Judges Scores Posted!

Hey all!

They just posted the detailed scores here, lots of fun to see...

http://stlouis2006.usfigureskating.org/News/EventNews/0117JudgesScores.aspx
Sorry, don't know how to post this as a go to link.

NC

Thanks for posting these! Can't wait to dig in.

DG

Thanks, Numbers.

As for posting clickable links, that's automatic. At the bottom of the dialogue box when you post, there is a little box that says "Automatically parse links in text." If this is checked (which is the default for the forum), this means that anything that starts with http or www will be redered as a clickable link.

You can also do it by hand using HTML commands.

[*url]whatever[/url] (take out the *)

If you want to make a word mask a clickable link, go like this (remove asterisk).

[*url=put url here, staring with http or www]plaintext words[/url]

It comes out like this:

Here are the judges scores for Nationals.

MM

Doggygirl said:

Thanks for posting these! Can't wait to dig in.

Click to expand...

Hehe. I'm going to call in sick.

Mathman said:

Hehe. I'm going to call in sick.

Click to expand...

At least for me I only have to call Mr. Doggy.

The first thing I'll note is that I wish the USFSA would adopt a format for posting results similar to what the ISU uses. I like the ISU's format where score sheets for each phase (i.e. SP and FS) are separated, and I also like the overall results where it shows the skaters placement in both SP and FS for a good "at a glance" of placement movements between phases. Of course only the total scores matter, but I've found it interesting to keep an eye on movement under COP relative to 6.0, where IMO, we didn't see nearly as much movement.

Just "at a glace" I was glad to see that Scott Smith was rewarded for his FS that IMO, was much better than his SP. Johnny better figure out what he is going to do about his FS if he wants to be a podium contender at Worlds. Actually, without a quad it's a tough road to begin with, and I don't think this program rises to to the level needed as a "quadless" program candidate.

Well, more later after some actual crunching...

DG

Posting help

Thanks Mathman! I see the url did work but your way is so much more elegant.

Doggygirl - We (the USFSA Accountants) haven't had this software very long. However, the awesome computer gurus involved will eventually tweak things so it's better for everyone. Right now we're still using the old system for the whole non-qualifying world and struggling to learn this new system for the future.

NC

Numbers Cruncher said:

Doggygirl - We (the USFSA Accountants) haven't had this software very long. However, the awesome computer gurus involved will eventually tweak things so it's better for everyone. Right now we're still using the old system for the whole non-qualifying world and struggling to learn this new system for the future.

NC

Click to expand...

Hi NC. I didn't realize you are a USFSA Accountant!! Double thanks for notifying us "junkies" that score sheets are up. I can appreciate that the new system has presented many challenges. Thanks for considering my feedback! There is something to be said for a "consistent look and feel" when it comes to computer stuff. IIRC, these sheets were made available more quickly than they were for Campbell's, so I'm sure I'm not alone thanking team USFSA for the continued effort at improvement.

DG

DG or MM - I am not all that familiar with the Short Hand descriptions of the elements especially in Pairs.

Now do you remember the innovative lift of Nam/Leftheris where Naomi did an upside down split and all the audience when WOW. From what I heard at the Nats was that they received a 0 for the element. Something about where he held her in the lift was a no no.

I tried to look that up in the scores but what would be the short hand for that lift? and was the talk at Nats that is got a 0 true?

Joe

Joesitz said:

DG or MM - I am not all that familiar with the Short Hand descriptions of the elements especially in Pairs.

Now do you remember the innovative lift of Nam/Leftheris where Naomi did an upside down split and all the audience when WOW. From what I heard at the Nats was that they received a 0 for the element. Something about where he held her in the lift was a no no.

I tried to look that up in the scores but what would be the short hand for that lift? and was the talk at Nats that is got a 0 true?

Joe

Click to expand...

I'm no expert, but I think the lift you are talking about (N/L) is listed as "3Li" in the LP section of pairs score sheets. The problem the way I heard it, is that he lifted her from the waist rather than the hips, which is a "no-no." I think this team has awesome potential, and I suspect they will not make that mistake again next year. I look forward to seeing them on the GP, and seeing how they fare with the teams that are destined for the next 4-year cycle. I think they exceeded expectations (by a long shot) this year. Can't wait for next year (X4).

DG

Thanks DG. Is there a list of the shorthand symbols that I can begin to learn?

I agree this team is going to be big. She's a doll and he is good looking on top of some of the best ice coverage in figure skating. Hope they stay together.

Joe

Scale of Value Symbols

Good morning!

Took me forever to find this doc, but here it is, all 25 pages of it. First is all dance but keep scrolling down to singles, etc.

So get going, the test is this evening...

http://www.usfigureskating.org/content/SOV Table 2005-2006.pdf

NC

Numbers Cruncher said:

Took me forever to find this doc, but here it is, all 25 pages of it.

Click to expand...

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Now we're getting somewhere! I just added the link to "My Favorites," LOL.The one thing that needs a big upgrade on the USFS site is their search feature. I can never find anything on it.

BTW, there is an interesting mistake on the scores for Sasha's LP. She is listed as having received tech scores for fourteen elements, numbered appropriately 1 through 14.

Let's see, there are 7 jumping passes, 4 spins and 2 step sequences. Hey, wait a minute, LOL.

It took me quite a while to notice that there is no #8. #7 is her 3T+3S sequence, and the next element is #9, her flying spin. Since she stumbled on the landing of her first jump in this sequence, there was probably some controversy about whether it should really be scored as a sequence (one jumping pass) or two separate elements. In Trophe Eric Bompard she did get zinged on this element, the tech specialist ruling that it should be counted as two jumping passes, and consequently she lost credit for her final jump.

Mathman

PS. If you have the ear of the USFS web masters, here is another way to make it more user friendly. Do all of these tables, scoresheets, etc., in HTM instead of PDF. You can't copy and paste from PDF documents. (Very annoying when you are trying to steal all this copyrighted material and repost it on your favoite message board.)

Numbers Cruncher said:

Good morning!

Took me forever to find this doc, but here it is, all 25 pages of it. First is all dance but keep scrolling down to singles, etc.

So get going, the test is this evening...

http://www.usfigureskating.org/content/SOV%20Table%202005-2006.pdf

NC

Click to expand...

Thank you SO MUCH!!! This is going in my ever important 3 ring notebook of skating stuff. I too have looked for this info all over the place, and was never able to find it. I've got the singles stuff figured out, but the pairs and dance stuff was beyond me.

Thanks!!

DG

Numbers Cruncher said:

Good morning!

Took me forever to find this doc, but here it is, all 25 pages of it. First is all dance but keep scrolling down to singles, etc.

So get going, the test is this evening...

http://www.usfigureskating.org/content/SOV Table 2005-2006.pdf

NC

Click to expand...

Million thanks Cruncher. It will take me forever to memorize all this but luckily I will have this list as a back up.

My original question about a lift Nan/Lefteris did. It was an innovative lift albeit it got no score due to a hand hold. Is there mention of innovation as an element or is it just in the PCS scores?

Joe

Thank you sooooo much! I know the abbreviations for all the jumps, but the spins and spirals had me scratching my head, never mind the lifts.

There is supposed to be the possibility of 2 points for an innovative move not in the computer. However, I have never seen those 2 points awarded. Furthermore, there is a waist lift--it's not a nono, it's a 2Li (with then possible levels) However, apparently, what they did doesn't match a waist lift either.

I'm wondering if the tech specialists are even trained on what to do with an innovative move..

Someones should try a double walley and see what happens, since it isn't on the list. That should make it an innovative move, yes?

Oh.I was interested to have a look at I&B's protocol sheet for the LP, since their total score for that was 125.57, about 15 points more than their previous personal best high score, and would have placed them 2nd in the LP at Euros, just behind T&M. For comparison, T&M scored 127.83 total points, base technical 57.5, total TES 63.66.

And, as you might suspect, yes I&B's PCS was inflated vs. what they had obtained previously in international scoring. (Although, they were faster and smoother than earlier in the year, so not wholly indefensibly so.) They are about ..3 to .5 higher per component than they were internationally.

However, their TES was not inflated, and was an eye popping 66.89.., as their base technical score was 63.5. The only base that was more than that this year was the Zhang's at the GPF, where their base was 64.2. (That's the competition Zhangs landed their 2A3T combination.) So then I dug to see whether the caller gave them unfairly high levels...and that wasn't so either. The levels are consistent with what they got at TEB and SA, with some minor changes:
1. Their spiral sequence got level 2 at Nats, level 4 at Skate America, and didn't count at TEB-sometimes they don't hold some or all of the positions long enough, but there are enough positions, and they are difficult enough.
2. Death spirals. Both were level 4 at Nationals and weren't previously, but they have been changed since the GP-double or more rotations on both of them. I might have had the back outside as a level 3, but they may have picked up the extra level for having it immediately after the previous element, a lift.

In any case, the change on the death spirals would only account for 2 base points.

So it truly was as amazing a technical skate as I had thought.

And by the way, it wasn't shabby as a performance skate. The Professional Skaters association voted it the best pair performance. Considering they gave the best men's performance to Savoie, the Ladies to Rosenthal, and the dance to Navarro/Bommentre, the PSA is not bound to reward the winners. And the pairs event had several wonderful performances, including Nam/Leftheris and Scott/Fein.

Thanks for the Analysis!!

Very interesting. I sure hope they can replicate that LP at the Oly's!! It's fun to think about them having a fighting chance at the podium. Please John, rotate and land your SBS jumps!!

DG

Numbers Cruncher,
What a great thread and new poster, at least to me, to wake up to. I think I speak for all of us number heads when I say, "BOY! We're glad you're here!"

Thanks especially for the list of abbreviations. Now, finally, I'll be able to interpret detailed score sheets for dance and pairs. Yippee!

And a hearty welcome to GS.

Rgirl

Doris - You are a godsend for analyzing Pairs.

I understand your comments about innovation and the judges inability to actually score them. Maybe they should put a +1 and +2 in the computer so they could actually touch on that.

I'm still confused about the questionable Nan/Lefteris lift. Did they actually score it with any kind of mark? or did they just ignore it?

I think that throw axel was what made I&B tech scores sizzle. Will the int'l judges feel the same way? Hope so. It's a toughy. The American judges I take with a grain of salt - not in their choices for placements but in their scores.

Joe