- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Judges need to stop using the GOE system to do what the old Artistic Impression marks used to do: Hold up certain skaters and keep down others.
I would like to put in a word of support for the old Artistic Impression score. First, as you say, that's just what the current system does anyway. Each skater gets an artistic impression score repeated three times in the last three program components. I think it would be more honest to admit this without apology. They could have an Artistic Impression score worth 25% of the total (and another 25% for blade work and in-betweens) and call it a day. Trying to distinguish among the three marks -- "gee, that skater had great choreography, but he can't interpret the music worth a darn" -- that just doesn't happen.
In fact, the whole idea of Program Components seems a little fishy to me. There is no place in the IJS for gestalt: "That was the greatest program I ever saw! 6.0, 6.0, 6.0!"
Is it wrong that I secretly want, if the element is so awful, for the GOE to push it into the negative scoring wise? ...
I agree. In terms of risk/reward, quads are all reward and no risk. I remember the famous time that Jeff Buttle threw in a quad fall just because that brought more points than a completed triple. I think what the fans want on the tech side is a "no guts, no glory" competition. If there is little risk, that diminishes the gutsiness of the performance, however competent.