Quantifying titles

[Old Cat Lady]

If one were to evaluate a career statistically, how would you value each international title?

I think it's pretty universally accepted that the Olympics are the pinnacle of the sport. I would personally take Olympic gold over 2 world titles and skaters regularly prioritize Olympics at the expense of worlds. How about 3 world titles?

When GPF first came out, I remember thinking that it was kind of hokey, but judging by how often it gets mentioned in credentials I'm thinking it's actually a pretty big deal these days and rated above 4 continents/Europeans. How many GPF's equals a world championship?

So then how would you rate the smaller grand prix competitions, Europeans, and 4 continents?

What about bronze and silver medals? Unfortunately I can't find the Oly silver vs. world gold thread - apparently I suck at internet searches



and yes, I realize the ISU has a points system but that is geared for functional year to year purposes rather than a historical valuation and I know that there's more to a skater than titles. Having a purely cold, statistical view of achievement is just another dimension to look at

 

[russianfan]

If one were to evaluate a career statistically, how would you value each international title?

I can tell you how. If your fave has won Olympics - Olympics is most important competition ever. If your fave has won Worlds - Worlds is the most important competition ever.
This is how it works.

I think O4G will confirm

 

[Old Cat Lady]

A very rough evaluation - I didn't put a lot of thought into this so don't take it too seriously. I just want to provide a general model

Olympic gold - 1000 points
Olympic silver - 500 points
Olympic bronze - 300 points

World gold - 500 points
World silver - 300 points
World bronze - 200 points

GPF gold - 200 points
GPF silver - 100 points
GPF bronze -50 points

European/4 continents gold - 100 points
silver - 50 points
bronze - 25 points

Grand prix series Gold - 50 points
silver - 25 points
bronze 15 points

 

[mau]

I think there’s nothing compared to an Olympic gold medal. Look at Sarah Hughes, she didn’t win anything besides an Olympic title but it doesn’t matter to the casual viewers or media, she’s still an Olympic champion and her name will be there in history books (and Wikipedia).

However, you don’t need an OGM to be a legend. If I could be Michelle Kwan or Sarah Hughes, I’d choose Kwan.

 

[yume]

A very rough evaluation - I didn't put a lot of thought into this so don't take it too seriously. I just want to provide a general model

Olympic gold - 1000 points
Olympic silver - 500 points
Olympic bronze - 300 points

World gold - 500 points
World silver - 300 points
World bronze - 200 points

GPF gold - 200 points
GPF silver - 100 points
GPF bronze -50 points

European/4 continents gold - 100 points
silver - 50 points
bronze - 25 points

Grand prix series Gold - 50 points
silver - 25 points
bronze 15 points

Personally i don't think that numbers and medals say who has the most valuable career.
My fave is Mao and she's not an olympic champion , but she's my champion. Yuna Kim is one of my faves too, after Mao.
If i have to score their achievments, it would be 3850 points for Mao, only for gold medals + olympic medal(1 OSM + 3 worlds gold+ 4 GPF+ 3 four continents+ 15 GP)
3550 for Kim, only gold medals + olympic medals too (1 OGM+ 1 OSM + 2 worlds gold+ 3 GPF+ 1 four continents+ 7 GP)
Though not sure about GPs.

 

[Old Cat Lady]

Personally i don't think that numbers and medals say who has the most valuable career.
My fave is Mao and she's not an olympic champion , but she's my champion. Yuna Kim is one of my faves too, after Mao.

The idea is to remove sentimental bias. So that's why I'm asking to create the system. In skating, most people judge based on many subjective valuations. I think it would be interesting to create a cold, objective statistical view as well. Of course, there are other factors like depth of talent that aren't factored in, but you can't cover everything.

 

[yume]

Yuzuru scores 4000 for gold medals. What hold his score back is 4CC and GPs (2 OGM + 2 worlds + 4 GPF + 0 4CC + 4 GPs)
Javier scores 2400 for gold medals + olympic medals. What hold his score back is GPF and olympic medals (1 OBM +
2 worlds+ 0 GPF + 6 euros + 8 GPs)

 

[echeveria]

I may be in the minority here, but I don't think that Olympic medals should be so much higher in point value than other medals, except for the grand prix series (excluding GPF). The only thing that really makes an Olympic medal more valuable is that there are more people watching, but it's still the same competitors, so maybe difference shouldn't be quite so big. Actually, I think there shouldn't really be a difference between Olys and Worlds at all, even though this year a lot of skaters opted out from Worlds. Also, the point difference between medals could smaller, here I just took off 25% from each one, because the difference between the medalists isn't usually huge.

Maybe:
Oly gold 1000
Oly silver 750
Oly bronze 500

Worlds gold 900
Worlds silver 675
Worlds bronze 450

GPF 300
GPF 225
GPF 150

Euros/4CC 200
Euros/4CC 150
Euros/4CC 100

GP 100
GP 75
GP 50

 

[yume]

Yes maybe there is too much gap between worlds and olympics. But the most accurate is
euros/4CC weight. They shouldn't worth more than GPF, cause:
1. Not the same field.
2. Participation. Too much withdraws at 4CC. (for example Hanyu took part to 4CC only 3 times while Fernandez took part to euros during his entire career so 12 times i think.)

 

[Mussique]

Olys should be worth more because the very athletes value it more. They work towards Olympics, they skip competitions due to Olympics, and they definitely feel more pressure during the Olympics.
I'm curious if the Team Event or individual performance during events (for example, gold small medal in Olympics) should be taken into account here, even as a small bonus.

 

[mrrice]

I think it depends. When Maria Butyrskaya won Worlds in 1999, she was the first Russian Woman ever to do so. IMO, she and Irina were the catalysts of the wave of Lady Skaters from Russia. Before Maria, I think that most Russian Women saw their road to glory through Pairs. So, to me, her World Title means everything.....

 

[noskates]

I am of the mind that a great career doesn't necessarily have to include a bunch of medals - or even an OGM. There are some fantastic skaters out there who never won an OGM and some who never won a World title. Obviously the OGM is the most important because there are 4 years between opportunities. Quite frankly, IMO, a World title in an Olympic year when several of the top contenders aren't there doesn't mean as much.

But then why would you do this anyway?

 

[Ziotic]

Oly gold 1000
Oly silver 750
Oly bronze 500

Worlds gold 950
Worlds silver 700
Worlds bronze 450

GPF 700
GPF 300
GPF 150

Euros/4CC 500
Euros/4CC 250
Euros/4CC 100

GP 100
GP 75
GP 50

I don't think an Olympic gold is worth THAT much more than a World's title. That being said, I do think the majority of people here have undervalued GPF.

It's the one competition where you get in based solely on your merit and not on how loved you are by your federation. Anna. P is someone who comes to mind. She was placed behind Sotskova at Nationals and luckily Alina was too young for worlds last year, but had she not been Anna wouldn't have made it to Euro's or Worlds (although her showing at worlds was unfortunate, I don't think it was a reflection of her overall quality).

 

[mrrice]

Well, it really depends. Look at Sarah Hughes and Adelina Sotnikova. IMO, Sarah and Adelina were Blips on the Radar compared to Michelle Kwan and Irina or Evgenia. Even though they both have OGM's.

 

[chopinskate]

Oly podium brings most visibility, to viewers in real-time, and to non-viewers in the coming few weeks. Most visibility in the skaters' countries, too.

For this reason alone, I would just tie the rest on a second-place. Only regular fans watch those.

 

[ladyjane]

Ahem...and how does the fabulous Misha Ge get evaluated in this system? Very low, as he only got one GP bronze medal. But as a skater, he is superb, and also well known - even among casual viewers. Oh, I'll agree on a points system to count the worth of medals. But that's just it. I don't think it's sentimental bias to also include other aspects than only a medal count. However important the medals are. Quantifying these less measurable aspects, is something else. Why do it? I'm with noskates on this one.

Not on the other point regarding the world title...another ahem for me. S/M? Who went for the Olympic Gold but, according to the judges, skated better yet at Worlds? And to me, Worlds after Olympics is always a treat, because of the surprises (and weren't there a lot of those this year?). At what other moment had we been able to enjoy Vasiljevs at his best or the bright new young Japanese star? Or Loena Hendrickx who absolutely shined?

As for Europeans and 4CC...those titles are worth a lot to the skaters. Perhaps 4CC is a bit downgraded in an Olympic year (but not in the other three years of an Olympic quad), but still many Olympic contenders were present there. But this does not apply to Euro's which for many is the last 'practice' opportunity before the Olympics. Many Euro champions in an Olympic year, medalled later on at those Olympics.

 

[lesnar001]

I think there’s nothing compared to an Olympic gold medal. Look at Sarah Hughes, she didn’t win anything besides an Olympic title but it doesn’t matter to the casual viewers or media, she’s still an Olympic champion and her name will be there in history books (and Wikipedia).

However, you don’t need an OGM to be a legend. If I could be Michelle Kwan or Sarah Hughes, I’d choose Kwan.

I know Sarah didn't win any other big titles but she still accomplished quite a bit in her fairly short career

7th at Worlds in 1999 at age 13
5th at Worlds in 2000 at age 14
Bronze at Worlds in 2001 at age 15
2 time Bronze and 2 time Silver medalist at US Nationals

AND this was done in Michelle's era of domination (and against other top quality skaters such as Sasha Cohen, Angela Nikodinov, Irina Slutskaya, and Maria B)

Not saying she is a "legend" but too many times people act like she was a total "fluke" and use her for these types of comparisons.

 

[Old Cat Lady]

I would just tie the rest on a second-place.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by this. Have all medals in other competitions be worth the same as each other but less than any Olympic medal?

While I agree that being Olympic Champion isn't necessarily a reflection of being a better athlete than a world champion, it is by far the most prized title in the sport so I think the point value should at least somewhat reflect how an athlete feels about it. My logic was that most, if not all, skaters would rather have 1 Olympic gold than 2 world titles. I think a lot would even trade 3 world golds and a few other titles for 1 Olympic gold so I figured it was worth at least double the points of a world title. Because of the prestige of the title, it is also the competition where skaters are under the most pressure so winning the Olympics shows more mental fortitude than winning worlds and therefore it does deserve at leas some boost in point value. For example, 1 skater is clean on around 40% of his programs outside of the Olympics, which is actually pretty normal for the current state of the men's field. But at the Olympics, he is 0/9. Shows how much more difficult it is to skate in the Olympic spotlight, even in the less pressure team event.

In the Oly silver vs. World gold thread, there were a lot of responses either way so I just made worlds worth the same as and Olympic silver. Though I understand the viewpoint that any Oly medal is worth more than a world gold as well as the people who believe the world gold is worth more.

The reason I didn't include the team is because I feel like it's a whole different event and often skaters who have little to no impact on the final score still get medals. It's also not fair since not everyone can participate.

I agree that 4 Continents is a weaker competition than Europeans but I feel like awarding 4 Continents less is penalizing skaters for not being from Europe. I think it's only fair to either give them equal points or don't include either of them at all.

The same logic as above was applied all the way down. In my mind, and correct me if I'm wrong, Olympics>Worlds>GPF>Europeans/4 Continents>Grand Prix series. I was thinking GPF should be worth more because, in an indirect way (through qualifying through the series), skaters are competing against a full field, most or all the top skaters are skating directly against each other, and people are less likely to withdraw from GPF than Europeans/4 Continents.

When thinking about point valuations, I was thinking the same logic as worlds vs. Olympics. Which title would I want more? Would I be angrier at losing 1 world championship or 2 GPF titles? Personally, I wouldn't trade any amount of Europeans, GPF, GPF series medals for an Olympic title and it would take a lot of lesser titles for me to trade a world gold but I figure these titles need to be given some value.

 

[mau]

I know Sarah didn't win any other big titles but she still accomplished quite a bit in her fairly short career

7th at Worlds in 1999 at age 13
5th at Worlds in 2000 at age 14
Bronze at Worlds in 2001 at age 15
2 time Bronze and 2 time Silver medalist at US Nationals

AND this was done in Michelle's era of domination (and against other top quality skaters such as Sasha Cohen, Angela Nikodinov, Irina Slutskaya, and Maria B)

Not saying she is a "legend" but too many times people act like she was a total "fluke" and use her for these types of comparisons.

I also don’t agree when some people say Sarah is an “accidental” winner, she just delivered when it mattered, the others didn’t. She was a prodigy and I love her Olympic winner FS, if she had a longer career, maybe she would be a contender for the legend status.

 

[Old Cat Lady]

Ahem...and how does the fabulous Misha Ge get evaluated in this system?

With our undying adoration This is meant to evaluate purely on a competitive achievement aspect. Artistic achievement or any other more subjective achievement is a whole separate thing.

Why do it? I'm with noskates on this one.

Why do anything? We're hanging out on a FS message board - nothing we're doing here is all that worth doing Just another angle to look at things - not going to change anyone's mind on anything just like every other argument on here.

As for Europeans and 4CC...those titles are worth a lot to the skaters. Perhaps 4CC is a bit downgraded in an Olympic year (but not in the other three years of an Olympic quad), but still many Olympic contenders were present there. But this does not apply to Euro's which for many is the last 'practice' opportunity before the Olympics. Many Euro champions in an Olympic year, medalled later on at those Olympics.

I'm sure all the titles are meaningful to the skaters. The ranking is more just a matter of "what would you rather have". I'm surprised that you consider Euros less prestigious than 4CC. I never really thought of Euros as a practice before but I can see it. I figured people would be more sentimental about Euros because of the tradition.