Nebelhorn Results
- Thread starter chuckm
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
The Caller's job
Thanks eurterpe and Nordlite for the info on the Caller!
In the case of Amber, I presume the fans and judges have to have full faith in the honesty of the Caller. Are his/her observations just to point out faulty technical elements and report them to the judges? or do the judges request information from the Caller?
One more question: In this particular competition, I can believe Amber overrotated her jump but that is not unusual in any given competition. There are many contestants who under or overrotate their jumps. Was she the only one the Caller pointed out?
I'm trying to understand the COP thing in action. Amber is a good example as to the workings of the Caller. When the Caller was first presented as part of the COP, I wrote in the GS discussion that the Caller would be a powerful person in the competition. Most responses to my statement was that the Caller's input will be minimal because the computer will detect all the faults.
I'm still confused.
HELP!!
Joe
Thanks eurterpe and Nordlite for the info on the Caller!
In the case of Amber, I presume the fans and judges have to have full faith in the honesty of the Caller. Are his/her observations just to point out faulty technical elements and report them to the judges? or do the judges request information from the Caller?
One more question: In this particular competition, I can believe Amber overrotated her jump but that is not unusual in any given competition. There are many contestants who under or overrotate their jumps. Was she the only one the Caller pointed out?
I'm trying to understand the COP thing in action. Amber is a good example as to the workings of the Caller. When the Caller was first presented as part of the COP, I wrote in the GS discussion that the Caller would be a powerful person in the competition. Most responses to my statement was that the Caller's input will be minimal because the computer will detect all the faults.
I'm still confused.
HELP!!Joe
The technical specialist, or caller, identifies each element as skated (vs. as planned) and assigns each its level. Then each judge .....................................oh heck, here are the descriptions from the ISU site: Communication 1207
"Technical Specialist (Caller)
Description
• identification and call of performed elements;
• identification and call of performed “levels”;
• identification and call of “corrected elements”, like less rotation, different element of both partners (pairs), etc.
• re-confirming additional elements;
• re-confirming “wrong elements”;
• re-confirming of forbidden repetition of elements;
• identification of the highlight bonus;
And........
ISU New Judging System
Basic principles of calculation Figure Skating:
a) Technical Specialists determine the name and level (when necessary) of every element.
b) According to this decision every element has a certain basic value indicated in the Scale of Value (SOV) chart.
c) Each Judge identifies for each element one of the seven grades of execution. Each grade has its own + or – numerical value also indicated in the SOV chart."
As for him (or her) being powerful or trusted, I'm sure he is, as much as anyone should be on the panel, but there is a Technical Controller who oversees everything he is doing, and at Nebelhorn there is an assistant tech specialist. Not sure if the assistant is just there because this is all new, or if there will always be one. We will just have to wait and see.
All info on these new positions is listed in very plain english in communication 1207 on the ISU site. You have to get through alot of technical crap until page 15 where everything is explained easily.
I am a little confused by this statement:
"Technical Specialist (Caller)
Description
• identification and call of performed elements;
• identification and call of performed “levels”;
• identification and call of “corrected elements”, like less rotation, different element of both partners (pairs), etc.
• re-confirming additional elements;
• re-confirming “wrong elements”;
• re-confirming of forbidden repetition of elements;
• identification of the highlight bonus;
And........
ISU New Judging System
Basic principles of calculation Figure Skating:
a) Technical Specialists determine the name and level (when necessary) of every element.
b) According to this decision every element has a certain basic value indicated in the Scale of Value (SOV) chart.
c) Each Judge identifies for each element one of the seven grades of execution. Each grade has its own + or – numerical value also indicated in the SOV chart."
As for him (or her) being powerful or trusted, I'm sure he is, as much as anyone should be on the panel, but there is a Technical Controller who oversees everything he is doing, and at Nebelhorn there is an assistant tech specialist. Not sure if the assistant is just there because this is all new, or if there will always be one. We will just have to wait and see.
All info on these new positions is listed in very plain english in communication 1207 on the ISU site. You have to get through alot of technical crap until page 15 where everything is explained easily.
I am a little confused by this statement:
How the heck can a computer detect the fact that a skater flutzed her lutz???
If the Caller has this much influence then he/she could have a bias for or against a certain skater.
If Maria B. was the Caller.....How would she handle a competition when Irina was skating.
Would a Russian Caller be more partial to the Russian skaters, a Canadian Caller be more partial to the Canadian skaters or a U.S. Caller be more partial to the American skaters.
Couldn't a skating federation easily get the loyality of one person with so much influence rather than deal with a whole panel of judges.
Or, am I still as confused as ever
If Maria B. was the Caller.....How would she handle a competition when Irina was skating.
Would a Russian Caller be more partial to the Russian skaters, a Canadian Caller be more partial to the Canadian skaters or a U.S. Caller be more partial to the American skaters.
Couldn't a skating federation easily get the loyality of one person with so much influence rather than deal with a whole panel of judges.
Or, am I still as confused as ever
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
This Caller thing is very scary to me and is, I think, the major flaw of the CoP. To take Amber's flip as an example: It was the judgement of one individual that the underrotation was sufficient that the jump should count as an "overrotated double" instead of an "underrotated triple." If a majority of the nine judges (or even all of them) disagreed with this assesment, too bad.
This invests too much responsibility in one person. IMHO. I bet there will be a lot of controversial decisions when the stakes get higher in the Grand Prix.
Mathman
This invests too much responsibility in one person. IMHO. I bet there will be a lot of controversial decisions when the stakes get higher in the Grand Prix.
Mathman
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2003
LADIES FINAL SP FS FINAL
Jennifer DON USA 143,07 1 1 1
Lesley HAWKER CAN 131,46 2 2 2
Olga NAIDENOVA RUS 119,54 9 3 3
Miia MARTTINEN FIN 119,43 4 6 4
Daria TIMOSHENKO AZE 118,62 5 7 5
Denise ZIMMERMANN GER 118,35 6 4 6
Amber CORWIN USA 117,87 3 8 7
Sara FALOTICO BEL 113,64 12 5 8
Katharina HÄCKER GER 109,92 7 9 9
Kristin WIECZOREK GER 101,79 10 10 10
Caroline GÜLKE GER 96,46 8 11 11
Constanze KEMMNER GER 86,58 13 13 12
Shirene HUMAN RSA 85,03 11 15 13
Irina LUKIANENKO UKR 84,38 15 12 14
Alenka ZIDAR SLO 83,77 14 14 15
Withdrawn Idora HEGELCRO
http://www.isufs.org/events/cat00004202.htm
Jennifer DON USA 143,07 1 1 1
Lesley HAWKER CAN 131,46 2 2 2
Olga NAIDENOVA RUS 119,54 9 3 3
Miia MARTTINEN FIN 119,43 4 6 4
Daria TIMOSHENKO AZE 118,62 5 7 5
Denise ZIMMERMANN GER 118,35 6 4 6
Amber CORWIN USA 117,87 3 8 7
Sara FALOTICO BEL 113,64 12 5 8
Katharina HÄCKER GER 109,92 7 9 9
Kristin WIECZOREK GER 101,79 10 10 10
Caroline GÜLKE GER 96,46 8 11 11
Constanze KEMMNER GER 86,58 13 13 12
Shirene HUMAN RSA 85,03 11 15 13
Irina LUKIANENKO UKR 84,38 15 12 14
Alenka ZIDAR SLO 83,77 14 14 15
Withdrawn Idora HEGELCRO
http://www.isufs.org/events/cat00004202.htm
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2003
PAIRS RESULTS:
http://www.isufs.org/events/cat00004203.htm
DANCE RESULTS:
http://www.isufs.org/events/cat00004204.htm
http://www.isufs.org/events/cat00004203.htm
DANCE RESULTS:
http://www.isufs.org/events/cat00004204.htm
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2003
Am I to understand that now the SP and LP are equally weighted? It looks that way since the total of their SP and LP results are added to give the final total.
Ladies Final Results
Jennifer DON USA 143.07 1 1 1
Lesley HAWKER CAN 131.46 2 2 2
Olga NAIDENOVA RUS 119.54 9 3 3
Miia MARTTINEN FIN 119.43 4 6 4
Daria TIMOSHENKO AZE 118.62 5 7 5
Denise ZIMMERMANN GER 118.35 6 4 6
Amber CORWIN USA 117.87 3 8 7
Sara FALOTICO BEL 113.64 12 5 8
Katharina HÄCKER GER 109.92 7 9 9
Kristin WIECZOREK GER 101.79 10 10 10
Caroline GÜLKE GER 96.46 8 11 11
Constanze KEMMNER GER 86.58 13 13 12
Shirene HUMAN RSA 85.03 11 15 13
Irina LUKIANENKO UKR 84.38 15 12 14
Alenka ZIDAR SLO 83.77 14 14 15
Interesting to note that Naidenova pulled up from 9th to 3rd.
Mathman- Actually, the way I understand it, the "caller's" decisions are really 3 people's. The Controller, the Specialist, and in this case, the Ass't Specialist. As I was told there is co-operation between the three during the comp. We will be trying to confirm this.
Jennifer DON USA 143.07 1 1 1
Lesley HAWKER CAN 131.46 2 2 2
Olga NAIDENOVA RUS 119.54 9 3 3
Miia MARTTINEN FIN 119.43 4 6 4
Daria TIMOSHENKO AZE 118.62 5 7 5
Denise ZIMMERMANN GER 118.35 6 4 6
Amber CORWIN USA 117.87 3 8 7
Sara FALOTICO BEL 113.64 12 5 8
Katharina HÄCKER GER 109.92 7 9 9
Kristin WIECZOREK GER 101.79 10 10 10
Caroline GÜLKE GER 96.46 8 11 11
Constanze KEMMNER GER 86.58 13 13 12
Shirene HUMAN RSA 85.03 11 15 13
Irina LUKIANENKO UKR 84.38 15 12 14
Alenka ZIDAR SLO 83.77 14 14 15
Interesting to note that Naidenova pulled up from 9th to 3rd.
Mathman- Actually, the way I understand it, the "caller's" decisions are really 3 people's. The Controller, the Specialist, and in this case, the Ass't Specialist. As I was told there is co-operation between the three during the comp. We will be trying to confirm this.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Way to go, Jennifer Don!
I was surprised that Amber didn't do better. She must have missed some jumps. She is a skater who I thought would be helped by the CoP because she always comes out with some inpressive individual elements, especially jumps. It was in "putting it all together" that she was not so strong, which I thought would be downplayed under CoP judging.
I was surprised that Amber didn't do better. She must have missed some jumps. She is a skater who I thought would be helped by the CoP because she always comes out with some inpressive individual elements, especially jumps. It was in "putting it all together" that she was not so strong, which I thought would be downplayed under CoP judging.
From what I have seen of the Nebelhorn results and some commentaries, it appears that the whole performance is more important than the individual elements.
That is why Nicholas Young won the SP by such a large margin over Scott Smith, and why event winning the FS didn't give the gold medal to Smith. Young accumulated enough PRESENTATION points in the SP to outdo Smith, who did a quad combination, and by a huge margin.
Similarly, Jennifer Don completed only two triple jumps in her FS, and no triple lutz, and got more points than Hawker and Naidenova (who both had triple lutzes, and Naidenova had a 3/3).
It seems a skater has to do what he or she set out to do, and do it technically correctly, in a balanced program, and skate with speed and confidence.
That is why Nicholas Young won the SP by such a large margin over Scott Smith, and why event winning the FS didn't give the gold medal to Smith. Young accumulated enough PRESENTATION points in the SP to outdo Smith, who did a quad combination, and by a huge margin.
Similarly, Jennifer Don completed only two triple jumps in her FS, and no triple lutz, and got more points than Hawker and Naidenova (who both had triple lutzes, and Naidenova had a 3/3).
It seems a skater has to do what he or she set out to do, and do it technically correctly, in a balanced program, and skate with speed and confidence.
RealtorGal said:Am I to understand that now the SP and LP are equally weighted? It looks that way since the total of their SP and LP results are added to give the final total.
Yes and no. The long program is worth more, for one reason, simply because it is longer, more elements to score. Maximum " program component" value in the SP is 50, maximum in the LP is 100. (for men) Women are 40 and 80. Plus technical marks.
And yes, the results are just added together to get the final total.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Norlite said:
That is exactly what I thought yet responses were saying the computer picks up faults. I can not even believe that a computer can tell the difference between a double and a triple axel.
But, thanks again on the info of the Caller.
Joe
The FS is weighted to have more value than the SP. In computing the final mark, SP points are multiplied by 1, FS points by 2, then the marks are added up.
But as we have seen in the Men's competition, a skater can pile up enough of a point advantage in the SP so that even if someone else has more points in the FS, the SP winner will still win gold.
But as we have seen in the Men's competition, a skater can pile up enough of a point advantage in the SP so that even if someone else has more points in the FS, the SP winner will still win gold.
Nick Young bio:
http://www.skatecanada.ca/english/teams/index.html
Oh, sorry. it seems it didn't lead to his page. Just click on Senior team to the left of the screen, then his name.
Strange that SC never leads directly like that.
http://www.skatecanada.ca/english/teams/index.html
Oh, sorry. it seems it didn't lead to his page. Just click on Senior team to the left of the screen, then his name.
Strange that SC never leads directly like that.
Last edited:
