M
mathman444
Guest
Re: Rossano's latest "presentation" on the CoP
The main thing that I hope the ISU will do next year is to communicate better with the live and television audiences -- the people who ultimately pay the bills. I hope that before each skater's performance they will give us a run down of the elements that the competitor has included in his/her/their program, and a base mark. Like, if they complete each planned element the program is worth 84 points on technical merit, before additions and subtractions for quality. Then a little discussion of the five presentation marks.
That way, the viewer would know a little bit about what to expect, they could tell whether a skater performed up to the program's potential or not, and they would be able to track a skater's progress throughout the season. Are they getting better and better? If so, is it because they are skating more cleanly? Or because they are adding difficulty to the program along the way? Or because they are putting the elements together into a complete program, as reflected by increases in the artistic marks?
Also, PLEASE give the score for each judge, broken down into as many categories as possible. The worst thing they could do is just give a single number at the end: Skater A got 154.2 points, Skater B got 161.9 points, good-bye and thanks for your support. This kind of thing is what was wrong with the interim system. It shows that the ISU has contempt for the audience. Plus, it takes away a lot of the fun -- analyzing the judging after the event.
Mathman
The main thing that I hope the ISU will do next year is to communicate better with the live and television audiences -- the people who ultimately pay the bills. I hope that before each skater's performance they will give us a run down of the elements that the competitor has included in his/her/their program, and a base mark. Like, if they complete each planned element the program is worth 84 points on technical merit, before additions and subtractions for quality. Then a little discussion of the five presentation marks.
That way, the viewer would know a little bit about what to expect, they could tell whether a skater performed up to the program's potential or not, and they would be able to track a skater's progress throughout the season. Are they getting better and better? If so, is it because they are skating more cleanly? Or because they are adding difficulty to the program along the way? Or because they are putting the elements together into a complete program, as reflected by increases in the artistic marks?
Also, PLEASE give the score for each judge, broken down into as many categories as possible. The worst thing they could do is just give a single number at the end: Skater A got 154.2 points, Skater B got 161.9 points, good-bye and thanks for your support. This kind of thing is what was wrong with the interim system. It shows that the ISU has contempt for the audience. Plus, it takes away a lot of the fun -- analyzing the judging after the event.
Mathman
Wasn't this a problem in the SLC 2002.!
