ISU Congress- Decisions bring new rules | Page 3 | Golden Skate

ISU Congress- Decisions bring new rules

merrybari

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
And you therefore understand why one particular Federation wants to keep secret judging.

Why can't there be another vote on secret judging?


Yep! That explains it.

I'm for another vote, as are most die-hard fans. A vote to ban secret judging would bring credibility to the sport in the eyes of the general "masses" thereby, IMO, attracting prospective fans who remain dubious to it's validity as a sport. Seems like a no brainer that the "powers that be" choose to view with a blind eye.

Are we back where we started? :banging: This gives me a headache!!
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Here is the official announcement of what was actually passed at the congress.

http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=980

The last change is interesting.

For edge calls on Lutzes and flips, the tech specialist will call "e" in the case of a very long and severe wrong edge. In that case the judges must give a -1 to -3 GOE on the element.

In the case of a shorter or less obvious wrong edge, the tech specialist will use a new symbol, "!" instead of "e." In this case the judges will use their discretion about how to factor the wrong edge into their GOE score.

To me, this last thing is redundant. The judges can "use their discretion" about bad edges whether the tech specialist calls anything or not.

If anything, I would rather something like this to be used for underroations. A downgrade for an egregious underrotaion and something to call the judges' attention to an milder underroation, short of a downgrade.
 
Last edited:

merrybari

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Here is the official announcement of what was actually passed at the congress.

http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=980

To me, this last thing is redundant. The judges can "use their discretion" about bad edges whether the tech specialist calls anything or not.

If anything, I would rather something like this to be used for underroations. A downgrade for an egregious underrotaion and something to call the judges' attention to an milder underroation, short of a downgrade.

Thanks for the link. So they've eliminated a spin for senior men & ladies. Nice to have that cleared up as I'd heard spin, jump or step sequence.

Makes the most sense to me. Must say I'm glad it wasn't a step sequence which to me adds variety and expression.


ITA re: under-rotations v. edge calls!

Was the old time before starting program 2 minutes?
 
Last edited:

Ptichka

Forum translator
Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Judging is only one aspect of the problems of ISU being really about federations, not the skaters. Skaters as such have zero rights within ISU, only federations have rights. For example, if a federation (for whatever reason) decides to end a skater's eligible career, it may do so even if they are a champion of everything. This benefits federations, but not the sport in general. However, I guess since it's the federations that pay (in theory) to create skaters, it's them that get to call the shots... And, of course, that's how we end up with superb skaters from skating powerhouses such as Russia, US, or Japan not being able to skate at Worlds because the team is already filled, yet have countries such as Azerbaijan send their skaters there anyway...
 

chuckm

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Country
United-States
Not quite fair to single out Azerbaijan. They sent only one man and one dance team to Worlds, and the dance team IS world class (even though neither partner has ever set foot in AZE).

OTOH, Uzbekistan sent dreadful Pair and Dance teams to 2008 Worlds, and Gizmo barely made the cut for the FS. BLR has one good male skater (Davydov), but their ladies and dance teams rarely make it to the final segment.

The really galling thing is somehow the 'loaned' judges to these 3 federations often seem to be seated on important judging panels.
 

Ptichka

Forum translator
Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Not quite fair to single out Azerbaijan. They sent only one man and one dance team to Worlds, and the dance team IS world class (even though neither partner has ever set foot in AZE).
True. I only used Aze as a first example to pop into my mind, not because it's worse than others.
 

merrybari

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
Not exactly. As I understand the proposal, all ten judges will be seated, all ten will think they are scoring the event, but one will be selected by the computer with the designation "substitute." His or her scores will not be included, unless one of the other judges has to drop out.

So basically, the idea is to toss out only one judge's scores (out of 10) instead of three judges' scores (out of 12.)

The justification offereed by the Russian federation was: (a) to save money, and (b) to provide for a substitute judge within the current framework.

This was the propsal. I don't know whether it was passed or not.

It occurs to me to wonder if it will be the SAME judge for all competitors? If not, there is still the same fluctuation in consistency because a different set of judges will be used for each skater.

I think they should designate one randomly selected judge as the "substitute" at the start of each event and the one so designated would remain the same for all the competitors in that event. That would keep the same judges judging all skaters.
 

dwiggin3

Final Flight
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
I wonder if they will delete the OD or the CD. I would remove the OD. The CD seems necessary to show the traditional patterns and the basics etc.. the OD just seems like a mini freedance. then again, the OD if more TV freindly. the CD seems like figures.... not very interesting to the average viewer.

If they did get rid of the compulsories, that would help Tanith and Ben... not in time for the olympics though.

I agree. If you are bound and determined to streamline dance, cut the OD and keep the CD and FD.
 

Ptichka

Forum translator
Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
I believe the original plan called for somehow combining OD an CD - a segment that's more rigid than the current OD, but more flexible than the CD.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Here is the official announcement of what was actually passed at the congress.

http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=980

The last change is interesting.

For edge calls on Lutzes and flips, the tech specialist will call "e" in the case of a very long and severe wrong edge. In that case the judges must give a -1 to -3 GOE on the element.

In the case of a shorter or less obvious wrong edge, the tech specialist will use a new symbol, "!" instead of "e." In this case the judges will use their discretion about how to factor the wrong edge into their GOE score.

To me, this last thing is redundant. The judges can "use their discretion" about bad edges whether the tech specialist calls anything or not.

If anything, I would rather something like this to be used for underroations. A downgrade for an egregious underrotaion and something to call the judges' attention to an milder underroation, short of a downgrade.
there's no way to deal with something already passed by the ISU. Many posters wil never argue these and just go along with them. They may discuss them if someone disagrees, but they will stick by the ISU.
The GoEs are not written in stone. They are subjective scores and have a powerful influence on the PCS scores. None of these new amendments have relevance to any real change but to affirm the right of the Technical Panel and the Countries which have skaters involved in the discipline. In fact they made it worse. Now the Tech Panels will judge the error as to whether it was a big error or a baby error. :confused: It's like saying on a test that 6+6=11, not correct but close enough to get some credit.

The question of underrotations since many GS posters disagree with the call, should have Instant Replay for the in-house and TV audiences. Other sports have it, why not figure skating. This would keep not only the Tech Panel sharp but be a god-send to the skater when taped. Also there would be less disagreements on the Boards.

The penalites for such errors when you think of them as attacking the name of a jump (flutz and Lip) and the ever popular underotations are so disparaging.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Judges for the SP and Different for the LP

To me if one judges the SP and another judges the LP then it implies that all judges are equal. Looking at protocols, I do not think so.
 

maureend

Rinkside
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Originally Posted by chuckm
Not quite fair to single out Azerbaijan. They sent only one man and one dance team to Worlds, and the dance team IS world class (even though neither partner has ever set foot in AZE).




I realize that facts can "get in the way" of a good story line. But Fraser & Lukanin went on a state-sponsored trip post-2006 Olympics. Then this year they performed in Azerbaijian for the first time in Averbukh's ice show, which was basically arranged by the Azerbaijain skating federation. So they have both been twice now.... not exactly living there, knowing the language, etc., but nevertheless facts are facts. They've been there. Twice.
 

KayMil01

On the Ice
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Then where are Fraser & Lukanin originally from then? all I know is that they train in New Jersey with Morozov.
 

merrybari

Final Flight
Joined
Oct 21, 2007
To me if one judges the SP and another judges the LP then it implies that all judges are equal. Looking at protocols, I do not think so.

This is true, but to me it's more important that they be consistent within the event with the same pairs of eyes and viewpoints for all skaters the same.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
This is true, but to me it's more important that they be consistent within the event with the same pairs of eyes and viewpoints for all skaters the same.
Well, all this is moot since, as far as I can see from the ISU announcement, this proposal by the Russian federation did not pass.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with having 9 out of 10 judges working the SP and a different 9 out of 10 doing the SP. The way it is now, out of the 12 judges in the SP (9 of them count), four are eliminated for the LP and replaced by four different judges. Then there is a separate draw among the new twelve as to which 9 will count.

I don't mind mixing things up between the SP and and LP, but the whole random draw is foolish, to me. I like the Russian plan better than the current draw of 9 out of 12.

From a statistical point of view, best would be to have all 12 judges' votes count, trimming the highest and lowest. If a judge gets sick in the middle of the contest, go with the remaining 11. Under ordinal judging you needed an odd number of judges to avoid ties, but that is not a factor in add-up-the-points judging.

About GOEs being subjective, to me that's the nature of judging. That's way we have judges in the first place, to offer their judgment about whether the skater gave a good performance or not. IMHO this applies equally well to judgments about individual elements and to judgments about the program as a whole.

I do not see what the sport thinks it gains by trying to replace judges with a computer.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Personally, I don't see anything wrong with having 9 out of 10 judges working the SP and a different 9 out of 10 doing the SP.

That was exactly the case under the old system.

About GOEs being subjective, to me that's the nature of judging. That's way we have judges in the first place, to offer their judgment about whether the skater gave a good performance or not. IMHO this applies equally well to judgments about individual elements and to judgments about the program as a whole.

Exactly. It's primarily a qualitative sport, so it has to be measured at least in part by qualitative judgments.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Exactly. It's primarily a qualitative sport, so it has to be measured at least in part by qualitative judgments.
So the Technical is not measured by definitions. It is measued according to the qualitative sport. Why then are there underrotations defined? If it's qualitative then let the jump be judged on whatever landing the skater executes the jump. No need to give it a careful definition. The jump is just measured on the landing, and no need to downgrade it. It's qualitative, and should be marked accordingly..
 
Last edited:
Top