enough time to zamboni the ice for every group, and the final six (or four, in pairs) skate on really crappy ice.
    Grand Prix events have 10-12 skaters per discipline, and they do not resurface the ice between groups. I doubt they would start doing at Worlds either.

  11. #26
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Joesitz
    I was being facitious, but now that you've question my soothsaying abilities, I'll bet you a cookie I can predict those top 18 skaters in the finals at Worlds and be 99 per cent correct. I think you can too. That is not difficult.
    OK, check back with me next March.

    I believe you work for the ISU or you are a judge so you are familiar with all those skaters and probably know their names.
    I do not work for the ISU and I am not a judge.

    Do you believe there should be an elimination round of some sort?
    I like to see as much participation as possible in the sport's biggest event. If I were going to introduce drastic changes, I would rather see the option of more skaters participating (e.g., up to 5 per country), and break up the initial field into more groups if necessary to make the necessary cuts.

    That of course would increase the costs for the organizing committee, so let the federations pay entry fees for any extra skaters they enter beyond the one free entry allowed.

    That's the most drastic change I'd like, and the most expensive, so I could live without it if it's not cost effective.

    I already explained a few months ago why I think cutting the number of skaters who advance to the final would be a money-losing proposition for the organizers.

    If anyone is to be exempted from qualifying, I would have it be skaters who medaled at Europeans and Four Continents that season (or placed in the top 5 or 10 there) plus anyone who qualified for the the Grand Prix final (even if they withdrew because of a legitimate health issue) or who did actually compete at the final as an alternate, where these are not the same individuals as the continental medalists. Junior World medalists from that year, provided they're old enough and their country chooses to send them to senior Worlds as well, could also be exempt.

    If two or more groups are necessary, I would seed them according to the ISU standings at the time, not according to last year's Worlds results.

    I would not carry over the the point totals from the qual rounds to the finals, but I would consider the rankings (e.g., tied for 31st) to be official Worlds standings for the skaters who don't advance.

    The process of determining who gets cut, and how many skaters is the maximum in a group is probably up for revision as we discover what works with the code of points.

    I would not like to see Worlds reduced to just an expanded version of the Grand Prix final with only 12 elite skaters who qualify through outside events. I think there is a real value to bringing the worldwide skating community together in one place at one time that would be lost if no such event existed at the senior world level.

  12. #27
    In my heart, I'm actually Canadian....
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Seattle at last!!!
    Posts
    2,884
    I should think that judging 40 short programs under the ordinal system, and trying to place them in some semblance of correct order would be an absolute nightmare, especially given that the overall skill level is a lot more even than it was 20, 30 years ago. This is in part why the qualifying round was instituted in the first place, because this is exactly what happened in Oakland in '92 (the last Worlds not to have qualifying).

    I don't have a problem with there being qualifying rounds for this very reason, tho I will allow that under CoP, the concept may now be outdated. Under the ordinal system, however, IMO it made the overall judging less error-prone by breaking the skaters down into more manageable groups. However, I don't think it should count toward the overall score; I've had a problem with that point ever since it was instituted. Now that one has QUALIFIED, let's let them start fresh with the SP, shall we?

    As far as this "it takes too much toll on the skaters to skate 2 LP's and an SP in one competition" arguement -- IF YOU ARE QUALIFIED TO SKATE ON THE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP LEVEL, YOU SHOULD CERTAINLY BE ABLE TO SKATE YOUR COMPLETE LONG PROGRAM AT LEAST TWICE IN ONE WEEK. IF YOU CANNOT, THEN YOU SHOULDN'T BE THERE TO BEGIN WITH. Many top coaches require 2 or 3 complete runthtroughs per day, how is this any more exhausting than that??

  13. #28
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    Quote Originally Posted by JonnyCoop
    As far as this "it takes too much toll on the skaters to skate 2 LP's and an SP in one competition" arguement -- IF YOU ARE QUALIFIED TO SKATE ON THE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP LEVEL, YOU SHOULD CERTAINLY BE ABLE TO SKATE YOUR COMPLETE LONG PROGRAM AT LEAST TWICE IN ONE WEEK. IF YOU CANNOT, THEN YOU SHOULDN'T BE THERE TO BEGIN WITH. Many top coaches require 2 or 3 complete runthtroughs per day, how is this any more exhausting than that??
    Yes, yes, yes. It is not the skaters who have the problem of skating 3 programs. These could be spread over a few days to give them sufficient rests (if they need it) and practice times. Besides they are on an adrenal rush and are goal set. If for any reason they are not up to that personal challenge, maybe they should not be in the competition in the first place. I can think of a few Japanese and American skaters who if they were entered in the Championships would be in the top 18, but they will not be eligible by their respecive Nationals. I contend the contestants will do whatever they have to do to skate,and go for the gold.

    However, I am not so sure of the judges especially the 'old timers' who know the top tier skaters with their eyes shut. How well will they be judging 45 or more skaters in no particular order skating to all too familiar music for 4.5 minutes each? It's not the CoP's fault. It's human error due to ennui and fatigue. While this may or may not affect the top 12 skaters, it will definitely affect the rest of the field. I can see a 'rush to judgement'.. Hope the CoP can take care of this but even so, will the judges be as dilligent for a less than top tier skater as they are for the top tier?

    Let's see what they do at Euros.

    Joe

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Olympic Qualifying Competition?
    By JonnyCoop in forum 2004-05 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-05-2005, 02:15 PM
  2. Men - Qualifying start order
    By Rosaleen in forum 2004-05 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-14-2005, 02:14 AM
  3. The demise of the Qualifying Round
    By berthes ghost in forum 2003-04 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 07-06-2004, 08:47 AM
  4. Ladies Qualifying Groups/Start Orders
    By SkateCynic in forum 2003-04 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-24-2004, 02:54 AM
  5. ???s re qualifying for Nationals
    By JonnyCoop in forum 2003-04 Figure Skating archives
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-09-2004, 02:47 PM

Posting Permissions

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