GOE questions - possible spoiler US Nationals

[MFarone]

I posted this in the event folder, but haven't really gotten a reply so thought I would ask the questions here. Here is what I posted in the other thread

I still find the GOEs hard to understand. I went to look at the protocols today and am puzzled for instance by Ashley Wagner's sp 3lutz fall which had GOEs of -2 and -3. I thought a fall always meant a -3, but maybe this has been changed. Also her layback spin, level 3 had GOEs ranging from +2 to -1 which I don't understand.

Sasha SP had scores on her 3lutz/2t of +1 to -2. I don't get it. If the GOEs were 0 and 1 or 2 and 3s I could understand it - but the spread really confuses me.

I was in Spokane for Nationals and was quite impressed with the Skatebug radio which allowed me to listen to a technical specialist (not working the event) to call the levels. No longer can a skater just go out and get into the music and only have to concentrate on the jumps. They have to count rotations in spins, changes of position/foot, seconds in the spirals. The footwork is a nightmare - not only do they have to do a variety of turns they must be spaced over the ice surface, mohawks, counters, loops, etc. can only be done 2 times or the extras don't count. I have often wondered why there is so little Level 4 footwork - its because in addition to the arms and torso being involved the head must also be involved. When the head is involved it must occur a certain percentage of the footwork - so what we have IMO is flapping, flinging, bowing to try to get the level 4.

My real question here tho is about the GOE spread in a skaters program for a single element (at whatever level is assigned). I used the examples above simply because they stood out to me, I am sure there are plenty more in the protocols.

Any input would be appreciated.

Maureen

 

[chuckm]

Sasha's lutz in the SP: it appears that some of the judges deducted for her flutz and some did not. She also slightly two-footed the jump, so a +1 seems a bit much.

Ashley's lutz in the SP (which she fell on): I've seen -3 and -2 marks on a fall from ISU judges and other National judges. I don't understand that either. Maybe someone else can elucidate.

 

[dorispulaski]

One difference with judges is that they all see the program from quite a different angle. Some flaws are more visible from some angles than others. However, I'd like the fall question answered too.

 

[Mathman]

About the -3 GOE on a fall, the ISU changed the rule last year. A fall used to carry and automatiic -3 GOE. The new rule is that the fall contributes a -3 to the total GOE, but positive considerations like excellent entry and take-off and superior height and body position in the air can be factored in to produce an overall -2 or -1 GOE for the element.

The GOE does have to be negative, however. And then there is the -1 fall deduction, taken off the top separately.

 

[chuckm]

Ashley has gotten edge calls on her flutz at all three international appearances this season, in both SP and FS.

COR: "e" in both SP and FS
NHK: "!" in SP and "e" in FS
GPF: "e" in both SP and FS

The USFS tech team ignored the flutz she fell on in the SP, and one judge gave her only -2 for the fall.
In the FS, the USFS tech team gave Ashley only "!" for a flutz all three ISU techies gave "e".

But USFS has ignored Ashley's flutzing at US Nationals fairly consistently. At 2008 Nationals, Ashley got no edge calls, but at Worlds, she got "e" on the flutz in the SP and two "e"s on her FS flutzes. Since then, Ashley has had only one lutz in her FS. She'd probably do better to substitute a 3Lo for the lutz in her SP (except at Nationals, of course).