- Joined
- Aug 4, 2015
A while ago, a generous poster gave us a link to a nifty score calculation sheet that he/she created, so that we could all become judges.
I decided to put that to use, and score the third and fourth groups of the 2016 World Championship Ladies FS the way that I would, to see what the results would be.
Here is the actual protocol, for reference in case you want to compare the real scores to mine.
http://www.isuresults.com/results/season1516/wc2016/wc2016_Ladies_FS_Scores.pdf
Now, I used a seven judge scoring system, and gave GOEs for each judge that I thought were a fair representation of what I thought the element should score. I used seven judges for more accuracy; for example, there are some elements that aren't necessarily a +1 or +2, but somewhere in between. Having seven GOEs helps keep that accuracy.
I made my OWN underrotation and edge calls, but since I don't know levels that well, I peeked at the protocol after finishing all twelve skaters and just went with the levels they gave.
*Obviously, this is my own opinion, and before anyone barrages me with angry messages about how I scored this skater and that skater, please respect my judgment, as I respect yours.*
Hope you enjoy! Sorry in advance for the length.
THIRD GROUP:
Mirai Nagasu
My protocol: https://snag.gy/cQkNX2.jpg
My score: 60.48/60.56 | 121.04
ISU score: 60.97/59.94 | 120.91
Comments: I gave Mirai nearly identical marks to that of the judging panel. Technically, I gave her one more underrotation than the judges did, on her 2A+3T. Like the judges, I gave her a ! on her first flip and carrots on her lutz and loop. Components were also nearly identical. I think Mirai was marked quite fairly.
Mao Asada
My protocol: https://snag.gy/ovlIxY.jpg
My score: 59.92/70.40 | 130.32
ISU score: 65.13/69.40 | 134.43
Comments: The specialist gave Mao carrots on the 3A, 3F+3Lo, and 2A+3T. I did the same but marked the 3Lo as <<, because I saw her skate hit the ice at 2.5 rotations in slow-mo, and gave her an additional carrot on a solo 3Lo. The specialist gave her an e on her lutz that I ignored because my camera angle wasn't great. I gave her slightly higher components than the judges did, but the extra carrots are why my score for her is lower than what she received.
Elizabet Tursynbaeva
My protocol: https://snag.gy/icuZyR.jpg
My score: 65.56/57.76 -1.00 | 122.32
ISU score: 67.39/55.60 -1.00 | 121.99
Comments: Again, I scored Elizabet very similarly to the judges. I gave her one underrotation on her 3S+3T combination which the judges did not, and therefore the technical score is lower. However, I compensated for that by giving her slightly higher component scores than the judges did, making the carrot a wash. I think Tursynbaeva got a fair score.
Rika Hongo
My protocol: https://snag.gy/zRrgPc.jpg
My score: 61.68/62.40 | 124.08
ISU score: 65.66/63.30 | 129.26
Comments: I gave Rika a slightly lower score than what the judges gave her. The main reason was that I called her lutz edge incorrect, whereas the ISU specialist did not. This was a 3 point difference, including GOE. The components are a point lower because I gave Rika about a half a point lower than the judges for skating skills, mainly due to her posture which I think could be improved. I gave her higher marks for the rest of the categories, because I love that program for her and she skates it well.
Zijun Li
My protocol: https://snag.gy/96im7S.jpg
My score: 58.22/60.72 | 118.94
ISU score: 59.40/59.73 | 119.13
Comments: Again, I am mostly in agreement with the judges here. I did give Zijun one more carrot than the judges, on both flips rather than one, but the specialist and I agreed about her incorrect lutz edge. This difference is largely made up by the fact that I like Zijun's skating a bit more than the judges do, and I'm realizing now I could have given her higher scores than I did.
Gabby Daleman
My protocol: https://snag.gy/KH1knC.jpg
My score: 65.00/63.28 | 128.28
ISU score: 65.15/63.15 | 128.30
Comments: Gabby's pretty easy to judge, since she rarely EVER underrotates and rarely EVER has edge problems. That being said, ISU protocol has her flip at a !, which I didn't notice. Otherwise, we were mostly in sync, and again, I feel like I could actually have given Gabby even higher components just for her speed alone.
FOURTH GROUP:
Elena Radionova
My protocol: https://snag.gy/NCVi1W.jpg
My score: 67.00/65.36 | 132.26
ISU score: 70.17/67.94 | 138.11
Comments: The judges gave Elena no carrots, whereas I gave her an underrotation on her first double axel. In general, I gave her lower GOEs than the judges, who IMO gave her jumps higher GOEs than they deserved. I also wasn't so keen on Elena's components, since I am not a fan of that Titanic program nor do I think she has particularly amazing skating skills. That explains the difference.
Evgenia Medvedeva
My protocol: https://snag.gy/j4kdvi.jpg
My score: 70.91/69.12 | 140.03
ISU score: 77.76/72.34 | 150.10
Comments: The big difference in technical score is due to a few reasons. Firstly, I gave Evgenia an edge call on the lutz that I thought was pretty obvious, but went ignored by the caller. Secondly, I gave her slightly lower GOEs on nearly all her jumping passes- I rarely gave her any +3's and stuck to a mix of +1 and +2, since I find she tanoes a bit too much and the jumps are a bit muscled. I actually thought I overmarked her components and they still came out to a 69. 72.34 to me isn't a fair judgment of her skating ability when you consider what greats like Yuna and Caro have received for PCS in the past.
Satoko Miyahara
My protocol: https://snag.gy/aBZ5Dc.jpg
My score: 73.62/68.64 | 142.26
ISU score: 73.54/66.35 | 139.89
Comments: Satoko is one of the few skaters I actually scored considerably higher than the judges did. Her Un Sospiro program is a favourite of mine, which explains the high component scores. I think her skating is much better than 66.35 suggests, and I would argue her performance quality was at least comparable to Medvedeva's, if not better. I looked hard for underrotations but didn't find any obvious ones- she came down cleanly on most jumps. (Yes, I know we had a discussion about her prerotation and such, but I looked past that here because to me, it's hard to tell.) I'd actually have this performance in first place.
Anna Pogorilaya
My protocol: https://snag.gy/YCH7N4.jpg
My score: 68.93/68.72 | 137.65
ISU score: 71.60/68.11 | 139.71
Comments: Once again, the difference in technical score comes down to an edge call- the caller gave Anna's flip a ! and I thought the error was big enough to warrant an e. The other elements were scored nearly exactly the same way and I thought her component scores were fair.
Gracie Gold
My protocol: https://snag.gy/KbJdCE.jpg
My score: 61.02/68.32 | 129.34
ISU score: 66.01/69.85 -1.00 | 134.86
Comments: I realized after I did this that the ISU credited Gracie with a fall on that crab-walk position she ended up in after the opening combo, whereas I didn't. The judges gave her slightly higher GOEs overall than I did, and I also marked her flip with an e whereas the caller only gave her a !. I thought she was slightly overscored on components, which is acceptable given home advantage. The inflation wasn't egregious.
Ashley Wagner
My protocol: https://snag.gy/PtbMIq.jpg
My score: 61.89/69.92 | 131.81
ISU score: 68.45/73.78 | 142.23
Comments: The huge discrepancy between the two scores here can mostly be attributed to home advantage. The judges gave Ashley two carrots, one on the flip-toe and the solo flip, which I agreed with, but they missed the carrot on the loop-half loop-salchow combination, which was frankly quite obvious. I actually nearly gave the salchow a downgrade. In general the judges gave nearly every element a higher GOE than I did, especially on her spins, which I think are fine, but not as good as the judges made them out to be. 73.78 for components is a stretch for Ashley, and while I gave her well-deserved 9's for some categories like performance, I think anything over mid 8's for skating skills and transitions is unwarranted.
Actual free skate standings:
1. Evgenia Medvedeva 150.10
2. Ashley Wagner 142.23
3. Satoko Miyahara 139.89
4. Anna Pogorilaya 139.71
5. Elena Radionova 138.11
6. Gracie Gold 134.86
7. Mao Asada 134.43
8. Rika Hongo 129.26
9. Gabby Daleman 128.30
10. Elizabet Tursynbaeva 121.99
11. Mirai Nagasu 120.91
12. Zijun Li 119.13
My free skate standings:
1. Satoko Miyahara 142.26
2. Evgenia Medvedeva 140.03
3. Anna Pogorilaya 137.65
4. Elena Radionova 132.26
5. Ashley Wagner 131.81
6. Mao Asada 130.32
7. Gracie Gold 129.34
8. Gabby Daleman 128.28
9. Rika Hongo 124.08
10. Elizabet Tursynbaeva 122.32
11. Mirai Nagasu 121.04
12. Zijun Li 118.94
I decided to put that to use, and score the third and fourth groups of the 2016 World Championship Ladies FS the way that I would, to see what the results would be.
Here is the actual protocol, for reference in case you want to compare the real scores to mine.
http://www.isuresults.com/results/season1516/wc2016/wc2016_Ladies_FS_Scores.pdf
Now, I used a seven judge scoring system, and gave GOEs for each judge that I thought were a fair representation of what I thought the element should score. I used seven judges for more accuracy; for example, there are some elements that aren't necessarily a +1 or +2, but somewhere in between. Having seven GOEs helps keep that accuracy.
I made my OWN underrotation and edge calls, but since I don't know levels that well, I peeked at the protocol after finishing all twelve skaters and just went with the levels they gave.
*Obviously, this is my own opinion, and before anyone barrages me with angry messages about how I scored this skater and that skater, please respect my judgment, as I respect yours.*
Hope you enjoy! Sorry in advance for the length.
THIRD GROUP:
Mirai Nagasu
My protocol: https://snag.gy/cQkNX2.jpg
My score: 60.48/60.56 | 121.04
ISU score: 60.97/59.94 | 120.91
Comments: I gave Mirai nearly identical marks to that of the judging panel. Technically, I gave her one more underrotation than the judges did, on her 2A+3T. Like the judges, I gave her a ! on her first flip and carrots on her lutz and loop. Components were also nearly identical. I think Mirai was marked quite fairly.
Mao Asada
My protocol: https://snag.gy/ovlIxY.jpg
My score: 59.92/70.40 | 130.32
ISU score: 65.13/69.40 | 134.43
Comments: The specialist gave Mao carrots on the 3A, 3F+3Lo, and 2A+3T. I did the same but marked the 3Lo as <<, because I saw her skate hit the ice at 2.5 rotations in slow-mo, and gave her an additional carrot on a solo 3Lo. The specialist gave her an e on her lutz that I ignored because my camera angle wasn't great. I gave her slightly higher components than the judges did, but the extra carrots are why my score for her is lower than what she received.
Elizabet Tursynbaeva
My protocol: https://snag.gy/icuZyR.jpg
My score: 65.56/57.76 -1.00 | 122.32
ISU score: 67.39/55.60 -1.00 | 121.99
Comments: Again, I scored Elizabet very similarly to the judges. I gave her one underrotation on her 3S+3T combination which the judges did not, and therefore the technical score is lower. However, I compensated for that by giving her slightly higher component scores than the judges did, making the carrot a wash. I think Tursynbaeva got a fair score.
Rika Hongo
My protocol: https://snag.gy/zRrgPc.jpg
My score: 61.68/62.40 | 124.08
ISU score: 65.66/63.30 | 129.26
Comments: I gave Rika a slightly lower score than what the judges gave her. The main reason was that I called her lutz edge incorrect, whereas the ISU specialist did not. This was a 3 point difference, including GOE. The components are a point lower because I gave Rika about a half a point lower than the judges for skating skills, mainly due to her posture which I think could be improved. I gave her higher marks for the rest of the categories, because I love that program for her and she skates it well.
Zijun Li
My protocol: https://snag.gy/96im7S.jpg
My score: 58.22/60.72 | 118.94
ISU score: 59.40/59.73 | 119.13
Comments: Again, I am mostly in agreement with the judges here. I did give Zijun one more carrot than the judges, on both flips rather than one, but the specialist and I agreed about her incorrect lutz edge. This difference is largely made up by the fact that I like Zijun's skating a bit more than the judges do, and I'm realizing now I could have given her higher scores than I did.
Gabby Daleman
My protocol: https://snag.gy/KH1knC.jpg
My score: 65.00/63.28 | 128.28
ISU score: 65.15/63.15 | 128.30
Comments: Gabby's pretty easy to judge, since she rarely EVER underrotates and rarely EVER has edge problems. That being said, ISU protocol has her flip at a !, which I didn't notice. Otherwise, we were mostly in sync, and again, I feel like I could actually have given Gabby even higher components just for her speed alone.
FOURTH GROUP:
Elena Radionova
My protocol: https://snag.gy/NCVi1W.jpg
My score: 67.00/65.36 | 132.26
ISU score: 70.17/67.94 | 138.11
Comments: The judges gave Elena no carrots, whereas I gave her an underrotation on her first double axel. In general, I gave her lower GOEs than the judges, who IMO gave her jumps higher GOEs than they deserved. I also wasn't so keen on Elena's components, since I am not a fan of that Titanic program nor do I think she has particularly amazing skating skills. That explains the difference.
Evgenia Medvedeva
My protocol: https://snag.gy/j4kdvi.jpg
My score: 70.91/69.12 | 140.03
ISU score: 77.76/72.34 | 150.10
Comments: The big difference in technical score is due to a few reasons. Firstly, I gave Evgenia an edge call on the lutz that I thought was pretty obvious, but went ignored by the caller. Secondly, I gave her slightly lower GOEs on nearly all her jumping passes- I rarely gave her any +3's and stuck to a mix of +1 and +2, since I find she tanoes a bit too much and the jumps are a bit muscled. I actually thought I overmarked her components and they still came out to a 69. 72.34 to me isn't a fair judgment of her skating ability when you consider what greats like Yuna and Caro have received for PCS in the past.
Satoko Miyahara
My protocol: https://snag.gy/aBZ5Dc.jpg
My score: 73.62/68.64 | 142.26
ISU score: 73.54/66.35 | 139.89
Comments: Satoko is one of the few skaters I actually scored considerably higher than the judges did. Her Un Sospiro program is a favourite of mine, which explains the high component scores. I think her skating is much better than 66.35 suggests, and I would argue her performance quality was at least comparable to Medvedeva's, if not better. I looked hard for underrotations but didn't find any obvious ones- she came down cleanly on most jumps. (Yes, I know we had a discussion about her prerotation and such, but I looked past that here because to me, it's hard to tell.) I'd actually have this performance in first place.
Anna Pogorilaya
My protocol: https://snag.gy/YCH7N4.jpg
My score: 68.93/68.72 | 137.65
ISU score: 71.60/68.11 | 139.71
Comments: Once again, the difference in technical score comes down to an edge call- the caller gave Anna's flip a ! and I thought the error was big enough to warrant an e. The other elements were scored nearly exactly the same way and I thought her component scores were fair.
Gracie Gold
My protocol: https://snag.gy/KbJdCE.jpg
My score: 61.02/68.32 | 129.34
ISU score: 66.01/69.85 -1.00 | 134.86
Comments: I realized after I did this that the ISU credited Gracie with a fall on that crab-walk position she ended up in after the opening combo, whereas I didn't. The judges gave her slightly higher GOEs overall than I did, and I also marked her flip with an e whereas the caller only gave her a !. I thought she was slightly overscored on components, which is acceptable given home advantage. The inflation wasn't egregious.
Ashley Wagner
My protocol: https://snag.gy/PtbMIq.jpg
My score: 61.89/69.92 | 131.81
ISU score: 68.45/73.78 | 142.23
Comments: The huge discrepancy between the two scores here can mostly be attributed to home advantage. The judges gave Ashley two carrots, one on the flip-toe and the solo flip, which I agreed with, but they missed the carrot on the loop-half loop-salchow combination, which was frankly quite obvious. I actually nearly gave the salchow a downgrade. In general the judges gave nearly every element a higher GOE than I did, especially on her spins, which I think are fine, but not as good as the judges made them out to be. 73.78 for components is a stretch for Ashley, and while I gave her well-deserved 9's for some categories like performance, I think anything over mid 8's for skating skills and transitions is unwarranted.
Actual free skate standings:
1. Evgenia Medvedeva 150.10
2. Ashley Wagner 142.23
3. Satoko Miyahara 139.89
4. Anna Pogorilaya 139.71
5. Elena Radionova 138.11
6. Gracie Gold 134.86
7. Mao Asada 134.43
8. Rika Hongo 129.26
9. Gabby Daleman 128.30
10. Elizabet Tursynbaeva 121.99
11. Mirai Nagasu 120.91
12. Zijun Li 119.13
My free skate standings:
1. Satoko Miyahara 142.26
2. Evgenia Medvedeva 140.03
3. Anna Pogorilaya 137.65
4. Elena Radionova 132.26
5. Ashley Wagner 131.81
6. Mao Asada 130.32
7. Gracie Gold 129.34
8. Gabby Daleman 128.28
9. Rika Hongo 124.08
10. Elizabet Tursynbaeva 122.32
11. Mirai Nagasu 121.04
12. Zijun Li 118.94