"Interpretation" of Program Component Scores

[Mathman]

(This thread is motivated by the comments of GRossano on the thread about triple/triples.)

Here is the official definition of the program component “Interpretation” from ISU document JS 08A:

Interpretation: The personal and creative translation of the music to movement on ice. To reward the skater who though movement creates a personal and creative translation of the music. As the tempo binds all notes in time, the ability to use the tempos and rhythms of the music in a variety of ways, along with the subtle use of finesse to reflect the nuances of all the fundamentals of music: melody, rhythm, harmony, color, texture, and form creates a mastery of interpretation.

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-152086-169302-64121-0-file,00.pdf

Once we penetrate the grammatical mysteries of this statement, the idea is clear (I think).

What skaters and which recent performances do you think deserved high marks in this area?

Do you think that the judges actually try to apply these criteria, or do they just give out the highest marks to the skaters that they think skated the best overall?

Here are the scores in Interpretation for the top ten ladies and men at 2007 Worlds (LP). Agree/not agree?

Mao Asada 8.18 (the most musical skater in the world? Or is this the triple Axel talking?)
Miki Ando 7.68
Kimmie Meissner 7.43
Yuna Kim 7.75
Joannie Rochette 6.32
Yukari Nakano 6.90
Suzanna Poikyo 6.54
Sarah Meier 6.79
Carolina Kostner 7.25
Valentina Marchei 6.11

Takahashi 7.82
Lambiel 7.80
Joubert 7.68 (is Joubert more musical than Buttle? Than Weir?)
Verner 7.38 (is Verner more musical than Buttle and Weir, or did he just do more quads?)
Lysacek 7.29
Oda 6.86
Berntsson 6.61
Buttle 7.36
Lindemann 6.46
Weir 7.29

 

[gkelly]

What skaters and which recent performances do you think deserved high marks in this area?

Hm, the examples that immediately came to mind were all Canadian and mostly not-so-recent (i.e., not competitive programs performed under the new judging system).

Sale & Pelletier 2002 short program, almost anything Kurt Browning has done since 1993 (amateur and pro), Josee Chouinard's "Humoresque" interpretive program from 2000 Canadian Open . . .

Oh, and of course Torvill & Dean, special mention to their 1994 Rhumba OD

Of course it's easier to work more intimately with the music when you're not concentrating on packing in as much technical difficulty as possible.

Of the current competitors, I'd have to give top marks to Jeff Buttle, another Canadian. Maybe I'll come back and give some specific examples of his work or other current/recent competitors who are good at this IMO, if I think of some.

Do you think that the judges actually try to apply these criteria, or do they just give out the highest marks to the skaters that they think skated the best overall?

I expect that most of them try to some extent, and some succeed better than others. Even the same judge would probably get different results on ranking interpretation in the same performances if that's all they were concentrating on as opposed to coming up with marks for all five components. It's easy to compare each component to the others for the same performance -- e.g., did the skater's moment-to-moment connection to the music live up to the choreography s/he was given, or not, or transcend it? -- rather than comparing to the other skaters in the event or to a fixed or floating external standard. If different judges approach the PCS differently, they'll have different success at applying the criteria.

 

[morninglight]

I totally disagree with the judges who rated Brian higher in interpretation than Jeff and Johnny.

Even in SP, where Jeff had a clean performance, Brian scored higher in all of the Program Components Scores than Jeff. I believe it absolutely impossible to justify the judging like this.

I have seen so many bashing comments on more technically-advanced skaters like Brian and Miki for getting similar or higher marks on PCS than artistically-advanced skaters. I feel sorry for them. Skaters are just doing their best. It's the judges who give rewards for what they don't really deserve.

Besides, the judging like this is implicitly encouraging the skaters to neglect artistry. It takes tremendous efforts, time, and money to attain the level of artistry like Jeff and Johnny. If the skaters with the most sophisticated artistry are not rewarded enough, general trends would be driven towards neglecting artistry.

I really hope that the judges would work on fairer judging in PCS marks.

 

[gsrossano]

I really hope that the judges would work on fairer judging in PCS marks.

So do I.

Of all the PCs, I think IN is the hardest one to judge and requires the greatest effort/study to learn. Certainly it requires the most developed artistic sensibilities of the PCs.

For those who have trouble with ISUnglish and the gobbldy gook that ends up in ISU rules, here is my transcription of the criteria for intepretation.

- Effortless movement in time to the music
- Expression of the music's style, character and rhythm
- Use of subtle movements to reflect the subtle details and characteristics of the music
- Demonstration of a relationship between the partners that reflects the character of the music
- Appropriateness of the music (OD, FD)
- Skating primarily to the rhythmic beat (OD) and skating to the rhythmic beat (FD)

 

[dancindiva03]

I think that the PCS scores as they are used now are just a crock of s*&%. Really, they are just another way for judges to prop up certain skaters, just like they did with the presentation mark in 6.0. Its really a joke.

 

[SeaniBu]

Do you think that the judges actually try to apply these criteria, or do they just give out the highest marks to the skaters that they think skated the best overall?

Here are the scores in Interpretation for the top ten ladies and men at 2007 Worlds (LP). Agree/not agree?

Mao Asada 8.18 (the most musical skater in the world? Or is this the triple Axel talking?)
Miki Ando 7.68
Kimmie Meissner 7.43
Yuna Kim 7.75
Joannie Rochette 6.32
Yukari Nakano 6.90
Suzanna Poikyo 6.54
Sarah Meier 6.79
Carolina Kostner 7.25
Valentina Marchei 6.11

Strange to me that you wouldn't see a name like FUMIE SUGURI in there. I must be lead to believe

or do they just give out the highest marks to the skaters that they think skated the best overall?

Kimmie? How else could that be? That is really close to Yu-Na for me to believe that is a "proper assessment" again.

I think that the PCS scores as they are used now are just a crock of s*&%. Really, they are just another way for judges to prop up certain skaters, just like they did with the presentation mark in 6.0. Its really a joke.

:agree: :agree: :agree:

 

[kappa_1]

^ Wasn't Suguri not at Worlds this year or did I misunderstand your comment?

Also count me in with those outraged by the above PCS scores. The top three interpretation scores should really go to Kim, Rochette, and Meier in no particular order. IMO Meier had one of if not the best LP this year in terms of overall mood and choreography, everything just flowed together and she presented it so well. It's unfortunate that she would usually screw up a jump towards the end of the program this season. I won't even comment on the men's scores, which are a complete joke.

Here endeth my rant and my procrastination.

 

[Hsuhs]

It's scandalously unfair but, what can be done?

 

[silver.blades]

It's scandalously unfair but, what can be done?

Split the panel. Half the judges mark TES and the other half mark PC it's the only way that the PC scores will be fair. Even if the judges try to judge fairly they don't have time if they have to look at PC and TES. That's why all the PC marks are the same or really close.

 

[Hsuhs]

It's been discussed before. Doesn't seem to work.
Since PCScores' mutual correlations are so high, it's practically one sole 'artistry' mark we're talking about. Fans in arena (or at home) could pretty much assess it, IMO.

 

[gkelly]

Fans in arena (or at home) could pretty much assess it, IMO.

So give it a try.

Watch a bunch of performances from the same competition, preferably one with a fairly wide range of ability, and assign marks for the five components. Don't bother with marking the elements if you think it works better to watch for components only.

I do think it's not very accurate for anyone, even experienced judges, to assess skating skills via video, and some aspects of the choreography are hard to get a good sense of, but you should be able to get a pretty good sense of the other components.

Would this be a good thread to report back on your results? Thought processes, and/or actual scores.

 

[SeaniBu]

^ Wasn't Suguri not at Worlds this year or did I misunderstand your comment?

No I am just a doofis. I just didn't read that {worlds 2007} or something. But she is often enough underscored in Interpretation and presentation, that it is a constant source of heart ache for me.

I'll just stick to the Kimmie being so close to Yu-Na - which even though I am a Kimmie fan and feel she is better in that area now, to be that close to Miss Kim's scores???? is somewhat disheartening. OK since I almost always talk about the ladies, B.Js marks? - as MM pointed out to start.

What are they really using this PCS for?

gKelly has a great idea. A while ago we had a "scores" thread and it was fun and I found discrepancies in the PCS with the marks given and what we were coming up with. -3 to +3 were really close, even SS and CH were. But interpretation and presentation seemed to be the most different from the actual scores. Of course I have found that I am not suppose to be counting edge use in / during a Jump as any form of marking in SS, but it was still one of the marks that was close.*shrugs*

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I hope the readers of this instruction understand that it is not necessary to stab oneself at the end of using Un Bel Di or flap one's arms through a music selection of swan lake. Those antics are not original!! There is no creativity advanced by the skater. It has already been done by the oriiginal stage productions.

Interpretation: The personal and creative translation of the music to movement on ice. To reward the skater who though movement creates a personal and creative translation of the music. As the tempo binds all notes in time, the ability to use the tempos and rhythms of the music in a variety of ways, along with the subtle use of finesse to reflect the nuances of all the fundamentals of music: melody, rhythm, harmony, color, texture, and form creates a mastery of interpretation.

The above says nothing about mimicry which is better served on Saturday Night Live, or movies like Blades on Ice.

Personal and Creative Virtud/Moir; Yu Na, Lambiel, Savchenko/Szolkowy.

Joe

 

[SeaniBu]

The above says nothing about mimicry which is better served on Saturday Night Live, or movies like Blades on Ice.

Sorry, but that sounds "old fuddy duddy" to me. What could you do that is totally original? Whatever, copy ballet moves that are so often brought into FS gives a higher regard than conveying the message of the music via theatrical interpretation and movement? That is just stuffy and premeditated scouring IMO. So if it is not new and fresh (which none of it is to dance just bring it to FS MIGHT be) it is automatically not good enough?

People ask for creative, which what in the world hasn't been done, realistically and not comparing 20 years ago, and the skaters try adding positions that get dinged as contortionistic and not skating...etc...

See this is exactly one of the reasons I believe in half the judges being in the 25-40 age group. I watch Paul and see (regarding "interpretation") the only "creativity" is bringing ballet more to the forefront of FS's choreography. That to me is not creative, just something already there but brought out more. No more qualifying for marks in interpretation then a theatrical gesture.

As for the 2005 SP F.S reference ( I do think twice during the routine was overboard though), I might not always be that hipp on theatrics (sometimes they go overboard), but don't see how that is any different. At least it is pushing some boundary, rather then just the same stuff but more of it. Ah my 2 cents.

PCS is probably one of the main reasons some do not see FS as a serious sport and more of a pageant. It is so subject to personal taste that it does not seem sound in the way it is scored.

I think some judges might not be scoring FS but their own version of Ballet on Ice. That would be something different, or that is what it would be called.

 

[shine]

I'll just stick to the Kimmie being so close to Yu-Na - which even though I am a Kimmie fan and feel she is better in that area now, to be that close to Miss Kim's scores???? is somewhat disheartening. OK since I almost always talk about the ladies, B.Js marks? - as MM pointed out to start.

You are entitled to think that Meissner is much inferior to Kim in interpretation, but t would be better if you didn't repeatedly state it as a fact. I personally think Kimmie's programs this year are absolutely beautiful, and she's doing a great job at feeling the music and skating in sync to it.
I also think the three highest interpretation scores should go to Rochette, Kim, and Meir, followed not too distantly by Meissner.

 

[SeaniBu]

I am sorry to everyone if a previous post may have sounded like I was Kimmie bashing. I really am a big Kimmie Fan.

You are entitled to think that Meissner is much inferior to Kim in interpretation,

I woun't say or thought I said "much inferior" - just not as close as it is.

but t would be better if you didn't repeatedly state it as a fact.

Me, Fact? Especially due to it being the question of why these marks are given, I am not even close to sure why some marks are giving in interpretation .....well interpretation is just that, and people are subject to their own so I could never state a fact based on context of the discussion. In using that in particular as example is just something that has been discussed enough here that I felt comfortable in saying "why that close." There has been a lot of discussions on Kimmie's improvements in this area this year as well as the need for said improvements. As much as I think they are closer than once before I am still wondering if their marks realy should be that close for worlds?

I personally think Kimmie's programs this year are absolutely beautiful, and she's doing a great job at feeling the music and skating in sync to it.

I hole heartedly, 100% agree with that.:agree:
And

not too distantly by Meissner

:agree: I would think Kimmie right next to Sarah M in points too.

 

[Mathman]

Josee Chouinard's "Humoresque" interpretive program from 2000 Canadian Open . . .

:agree: That is an outstanding example. The whole point of the program (Pierette) was to give an interpretation in movement to what Dvorjak accomplished musically. The conception was so true that Josee beat a nice, if rather generic, performance by Michelle Kwan -- this despite the fact that Josee fell on her triple Lutz and Michelle skated cleanly.

Josee afterwards used that performance in her pep talks to her students to punctuate the theme, give it your best shot, believe in yourself, anything can happen!

BTW, this music was from one of Lori Nichol's all-time favorite albums (oops, I mean CDs -- showing my age there ) -- Humoresque, performed by violinist Nadja Salerno-Sonnenberg. Lori also used several other tracks at various times -- Embraceable You, also for Chouinard, Michelle's 1999 SP Fate of Carmen and Sale and Pelletiere best program, Tristan and Isolde (an arrangement for piano by Waxman).

If anyone happens to have this record, check out track 2, City Montage, also by Waxman. IMHO it would make an awesome SP for someone like Mao Asada.

However, to me, this example points up the problem rather than speaks to the solution. I have never seen, and never expect to see, a competitive program that is all about the interpretation of the music. Harlequins, after all, are not traditionally indentified with triple flip/triple loop combinations.

When Frank Caroll complained about the judging at the Canadian Open the judges replied that, well, sure, Michelle Kwan is twice the skater that Josee Chouinard ever was, but this was specifically the Interpretive part of this pro-am competition. Michelle won the first part (the technical program), but her interpretive program didn't interpret anything, so they gave the high marks to Josee.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Sorry, but that sounds "old fuddy duddy" to me. What could you do that is totally original? Whatever, copy ballet moves that are so often brought into FS gives a higher regard than conveying the message of the music via theatrical interpretation and movement? That is just stuffy and premeditated scouring IMO. So if it is not new and fresh (which none of it is to dance just bring it to FS MIGHT be) it is automatically not good enough?

People ask for creative, which what in the world hasn't been done, realistically and not comparing 20 years ago, and the skaters try adding positions that get dinged as contortionistic and not skating...etc...

Wow, I'm a fuddy duddy. I prefer an old curmudgeon.

But I can't agree with you. If it's an art form then it should have originality, or at least a major improvement over what is being copied. When I read that she skated so balletically, I just think why not go and see the real thing.

There are creative artists and there are performing artists. There is no need to copy another artform.

Enjoy the imitations.

Joe

 

[SeaniBu]

Wow, I'm a fuddy duddy. I prefer an old curmudgeon.

I wouldn't say you are, just that comment sounded that way to me.

There are creative artists and there are performing artists. There is no need to copy another artform.

So what exactly would a suggestion be for "originality / creativity?" Anything they do someone else has done - and not saying just you Joe - and when they try something it is not well received when attempting to be original. It gets categorized as "just another contortionist position, too theatrical, etc... I just don't see what we can expect as far as "creativity." Maybe take out "creativity" in the definition of interpretation - heck I am thinking take out "interpretation" from the scoring all together. It is so subjective, and it doesn't seem correctly used much of the time anyway. ????

 

[gio]

Meissner good in interpratation??? Not distant from Yu Na??? She is way behind Yu Na and Mao. Alissa Czisny, Susanna Poykio, Sarah Meier, Joannie Rochette, Valentina Marchei, Yukari Nakano all were better in interpretation than Kimmie. Kimmie is better than these girls in other aspects of skating, but not in interpretation.

Did you see Alissa Czisny? She is superior to Kimmie in interpretation, but she received way too low marks.

JMO