I remember reading somewhere that women receive only 85% of their PCS scores. The rule was put in place to balance women's technical and artistic components. This was before women started doing triple axles and quads. So, is this true and is there a chance that the ISU is reviewing this to award women 100% of their PCS scores to "re-balance" technical and artistic achievements? Really helpful if someone can refer me to the authority on this topic. Thanks.
PCS Scoring for Women
- Thread starter ray94611
- Start date
I don't see the point since PCS seems to be mostly technical now too. Really, what you need for high PCS isnt artistry, but consistent jumps and backing of a major federation.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2021
What people seem not to understand about this is that if everyone’s PCS is raised from 80% to 100%, then the relative difference is very small.
Example if women’s skater A has 72.4 PCS and women’s skater 3 has 67.2 PCS, after adjusting to 100% they’ll have 90.5 and 84. So the gap went from 5.2 points to 6.4 points or a change of only 1.4 points.
this would change results in some very close situations with very mixed results. Example Worlds 2018 would be:
1) Kaetlyn
2) alina
3) carolina
4) Satoko
5) Wakaba
because remember PCS is based on narrative not on performance.
Also Medvedeva would have won Olympic gold I think? And world silver 2019? I have to go calculate if Kihira Sakamoto or Tursynbaeva would have won bronze.
I don’t think rebalancing PCS would do anything to the quadsters when they are getting pretty good PCS and the margins of victory with quads are larger.
That being said I’m still in favor of raising it solely because I think it’s interesting to compare the men’s and women’s scores now that the free programs are the same post-2018.
Example if women’s skater A has 72.4 PCS and women’s skater 3 has 67.2 PCS, after adjusting to 100% they’ll have 90.5 and 84. So the gap went from 5.2 points to 6.4 points or a change of only 1.4 points.
this would change results in some very close situations with very mixed results. Example Worlds 2018 would be:
1) Kaetlyn
2) alina
3) carolina
4) Satoko
5) Wakaba
because remember PCS is based on narrative not on performance.
Also Medvedeva would have won Olympic gold I think? And world silver 2019? I have to go calculate if Kihira Sakamoto or Tursynbaeva would have won bronze.
I don’t think rebalancing PCS would do anything to the quadsters when they are getting pretty good PCS and the margins of victory with quads are larger.
That being said I’m still in favor of raising it solely because I think it’s interesting to compare the men’s and women’s scores now that the free programs are the same post-2018.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2014
It's partially true and there is logic behind it (I did not mean federation business - it's just a conspiracy theory). Most of pcs criteria are subjective. There are no universal criteria of performance, interpretation and famous skating skills. It's about tastes. Well, I was twice in Bolshoi theater at opera and ballet recently. And both times I was dissatisfied. Figure skating is partially to blame. I see how the prima balerina cannot hold her position and suddenly her interpretation is marred. I hear how Carmen struggles with low notes in her famous aria and I cannot connect with her performance.
Tech is the key. You can beautifuly skate with no jumps doing various delicate arm movements and emotional grimaces. Or you can try to be with the music after jumping a quad. I just don't understand (well, in fact I do) people's complaints about Eteri's skaters' pcs. They jump ultra-C jumps and they do much more on ice than the competition. This is hard. They could do simple choreo like some of their competition but that's not what Sambo-70 school is about. Yes, Alina received good bonus when backloading was permitted. I would laugh at the views that others did not follow the suit for "artisitic and choreographic reasons". They just could not do 3-3 combos in the second half of the program. A lot of non-Russian skaters keep skating "old style" with nothing happenning for at least a minute during a FP. Then the public here keep crying about their low pcs. Come on, get on board. I was quite pleasantly surprised 2 seasons ago when I saw that Bradie started to skate "Eteri's style" with a lot of transitions. At - a - girl!
The opposite is true as well. If you go for crazy tech and you are a success you should be rewarded in both TES and pcs. But if you fall you should be punished quite strongly. I think that was the case with Trusova.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2019
- Country
-
That difference is enough to change medaling or not at events for men with PCS winning out even with really high TES. Given how subjective PCS are, leaving them where they are for women would be best. If anything, bringing it down for men to reflect the demand on lower BV but cleaner skated programs would make sense. It would provide the signalling, but avoid egregious misuse of PCS.
Tech judging is also mostly subjective. (the idea that only PCS is subjective is a conspiracy theory). Artistry is why Kwan is a beloved legend and Slutskaya an almost forgotten footnote. I was not aiming my comments at Russian skaters in particular, or the Russian fed, btw. I think NHK sorely missed the Russian women.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2014
Kwan is forgotten by everyone but some avid fans in Russia. You would find no mentioning of her in Russian sports media for many years. Slutskaya would have been forgotten as well if she had not showed up with some usually bizarre comments. No one cares about her competing against Kwan 2 decades ago. No one cares about figure skating 2 decades ago when we have the new amazing generation of skaters who bring joy and dramas every now and then.
I understand it may be different in the States. Although even there I would be surprised that everyday folks could remember anything but Tonya/Nancy case especially after the movie.
I understand it may be different in the States. Although even there I would be surprised that everyday folks could remember anything but Tonya/Nancy case especially after the movie.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2014
We could go into the semantics of words. What is "mostly"? What is "subjective"? Whatever is assessed by people is subjective. It's not like 100 m race. However, there are light years of difference between the number of rotations of jumps versus the perception of how the skater feels the music. There is a difference if a skater does a Bielmann or just a layback because her back does not allow a Bielmann spin. And one can talk as long as one likes about the lack of "artistic laybacks" vs. "ugly Bielmans". When Kolyada could do a Bielman, he did it. Now he can't. Yes, there is a big difference between tech and pcs.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2020
- Country
-
I never understand why a spin is “artistic” but a quad isn’t. A quad is pure art. But the word has been narrowly defined.
Also, if a skater can jump quads and 3A how many would refrain from doing them so they can just focus on artistry? The people that don’t jump as well are the ones focusing on lower score elements, not those that do.
Kamila is as artistic as anyone who came before her. Just happens to be a better athlete as well.
It’s simple: if spins were worth 15 points, Kamila and her teammates would be the best spinners ever. They don’t focus on spins because points wise it is foolish to do so now.
Also, if a skater can jump quads and 3A how many would refrain from doing them so they can just focus on artistry? The people that don’t jump as well are the ones focusing on lower score elements, not those that do.
Kamila is as artistic as anyone who came before her. Just happens to be a better athlete as well.
It’s simple: if spins were worth 15 points, Kamila and her teammates would be the best spinners ever. They don’t focus on spins because points wise it is foolish to do so now.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2018
- Country
-
Women’s components are factored out of 40/80 versus 50/100 for men.
We’re still a long way from it being warranted to change the factoring — the women’s field as a whole isn’t close to the men technically.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2019
- Country
-
PCS (let alone spins and step sequence) has only 2/5 artistic components, performance and music interpretation. While PCS is the second score, just like artistic one used to be, it assesses three drilled in components performing which has nothing to do with how much the skater is one with the music. SS, TR and CO are all all measure of how much natural talent for gliding and how many hours was invested in glide and edges, and how much stamina/time was invested into developing movements that are not required elements, and how well the skater can reproduce it in competition environment.
It’s not like play a music piece to them, give them 30 minutes and then they deliver an artistic interpretation of it with jumping passes and spins, and, like, PCS measures how well they self-choreographed.
Performance and Music Interpretation sort of measure magnetism, flirting with the audience and judges and maybe sort of presenting the music for the routine as naturally as possible. And, oh, yeah, how well the costume fits.
It’s not like play a music piece to them, give them 30 minutes and then they deliver an artistic interpretation of it with jumping passes and spins, and, like, PCS measures how well they self-choreographed.
Performance and Music Interpretation sort of measure magnetism, flirting with the audience and judges and maybe sort of presenting the music for the routine as naturally as possible. And, oh, yeah, how well the costume fits.
Neither a spin nor a quad is inherently artistic. It is the manner they are performed that makes it so.
You highlight a problem of the scoring system well. Since PCS was the replacement for the old presentation /artistic mark, why is there so much tech emphasis in it? This is wrong. While this rewards the hard working overachievers, it is unfair to the more naturally talented and gifted women. Skating isn't about just what your skate is doing, but what your whole body looks like while doing it. I for one watch sports mostly to see rare talent, but I acknowledge many prefer the hard working less gifted. I guess it comes down to what people self identify with I guess. Lol
There is also much subjectivity as to whether a jump is fully rotated or not, whether an edge is proper or not, whether a jump is high or far, or an element is difficult or original, even if a skater is fast. So it seems there really isn't much difference in the subjectivity levels between tech and artistry after all. Since PCS is being ever more dominated by tech, I will just use the term artistry for what PCS is supposed to mean.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2014
Ok, let's agree to disagree. Even a URed quad is a quad - it looks different in real time than a fully rotated triple jump. When a quad has to be downgraded, it looks like a different jump not like a quad. One does not have to be a professional to see the difference even without slow-mo. The same goes with spins. There are Yulia's spins and there are (I won't put names to not offend particular fans) spins.
Yes, there is some politics and subjectivity in GOE. Nathan Chen is a phenomenal jumper. But GOE that he receives for his jump and non-jump elements sometimes is very surprising. But when speaking in relative terms I can't say that he does not deserve to be the first when he is on. Because Yuzuru aside he is just better than the rest. The same is true with top Russian ladies. They are just better and it has nothing to do with politics or fed support or human subjectivity.
Yes, there is some politics and subjectivity in GOE. Nathan Chen is a phenomenal jumper. But GOE that he receives for his jump and non-jump elements sometimes is very surprising. But when speaking in relative terms I can't say that he does not deserve to be the first when he is on. Because Yuzuru aside he is just better than the rest. The same is true with top Russian ladies. They are just better and it has nothing to do with politics or fed support or human subjectivity.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2019
- Country
-
Because it is not a replacement for the artistic score. It is a way to transparently assess the components of the skater’s routine that are left out by the fixed elements that every skater must perform in the routine. It doubles down on the artistic score, by essentially giving it a max of 20 instead of 10. All the other elements and components assess the routine, preparedness to present it and the deviation from the perfect skate of that routine.
20 points is what is given to the artistic impact of the routine on the jury. And only on the jury. Not an individual fan.
In the end of the day, figure skating is about developing and presenting a routine in the best possible way, not about creative expression. That’s why they have galas and show skating. Without strict adherence to it, figure skating stops being a sport and becomes a smallish popularity contest in the back lanes of social media with a dollop of national sentiment on top.
Remaining a sport and having that lion’s share of the Winter Olympics pie is the only way figure skating continues. Scoring system must satisfy the requirements of a fair competition. They don’t put Olympic medals on the biathlon team with the loveliest smiles and tightest pants and prefered flag pattern. Neither they should do it in figure skating.
Last edited:
Wrong! 100%.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2019
- Country
-
Agree to disagree.
It looks that way my friend. Thats skating. Lol
Similar threads
