^ Thank you for explaining this "median" mark mskater. This is an unusual way to use the word "median," since for each judge it is the median of a set containing only one number. I remember in 6.0 competitions there was always a delay after the first skater performer to calculate the "median mark," which I assumed was the median of all the marks given by the judging panel for that skater, tech and presentation separately.
Yes, that's what "median" referred to.
Judges then had the opportunity to change their marks for the first skater so they would all be calibrated closer to the median.
But then for all subsequent skaters they were on their own.
So my question is, what use were the judges expected to make of this information? Suppose the announced median of all the judges marks is 3.0. I, an individual judge, gave 2.0. Now the next skater goes and is a little better. Presumably I give 2.3 and the other, more typical, judges give 3.3. Is that right?
Yes, if you choose not to change your mark for the first skater. If you did change it, then you would score the subsequent skaters in relation to the mark you changed it to.
If you gave 2.0 and the median was 3.0 (which meant half the rest of the panel was above 3.0), you might not want to change your score to 3.0 if you had a clear idea in your head of what a performance would need to deserve 3.0 and this performance was nowhere near that. But you might change it to 2.5 or something like that, so your scores wouldn't be so out of line when read out loud and you'd be less likely to get booed.
For competitions that didn't read the marks out loud, they didn't bother taking the median.
How does it help me, as an individual judge, to know that I am scoring more conservatively than my fellows?
It doesn't, really, if you feel that you know what you're doing and you're satisfied that the marks you gave the first performance are exactly what you think that performance deserves, and that you'll have plenty of room above and below to fit in all the subsequent skaters.
Except that if you're scoring much lower you're likely to get booed often, but maybe you take pride in being the hardass and consider that a good thing.
It does help the panel as a whole if the range of scores for the first skater is relatively narrow and therefore the rest of the scores are also within the same general range and it looks as though the panel as a whole is more or less on the same page. And you're part of that panel. So if you want the panel to look cohesive, you'd adjust your initial score toward the median. If you think the rest of them are all wrong or want to look like a maverick, you'd leave it as is.
Also, knowing that you're much higher or lower than the rest of the panel might help you if you have less of an idea of what to expect from this field than some of the other judges. E.g., if you're judging in a new area or at a new level and haven't seen most of the skaters before, don't have much idea what the standard is likely to be at this event.
E.g., if this is an intermediate event and you're used to seeing intermediates with lots of clean doubles and several with double axels and maybe triples, when the first skater skates slowly with lots of cheated doubles you may think she's a weak intermediate and give her 2.0/2.0, expecting that this skater will finish near the bottom. If the median score lets you know most of the rest of the panel, who are more familiar with the standards in this region, all give scores in the high 2s and 3s, that would alert you that this might be one of the better performances you're going to see today after all, maybe no one else will land any clean double jumps either, and you'd better leave plenty of room below this skater fit in everyone else.
The same issue would come up at the top of the scale. You don't want to give 5.5 or higher to a clean junior or senior performance with a few easy triples, even if that's the best you ever see in your home area, and then find out that ten more skaters in this event are going to land 6 or 7 triples, triple-triple combinations, etc., making it hard to slot them each in the order you think they deserve.
(I'm just using jump content as an example -- the quality of the basic skating would be a consideration as well.)
A skater can't win on GOE alone.
The more the merrier.
