The Personal Best Scores

Do they actually reflect a picture of the best scores attained by a Figure Skater?

I've often had reservations as to what PBs mean when they are compared with different judges and different venues., I was also happy to see and hear Button thinking they are not comparable'

Joesitz said:

Do they actually reflect a picture of the best scores attained by a Figure Skater?

I've often had reservations as to what PBs mean when they are compared with different judges and different venues., I was also happy to see and hear Button thinking they are not comparable'

Click to expand...

I think you got a good point there. I think judges look for and notice different things and you have the factor that judges look at past competitions to determine the PCS. And who is selected as the tech specialist for the competition can make a difference too.

But I still think that PBs serve as one indicator of progress. I'm still on the edge on whether she should have broke her PB by 20 points, but Yuna's PB is indictive that she skated two clean programs back to back which is something we haven't seen in a while. I think people disagere that Laura Lepisto got a 126 to break her PB, but seriously that's the best skate I've seen from her. And at 4CC Baby Yuna (Min Jung Kwak) broke her PB by more than 30 points, an indicator of rapid progess.

Is it perfect? No. But totally useless? No.

Joesitz said:

Do they actually reflect a picture of the best scores attained by a Figure Skater?

I've often had reservations as to what PBs mean when they are compared with different judges and different venues., I was also happy to see and hear Button thinking they are not comparable'

Click to expand...

I agree with Bottun on this. (it was a typo, but I caught it and decided not to correct it)

Since it varies from panel to panel, it hardly seems reliable. High scores are also dubious, in ice dance anyway. V&M and D&W have put out the 2 best FD under COP (Mahler and S&D) and yet V&M are placed behind N&K for at #2 and D&W are sandwiched between C&S and D&L at #8? And for POTO and not S&D, that does not make any sense.

BigJohn said:

I agree with Bottun on this. (it was a typo, but I caught it and decided not to correct it)

Since it varies from panel to panel, it hardly seems reliable. High scores are also dubious, in ice dance anyway. V&M and D&W have put out the 2 best FD under COP (Mahler and S&D) and yet V&M are placed behind N&K for at #2 and D&W are sandwiched between C&S and D&L at #8? And for POTO and not S&D, that does not make any sense.

Click to expand...

In ice dance, COP has changed alot from 2005 to 2010. If you look at FD protocols from WC 2005, the pairs were allowed to do 11 scoring elements (2 twizzles, 2 spins, 2 step sequences, 5 lifts) and the factors for PCS were different (1.50, 2.00, 1.50, 1.50, 1.50).

Today pairs are allowed 7 scoring elements (1 twizzle, 1 spin, 2 step sequences, 3 lifts) and 2 non-scoring lifts. The factors for PCS are now 1.25, 1.75, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00. So scores from 2005 were a lot higher than they are today. If you factored in these changes, V/M and D/W would have the two all time best scores (just look at GOE's and unfactored PCS).

sequinsgalore said:

In ice dance, COP has changed alot from 2005 to 2010. If you look at FD protocols from WC 2005, the pairs were allowed to do 11 scoring elements (2 twizzles, 2 spins, 2 step sequences, 5 lifts) and the factors for PCS were different (1.50, 2.00, 1.50, 1.50, 1.50).

Today pairs are allowed 7 scoring elements (1 twizzle, 1 spin, 2 step sequences, 3 lifts) and 2 non-scoring lifts. The factors for PCS are now 1.25, 1.75, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00. So scores from 2005 were a lot higher than they are today. If you factored in these changes, V/M and D/W would have the to all time best scores (just look at GOE's and unfactored PCS).

Click to expand...

Therefore scores should be adjusted for inflation.

sequinsgalore said:

In ice dance, COP has changed alot from 2005 to 2010. If you look at FD protocols from WC 2005, the pairs were allowed to do 11 scoring elements (2 twizzles, 2 spins, 2 step sequences, 5 lifts) and the factors for PCS were different (1.50, 2.00, 1.50, 1.50, 1.50).

Today pairs are allowed 7 scoring elements (1 twizzle, 1 spin, 2 step sequences, 3 lifts) and 2 non-scoring lifts. The factors for PCS are now 1.25, 1.75, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00. So scores from 2005 were a lot higher than they are today. If you factored in these changes, V/M and D/W would have the two all time best scores (just look at GOE's and unfactored PCS).

Click to expand...

And if different judges in different venues with different cultural values, what then?

I think you have to look at TES when determining improvement/decline in skills:
Base Value (improved/declined) along with UR, edge calls and edge alerts compared to before
GOEs (improved/declined)

The TES kind of guides some of the PCS marks. Clean skate, no decernable URs = higher PCS