Jenny's latest: Problems with Cop

[jeff goldblum]

At this rate, we will just going to see 2A and 3T and 3S in any competition. The downgrade system just getting out of hand a little bit. It's already bad enough that you see skater with only 2-3 clean triple jumps getting on the podium.

I think this is right on. Except I'd go so far as to say the penalty for downgrades has always been out of hand. I just don't see how any person involved in skating - judges, coaches, skaters, officials, etc. - in his right mind would actually consider a triple jump where the blade reaches the ice 90º "short" of rotation a double. I mean, is there really anyone out there who thinks Mirai Nagasu, in her free skate last weekend, completed one two triples and a boatload of doubles? Surely almost every jump was not landed with ease and that should be reflected in the score, but I think Jenny is right in her assertion that the system is a bit askew. I've also thought from the beginning that this system is no less subjective than the old one. Sure, elements have distinct values now, but what's to stop judges, technical specialists or whoever from grading these elements in an unfair manner?

As far as ignoring downgrades being unfair to other skaters who apparently jump more properly I think this is where this system itself is a bit off. We've all seen Nagasu clearly under rotate some triple jumps, so we know it's a problem, but even when she jumps cleanly, they've always been close. It's been my observation that most female skaters jump this way, including the last 3 Olympic champions. People say, "What about Yu Na Kim or Joannie Rochette who can get great lift and not present questionable landings?" Well, this is what GOE was built into the new system. Yu Na Kim's jumping clearly represents the extraordinary side of things, so she should be strongly rewarded for it, but we can't honestly expect everyone else to jump that way too.

Go back and watch some programs from the late '90s. Pay attention to the landings on jumps. I'm sure everyone can find a favorite skater landing 2 or 3 jumps in a program with questionable rotation. But no one is really going to sit there and think, "Man, too bad about those double jumps." On the other hand, think of Surya Bonaly and most of her attempts at triple-triple combinations, usually half a turn cheated or more. That's the kind of stuff we should be penalizing.

 

[Blades of Passion]

Jeff Goldblum is not just an interesting actor, he is also an insightful skating guru.

So happy to see these opinions coming out.

 

[prettykeys]

It's been my observation that most female skaters jump this way, including the last 3 Olympic champions.

That's not a good thing, in my eyes, and only underscores the fact that the cheated-jump issue needed to be addressed a long time ago.

However, someone mentioned that Men's figure skating has started to become more artistic. Well, with fewer quads, they've also become less technically demanding, too (IMO.)

I would say we do need to re-visit some of the rewarding/penalizing margins for issues regarding jumps and other elements.

 

[antmanb]

1. What was the most interesting part? I didn't mean to ignore it.

The bit that i went on to address and you in turn have replied to

2. I'll echo the thrust of this now: COP is not perfect. It relies on a degree of precision that human beings are unlikely to ever accomplish. The base values of some things are questionable, as are the punishments for other things (BoP has me convinced of the UR concerns, even if I don't agree with his/her solution). But frankly, I'd rather have a system that asks too much from the judges than one that asks too little.

I agree in essence with what you write, but the problem i have is that as you have rightly pointed out the judges are fallible (they're only human after all) so my concern is that the more you heap onto their plate the more and more difficult it actually becomes to mark it. Apparently they did trial having a separate panel judging PCS at a senior B event a couple of seasons ago (was it Nebelhorn or Ondrej Nepala?) and they didn't see much of a difference. Essentially the point i think we all agree on is that the COP needs some changes to it before it starts to work a bit better.

Where I hit a wall with it is with regards to the features for levels, because at the moment it is the features for levels that is making everyone's noe jump elements look the same. Just because something is difficult it doesn't mean it should be done poorly. But I don't actualyl know what i'd do to change it to make it better. So i'm stuck - i think it's broken but i can't suggest any fixes. What i'd like is for some change that means it is worth the points for a skater to execute a blindingly fast, well centred scratch spin in their programme again, or a gorgeous long fast layback that doesn't end with a skater's blade over her head in some way. Maybe some automatic penalty if a skater slows down considerably getting into a difficult variation or edge change on a spin. BUt i don't really know how it would work in practice.

a) Where that skater ranked in the short (if long)
b) The skater's season's best (ie, what we can expect to see if he/she/they skate well)
c) After the performance, we're given the total element score, the program component score, the total score, if it's a season's best or not and where they rank overall.

What do you think they should add/change in terms of scoring?

The issue I have with the COP is that sometimes (say the ladies SP in Torino) you have skaters within a point of each other - sometmies within a couple of hundreths of a point of each other. That point difference is just irrelevant, different selection of the panel could bring that out in a completely different order - the system is not accurate even to a couple of full points let alone a couple of hundredths of a point so i don't get it, it can simply be a mathematical quirk that makes the result. What is missing is the actual ranking that the judges used to give under 6.0. I haven't heard anyone say that they thought Johnny and Evan should have been manthematiaclly tied at that nationals and if the judges had actually ranked them there would have been a clear winnner that night. It's as if COP takes the responsiblity away from the judges "we just punched in teh number it was the computer that determined the result".

5. The big issue for me is this: I've seen so many people (here and elsewhere) bash COP for ruining the sport, blaming it for all it's current ills - financial, lack of popularity, killing artistry blah blah blah. So I over-react in the other direction. But a major shift in the cultural idiom, the lack of a strong skater in the marquee event, rather artificially inflated popularity in the first place all contributed to the sport's decline.

I agree I don't think COP is completely to blame for the lack of popularity. Arguably in Asia skating has never been as popular and that is all post COP. It is all about having skaters in the mix and the US seems to ignore anything but the ladiezzzz.

But there are some things that, IMO, can validly be laid down at COP's door. Boring cookie cutter programmes with the same features repeated ad nauseam throughout a skater's routine (think identical spin features, the zzzzzzzzpiral sequences, frantic inappropriate movements in step sequences). That certainly has killed my enjoyment of LPs moreso than SPs, but still.

The fact there is virtually no time in between the elements anymore because it takes the skater 30secs to complete a step sequence that wonders all over the ice in an unrecognisable pattern.

Consider also this - maybe there is a lack of a strong skater in a marquee event, because strong skaters are confined by the COP more than they allowed to flourish so boring uninspried error riddled programmes are now the norm, compared to the cleaner (if comparatively simpler) routines under 6.0?

It's a difficult one to look at and i'm not sure there really is an answer.

Ant

 

[schiele]

Consider also this - maybe there is a lack of a strong skater in a marquee event, because strong skaters are confined by the COP more than they allowed to flourish so boring uninspried error riddled programmes are now the norm, compared to the cleaner (if comparatively simpler) routines under 6.0?

It's a difficult one to look at and i'm not sure there really is an answer.

Ant

:agree::agree::agree:

Basically what I'm trying to say is, even to a blind eye, there are very simple conclusions that can be drawn from the developments since 06:
1) Programmes are generally carbon copy of each other, void of individuality & musicality and (yes) boring. There are exceptional skaters with wonderful programmes, but they are rare and exceptional. Although tastes differ, lack of choreography and disapperance of musicality should be more objective.
2) The jump content is reducing. In general, no more 3+3 in ladies (except Yuna), only very few quads in men's. In fact some of the top ladies don't even attempt some of the main jumps.
Clearly, the incentives under COP are clearly misplaced somewhere. Hence, asking for a fix is not so out of line I believe. Enhancing the current system could lead us to much better skating in the future.

 

[janetfan]

but I think Jenny is right in her assertion that the system is a bit askew. I've also thought from the beginning that this system is no less subjective than the old one. Sure, elements have distinct values now, but what's to stop judges, technical specialists or whoever from grading these elements in an unfair manner?

People say, "What about Yu Na Kim or Joannie Rochette who can get great lift and not present questionable landings?" Well, this is what GOE was built into the new system. Yu Na Kim's jumping clearly represents the extraordinary side of things, so she should be strongly rewarded for it, but we can't honestly expect everyone else to jump that way too.

.

An excellent, and very hushed up point - about CoP being every bit as subjective as 6.0.

Merely assigning point values does not make CoP less subjective - and may indeed make aspects of it more subjective than 6.0. That is not necessarily a bad thing until we see how top skaters are being held up and lesser skaters being severely penalized.

An example would be Joannie's dreadful SP last week at COC. I thought Joannie's score in the SP did not reflect how poorly she skated and very subjective judging propped her up enough to comeback in the LP.

If Mirai is to be so critically marked then so should everybody else - or we lose any semblance of a sporting event. I am seeing more favortism than ever and perhaps ISU has no other choice. To treat their stars the way they are treating lesser known skaters would only make it more obvious how many flaws are in this system. I thought Miki received some generous scores in Russia for some very mediocre skating. But to mark the stars as harshly as the others would not be good for ISU so it will continue.

I think that so many new fans don't understand just how rare Yuna is. For anyone to think in 3-4 years all the girls will be jumping like Yuna thanks to CoP shows they have not followed skating long enough. Yuna is a once in a generation (maybe lifetime) skater which is very obvious to fans who have actually seen other generations of skaters. Forget which scoring system, and forget using Yuna as the model. Yuna's great jumping technique will never be the norm and she should not be used as an example unless we want to use "twilight zone" logic.

I think a great feature of CoP is that they can award Yuna's excellence but think the current rules will promote more cautious and less athletic skating. Not to mention the incredibly dull spirals and look-a-like spinzzzzzzzzzz.

Joannie should just forget the 3x3 because it could cost her dearly in Vancouver. She should play it safe, go with the trend and do a 3x2 if she wants the Silver medal.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Okay. I'm gonna go do some youtube watching before responding again.

 

[schiele]

Whole past

Thankfully, there are ppl out there better at expressing what I'm thinking and trying to say..

 

[janetfan]

Thankfully, there are ppl out there better at expressing what I'm thinking and trying to say..

Here is Joannie's SP from COC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yn2r3Co7wC8&feature=related

BTW, I love this program and it is my favorite of all the Ladies SP's this season.
Even with a poor performance it is easy to see that Joannie is a great skater.

But this is the SP - and she missed the two most important elements. There also is a boble in her spiral and her steps were no where near her best.
I may sound too picky - but if CoP wants to be so critical it should apply the same judging standards to all of the skaters and stop propping up the favorites.

 

[i love to skate]

An example would be Joannie's dreadful SP last week at COC. I thought Joannie's score in the SP did not reflect how poorly she skated and very subjective judging propped her up enough to comeback in the LP.

But this is the SP - and she missed the two most important elements. There also is a boble in her spiral and her steps were no where near her best.
I may sound too picky - but if CoP wants to be so critical it should apply the same judging standards to all of the skaters and stop propping up the favorites.

How exactly was she propped up? Did you look at the protocals? She was dropped down to a level 2 on her spiral sequence and her final spin was downgraded to a level 2 as well. She received negative GOEs on her jumps (besides the flip which was great) and her PCS were in the high 6s and low 7s - she usually gets high 7s and some 8s.

Even with her disastrous skate you can see the quality in her skating skills, transitions, and she still performed to the music fairly well. This performance was a full 15 points lower than her personal best. Her TES was the third lowest in the competition. So please explain how she was "propped" up?

Joannie should just forget the 3x3 because it could cost her dearly in Vancouver. She should play it safe, go with the trend and do a 3x2 if she wants the Silver medal.

She is: http://www.ctvolympics.ca/figure-skating/news/newsid=18631.html

 

[janetfan]

How exactly was she propped up? Did you look at the protocals? She was dropped down to a level 2 on her spiral sequence and her final spin was downgraded to a level 2 as well. She received negative GOEs on her jumps (besides the flip which was great) and her PCS were in the high 6s and low 7s - she usually gets high 7s and some 8s.

Even with her disastrous skate you can see the quality in her skating skills, transitions, and she still performed to the music fairly well. This performance was a full 15 points lower than her personal best. Her TES was the third lowest in the competition. So please explain how she was "propped" up?



She is: http://www.ctvolympics.ca/figure-skating/news/newsid=18631.html

I will watch again but Joannie seemed to slip during her steps for a sec and it was enough to get her behind the music and to make one portion of her steps look off. My point is that if we get under the microscope and become hyper critical we can find fault with every skater. And her LP was not her best either if we want to be honest about it. I felt the same way about Miki at COR. She was far from her best and I think she was marked with preferential treatment.

Can anybody imagine ISU permitting Joannie and Miki to miss the GPF? I don''t think so and I see judging that is reflective of Olympic season politics.

I could be wrong and don't mean to pick on Joannie, who is one of my favorite skaters. But if she is subpar again at SC I am sure she will get the marks needed to make the GPF. It is necessary for ISU since the Olympics are being hosted by Canada.
Am I too full of conspiracy theories or just seeing what typically happened under 6.0 repeating itself under CoP???

 

[prettykeys]

How exactly was she propped up? Did you look at the protocals? She was dropped down to a level 2 on her spiral sequence and her final spin was downgraded to a level 2 as well. She received negative GOEs on her jumps (besides the flip which was great) and her PCS were in the high 6s and low 7s - she usually gets high 7s and some 8s.

Even with her disastrous skate you can see the quality in her skating skills, transitions, and she still performed to the music fairly well. This performance was a full 15 points lower than her personal best. Her TES was the third lowest in the competition. So please explain how she was "propped" up?

Yes, I am not convinced that Joannie was disproportionately propped up, nor that CoP is "just as subjective" as 6.0 was.

And Joannie's LP coming in 2nd at CoR was no fluke. I'd say it is the most beautiful free program of this season, with lots of technical goodies.

CoP has not eliminated subjectivity (well, how is it even possible to eliminate subjectivity in a judged performance/artistic sport?), but it's done a very good job of making Figure Skating judging more objective. Not perfectly, but better than 6.0.

 

[antmanb]

Can anybody imagine ISU permitting Joannie and Miki to miss the GPF? I don''t think so and I see judging that is reflective of Olympic season politics.

To be brutally honest though that argument is blown out of the water by one simple fact. Replace the words "Joannie and Miki" with "Mao".

Yet that seemingly has happened. f it was all score manipulation to get the rigth skaters at the GPF then i think the ISU would push harder to have Mao and Yuna there than any other two skaters, so i don't buy the fact the judges are manipulating the results.

That would also presuppose that the judges are all acting as one on behalf of the ISU...and we all know that they act for the good of the individual federations rather than the ISU as a whole.

Ant

 

[i love to skate]

I will watch again but Joannie seemed to slip during her steps for a sec and it was enough to get her behind the music and to make one portion of her steps look off. My point is that if we get under the microscope and become hyper critical we can find fault with every skater. And her LP was not her best either if we want to be honest about it. I felt the same way about Miki at COR. She was far from her best and I think she was marked with preferential treatment.

Can anybody imagine ISU permitting Joannie and Miki to miss the GPF? I don''t think so and I see judging that is reflective of Olympic season politics.

I could be wrong and don't mean to pick on Joannie, who is one of my favorite skaters. But if she is subpar again at SC I am sure she will get the marks needed to make the GPF. It is necessary for ISU since the Olympics are being hosted by Canada.
Am I too full of conspiracy theories or just seeing what typically happened under 6.0 repeating itself under CoP???

Of course her long program wasn't up to her standards either. She knows that, everyone knows that. Again, her scores reflected her mistakes - she got 111 when her personal best is 126! She had an off day - and still managed to land 6 triples!

Joannie receievd deductions for her mistakes, her levels were dropped down when she didn't hold her spirals and spins long enough, and she was chasing to catch up to her music (in the long). I just don't see where this preferential treatment idea is coming from. It's one thing if the scores didn't reflect the mistakes but they did!

ETA: Just watched her short program again and her footwork is absolutely beautiful. Not a step out of place and I didn't see a slip up or stumble.

 

[prettykeys]

If female skaters are struggling to put out clean, beautiful performances because they feel harassed about the stricter technical standards, that is their problem. We should not compromise on standards just because it makes skaters "unhappy" and their mental state is not reacting well to it. I find that a very poor argument in the light of promoting sporting excellence.

If we want to argue that they are being overly punished by underrotation calls, etc., that's a whole other ballgame (and I would agree.) But it is a skater's individual issue when wanting/trying to fix it causes aspects of their skating to suffer.

If rules are being applied fairly and consistently, then it shouldn't matter if "the great majority of female skaters jump like that (underrotated, etc.)" and they are all getting penalized in the same way...or if the opposite is occurring (they are all being forgiven for the same things.) But the latter would be doing a disservice to the truly excellent techniques of certain other skaters. (Someone else argues that there is a big arbitrariness in underrotation calls, and yes, that is an issue too.)

It doesn't matter that YuNa is an exception (and that Joannie is not that far behind.)

Maybe the reason why good technique is so freakin' rare is because everyone else has been sloppy on technique and where those sloppy skaters come from, the judgments were lax. YuNa skated in the isolated bubble of S. Korea for most of her junior years; Joannie forced herself to fix things (probably overhauled everything because no one was about to forgive her or make exceptions for her), and these two had less experience of seeing rivals with poor technique receive advantages in competitions. I mean hey, if you're training and competing in an environment where technical standards are lax, why force yourself to invest time and training into fixing technique when the logical thing to do is to invest in other things that may reward you more? Increasing technical standards may actually have the (very nice) benefit of increasing female jumping quality over time, and maybe YuNa and Joannie will no longer be seen as such impossibly rare exceptions. Neither of them are freaks of nature. They developed their skills.

 

[janetfan]

Of course her long program wasn't up to her standards either. She knows that, everyone knows that. Again, her scores reflected her mistakes - she got 111 when her personal best is 126! She had an off day - and still managed to land 6 triples!

Joannie receievd deductions for her mistakes, her levels were dropped down when she didn't hold her spirals and spins long enough, and she was chasing to catch up to her music (in the long). I just don't see where this preferential treatment idea is coming from. It's one thing if the scores didn't reflect the mistakes but they did!

ETA: Just watched her short program again and her footwork is absolutely beautiful. Not a step out of place and I didn't see a slip up or stumble.

Let's consider this for a minute.
Mirai received the second highest SP score so far this season at COC.
Yet many say her jumps in the SP were not that much different than some of her jumps in the LP. The LP just had more of them and a few problems were noticable even without replay.

Was the ISU hoping (helping) for an American Lady to get to the GPF too?

Do you think after Yuna that Mirai has the best SP of the season?
I wonder about that???

 

[i love to skate]

Maybe the reason why good technique is so freakin' rare is because everyone else has been sloppy on technique and where those sloppy skaters come from, the judgments were lax. YuNa skated in the isolated bubble of S. Korea for most of her junior years; Joannie forced herself to fix things (probably overhauled everything because no one was about to forgive her or make exceptions for her), and these two had less experience of seeing rivals with poor technique receive advantages in competitions. I mean hey, if you're training and competing in an environment where technical standards are lax, why force yourself to invest time and training into fixing technique that when the logical thing to do is to invest in other things that may reward you more? Increasing technical standards may actually have the (very nice) benefit of increasing female jumping quality over time, and maybe YuNa and Joannie will no longer be seen as such impossibly rare exceptions. Neither of them are freaks of nature. They developed their skills.

Fantastic post! I think it's rather amusing when people say Joannie is now a "favorite" and being given special treatment. The girl was not handed down anything and worked her butt off to get where she is - at the "old" age of 23. The ladies field in Canada was pretty much non existent before she came along and look where she has gotten us! Joannie never received a free pass and worked so hard to get her technique and presentation skills to where they are now. She paid her dues at the rink. I think some other skaters expect things to be handed to them and do not put in the work required.

 

[janetfan]

and maybe YuNa and Joannie will no longer be seen as such impossibly rare exceptions. Neither of them are freaks of nature. They developed their skills.

Good post and believe it or not I agree with much of it.

But I do think Yuna is without a doubt the exception rather than the rule. I think most skaters simply don't have her combination of talent(s) and work effort/discipline.
Yuna's talent goes beyond her athletic abilty and she seems to be gifted as a performer and competitior as well. Some things skaters can learn, but other things are gifts from the skating Gods.

I have asked several times about the next Yuna. Skating is very popular in Korea now and never before have so many little ones taken up figure skating.

But I don't expect another "Yuna" to emerge from Korea anytime soon. She is uniquely blessed with so many attiributes and a talent like hers does not come along but once in a while.

I see Joannie as a better example as we are familair with her struggle and determination to fix up some technical problems. Even as a performer it took until Joannie got into her 20's to match what Yuna showed us with "Roxanne" at age 16. Just a great abilty to perform and COMPETE well under pressure.

I don't really see that much in common with them besides a strong work ethic.

 

[prettykeys]

Fantastic post! I think it's rather amusing when people say Joannie is now a "favorite" and being given special treatment. The girl was not handed down anything and worked her butt off to get where she is - at the "old" age of 23. The ladies field in Canada was pretty much non existent before she came along and look where she has gotten us! Joannie never received a free pass and worked so hard to get her technique and presentation skills to where they are now. She paid her dues at the rink. I think some other skaters expect things to be handed to them and do not put in the work required.

Yes, Joannie probably put in the most time and effort into refining a whole lot of things in the past 2 or so years. I still find this fact astonishing. She doesn't seem to be receiving bonuses just because she's Canadian and we're having a Canadian Winter Olympics--I think that fact made her train extra hard to want to represent her home country well.

"Unfair" that the majority of female skaters with flawed technique are being downgraded? It is unfair to overlook other skaters who invested time and care into doing things right.

Maybe the margin/rules for downgrading are disproportionate. But the mere fact of downgrading flawed technique or underrotation (less quality) jumps isn't unfair in itself.

 

[bekalc]

Good post and believe it or not I agree with much of it.

But I do think Yuna is without a doubt the exception rather than the rule. I think most skaters simply don't have her combination of talent(s) and work effort/discipline.
Yuna's talent goes beyond her athletic abilty and she seems to be gifted as a performer and competitior as well. Some things skaters can learn, but other things are gifts from the skating Gods.

I have asked several times about the next Yuna. Skating is very popular in Korea now and never before have so many little ones taken up figure skating.

But I don't expect another "Yuna" to emerge from Korea anytime soon. She is uniquely blessed with so many attiributes and a talent like hers does not come along but once in a while.

I see Joannie as a better example as we are familair with her struggle and determination to fix up some technical problems. Even as a performer it took until Joannie got into her 20's to match what Yuna showed us with "Roxanne" at age 16. Just a great abilty to perform and COMPETE well under pressure.

I don't really see that much in common with them besides a strong work ethic.

The thing is that Yu-na's great technique didn't come easily for her. I remember reading reports about how if for example as a kid she cheated a jump, she'd have to do laps around the rink (for example).

I mean of course Yu- na had natural talent, but I would discount the hours of work that she did to get as good as she did.