Tuktamysheva: The Views of Frank Carroll

[prettykeys]

What an interesting read this thread has been. So far I have learned that Frank is a bitter old man who should keep his mouth shut, fans that appreciated skating before COP and criticize the current system should keep quiet about their dislike of COP, skating has declined in the US because of Dick Button and Scott Hamilton, Michelle's Tosca was gross so therefore not COP worthy. Carry on......

Sniffle, sniffle...

It doesn't surprise me that MK's Tosca has one choreography credit and I know how I react to most of his other work. Some others may think Tosca is super (and it's your every right), but not I (and that's my right). Carry on.................................

It was great! I also liked both Czisny's and Kostner's short programs at Skate America. I still think that the judging system is a hindrance to these three and to other ladies. I agree with Frank Carroll about that.

What is frustrating about conversations like this is the following. Figure skating as a spectator sport is in big trouble in the United States. The solution? According to CoP enthusiasts, the solution is to tell people to read more ISU protocols.

Well, I agree that the IJS a "hindrance" in that is makes things difficult, but I do know that Kostner has had some fantastic programs choreographed by Kurt Browning in her past. If it's a hindrance to them, it is probably a hindrance to many other skaters (male or female) but I don't think it's the iron wall that it is presented as by some fans. There may be some CoP enthusiasts who do just tell you to learn the ISU protocols, but there are plenty of CoP enthusiasts who don't and tell you why the judging needs to be fixed, or who propose improvements to a system they think either 1) does some things well, and b) has the potential to do even better. BoP and gkelly's posts pertaining to that are beyond me, unfortunately.

Either way, CoP-enthusiast newbs like me question why Alissa Czisny for example, was given better PCS in the SS department at SA over Carolina Kostner in the LP which looks to be more a fault of the judging than the system. Kinda 6.0-like, if you ask me. One of your posts in the thread discussing it included the confused question of "How can CoP enthusiasts disagree with CoP competition results?" -- Because CoP fans know it isn't perfectly structured, nor perfectly applied by judges every single time. Just like 6.0 enthusiasts didn't agree with every single 6.0 result.

Speaking of PCS. Another poster already mentioned it but I don't know what Frank Carroll is complaining about. Tuktamysheva received PCS averages of (inclusively) between 6.00-7.00. I don't think she was overscored, but maybe the others were relatively underscored, if that's what some of you mean. (e.g. I'm not a master at studying the protocols and judging Transitions for myself, but Akiko Suzuki received a 4.50 from one judge.)

Yagudin was MANY great things, but was he musical really? I mean he was like Buttle or Daisuke? I didnt seem him this way before and I dont think I ve missed a program of his before and after he retired.

Well, that's too bad but you wouldn't be the first Plushenko fan who was a Yagudin detractor (which I find interesting.) I liked both, but Yagudin a little more. He was a very passionate, powerful performer at his best. I definitely agree with Daisuke Takahashi as one who has had some marvelously musical CoP programs.

 

[seniorita]

Oh no, this is not right. I m sorry prettykeys but I ve never belittled Yagudin is my whole skatefan career, and my post was not as that. I didnt mean he was not musical as negative thing but I thought he was another type of skater, and not that , obviously having been a Plushenko fan I dont mind skaters being not so ultra musical but having strengths elsewhere, or at least I find music where the majority doesnt but I would just think Yags had another kind of presentation and charisma, not necessarily that kind of Daisuke or Lambiel and their interpretation of music. In my view he had more similarities to Evgeni rather than to someone like Buttle, or at least his programs although he was more subtle. And I was /am still a huge fan.

He was a very passionate, powerful performer at his best.

yes more or less that was my point. I never thought to call him a musical skater, the way we call them on the board at least, thats all.

 

[bekalc]

I personally feel the problem with the system is there are two many parts and nothing of the whole. I know PCS department supposedly judges the whole but it doesn't. IMO, you can't judge a technical performance just by the amount of points the skater got for each element, ESPECIALLY when GOE factors in. You kind of have to also look at the program as a whole. Especially since IJS has some rules which makes sometimes minorish errors into more punishment than major more glaring errors.

Here's an example I think GPF 2007 I believe, Daisuke did a quad, two beautiful triple axels. He tripled his other quad attempt which means he was unable to do a 3/3. (That cost him points not only for the quad but the 3/3 too). In contrast Lambiel, went out had some bad stumbles on his one triple axel quads, and pretty much only had a 3/3. Lambiel won and was close to Daisuke on the tech mark.

(Another good example was in the short where Lambiel land a clean quad/3 and a triple axel and lost to Daisuke with his (yes great artistic short) and much better quality combination but still only a 3/3).

I think in both cases if the judges looked at what both skaters did technically on a whole. Daisuke would have been given a significant advantage offer Lambiel in the long, and Lambiel an advantage over Daisuke in the short. Both were so wonderful artistically that between the two of them (really should come down to the jumps).

I also think in general well balanced jump content needs start being rewarded.

I also think its concerning that PCS are so caught up on reputation. Don't get me wrong I absolutely think its natural that reputation factors into PCS and I don't think its completely unfair, you earn your reputation. But when Mao Asada skates lights out in the long program at Worlds, and Kim skates with quite a few mistakes and lethargically. Shouldn't that be reflected in the PCS marks? At the very least Asada should have significantly taken the P/E mark, which she didn't. Whats the point of watching if Kim is guaranteed a huge lead on PCS over Asada, no matter how well Asada and her skate? Oh I know Asada "won" but not that long program, and pretty much because Kim screwed up two programs.

 

[prettykeys]

Oh no, this is not right. I m sorry prettykeys but I ve never belittled Yagudin is my whole skatefan career, and my post was not as that. I didnt mean he was not musical as negative thing but I thought he was another type of skater, and not that , obviously having been a Plushenko fan I dont mind skaters being not so ultra musical but having strengths elsewhere, or at least I find music where the majority doesnt but I would just think Yags had another kind of presentation and charisma, not necessarily that kind of Daisuke or Lambiel and their interpretation of music. In my view he had more similarities to Evgeni rather than to someone like Buttle, or at least his programs although he was more subtle. And I was /am still a huge fan.

yes more or less that was my point. I never thought to call him a musical skater, the way we call them on the boar at least, thats all.

OHH, okay. I thought by "never missed" you meant never regretted not seeing again...haha.

 

[seniorita]

No I meant I ve seen them all!!

 

[Dragonlady]

I personally feel the problem with the system is there are two many parts and nothing of the whole. I know PCS department supposedly judges the whole but it doesn't. IMO, you can't judge a technical performance just by the amount of points the skater got for each element, ESPECIALLY when GOE factors in. You kind of have to also look at the program as a whole. Especially since IJS has some rules which makes sometimes minorish errors into more punish than what should be more errors.

Ding, ding, din, we have a winner. Sometimes the sum of the parts does not equal the value of the whole and that is especially true under this system. Added to which skaters get a big PCS bump when they land big jumps or throws in pairs regardless of how weak the rest of their skills may be, or how poorly choreographed and performed their program may be. The kindest thing you can say in this regard is that all of the skaters are playing under the same rules, and in terms of honesty and fairness, this system is a whole lot better than the one it replaced but that's damning it with faint praise.

Getting back to Frank's criticism of ET, she was marked down in PCS and finished behind both Suzuki and Wagner in her PCS score, which I think is the correct result for now. I certainly would have had ET ahead of Leonova, Flatt and Nagasu and the Canadians in terms of her performance which was quite lovely. She paid attention to the music and worked it but her choreography let her down because of the lack of ice-coverage.

 

[Mao88]

Here is the Philip Hersh's new article which also contains his opinion on Tuktamysheva's performance at Skate Canada:-

Philip Hersh article

 

[blue dog]

Ding, ding, din, we have a winner. Sometimes the sum of the parts does not equal the value of the whole and that is especially true under this system. Added to which skaters get a big PCS bump when they land big jumps or throws in pairs regardless of how weak the rest of their skills may be, or how poorly choreographed and performed their program may be. The kindest thing you can say in this regard is that all of the skaters are playing under the same rules, and in terms of honesty and fairness, this system is a whole lot better than the one it replaced but that's damning it with faint praise.

Getting back to Frank's criticism of ET, she was marked down in PCS and finished behind both Suzuki and Wagner in her PCS score, which I think is the correct result for now. I certainly would have had ET ahead of Leonova, Flatt and Nagasu and the Canadians in terms of her performance which was quite lovely. She paid attention to the music and worked it but her choreography let her down because of the lack of ice-coverage.

Perhaps a solution to this would be to have MORE judges--and have separate judges judging PCS. Instead of being at ice level, judges should also be throughout the arena.

 

[Spun Silver]

Here is the Philip Hersh's new article which also contains his opinion on Tuktamysheva's performance at Skate Canada:-

Philip Hersh article

Thanks for posting. A nice summary.

Mirai Nagasu? Mirai? Nagasu. Mirai? Nagasu?

LOL. I'm glad to see he is coming around to ice dance, due to D/W and V/M. And glad he likes Caydee & John's potential. As well as (back on topic) Queen Tu(k)t.

 

[Dragonlady]

Perhaps a solution to this would be to have MORE judges--and have separate judges judging PCS. Instead of being at ice level, judges should also be throughout the arena.

They tried that at Nebelhorn one year and I gather they didn't like the results. Added to which it's very expensive to have two panels of judges.

I also want to add that whatever it's problems and/or limitations, CoP is producing much better programs on average, up and down the ranks than we ever saw under 6.0 in the post-figures era. Certainly there are exceptions to that broad statement, but for all of the talk about Winter, how many other programs are we discussing as being great from that Men's competition? I can't think of a single one that impressed me as being creative or interesting.

When figures were dropped, old-time skating fans had warned that skating skills would decline and we’d be left with a bunch of young kids who could jump and not much else. Those of us who couldn’t wait to see the end of figures pooh-poohed this notion thinking it would never happen but by 2002, here we were, a little more than 12 years later, and with few exceptions, the old-timers were right. It had happened. Skaters stroked weakly from jump to jump. Spins were painful to watch and skaters outside of the top flight would often struggle to meet the minimum rotations required for the SP.

If you only every watched the handful of skaters who made the TV broadcast, you may not have seen it, but those of us who attend live events and sit through the full roster of skaters were appalled, and bored to death. At least under CoP, there is something to hold your attention if the skater can't jump. And the quality of the skills show by the full field has never been better. Best of all there are multiple programs in an event which are interesting and/or entertaining, even if the choreography couldn't reasonably be called great art.

 

[gkelly]

They tried that at Nebelhorn one year and I gather they didn't like the results.

One thing I heard was that the judges who were judging only GOEs were very bored since they had nothing to do between elements.

So if a larger, more divided panel were to be tried again, maybe have one set of judges looking only at GOEs and Skating Skills and Transitions and the other set looking at the more presentation-oriented components.

That would also cut down on evaluation of the interpretation, etc., being so heavily influenced by the evaluation of skating skills.

Added to which it's very expensive to have two panels of judges.

But cost will always be a consideration.

I also want to add that whatever it's problems and/or limitations, CoP is producing much better programs on average, up and down the ranks than we ever saw under 6.0 in the post-figures era. Certainly there are exceptions to that broad statement, but for all of the talk about Winter, how many other programs are we discussing as being great from that Men's competition? I can't think of a single one that impressed me as being creative or interesting.

I can think of quite a few men's programs that impressed me as creative or interesting in the era between the end of figures and the end of 6.0. But from 2002 Olympics specifically? . . . nope, can't think of any offhand.

 

[bekalc]

They tried that at Nebelhorn one year and I gather they didn't like the results. Added to which it's very expensive to have two panels of judges.

I also want to add that whatever it's problems and/or limitations, CoP is producing much better programs on average, up and down the ranks than we ever saw under 6.0 in the post-figures era. Certainly there are exceptions to that broad statement, but for all of the talk about Winter, how many other programs are we discussing as being great from that Men's competition? I can't think of a single one that impressed me as being creative or interesting.

When figures were dropped, old-time skating fans had warned that skating skills would decline and we’d be left with a bunch of young kids who could jump and not much else. Those of us who couldn’t wait to see the end of figures pooh-poohed this notion thinking it would never happen but by 2002, here we were, a little more than 12 years later, and with few exceptions, the old-timers were right. It had happened. Skaters stroked weakly from jump to jump. Spins were painful to watch and skaters outside of the top flight would often struggle to meet the minimum rotations required for the SP.

If you only every watched the handful of skaters who made the TV broadcast, you may not have seen it, but those of us who attend live events and sit through the full roster of skaters were appalled, and bored to death. At least under CoP, there is something to hold your attention if the skater can't jump. And the quality of the skills show by the full field has never been better. Best of all there are multiple programs in an event which are interesting and/or entertaining, even if the choreography couldn't reasonably be called great art.

Well Dragon Lady. I remember being impressed by Plushenko's short watching the 2002 Olympics, even with the fall. Oh I wouldn't call the program high art. But I remember even from my tv screen it looked like King Plushenko was just flying accross the ice and all of the other elements were performed with attack (everyone says Plushenko was a terrible spinner but I don't think for 6.0 era he was) No Lambiel, but i wouldn't say terrible). I remember thinking man this kid is a good skater. And I was a Yagudin fan.

I agree though that looking at 6.0 programs I am struck by how little there is in between the jumps. :lol: And the footwork etc. I'm glad footwork is now rewarded although sometimes I think less could be a little more. I also think bad positions on spins...

 

[Bluebonnet]

Here is the Philip Hersh's new article which also contains his opinion on Tuktamysheva's performance at Skate Canada:-

Philip Hersh article

Ah, how I love Hersh who is one of the few writes indepth articles about figure skating! However, I feel that ISU is desperately in need of educating people on their scoring system! Hersh's knowledge on IJS is still very limited and remained on the surface. Here is the definition for Skating Skills from ISU summary of the IJS:

Skating Skills, which is the overall quality of the skating ability (e.g. balance, flow, multi directional skating, power)

I remember there were several threads discussed intensively on the subject on this board a couple of years ago. And I've learned a lot from some CoP experts here. In fact I have asked the exact same quastion about the scoring on Skating Skills. I think the answer was that jumps are included in TES with base values and GOEs and fall deductions, not in SS. So falls on jumps affect little on SS.

 

[Tonichelle]

I think CoP averages about the same "memorable" performances as pre-CoP era did... not all of the programs before the new rules were stuff to write home about.

 

[prettykeys]

Ah, how I love Hersh who is one of the few writes indepth articles about figure skating! However, I feel that ISU is desperately in need of educating people on their scoring system! Hersh's knowledge on IJS is still very limited and remained on the surface. Here is the definition for Skating Skills from ISU summary of the IJS:
...
I remember there were several threads discussed intensively on the subject on this board a couple of years ago. And I've learned a lot from some CoP experts here. In fact I have asked the exact same quastion about the scoring on Skating Skills. I think the answer was that jumps are included in TES with base values and GOEs and fall deductions, not in SS. So falls on jumps affect little on SS.

Indeed. The rest of the article is a mishmash of old forum chatter, as usual...heh.

 

[blue dog]

I'm glad footwork is now rewarded although sometimes I think less could be a little more. I also think bad positions on spins...

During post-figures 6.0, skaters were encouraged to spread out their footwork and spiral sequences during the LP as choreographic elements, rather than singular elements within the program. You might see something like: twizzle/twizzle/LFO 3 into triple salchow... rather than a full-on footwork sequence. Of course, in the short, they were required to demonstrate each as a single element. This poor woman, who skated during the figures era, was criticized for having a very easy step sequence:

http://youtu.be/XsGQPOaq8bE Poor woman tripped on a bracket/choctaw!

14 years later, another woman was given the same criticism:

http://youtu.be/Vu7cYhQa774

 

[Blades of Passion]

You emphasize choreography and performance as the most important aspects of competitive skating. The judging system does not.

60% of the PCS are based upon Performance, Choreography, Interpretation. This past season, the rules for scoring step sequences were changed to specifically include bullet points that punish step sequences which don't go with the music and reward step sequences which "reflect the character and concept of the program."

The system does emphasize it, the judges simply aren't scoring properly.

I think CoP averages about the same "memorable" performances as pre-CoP era did... not all of the programs before the new rules were stuff to write home about.

Ultimately it's not about trying to match pre-CoP, or about saying "A, B, C are better now, even if X, Y, Z are worse", or about being satisfied if CoP has reached a point where we can say "Overall, it's better now than it was back then." The real goal should be to improve the sport as much as possible, taking everything we've learned from the past into consideration and combining it all together to usher in an era of competitive ice skating that is the best ever in all regards.

 

[Dragonlady]

60% of the PCS are based upon Performance, Choreography, Interpretation. This past season, the rules for scoring step sequences were changed to specifically include bullet points that punish step sequences which don't go with the music and reward step sequences which "reflect the character and concept of the program."

The system does emphasize it, the judges simply aren't scoring properly.

I checked the ISU Components explanation and the current scoring criteria for step sequences on the ISU Website. There is no mention of the changes you are citing. This is the only scoring criteria for step sequences in the Rule Book:

Number of features for Levels: 2 for Level 2, 3 for Level 3, 4 for Level 4
Step
Sequences:
1) Simple variety (Level 2), variety (Level 3), complexity (Level 4) of turns and steps
throughout (compulsory)
2) Rotations (turns, steps) in either direction (left and right) with full body rotation
covering at least 1/3 of the pattern in total for each rotational direction
3) Use of upper body movements
4) At least half a pattern on one foot only
5) Combination of difficult turns (rockers, counters, brackets, twizzles) quickly executed in
both directions (at least twice within the sequence)

 

[Blades of Passion]

You may want to read more carefully and thoroughly, as you are wrong yet again.

 

[Dragonlady]

You may want to read more carefully and thoroughly, as you are wrong yet again.

I see nothing in the rules book which confirms what you're saying.

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-202745-219968-166758-0-file,00.pdf

Other than the requirements for levels as previously posted, under the grading of GOE, it says:

In marking the GOE the following must be considered:
a) jumps: the height, length, technique and the clean starting and landing of the required jumps, in the case of pairs, credit must be given to the jump of each partner according to its merit;
b) jump combination/sequence: the perfect execution of the jumps in relation to their difficulty, each jump must be given credit according to its merit;
c) lifts/twist lifts: the speed, the height, the continuous rotation, smoothness of the take-off and landing, good coverage of the ice surface, the position of the Lady in the air;
d) throw jumps: the height, the distance, the take-off and clean landing of the Lady, the position of the Lady in the air;
e) death spirals: a smooth entry and exit, the even descent into the spiral by the Lady, the maintenance of the pivot position by the Man and the position of the Lady's body and head should be close to the ice surface during the execution of the actual death spiral;
f) spins: quality of the required positions, strong and well controlled rotation, number of revolutions in the required position(s), speed of rotation, centering of the spin. In flying spins the height of the jump and the position in the air and landing;
g) step and spiral step sequences: the swing, carriage and smooth flow of the movement in conformity with the character and the rhythm of the music.