6.0 tarnished at U.S. Nationals

[Vash01]

Normally I don't compare scores from different competitions but I see what Brad is driving at and I completely agree with him. The 6.0's were given for something rare, because 5.9 were considered excellent marks. The 6.0 was something to strive for. The judges cheapened the 6.0's by giving them away for mediocre performances. The US judges are not alone in it though. The judges at worlds gave them away just as freely. In fact the trend began when it became clear that the 6.0 system would be eventually replaced. Even though the scores are relative, the judges needed to use more restraint in giving 5.9's to some of the earlier skaters, and avoided putting themselves in a position where they had nowhere to go but 6.0. In the pros several years ago we were seeing too many 10.0's. Finally they changed the rules to say 10.0 should not be given unless the program is not just the best in the competition but the skater's best ever. After that I never saw a 10.0. That is going to extreme. All they needed was sticking with the kind of scores we were used to seeing. Some of the 6.0's at the US nationals were down right embarrassing, but so were many 6.0's at worlds last year. Belbin and Agosto skated very well but to give them all 6.0's across the board created the illusion of greatness. I don't believe they are there yet.

Vash

[Glacierskater]

Belbin and Agosto skated very well but to give them all 6.0's across the board created the illusion of greatness. I don't believe they are there yet.

Vash

I agree that it was not ultimate greatness, but compared to the skaters that they were with, and that given performance the marks were more warranted than say certain skaters that keep rehashing the same stuff over and over and can't seem to manage their program time...I was as frustrated as she was because I know that she is capable of better...I'll leave it at that.

[Joesitz]

While I understand what Brad is saying, and if I believed that the 6.0 system was not a comparison of skaters' performances, I would go along with his remarks. But the bottom line is the whole system is just a comparison of scores. The score of 6.0 means nothing. It has been given false hype, duh!

When a skater (let's assume Sasha) skates a beautiful program (which she can do) and is awarded 5.9s, and afterwards, another skater (let's assume Irina)skates a technical packed no faults program (which she could), the subjectivity of the sport becomes in the mind of the judges. If they genuinely believed Irina skated a better performance than Sasha they have no alternative but to give Irina scores of 6.0s.

Why is this so difficult to understand? Anything else is just blindly thinking of one's favorites and not the substance of the matter.

Joe

[wvgal57]

The score of 6.0 means nothing. It has been given false hype

That's why Brad's post makes excellent sense. The candy fest at least years Worlds and this years US Nationals was riduculous.

6.0 for perfect program is great but for flawed programs its wrong.

[Mathman]

But in the case of Michelle, to me, just let her stand out there for four minutes -- 6.0!

MM

[Joesitz]

That's why Brad's post makes excellent sense. The candy fest at least years Worlds and this years US Nationals was riduculous. 6.0 for perfect program is great but for flawed programs its wrong.

If one really believes that the 6.0 means perfection then so be it. I don't! I believe it is a comparison score. If some dumb judge gives a skater a 5.9 before the last skater skates, and he is honest, then he has no alternative but to give the next skaters 6.0 and hopefully there is only one left.

And if one believes there was a candfest. So what? I don't. In the last US Nationals' Ladies: The right skater won. Over and out. Continue to worry about 6.0s if it means that much to anyone else. But save some of this nitpicking for the summer months. :sheesh:

Joe

[chuckm]

At Worlds 2004 and at US Nationals 2005, too many 6.0s were given out because the judges overmarked the skaters just below the top tier.

At Worlds, it became obvious in the FSs/FD that presentation 5.7s and 5.8s given out in the next-to-last group would push presentation scores in the final group to 5.9s and 6.0s.

[lavender]

It's true that on a normal day only 2 programs that I was able to see on tv deserve a 6.0 but really I don't care that they gave them out like candy. This is done with and I'm just looking forward to Worlds.

[Kasey]

If I recall correctly, there were 6.0s awarded like candy at last year's Worlds, which was the last time they would be used there....again, diminishing the "meaning" of the mark, since they were questionably deserved as well. I doubt that the U.S. Nationals this year caused more disgrace than that.

At Johnny Weir saying he didn't deserve any 6.0s! Gotta love that guy and his honesty!

Kasey

[Joesitz]

After reading all the anti-comments of recent 6.0 competitions and failure to read that the entire system is a comparison score then I am glad the system is over with. Cannot understand why it was so important to fans to worry about 6.0s.

Joe

[chuckm]

The problem is PCS marks in the 9s will become the new 6.0s. You can count on it. We already saw 9s in the GPF for Plushy and the Canadian skaters.

[ditzysk8r]

But in the case of Michelle, to me, just let her stand out there for four minutes -- 6.0!

MM

Exactly, she doesn't even have to skate, really! Sure, let's go do a butt spin, see how many 6's they give me!

[Tonichelle]

I don't think a lot fans took 6.0 seriously since last year worlds. I hardly take any 6.0 earned in Nationals, any Nationals in any country too seriously. They are all a 'setup' scores for the skaters the federation send to the big worlds.

exactly


I was there, and I only really thought the 6.0s would have been awarded to Tanith and Ben, but in other circumstances MAYBE one or two, not the full string

but their energy alone was soooooooo powerful that who knows...

anyway, who gives a whoop. It was a way to get the crowd jumping, and it was one last time around for the 6.0 :(

[Vash01]

If I recall correctly, there were 6.0s awarded like candy at last year's Worlds, which was the last time they would be used there....again, diminishing the "meaning" of the mark, since they were questionably deserved as well. I doubt that the U.S. Nationals this year caused more disgrace than that.

At Johnny Weir saying he didn't deserve any 6.0s! Gotta love that guy and his honesty!

Kasey

At the 1998 Olympics when Kazakova-Dmitriev received a 6.0 (just one) for presentation, Dmitriev disagreed with the 6.0 during the interview. He said 5.9 was OK but 6.0 was too much for that performance..... and they were not handing out 6.0's like free candy those days.

Vash

[Vash01]

After reading all the anti-comments of recent 6.0 competitions and failure to read that the entire system is a comparison score then I am glad the system is over with. Cannot understand why it was so important to fans to worry about 6.0s.

Joe

I disagree that it was a failure to read the entire system. I do understand that the marks are relative and that after 5.9 there is only one way to go for a better performance- 6.0. It does not have to be perfect performance. Still the problem is what do you do if there are two or more great performances? There is no 6.1 or 6.2, so the judges really have to undermark the earlier skaters to avoid getting into that situation. Unfortunately in these specific competitions (USN 2005 and 2004 worlds) the judges seemed to have made up their minds to give 6.0's to whoever skated the best in their opinions, so they were liberal in giving marks in general. The other point is it is not always necessary to give a 6.0. Why give a 6.0 if a 5.9 would have given the placement to that skater? I don't see a problem with the 6.0 system per se, it is the way the judges midhandled it since last year. OTOH had they not known that the system would be replaced very soon, they might have been more careful with it.

Vash