Unfortunately the judging is a complete mess. The ISU must take some serious actions.
Last edited:
Judging controversy
- Thread starter gio
- Start date
Unfortunately the judging is a complete mess. The ISU must take some serious actions.
Ah! I remember Angelo, a very artistic skater, but no jumps! Maybe that's why!
I'm glad that you remember him!
You are right Rhumba, he was very artistic. At Eurosport he always analyzes the artistic performance of the skaters.
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2006
IMO the only time jumps should ever interfere or have any basis in the PCS is when the skater falls on a jump b/c it distracts from the program. TES and PCS should be 2 totally different score marks based on 2 totally different elemental parts. I think it's highly possible for certain skaters to get high or low PCS and low TES or vice versa. I rarely see issue w/ TES problems. Perhaps some skaters shouldn't get GOE marks they do or shouldn't have certain jumps counted (Evan's 3A, Kimmie's triples) but for me the biggest issue is w/ PCS not being scored appropriately.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2006
I'm glad that you remember him!
You are right Rhumba, he was very artistic. At Eurosport he always analyzes the artistic performance of the skaters.
LOL! He's human. :agree:
He had a verrrry interesting LP to a Clockwork Orange, the controversial British film. Impressive and different, not the norm.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
What CoP does is make the marking transparent, something that was impossible under the 6.0/OBO system, except when judges clearly didn't take off the mandatory deductions in the SP.And Cop was supposed to PREVENT all this.
Can we officially declare Joannie Rochette to be the deserved 4CC Silver Medalist? I think there's a consesus on this board about that.
However, there's no consensus over whether Buttle should have won instead of Lysacek. Would higher PCS have helped Buttle clinch the gold? Not sure.
Yeah, it could have made a difference in the overall outcome, because Buttle had a significant lead over Lysacek coming out of the short program, so it ends up not just being about who won the long. Lysacek would have won the LP either way.
IMO, the CoP makes the marking much less transparent than under the 6.0 system because the judges are anonymous.
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2007
The only thing less transparent under the CoP than the 6.0 is who gave which marks to whom. Other than that everything is very obvious and clear. When someone is over marked or undermarked, EVERYONE knows. (unless of course opinions clash
) If the ISU could just do away with anonomous judges this system would be much improved. And the judges need a crash course in how to mark the PC.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2005
I do not know what is going on with the judges, but it is obvious when it comes to PCs each one judge to their on drum. Has any one seen took a close look at these protocols. Some of the differences are up to 1.75. I was expecting something closer to .75
Buttle
Program Components
Skating Skills
7.75 7.50 7.25 7.50 8.25 7.00 7.50 7.50 7.25 7.50 7.50 7.75
Transition / Linking Footwork
7.50 6.75 7.25 7.75 8.00 6.75 7.00 7.25 7.00 7.00 7.75 7.25
Performance / Execution
7.50 7.00 7.25 7.00 8.50 6.75 7.25 7.50 7.00 8.00 7.25 7.50
Choreography / Composition
7.50 7.25 7.50 8.25 8.50 6.75 7.25 7.50 7.25 7.50 8.00 7.75
Interpretation
7.50 7.25 7.25 8.00 8.75 7.00 7.25 7.75 7.25 7.75 8.00 7.50
7.50
7.29
7.29
7.57
7.50
71.94
Judges Total Program Component Score (factored) 74.30
Deductions: 0.00
x Credit for highlight distribution, jump element multiplied by 1.1
Buttle
Program Components
Skating Skills
7.75 7.50 7.25 7.50 8.25 7.00 7.50 7.50 7.25 7.50 7.50 7.75
Transition / Linking Footwork
7.50 6.75 7.25 7.75 8.00 6.75 7.00 7.25 7.00 7.00 7.75 7.25
Performance / Execution
7.50 7.00 7.25 7.00 8.50 6.75 7.25 7.50 7.00 8.00 7.25 7.50
Choreography / Composition
7.50 7.25 7.50 8.25 8.50 6.75 7.25 7.50 7.25 7.50 8.00 7.75
Interpretation
7.50 7.25 7.25 8.00 8.75 7.00 7.25 7.75 7.25 7.75 8.00 7.50
7.50
7.29
7.29
7.57
7.50
71.94
Judges Total Program Component Score (factored) 74.30
Deductions: 0.00
x Credit for highlight distribution, jump element multiplied by 1.1
Last edited:
Emily vs. Joannie:
The big difference between the two is confident skating with attack. Emily is confident and skates with attack, Joannie is not--she tends to freeze up on the jumps she is not sure of and the result is pops.
Joannie does not believe in her ability to win a competition and it shows. Emily may miss some of her technical elements, but she exudes confidence and joy (even if some of us, including myself, are not her greatest fans). Joannie just looks---well, scared. That just does not impress judges, and they give her lower PCS scores.
Joannie's FS program does not suit her, and that in turn compromises her ability to sell it. I think she needs a different choreographer. Wilson's choreography has worked extremely well for Buttle, but he is naturally more musical than Joannie, and she is unable to make the most of the difficult choreography. She is overwhelmed by it, and that leads to the lack of confidence.
Evan vs. Jeff
Evan landed 4T3T, 3A, 3L, 3S, 3A3T, 3F2T2L, 3Z, 2A Total TES: 84.43
Jeff landed 3L, 2A, 3F3T, 3Z2T2L, 1A, 3S, 3F, 3Z. Total TES: 71.94
Jeff had no quad, no 3A, and only two combinations. Evan easily made up for the 10-point SP deficit just with the TES in the FS. Evan got higher PCS marks in P/E and IN because he skated with confidence and attack while completing far more difficult elements that Jeff.
Judges will reward Jeff just so much for beautiful skating with easier elements, but when another skater can execute a much more difficult program with ease and confidence, they may be inclined to value that performance just a little higher.
The big difference between the two is confident skating with attack. Emily is confident and skates with attack, Joannie is not--she tends to freeze up on the jumps she is not sure of and the result is pops.
Joannie does not believe in her ability to win a competition and it shows. Emily may miss some of her technical elements, but she exudes confidence and joy (even if some of us, including myself, are not her greatest fans). Joannie just looks---well, scared. That just does not impress judges, and they give her lower PCS scores.
Joannie's FS program does not suit her, and that in turn compromises her ability to sell it. I think she needs a different choreographer. Wilson's choreography has worked extremely well for Buttle, but he is naturally more musical than Joannie, and she is unable to make the most of the difficult choreography. She is overwhelmed by it, and that leads to the lack of confidence.
Evan vs. Jeff
Evan landed 4T3T, 3A, 3L, 3S, 3A3T, 3F2T2L, 3Z, 2A Total TES: 84.43
Jeff landed 3L, 2A, 3F3T, 3Z2T2L, 1A, 3S, 3F, 3Z. Total TES: 71.94
Jeff had no quad, no 3A, and only two combinations. Evan easily made up for the 10-point SP deficit just with the TES in the FS. Evan got higher PCS marks in P/E and IN because he skated with confidence and attack while completing far more difficult elements that Jeff.
Judges will reward Jeff just so much for beautiful skating with easier elements, but when another skater can execute a much more difficult program with ease and confidence, they may be inclined to value that performance just a little higher.
M
mylastduchess
Guest
chuckm I'm sorry but no matter how you justify Evan having higher PCS marks than Jeff because of technical content is kinda useless cause no one who ever skated can say Evan has better edge quality, transitions, or choreography than Jeff. I mean difference is huge. Look at the chinese skater last year in 4CC he landed a quad and almost all his jumps his PCS was around 5. The PCS was created to reward artistry, for skaters to balance the sport aspect of skating to the artistic side.
M
mylastduchess
Guest
Who the heck is that idiot who gives 6.75 I mean can we get judges that actually know how judge.
In the first place, I do not have to justify anything.
If you actually looked at the PCS scores, and if you read my entire post, you would see that Jeff got higher PCS scores in Skating Skills, Transitions and Choreography. I said Evan deserved his higher scores in Performance/Execution and Interpretation because he skated with great confidence, intensity and expression while Jeff held back in those areas because he was not confident of his technical elements.
Jeff himself said after the competition that he had not skated his best. In the GoldenSkate Day 3 article in this forum, Buttle said:
"Overall tonight, it wasn't obviously the skate that I wanted...The jumps went pretty good except for the Axels. I just didn't commit to them. I definitely need to go home and train harder and try to make up for lost time."
"I don't think I was as aggressive as at Nationals in the long program"..."Definitely in the end I was feeling the altitude"
The PCS does not per se reward "artistry" but the artistry of this particular performance. While Jeff has great artistry, this performance was not one of his best, and he was the first one to admit it.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Emily, imo, gets high PCS scores, if and only if she lands the jump because her jumps are high. Her telegraphing is ignored. What we need is a separate juding panel for PCS.
Joe
Joe
She also gets the high PCS scores because she shows enthusiasm and the dreaded "spunk"
. So many skaters are mechanical and don't show much affect, so I think the judges are happy to see a skater who looks as if she's enjoying what she's doing.Joannie Rochette, OTOH, looks as if she's enduring a trial by fire. She never looks as if she's doing something that gives her pleasure.
And Cop was supposed to PREVENT all this.
The ONLY thing thay will prevent it is NEW JUDGES!!!
I have to disagree with the above.
Jumps, spins and footwork are all integral parts of a program, and the PCS scores should express what the judges thought of the performance of the program, not what they think about the skills of the skater.
If the PCS scores were reflective only of the skater's intrinsic talent, then they would never change from one performance to the next, regardless of whether the skater landed seven or eight jumps or popped them all. Obviously, that would be incredibly unfair. Talent is one thing, ability to execute is another, and the PCS scores are meant to be a combination of both, and should represent the level of expertise of the performance.
A performance should move smoothly from one element to the next without noticeable interruptions, should express the feeling/meaning of the music throughout, and should be executed with attack and confidence.
Obviously, falls completely disrupt a performance. Wonky jumps landed shakily, on two feet or barely saved interrupt the flow of the program and make for jarring transitions. Popped jumps look awkward and detract from choreography and transitions.
Therefore judges must take into consideration the technical execution of the elements, including jumps, when evaluating the performance at the component level.
Jumps, spins and footwork are all integral parts of a program, and the PCS scores should express what the judges thought of the performance of the program, not what they think about the skills of the skater.
If the PCS scores were reflective only of the skater's intrinsic talent, then they would never change from one performance to the next, regardless of whether the skater landed seven or eight jumps or popped them all. Obviously, that would be incredibly unfair. Talent is one thing, ability to execute is another, and the PCS scores are meant to be a combination of both, and should represent the level of expertise of the performance.
A performance should move smoothly from one element to the next without noticeable interruptions, should express the feeling/meaning of the music throughout, and should be executed with attack and confidence.
Obviously, falls completely disrupt a performance. Wonky jumps landed shakily, on two feet or barely saved interrupt the flow of the program and make for jarring transitions. Popped jumps look awkward and detract from choreography and transitions.
Therefore judges must take into consideration the technical execution of the elements, including jumps, when evaluating the performance at the component level.
