So an error that anyone with no skating knowledge can see, and that is ugly and disruptive, should be penalized more than a brief, nondisruptive, not-unattractive fall?
That means that the degree of disruption, the level of ugliness, etc., is subject to the subjective judgment of the judges on the panel (and the subjective opinions of fans).
Actually I think this is a good starting place for changes in rules or guidelines.
But if both partners fall in perfect unison perfectly in time with the music, then maybe the good aspects of the fall can add to the PCS enough to counteract the recommended reduction in the component score. (They'd still get 2.0 mandatory fall deduction though)
Or a skater who falls and plays it off as part of the choreography could earn back as much in goodwill as s/he loses to the recommended reduction.
Yes, and rightfully so in terms of its impact on presentation, interpretation or performance. If there is no subjectivity in judging, why do we need nine judges on the panel? Do you think figure skating can be measured by a ruler or a timer?So an error that anyone with no skating knowledge can see, and that is ugly and disruptive, should be penalized more than a brief, nondisruptive, not-unattractive fall? That means that the degree of disruption, the level of ugliness, etc., is subject to the subjective judgment of the judges on the panel (and the subjective opinions of fans).
To me, this is just common sense. Why would judges need "rules and guidelines" to do this?
Yes, and rightfully so in terms of its impact on presentation, interpretation or performance. If there is no subjectivity in judging, why do we need nine judges on the panel? Do you think figure skating can be measured by a ruler or a timer?
Gee, I didn't realize the scores were presented in a random order. Thanks for pointing that out. Somebody claimed in the GPF Men FP thread that Judge #2, #3, #4, #6, and #9 gave Takahashi higher PE than Chan. And so I assumed that he was correct and that the order was not random.It is not possible to tell from the protocols whether a majority of judges favored Chan or Takahashi in P/E. The random order in which the judges' scores are presented is as follows....
gkelly said:(1997 Nationals?)
(Michelle Kwan} fell twice, had other serious and visible errors, and beat skaters who did not fall or have disruptive errors.
(BTW, here's one of my favorite performances from that competition with only one fall)
Mathman said:If Michelle had won in spite of her falls, the audience would have gone away with a certain amount of puzzlement and disgruntlement, muttering WTH was that?
Really, even if Lipinski had withdrawn or also fallen at least twice? Yeah, Bobek would probably have won the LP but was too far behind in the short program (with falls) to win the title.
Sometimes the best skater falls.
gkelly said:E.g., look at the Alizah Allen program I posted earlier in this thread. A casual fan might look at that performance and see one cringe-inducing failed jump. A judge would probably see three (same number as in Kwan's more difficult program the same day).
But there's also a lot of good stuff in that program too.
gkelly said:Placements aside, do you think there's a difference in the disruptiveness of these two falls and how much they should be penalized, from whatever score(s) the judge was going to give the performance otherwise?
Here is where we are helpless. It is not possible to tell from the protocols whether a majority of judges favored Chan or Takahashi in P/E. The random order in which the judges' scores are presented is as follows.
Chan 9.25 8,00 8.25 8.50 9.50 8.50 8.75 8.50 8.75
Taka 8.00 9.50 8.50 9.00 8.75 9.00 8.00 8.00 9.00
If you compare the two lists ordered in this way, Takahashi is favored by the judges listed 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th and 9yh. Takahashi wins, 5 judges to 4.
But if we take the same scores and put the second set in a different order we get:
Chan 8.00 8.25 8.50 8.50 8.50 8.75 8.75 9.00 9.25
Taka 9.50 9.00 9.00 9.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.75 8.50
Now Chan wins judges 5,6,7,8 and 9. Chan wins, 5 judges to 4.
Which order is right? The ISU isn't telling.
Is it not favoristism- I have not read this thread so excuse me- that Patrick won over Daisuke with what happened in PC's SP and LP? How many here felt Dai deserved the gold? Or is PC the 'pet" here at GS with all the Canadian members?
Guess I should head to the poll folder to see what is the consensus about GP Final....
I think the biggest misconception and misconnection with casual fans about COP is spelled out in the thread title - Rewarding Failure.
In actuality, COP rewards all the accomplishments a skater brings on the ice, the sum of which being the final total scores. But many proverbial casual fans are not able, and some refuse, to see the accomplishments....
BTW, I have to call out Mathman and skatinginbc, two very articulate skating fans with strong interest and devotion to their favorite skaters, as masquerading as "casual fans". The number of posts on this fan board alone say otherwise.
BTW, I have to call out Mathman and skatinginbc, two very articulate skating fans with strong interest and devotion to their favorite skaters, as masquerading as "casual fans". The number of posts on this fan board alone say otherwise.
I guess you've totally forgotten that Takahashi had an over 10 points deficit from SP. Dai could never win gold even if he won LP. Of course you can always day-dream about it.
I think that sports fans in general are not used to a sport that adds up little hundredths of a point for every twist and turn the athlete makes. In golf, you do not get any points for lining up your putt, for reading the green, for having a smooth putting stroke -- the only thing that counts is, does it go in the cup. All of those things may add up up to a putt that has a higher probability of going in, but at the end there is that yes or no that defines the sport.
Under the CoP judging system, figure skating is not like that. Maybe it is not like that under any scoring system, but to the fan who has been schooled in other sports and is not an expert in skating, under the 6.0 system skating seemed more like other sports. You prepare for your big element, you take off on a secure edge, straight body position in the air, good height, quick rotations -- all of those things increase the probability that you will score. Then BAM you hit that perfect landing, or AWWWW, you fall. To me, the CoP kind of takes away that thrill. Instead of the thrill of victory and agony of defeat, we have a sequence of so-so, half OK, half could-be-better moments.
If only I could tell what edge a skater is on in real time, or learn the difference between a Chocktaw and a Mohawk, as easily as I can bang away at the keyboard!
I mean yes Chan had an extra quad attempt, but Daisuke had an extra triple axel attempt, and unlike Chan, Daisuke actually landed his triple axel beautifully (vs Chan's quad attempt).