Sonia Bianchetti's thoughts on U.S. Nationals

[gkelly]

A much better solution, as I have said in other threads, is to bring back a real emphasis on artistic maturity. Children can learn jumps and spins and have great flexibility, but only years of study and training can help them attain artistic maturity -- and some never get there. Make it a key component of the scoring system, then young skaters would rarely make into the top tier of national competitions, never mind being very competitive at the international level.

Except "artistic maturity" is also a subjective quality. And some skaters do get further at 13-15 than others do at 18-20.

So even if the rules emphasize power, edge quality, choreography, musical interpretation, and general "maturity" more and flexibility and jump difficulty less, there will still be times when younger skaters will deserve to place ahead of older ones.

 

[attyfan]

...

The reason why is what we just saw at U.S. Nationals. One skater (Weir) skated beautifully, the other (Lysacek) didn't. But the IJS gave Lysacek the victory in the LP and ultimately the championship.

This is wrong. The only thing we really ask of a judging system is that it give the top placement to the skater who skates best. The CoP doesn't. Indeed, the CoP doesn't seem to care whether the performers skate well or not.
...

The CoP doesn't care who skates best; the CoP cares about which skater racks up the most points. IMO, Evan deserved to win under CoP, not because he skated best (he didn't), but because he did a better job of maxing out his points than did Johnny. It isn't fair to say that "Evan didn't deserve to win because Johnny skated better" under a system that rewards badly done stuff that is complicated over beautiful stuff that is simple (i.e., getting the GOEs to make a level 1 or level 2 come close to a leval 4 is extrremely difficult)

 

[gkelly]

getting the GOEs to make a level 1 or level 2 come close to a leval 4 is extrremely difficult)

This could be fixed somewhat by adjusting the scale of values so that each additional GOE point is worth more than each additional level.

We want level 1 done very well to be worth more than level 2 done just "well" or level 3 done adequately or level 4 done poorly.

As a matter of fairness, we do still want level 4 done well to be worth more than level 2 done equally well. But not twice as much more.

So make the numbers work out that it's worthwhile for skaters to focus on improving quality instead of just adding difficulty.

But I'm sure that there would still be times when observers think that skater X's level 2 element done well should be worth more than skater Y's level 4 element of comparable quality, just because they happen to prefer X to Y or happen to prefer simplicity to complexity as a matter of principle.

And sometimes maybe both elements would average +1 GOEs, for example, because X's is almost but not quite good enough to merit +2s in the opinions of the judges, and Y's is just barely good enough to qualify for +1s. In theory, if there is a visible objective difference in quality, at least some of the judges in that case would be expected to give +2s to X and/or 0s to Y, but that still might not make the difference in the panel's average GOE enough to make up the difference in base value.

 

[Vodka Shot]

But we allow the judging system to influence us - you remember that after the Nationals lots of people here and lots of journalists said: well, actually it is Weir's fault - he should have included a change of edge to make it level 4, he should have tacked on a double toe...

ITA, that was my biggest frustration after nationals, the talk of, "he should have done this, he should have done that..." when in fact no, if the judges had marked GOE and PCS properly he wouldn't have needed to tack on a double toe or change a spin. That kind of thinking is so ridiculous imo because when does it stop, every time a skater is clearly better, but has wrong PCS and GOE marks are we going to start examining their technical elements for instances when they could have had a higher base value, when are we just going to admit that the PCS and GOE was were the major flaw is/was? And even he did this in his journal by saying he was one double toe away from the win, when the way it needs to be looked at is he was one wrong GOE or PCS mark away from the win. If he was properly judged for what he actually did he should have won and any extra element would have been unnecessary. But, I think like you said people don't want to actually dig into the PCS and GOE and really question it, they want to blame the skater, therefore letting the NJS influence us.

Anyway, I'm liking this Sonia chick.

 

[Jaana]

That is an outstanding observation, IMHO. The danger is that we will eventually forget that figure skating was once something more than just another sport.

I think that figure skating still is something more than just another sport. Every season there are plenty of beautiful, artistic performances e.g. from top skaters. LOL, fortunately they all don´t have the same artistic style, but they are artistic as there is not just one kind of art, in my opinion.

 

[Tinymavy15]

an enjoyable read. I agree with Sonia that carloine is the star of the bunch... somhow i get this feeling that racheal will lose all those nice jumps when she grows.. but caroline. wow. that girl is talented.

 

[Mathman]

To me, it is becming more and more clear that in the ISU judging system, the difficulty of the tricks trumps all other considerations. The same is true of trapeze acts in the circus.

The winning program is the one that has the largest quantity of goofy spins, ungainly spirals, slap-dash footwork, and sloppy jumps. Who cares if I fall, as long as I make it around the required number of times?

I will become a fan of the CoP when I see a skater come along who can match Michelle Kwan's body of work. The new generation will win their medals. Will they leave a legacy like Salome (1996 Worlds), Rachmaninov (1998 U.S. Nationals short program), Lyra Angelica (1998 U.S. nationals LP), East of Eden (1998 World Pro artistic program), The Red Violin (2000 Worlds), The Song of the Black Swan (2002 Worlds), Fields of Gold (2002 Olympics exhibition), Aranjuez (2003 Worlds), Tosca (2004 U.S. Nationals), and The Feeling Begins (2004 Worlds short program)?

 

[kappa_1]

To me, it is becming more and more clear that in the ISU judging system, the difficulty of the tricks trumps all other considerations. The same is true of trapeze acts in the circus.

The winning program is the one that has the largest quantity of goofy spins, ungainly spirals, slap-dash footwork, and sloppy jumps. Who cares if I fall, as long as I make it around the required number of times?

I will become a fan of the CoP when I see a skater come along who can match Michelle Kwan's body of work. The new generation will win their medals. Will they leave a legacy like Salome (1996 Worlds), Rachmaninov (1998 U.S. Nationals short program), Lyra Angelica (1998 U.S. nationals LP), East of Eden (1998 World Pro artistic program), The Red Violin (2000 Worlds), The Song of the Black Swan (2002 Worlds), Fields of Gold (2002 Olympics exhibition), Aranjuez (2003 Worlds), Tosca (2004 U.S. Nationals), and The Feeling Begins (2004 Worlds short program)?

It is hardly likely that anyone, regardless of judging systems, can match up to Kwan's body of work. She was just that consistently good throughout her career.

Jeffrey Buttle is a skater who I think has had consistently tremendous programs (pre and post the introduction of CoP), except he tends to falter technically (this has been true under both systems as well). Sahsa Cohen had beautiful programs under both systems as well, and so did others like Fumie Suguri (see her Carmen LP where she wore a unitard or her Paint it Black SP). I could go on and on.

There were ugly programs under 6.0, there are now ugly programs under CoP, the only difference is that programs tend to be more homogenous in their ugliness.

CoP did not give Lysacek the victory over Weir, the judges did, and I suspect the same would have happened under 6.0- his victory is hard to justify under CoP (inflated PCS scores etc.) and would have been hard to justify under 6.0

Unless we can somehow create some all-powerful, all-knowing figure skating Machine that judges everything perfectly, there will be close calls and there will be undeserved victories. I personally prefer the CoP because it is way more transparent. I can see how all the points add up, even if I may disagree with them. 6.0 was an arbitrary scoring mess, and it was way more exciting and way more flexible, but a sport's gotta have its rules.

 

[Dodhiyel]

Thank you so much for this thread, netnuts

I always get so much out of reading what Sonia writes; she puts into words so well what I think about CoP. I especially like her saying that Johnny Weir's skating at Nationals reminded her of John Curry. I have said that, too, privately.

It has not been tempting for me to write about CoP very much, because the subject is so frustrating; I am grateful that Sonia Bianchetti writes about it. As for Ottavio Cinquanta, I think he cares nothing for the sport or the athletes who engage in it. I still remember when he forced skaters to do three different programs in the GPF one year; even Michelle Kwan complained. Ottavio treats figure skaters as if they are as disposable as tissues or paper towels. He shows disregard for the physical well-being of the skaters and disrespect for the intelligence of their audiences. I think the worst scandal in figure skating is not what occurred in 2002; the real scandal in figure skating is Ottavio Cinquanta. The ISU should put someone in charge of figure skating who is a former figure skater, not a former speed skater.

 

[feraina]

The real scandal in figure skating is Ottavio Cinquanta. The ISU should put someone in charge of figure skating who is a former figure skater, not a former speed skater.

Thanks for reminding us of that fact! That would explain why figure skating is starting to look more and more like speed skating!

Lyrical Pang/Tong loses to robotic Zhang/Zhang in PCS and therefore also overall. Why? Because Zhang/Zhang are faster.

A polished Rochette can't garner PCS as high as sloppy Carolina Kostner. Why? Because Carolina is faster.

The soulful Weir can't beat the generic Evan Lysaceck. Why? Because Evan is faster.

The mesmerizing grace of Caroline's programs can't get PCS anywhere close to Miki Ando's sloppy, hunched performances. Why? Because Miki is faster. (Even Nancy Kerrigan said at SA that she thought Caroline deserved higher PCS for her flawless SP than Miki's ponderous, sluggish, unfinished performance. As it was, Miki was higher by a huge margin, and was really close to Kimmie, who herself has become a speed demon this year.)



I am _really_ tired of the single issue of speed becoming more and more dominant in this beautiful sport that I love. If I cared about speed I would go watch speed skating; as it is, I have no interest in almost any speed sport.

 

[cassieandcheetah]

Thanks for reminding us of that fact! That would explain why figure skating is starting to look more and more like speed skating!

Lyrical Pang/Tong loses to robotic Zhang/Zhang in PCS and therefore also overall. Why? Because Zhang/Zhang are faster.

A polished Rochette can't garner PCS as high as sloppy Carolina Kostner. Why? Because Carolina is faster.

The soulful Weir can't beat the generic Evan Lysaceck. Why? Because Evan is faster.

The mesmerizing grace of Caroline's programs can't get PCS anywhere close to Miki Ando's sloppy, hunched performances. Why? Because Miki is faster. (Even Nancy Kerrigan said at SA that she thought Caroline deserved higher PCS for her flawless SP than Miki's ponderous, sluggish, unfinished performance. As it was, Miki was higher by a huge margin, and was really close to Kimmie, who herself has become a speed demon this year.)



I am _really_ tired of the single issue of speed becoming more and more dominant in this beautiful sport that I love. If I cared about speed I would go watch speed skating; as it is, I have no interest in almost any speed sport.

Goodness, you're yet another person that insists despite all evidence that speed does not matter in figure skating. I'm a bit tired of this. Of course it matters! The fact that the ISU prez was a former speed skater has absolutely nothing to do with this. I can't believe you're making such a juvenile argument. I'm so tired of belaboring on this matter, so I won't this time, but speed does matter. I cant' emphasize that enough. Do you think it's a matter of choice? do you think it's actually easy to skate that fast and still be able to do the elements that you do? I mean, it's ridiculous how slow Zhang is, and even her coach admits that's one weakness her pupil definitely needs to work on. Come on. Please don't start this again now.

 

[beep_beep]

I agree with everything that's being said about PCS and GOE monsters, and how CoP still has within it the tools that biased/bad intentioned judges can use to get the competition to go their way, and leave us fighting about it: just like 6.0

What baffles me is that everyone is seeing that something that started with the best of all intentions (at least it was supposed to be, let's take the Polyanna spirit here just for this second) and is now turning out to have some very wrong outcomes, and no one (ISU) is actually doing something to change it !!

CoP took only about one year to develop and it's being effectively used for only four years. It substituted a system that was being used since the sport exists. No one could expect the CoP to be perfect right from the start. (except for Speedy apparently...) Alright, they came up with PCS to replace the artistic mark. Everyone sees that is not doing what it was supposed to be doing. What should be done ? IMHO, start changing it !! Already, on this very forum, there are some good suggestions...

CoP is not even close to be perfect (but I do think that it is an improvement from 6.0) and it definetively needs to evolve to a point where it can reward the the skaters that are more the "whole package" of the sport. How long will it take ?Wished I knew...

And, yes, Speedy should have NOTHING to do with figure skating...

 

[Mafke]

I am _really_ tired of the single issue of speed becoming more and more dominant in this beautiful sport that I love. If I cared about speed I would go watch speed skating; as it is, I have no interest in almost any speed sport.

Well it isn't that new. As I recall, 'speed and power' first began being a major issue in the mid to late 80's, the first I heard of it was at Calgary 88. Before that skaters were expected to vary speed in their programs, within a few years 'slow' seemed to reinterpreted as 'really fast skating with fewer changes of position'.

I'd say what's ruining FS is the emphasis on 'difficulty' and 'levels'. I'm sympathetic to many of the guiding principles of CoP but a superb level 2 spin should get more points than a crappy level 3 but CoP is apparently designed so that it isn't, with predictable results to anyone not actually involved in the creation/modification of CoP.

My biggest problem with CoP isn't in the details of its construction (though those are certainly worth discussing) but the results. I can't think of a single CoP program (in how many seasons now?) that's greater than the sum of its parts. For all the flaws of 6.0 (which I'm well aware of) every season there were programs that I could watch again and again and never get tired of (even after noting the flaws).
I keep hearing that skaters are getting the hang of CoP (and there are superbly talented and gifted skaters out there now) but I just don't want to watch their programs...

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Two points in this thread stand out.

1. The SPEED of a performance seems to be very relevant in scoring. Is it?
If one looks at Carolina Kostner, she seems to be the epitome of speed. It is quite noticeable. Yet if you look at the whole program, can you say at the same time whether it is controlled speed. Do you judge the slow down for the preparation of an element? The other case in point, is Yuka Sato, no matter that she is a pro. She is unique in skating in that her speed is all inclusive in her programs. There is no slowing down for an element.

Which of the two examples do you prefer and which of the two should the judges give more credit to? Remember we are talking about PCS.

2. As you all know, I believe one or two 14-18 year old Ladies, in particular, would be called child prodigies in the world of Artists. There will always be child prodigies in the Arts but not every year and not a must in figure skating. Flowing ballet arms is not so difficult in skating and I just nod my head when I see it. I do not jump for joy nor do I say that is unbelieveable. It is just a little girl reenacting what she has seen someone else do. Nothing original and not necessarily something to classify her as the next Pavlova on ice skates.

There is a modicum of artistry in figure skating, which I see mostly in those skater that go on to the professional life and are not restricted to the CoP.

Joe

 

[Kwanford Wife]

To me, it is becming more and more clear that in the ISU judging system, the difficulty of the tricks trumps all other considerations. The same is true of trapeze acts in the circus.

The winning program is the one that has the largest quantity of goofy spins, ungainly spirals, slap-dash footwork, and sloppy jumps. Who cares if I fall, as long as I make it around the required number of times?

I will become a fan of the CoP when I see a skater come along who can match Michelle Kwan's body of work. The new generation will win their medals. Will they leave a legacy like Salome (1996 Worlds), Rachmaninov (1998 U.S. Nationals short program), Lyra Angelica (1998 U.S. nationals LP), East of Eden (1998 World Pro artistic program), The Red Violin (2000 Worlds), The Song of the Black Swan (2002 Worlds), Fields of Gold (2002 Olympics exhibition), Aranjuez (2003 Worlds), Tosca (2004 U.S. Nationals), and The Feeling Begins (2004 Worlds short program)?

to Mathman

to the programs that for me are The. Best. Darn. Programs. EVER!

Having worshiped and said all of that - I believe that for US fans, in particular Kwan fans, this gets to the heart of the problem... we're spoiled. We witnessed 10 years of the best skating had to offer and those who competed against her knew that in order to beat her, you had to truly bring it - you had to throw caution to the wind, decide that silver wasn't for you and then make up your mind to knock her off the podium. And what resulted was Irina's 2002 & 2005 seasons, Sasha's moments of sheer brilliance, DivaKwara at 04 Worlds, Sarah at 02 Games and that little Tara... even Maria B. was able to steel her nerves once or twice. And skating prospered, matured and became more than the sum of its parts. It was a beautiful thing...

Kwan had an impact that will never be duplicated and I suspect it had little to do with the scoring system...

Now, despite my own issues with CoP - it appears to me that skating is simply in a transition and is currently dominated by jumping beans who spend so much time on individual things - they don't pull it all together - but I doubt this will remain true. If this generation can stay healthy enough, I believe a few of them will go on to have brilliant careers - but most will not and that's ok.

But the fans will have to be patient, the judges will need to decide if skating is more about the package and less about individual tastes and elements and the federations will need to learn the difference between short term & long term goals. It simply comes down to what's more important? A new world champ each year or sensational rivalrys over the years... and if we want the long term rivarlrys, we will need to have realistic expectations of what is technically superior: overall skating quality or the 3x3, 3axels and wacky spins thrown in for good measure.

I just don't think you can have it both ways...

 

[jennylovskt]

Thanks for reminding us of that fact! That would explain why figure skating is starting to look more and more like speed skating!

Lyrical Pang/Tong loses to robotic Zhang/Zhang in PCS and therefore also overall. Why? Because Zhang/Zhang are faster.

A polished Rochette can't garner PCS as high as sloppy Carolina Kostner. Why? Because Carolina is faster.

The soulful Weir can't beat the generic Evan Lysaceck. Why? Because Evan is faster.

The mesmerizing grace of Caroline's programs can't get PCS anywhere close to Miki Ando's sloppy, hunched performances. Why? Because Miki is faster. (Even Nancy Kerrigan said at SA that she thought Caroline deserved higher PCS for her flawless SP than Miki's ponderous, sluggish, unfinished performance. As it was, Miki was higher by a huge margin, and was really close to Kimmie, who herself has become a speed demon this year.)



I am _really_ tired of the single issue of speed becoming more and more dominant in this beautiful sport that I love. If I cared about speed I would go watch speed skating; as it is, I have no interest in almost any speed sport.

I agree with many points of yours in this thread but not this one. Speed plus artistry, that is the unique and real beauty of figure skating. The idea seems being twisted into a wrong way in this post.

 

[feraina]

It's not that I don't think speed is important. Athletic grace is grace too, and speed is a major component of that. But I just wouldn't want speed to become the single dominating component of what is judged to be "beautiful skating." Everything needs to be balanced in a beautiful program. I don't want to pick on Miki or Zhang/Zhang, but sometimes I really wonder what the judges see in them to give them such high PCS. It seems like having speed without any other positive attributes is sufficient to get top-level PCS, but have everything else but phenomenal speed and you're doomed to a mediocre PCS.

Maybe the rest of you really think speed is the only thing that should matter, I'm just expressing my own personal opinion...

 

[dancemaster]

It's not that I don't think speed is important. Athletic grace is grace too, and speed is a major component of that. But I just wouldn't want speed to become the single dominating component of what is judged to be "beautiful skating." Everything needs to be balanced in a beautiful program. I don't want to pick on Miki or Zhang/Zhang, but sometimes I really wonder what the judges see in them to give them such high PCS. It seems like having speed without any other positive attributes is sufficient to get top-level PCS, but have everything else but phenomenal speed and you're doomed to a mediocre PCS.

Maybe the rest of you really think speed is the only thing that should matter, I'm just expressing my own personal opinion...

also there is a difference between speed and clean strong stroking..speed without clean control edges is just ugly...:agree:

 

[hockeyfan228]

The reason why is what we just saw at U.S. Nationals. One skater (Weir) skated beautifully, the other (Lysacek) didn't. But the IJS gave Lysacek the victory in the LP and ultimately the championship.

This is wrong. The only thing we really ask of a judging system is that it give the top placement to the skater who skates best. The CoP doesn't. Indeed, the CoP doesn't seem to care whether the performers skate well or not.

Why are you sure that if placements were given, Weir would have been placed ahead of Lysacek, and the quality of Weir's skating would have trumped Lysacek's?

 

[Medusa]

Why are you sure that if placements were given, Weir would have been placed ahead of Lysacek, and the quality of Weir's skating would have trumped Lysacek's?

Because we have a TARDIS, went back into time, changed history and examined how the outcome would have been with the old scoring system... ahm, sorry, I have a thing for cheap British Scifi.

Honestly - we can't know what would have happened, Nationals are often more biased than international competitions and perhaps they might have even preferred Lysacek with the old scoring system.

But - there are several examples where clean has beaten difficult, in my opinion the most prominent example are the 2002 Olympics where Plushenko had the more difficult program (4T-3T-3R, 4T, 3A-3F, 3A) and also Goebel with his three Quads and two Triple Axels. Both had a little stumble, but Yagudin's last jump wasn't that clean either. Yagudin had only one Triple Axel and only one combo (but nobody screamed "Max out your combos" after the Olympics - probably because he had won). Plushenko's spins are certainly uglier than Yagudin's but more difficult - he would have collected more points with them and their footwork was pretty even.

But nobody ever questioned Yagudin's win (well except the NBC-guys - that's why I have the Canadian version on my computer), because it was clean, everything belonged together, it was amazing and in my opinion magical... It's actually a shame that the post-Yagudin-watered-down-version-of-Plushenko - or Goebel himself - never pulled off a show like that under COP, they would have scored massive points...