Sonia Bianchetti Review on the GPF

[ImaginaryPogue]

I think Sonia Bianchetti's position is quite clear. When Patrick skates well he deserves high marks. When he doesn't, he doesn't.

Yep. That's been her position in general. She hates messy skating being rewarded. Which is not an uncommon position to have.

The one thing that confuses me is her stance on COP. To be honest, I don't understand how someone can respect Patrick Chan the way she does (singling him out for praise post-TEB.... in 2007) but not like COP. Chan's possible because COP explicitly rewards what he does

 

[Mathman]

I think Mrs. Bianchetti is mellowing in her opposition to the CoP. Her main thing is beautiful free skating. That's why she took the lead in the move to eliminate school figures. Plus, she is automatically against anything Ottavio Cinquanta is for.

The big knock on the CoP is that by design it is a paint-by-numbers system that stifles individualism and creativity. Patrick Chan was recently quoted as wanting to rise above "cookie-cutter" programs and explore his artistic side. He also said (twice) in the same interview that he skates for the appreciation of the audience, not the judges.

Maybe Mrs. B. is starting to see more of what she wants in a skating performance, both from Patrick and from other skaters. She loved Carolina Kostner in the GP Final, for instance.

 

[dorispulaski]

She liked both D&W and V&M--in herprevious posts from past years, she said she did not wish to comment much on dance.

She's becoming a fan

 

[WeakAnkles]

Welcome to GS, one4V&M! We hope you will post long and often.

Patrick is still quite young-his inner dancer may not have yet entirely revealed itself yet. I think of Brian Boitano. He was 25 before Sandra Bezic helped him give birth to his inner dancer with Les Patineurs and Napoleon programs.

This.

I think this is the year Charlie White is discovering his inner dancer.

Some very interesting assumptions about the nature and definition of "beautiful" in that article.But it might be better to save that for another discussion...

 

[Puchi]

I don't know enough about the ins and outs of either technique or scoring to make a judgment about this issue, but mightn't it make skating look less like a sport if a guy who falls several times still beats clean skaters? ...It just seems as if the scoring system is working against the general perception of skating as a sport to casual viewers.

The only way to avoid this perception would be if all the skaters had the exact same technical content in their programs to make them directly comparable. Since this is not the case (not even in the SP), the scoring system itself is not to blame for this perception.

 

[Mathman]

The only way to avoid this perception would be if all the skaters had the exact same technical content in their programs to make them directly comparable. Since this is not the case (not even in the SP), the scoring system itself is not to blame for this perception.

I think the scoring system is to blame, at least in part. The scoring system allows for a skater to botch all of his elements and still get 9.00s and 9.50s in PCSs. He can win the gold medal as a result of the program components and partial credit for botched elements. I hope this doesn't happen at the Olympics, when lots of people are watching.

 

[bekalc]

The only way to avoid this perception would be if all the skaters had the exact same technical content in their programs to make them directly comparable. Since this is not the case (not even in the SP), the scoring system itself is not to blame for this perception.

Once again its not like Patrick was clean with his difficult elements. Neither of his quads were clean. I'd take the one clean quad from Hanyu more than the two flawed ones from Patrick. And the scoring system doesn't take into account the difficulty of combinations. Daisuke landed a much harder triple/triple than Patricks. But the scoring system currently doesn't recognize that.

If your going to give people credit for difficult elements its should be on the basis of them actually completing the harder elements cleanly.

 

[Violet Bliss]

I think the scoring system is to blame, at least in part. The scoring system allows for a skater to botch all of his elements and still get 9.00s and 9.50s in PCSs. He can win the gold medal as a result of the program components and partial credit for botched elements. I hope this doesn't happen at the Olympics, when lots of people are watching.

This has never never happened and seems impossible to happen.

There has only been one program with a fall rewarded with over 90 points PCS. Does that merit all the protests and calls for revamping the system?

 

[skatinginbc]

The one thing that confuses me is her stance on COP. To be honest, I don't understand how someone can respect Patrick Chan the way she does...but not like COP.

I love Patrick Chan's skating and I like CoP. My often criticism about visible errors not being penalized enough might give people an impression that I like neither Chan nor CoP. But that is not the case. Chan is truly a great skater. I can understand how someone with a 6.0 mindset can speak highly of Chan and yet criticize the current system.

There has only been one program with a fall rewarded with over 90 points PCS. Does that merit all the protests and calls for revamping the system?

Yes. One is good enough to set off alarm bells, or should we wait until you see the fire?

I don't mind a skater receiving over 90 PCSs without attempting even a single jump. But when someone attempts a jump and fails, that disruption is a minus in my mind.

 

[Mathman]

This has never never happened and seems impossible to happen.

Let me amend my post to: The CoP allows skaters badly to botch several elements, yet still win by getting high PCSs and partial credit for their failed elements.

Does that merit all the protests and calls for revamping the system?

Again, I hope it doesn't happen at the Olympic when people are watching.

In the pairs event in 2002 all of North America was up in arms because an excellent program with the smallest of bobbles on a single element was placed ahead of another excellent program which had no visible errors. This led to protests and calls to revamp the system. Whether merited or not, the ISU, under the lash of the IOC, did so.

 

[gkelly]

Yes. One is good enough to set off alarm bells, or should we wait until you see the fire?

I don't mind a skater receiving over 90 PCSs without attempting even a single jump. But when someone attempts a jump and fails, that disruption is a minus in my mind.

It is true that the way the singles free skate well-balanced program rules now work, it is not required to attempt any jumps. It would be within the rules to fill the 4 or 4 1/2 minutes with steps and spins (and choreo spirals for ladies) and other transition moves, accept the low base mark for not attempting half the allowed elements and not including the hnigh-value jumps that most senior competitors include.

However, considering that the well-balanced program rules allow for 7 or 8 jump passes, would it really be considered "well-balanced" enough, to deserve high marks for Choreography, especially regarding the Proportion (equal weight of all parts) criterion?

Could the Transitions really be considered difficult and intricate enough to deserve high marks, even though there are no difficult jumps to transition in or out of?

Surely a skater who does 7-8 jump passes along with everything else, and one fall, deserves higher scores for those components than a skater who does 0 jump passes, that much more everything else to fill the time, and no falls.

Of course, if there were a solo ice dance event where jumps are not allowed, we'd expect the program to be filled with skills other than jumps and expect the component scores to reflect whatever would be considered well balanced and difficult for that event.

But we wouldn't expect a free dance to score well in a pairs event (or vice versa).

That's an extreme example, you're the one who brought it up, if I understand you correctly.

My point is that I don't think a singles free skate in which the skater does not attempt any jumps would ever deserve to earn 90 points in PCS. Maybe a freeskate with only double jumps.

And I don't think there's any reason for a freeskate with one fall and 90+ PCS (before factoring, for ladies) to ring alarm bells on principle. Now if it were earning 100 points (maximum scores from all judges for all components) then I'd be worried.

After all, it was possible for a program with one fall to earn a 6.0 for artistic impression (from one judge).

I.e., I think the disruption of a fall being a minus in your mind doesn't translate into it begin a significant disruption in all judges' minds or in the rules.

 

[skatinginbc]

However, considering that the well-balanced program rules allow for 7 or 8 jump passes, would it really be considered "well-balanced" enough, to deserve high marks for Choreography, especially regarding the Proportion (equal weight of all parts) criterion?

Good point.

 

[gkelly]

In the pairs event in 2002 all of North America was up in arms because an excellent program with the smallest of bobbles on a single element was placed ahead of another excellent program which had no visible errors. This led to protests and calls to revamp the system. Whether merited or not, the ISU, under the lash of the IOC, did so.

Well, no. The furor at the 2002 Olympics grew as large as it did and forced immediate changes in the results and too-rushed changes in the judging system because a judge admitted to being influenced in her marks by outside pressure.

Programs with visible falls or bobbles had beaten programs with fewer errors visible to the untrained eye in previous Olympics with only minor grumbling.

I think we would have gotten something like a code of points eventually even if the cleaner program had won that event and/or there had been no confession of judging impropriety. But I think that without the impetus from a cheating scandal it would have been a long-term project (hopefully with more input from skaters and coaches and more of the initial glitches worked out before it went live) and would not have been ready for 2006.

 

[Mathman]

After all, it was possible for a program with one fall to earn a 6.0 for artistic impression (from one judge).

Speaking of programs that made the ISU change the scoring system...

She probably got credit for all the geese flying by.

Not only did she get a 6.0 for presentation she got seven 5.9s and two 5.8s for technical merit, despite the fall.

I.e., I think the disruption of a fall being a minus in your mind doesn't translate into it being a significant disruption in all judges' minds or in the rules.

It is hard to tell -- different times -- but I bet in the judges' minds they gave her 0 points for the element that she fell on (was it supposed to be a spin?) Anyway, that program was utterly spellbinding. I do not think we will pass that way again.

 

[Violet Bliss]

Yes. One is good enough to set off alarm bells, or should we wait until you see the fire?

I don't mind a skater receiving over 90 PCSs without attempting even a single jump. But when someone attempts a jump and fails, that disruption is a minus in my mind.

So that one disruption should automatically disqualify the performance from receiving 90 PCS regardless of how well the rest of the program is skated?