- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
It is quite hilarious there are posters so desperate that they still try to argue the ladies competition scoring as even somewhat legitimate. Like a free comedy show.
The Judging Controversy Thread
- Thread starter Andre Smith
- Start date
It is quite hilarious there are posters so desperate that they still try to argue the ladies competition scoring as even somewhat legitimate. Like a free comedy show.
Pcs is not related to falls or doubled jumps. It's what allowed chan to win many comps. Enter cop reality!!! She was not harmed in the sp that much and then in the lp hurt but second group. Learn cop. Her sp scores should've been all fives or something.
It's not 6.0 there's no saving numbers. Learn cop. Cop is not 6.0z
It's not 6.0 there's no saving numbers. Learn cop. Cop is not 6.0z
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
There is little desperation here. You believe what you want, we believe what we want. When you produce a list of six judges that you believe are part of the conspiracy we can have something to talk about. Otherwise it boils down to you believe there's a conspiracy because you don't like the marks.
PCS is not related to falls?
If a skater falls in a performance, it's probably not the best demonstration of skating skill, transitions, execution, choreography or interpretation. A fall most certainly hurts in PCS. You probably need to double check again.
Chan? Many have complained that his PCS were too inflated, especially when he made several mistakes in a performance.
You mean Mao's PCS in SP should have been all fives???
Here is the score for the SP: http://www.isuresults.com/results/owg2014/SEG003.HTM
The last place finisher also has one of the lowest PCS and she has all fives.
You mean Mao should match that?!
Your logic just contradicts itself.
There is no saving the marks under CoP as in the 6.0 system.
So, why would skating in the second group hurt a skater?
If it's not due to saving the marks, then it must be that the judges have very short memories, shorter than most posters here, I am sure.
Since you mentioned that you disliked Mao's scores in LP, I guess you believe the judges were somewhat incompetent.
And you choose to accept their incompetence because it has always been the case in figure skating.
Correct me if I am wrong.
THe skating in the second group reminded the judges of her bombing and she got as good scores as possible in the lp you could get in he second group but she wasn't a factor to win or medal and didn't get the 10s of Yuna and Carolina. It's a fact that falls doesn't effect pcs that much. Saying Mao got great pcs scores in the sp and also got great pcs in the lp doesn't mean anything unique to sochi. What was comparing her sp pcs to her lp pcs supposed to mean? She fell and doubled jumps in the sp not forget how to skate or interpret. It's the history of chan pcs. What is supposed to happen to Mao or chan when they fall or Julia too? All fives in pcs? Julia fell in the lp but still got last group pcs. Pcs can generally go up as a competition continues but numbers are not saved its not a comparison system. 6.0 was about comparing skaters. Cop is not. You say judges should apply 6.0 thinking about numbers to cop scoring. They don't really do that.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
If you can't see that Mao getting a medal with the absolute worst SP of any top lady ALL season would be a bigger travesty than three deserving medalist who skated clean performances under Olympic pressure....then wow. You do need corrected.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
So, what is the conclusion emanating from this general policy explanation? Do you think Adelina's transitions factored her high scores even though Adelina and Yuna tied in TR? If so, how?
Yes.
I can't read the judges' minds, but in my opinion I think Adelina got more credit for intricacy and variety, Yuna got more credit for quality, and their different strengths balanced out to similar Transitions scores.
If I were scoring, I would have given Yuna the higher score for Skating Skills, so in comparison I'd have "gone down" for her Transitions more than for Adelina's.
However, as I mentioned in my earlier post, Adelina also may have earned some credit in Skating Skills for the fact that she was keeping up her speed through the use of threes, mohawks, etc., in both directions, and not a lot of crossovers.
I also think that complex transitions can help the Choreography score in some judges' minds.
Sorry, but I believe most posters will disagree with what you have to say.
The judges are supposed to mark the skaters based on how they perform.
Skating in the second group reminds the judges about Mao's SP? Professional judges should not allow that to affect their judgement.
I never say Mao should get any 10s for her PCS in LP. But I simply believe that the judges should remember what they gave Mao during the competition so they could give out marks fair to everyone. Say, they gave Mao 8.5 for all five categories. The skaters who came up after Mao would need to surpass Mao to get scores above 8.5.
What's the definition of last group PCS? The PCS is something which automatically goes up as the competition progresses regardless of what actually happens on the ice?! Then, what's the purpose of the guidelines/rulebook of CoP??
Yes, to a certain degree, PCS is not affected by falls that much for every skater, but a fall or two does lower the PCS most definitely. For example in SP, the skaters only have 2.5 minutes to show what they can do. If they fall on the ice, it's definitely not the best demonstration of skating skills, transitions, execution, choreography, or interpretation, unless you consider falls on the ice as a good skating skill, great transition, excellent execution, intricate choreography, superb interpretation. For the same skater, a clean performance most certainly helps boost PCS because the skater will maximize what he/she can do without major interruption.
Under the 6.0 systems, the judges had less marks to work with so a lot of time they had to use the marks as place holders, i.e. they sometimes had to give out inaccurate marks just to get the placements right. However, under CoP the judges have tons of scores to work with. Under each of the five program components, they can hand out anything between 0 and 10 which allows them to be accurate in their assessment of various aspects of each skater's performance.
Any judging system is about comparing skaters. CoP is not about comparing skaters??? Who told you that?!
If it's not about comparing the skaters, how do they determine who the winner is???
When did I say I believe Mao deserved to win a medal?
I simply believe that Mao deserved to win the LP and I believe that the podium was correct, just the order was wrong.
I thought I made it very clear all along... maybe not to you...
Don't forget the tech panel's merciless calls on her jumps. Even if you buy the theory that audience carried the Russian skaters (they did not), you cannot explain the tech panel's calls. They did not even try to buy off someone with more neutral appearance. They just put a person with direct interest with the outcome of the contest in charge.
I don't know if anyone can explain away the tech's selective calls with "having the skate of life" or some such. If the techs are there to be affected by the audience, then the ISU might as well get rid of them.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
I posted a link in response to you earlier showing exactly how a fellow poster scored the LP with the exact scenario of Mao winning the FS. Gkelly is spot on with her answers from a very impartial view and purely factual view. I guess I may have assumed that you wanted Mao to win a medal or else why raise such a stink. Judges are humans and a bad SP can affect how a judge scores your FS. It's not in the ISU guidelines but simplify summed up as YMMV. If you remove it from the sport the artistic side of this sport dies. There MUST be interpretation. The real responsibility lies in the fans to be able to accept a style that isn't there favorite and understand it too CAN on some occasions win out the day. Is that so unfair??
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
I do not see any tight correlation. More threes and rockers enhance musicality... I guess there must be some links between them.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
Mao having lower PCS than Julia with a fall and 5 points lower than Sotnikova CANNOT be explained away just by skate order. Mao having lower PCS than Kim and Kostner, and not blowing Sotnikova away in PCS, can be explained by skate order, but no more than that. To give the judges that much leighway based on skate order is ridiculous, and implies skate order (which was supposed to matter less and some suggested even none at all under the new fabulous and oh so objective COP) in fact matters even much more than 6.0, and is another sign COP has been nothing but an epic fail.
Like someone else had said, Mao's score in LP might shed some light on the possibility of a conspiracy.
Yes, if we remove the artistic side of figure skating, this sport will die.
Almost every friend of mine who love watching figure skating but have no knowledge on the technical side thought Yuna should have won.
I also wonder if getting too technical in the analysis might lose the big picture.
My friends' reaction got me thinking a lot...
(I had to remind them to watch Mao's LP again more carefully because it is magnificent!)
Primarily the Pattern and Ice Coverage criterion, which is described as "Movement phrases are designed using an interesting and meaningful variety of patterns and directions of travel."
More turns, more different kinds of turns (especially rockers, counters, and choctaws), more turns in both directions, more changes between forward and backward skating, would add up to more variety of patterns and directions of travel.
How meaningful they are is another question.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
ita.
