Judging the "Old-Fashioned" Way

janetfan · Jul 10, 2011

gkelly said:
If it's wrong to allow some skaters to do three GPs and not others -- I'm not taking a position on that question -- then the blame lies with the rules governing the GP entries.

It has nothing to do with the scoring system.

Seeded skaters were allowed three GPs for all of the time that the GP existed under 6.0 scoring, during 2003-04 when the IJS was used only at Nebelhorn and the GP, and during 2004-05 when it was adopted for all international events.

Then the GP selection rules changed at a different time and for different reasons than the scoring system changed. And now that particular rule has changed back again.

Let's not forget the scoring system will change again but will it be because the sport is evolving or as I suspect due to pressure from a federation throwing alot of money at the hounds who run ISU?

Last season we saw it and don't be surprised if leading into Sochi we see changes based on pressure from the next Olympic hosts.

Three double axels indeed. If a certain skater didn't have such a great 2A that was milking the system and making if difficult for another federations Ladies to compete against her that rule would not have been changed.

Believe it or not, I can be as idealistic as the next person. But I am not blind or incapable of free thoughts and don't get why a few CoP fanatics support the system and ISU like it is a blood relative. :sheesh:

It's about politics and money and as long as cheaters are running ISU the sport won't change. It feels to me those who defend it also support politics and cheating in sport or are simply too naive to accept what at times is obvious.

For starters, wouldn't it feel more FAIR if rule changes were put in a year ahead of time giving skaters a full season to adapt to new changes?

Or would that negate the purpose of certain rule changes. After all, if a federation is throwing enough money at ISU should they have to wait a full season for new rules to take effect?

Money talks and ISU always have their greasy hands out.

gkelly · Jul 10, 2011

school figures
short program
factored placements
6.0 vs. IJS
anonymous judging
reputation judging
politics
branding
Grand Prix selection rules
well-balanced program rules
timing of how soon new rules are implemented after being enacted

Lots of topics have been mentioned in this thread. All are worthy of discussion on their own merits. Most are ISU rules that have changed over the course of the decades. Some are fan and media perceptions that may reflect unwritten ISU practices and reasons for their rule changes.

The ISU makes a lot of decisions over the years and often changes its collective mind several years later. We're each going to like some of the changes and dislike others.

Of course thread topics drift. But it's kind of hard to have a meaningful discussion when issues that have nothing to do with each other are conflated. Why not debate each one on its own merits? I see no purpose in attributing rules that have nothing to do with the judging or scoring system to "the CoP" or "CoP supporters."

Mathman · Jul 10, 2011

Joesitz said:
Well that's an OPINION...

Facts:

Michelle Kwan received 57 6.0's in major competitions over her career.

Alexei Yagudin received more 6.0s (19) in major international competition than any other male skater in history, including 10 at the 2002 Olympics.

Torvill and Dean are renowned for receiving a record 12 6.0's for their performance of Bolero at the 1984 Olympics, including straight 6.0s in the second mark from every judge.

These skaters carry the banner for the 6.0 brand name.

I, for one, am sorry to see it go.

Mathman · Jul 10, 2011

Hernando said:
Money talks and ISU always have their greasy hands out.

I think that what you are against is cheating, politics, and assorted skulduggery in sports. Everyone is against cheating, politics, and skulduggery in sports.

Supporters of code of points scoring are against these things. Supporters of judging by ordinal placements are against these things. Innovators who propose other methods of adjudicating competitions are against these things.

You are fighting valorously, but no one on this board is fighting against you.

Mathman · Jul 10, 2011

gkelly said:
It has nothing to do with the scoring system.

Why not debate each one on its own merits? I see no purpose in attributing rules that have nothing to do with the judging or scoring system to "the CoP" or "CoP supporters."

Against illogic the gods themselves contend in vain.

Joesitz (RIP) · Jul 10, 2011

gkelly said:
school figures
short program
factored placements
6.0 vs. IJS
anonymous judging
reputation judging
politics
branding
Grand Prix selection rules
well-balanced program rules
timing of how soon new rules are implemented after being enacted

Lots of topics have been mentioned in this thread. All are worthy of discussion on their own merits. Most are ISU rules that have changed over the course of the decades. Some are fan and media perceptions that may reflect unwritten ISU practices and reasons for their rule changes.

The ISU makes a lot of decisions over the years and often changes its collective mind several years later. We're each going to like some of the changes and dislike others.

Of course thread topics drift. But it's kind of hard to have a meaningful discussion when issues that have nothing to do with each other are conflated. Why not debate each one on its own merits? I see no purpose in attributing rules that have nothing to do with the judging or scoring system to "the CoP" or "CoP supporters."

Irregardless of the faults of one system over another. There are some fans who are looking for corrective criticisms of what was/is wrong with the system I believe you choose to give credence to anything the IJs or the CoP has determined. So in effect, there is no discussion from you of what the Official word on an issue. It's in accordance with current directives. So you have nothing to say about revising the IJs or the CoP but wait for other officials to change an issue, and accept whatver they decide. Indeed, as you say, there is no purpose in discussing judging or scoring systems (because the rules are there). I can only say that you are not someone to raise an issue in a Forum, but you will react to others who do who go against the established system on a few issues.

Joesitz (RIP) · Jul 10, 2011

gkelly said:
If it's wrong to allow some skaters to do three GPs and not others -- I'm not taking a position on that question -- then the blame lies with the rules governing the GP entries.

Good grief. You are blaming an oficial directive. But you wont say it is unfair. Of course, you will not take a position this because it would go against the rules.

Mathman · Jul 10, 2011

Hernando said:
Pick and choose is another way to say it. And wear blinders so everything appears as rosey as possible.

BTW, my favorite sport is going through convulsions at the moment as the ruling body has been caught dealing in bribery and following the money....

Again, I think that your beef is with those who support the ISU uncritically, not with those who like the concept of point total judging better than other methods.

Good grief. You are blaming an oficial directive. But you wont say it is unfair. Of course, you will not take a position this because it would go against the rules.

Joe, what GKelly is saying is that these are two different topics. If you want to raise the issue of whether it is fair to let skaters participate in three Grand Prix events, yes, this is a good topic of discussion.

But why bring that into a discussion of the relative merits of point-total scoring versus alternatives?

The illogic comes in here: Poster X says, "I like the concept of scoring by adding up points."

Then poster Y jumps in with, "Aha! You just admitted that you like everything the ISU and Cinquanta do. You just admitted that you like flutzing! You just admitted that you turn a blind eye to crooked judging!!"

Do you see that those conclusions do not follow from what poster X actually said?

ImaginaryPogue · Jul 10, 2011

Why is it unfair to you, Joe?
a) At this point, skaters are required to post a minimum score to skate on the GP. Is it unfair to those skaters who love to skate competitively but haven't earned a score that would qualify them? They too dream of medals, of skating in front of judges and audiences.

b) If not, is it unfair to have a rule in place that says that skaters are required to earn a certain ranking at Worlds to skate three GPs?

c) Why is it unfair that a skater who didn't earn said spot gets credit for earning said spot (so if they miss a medal because three skaters/teams skated better than they, aren't they themselves to blame)? How is it any more unfair than pointing out that individual GP events often have different levels of competition anyway (TEB 2009 had Kim, Kostner, Asada and Nakano, for example)

d) Now, let me make this clear. I don't like the idea of skaters doing three GP events. I think it's a move that looks backwards from the ISU and could have a deleterious effect on figure skating development, particularly in newer/still growing federations. But I don't think it's fair to give credit to skaters who don't earn it, which is what you are arguing Joesitz. That has nothing to do with me believing that COP (the method of judging programs by assigning point values to individual elements and component parts) is a fair and intelligent way to judge figure skating programs. It has nothing to do with me being "blind" to the faults contained within said system, the ISU governing structures, the GP system or any other totem you wish to assign to me. Stating otherwise is ad hominem and frankly, is beneath you and rational discourse.

Joesitz (RIP) · Jul 10, 2011

I'm acting on MM's post, and apologizing for bringing in another topic although that is not unusual in forums like suddenly discussing a movie.

Any how. IP, regarding the point value used in the CoP scoring. I am not against the CoP for the 100th time. I just take issues on some items in the system. I am all for them to be corrected. Not everyone agrees with me, and to their advantage I have no power to correct them.

It has nothing to do with figure skating, I am my own man. I think, therefore I am. Just too much of being a rebel in Philosophy.

The point system is ok. It does serve a good purpose for the Tech Score, although I can't believe a score can be given for an attempt. That's not sportsmanship. Also the Grades-of-Execution are mere opinions regardless of their guidelines as are the Total PC scores. All of which leads to judging manipulations.

One could attempt to judge the skater on what he does to show off his skating ability in a muscial presentation. That is to rid the Program concerns, and concentrate on what the skater is doing for his Presentation (or artistry, if you must).

Scoring by Points could mean giving Musicality a numeric based on the guidelines of Ice Dance; for Stroking; for Flow; a few numerics could be added. We are judging the skater - not the program.

Just thinking of ways to get away from the Henie/Media way of thinking.

Mathman · Jul 10, 2011

OK, here is what I think about letting some skaters but not all skate in three Grand Prix events.

That is just dead wrong. You cannot have a sporting contest where some players get three strikes and others only two.

To Imaginary Pogue's post: listing other things that are "just as unfair" does not make this fair. This is just wrong. period. By necessity there have to be rules about who gets to play in the tournament, and not everyone will be pleased with them. But once the tournament starts, the rules must be the same for everyone.

ImaginaryPogue · Jul 10, 2011

I'm not convinced it's unfair. I'm convinced it's wrong (but for different reasons than you). I'm not convinced that this change negates your statement. Maybe it's just semantics.

janetfan · Jul 10, 2011

ImaginaryPogue said:
I'm not convinced it's unfair. I'm convinced it's wrong (but for different reasons than you). I'm not convinced that this change negates your statement. Maybe it's just semantics.

I think it is a difference it what represents true sporting values.

No surprise I agree with mathman here as I too believe any sport is diminished when the playing field is not level and fair for all of the competitors.

Mathman · Jul 10, 2011

ImaginaryPogue said:
I'm not convinced it's unfair. I'm convinced it's wrong (but for different reasons than you). I'm not convinced that this change negates your statement. Maybe it's just semantics.

I am using the word "unfair" in the sense of "not even-handed, characterized by inequality."

Holding a golf tournament and then saying that Tiger Woods gets to tee off from the short tees and everyone else from the long, because Tiger Woods won some big tournaments in the past and besides, he is a big audience draw -- that's unfair.

Having a skating contest and saying that Davis and White get to go with the best two out of three, while everyone else has only two chances do or die, because Davis and White won a championship last year and are an audience draw -- to me that is unfair on its face.

janetfan · Jul 11, 2011

What do you think letting a few top skaters/teams compete three times says about ISU's own attitude about the Grand Prix series?

Does ISU see the Grand Prix primarily as a legitimate championship series or as money making festival?

Does this mean that in the future ISU may decide to let a few top skaters perform their SP and LP twice at the World championship and allow them to keep their best score

Must all of us blindly accept rule changes as "divine intervention" or is it fair to question the motives of decisions that at times seem puzzling?

Joesitz (RIP) · Jul 11, 2011

^^^
Good questions.

However, there are certain Sporting events that give the underdogs a "handicap", that is, a slight lead in a competition before the event starts. It gives a chance for all entrants to do well. But in Figure Skating, that "handicap" is given to the Elite competitors and it makes the underdog's chances impossible to do well.

Many fans consider this to be ok because it is in the regulations without thinking what the ISU's motivation is about. It's more like Hernando's: "a money making Festival", and nothing about what a sport is all about.

As Mickey Rooney would say to Judy Garland, "Let's put on a show" to raise money.

silverpond · Jul 19, 2011

Joesitz said:
Lest we forget. The name of the sport is FIGURE skating. I think it should be changed to Program Skating. No?

Ice skating, figure skating, artistic skating, recreational skating, competitive skating, etc.....

IMHO, 'figure skating' is still the best overall name, with sub-categories of singles, pairs, ice dance, and any other combination that may arise. Figure skating is traditonal and brings to mind the origin of the sport - when the competitions involved tracing the figures and nothing else.

Joesitz (RIP) · Jul 20, 2011

silverpond said:
Ice skating, figure skating, artistic skating, recreational skating, competitive skating, etc.....

IMHO, 'figure skating' is still the best overall name, with sub-categories of singles, pairs, ice dance, and any other combination that may arise. Figure skating is traditonal and brings to mind the origin of the sport - when the competitions involved tracing the figures and nothing else.

There was barrel jumping as well which was replaced by Jumps in the traditional scheme of Free Skating which was 40% of Figure Skating. Skaters can now jump into the air and rotate all their jumps in the same direction. Much, much easier than jumping over barrels

silverpond - I'm not really interested in a name change for figure skating but you gotta admit, the PC scores are very much about the program more than judging the contestant. And its all based on the majority of scores as in Pagaent Judging.

Are you really happy with the results?

janetfan · Jul 20, 2011

This article raises some interesting points particularly about how casual fans (and a few experts) have trouble relating to the CoP.

http://sports.espn.go.com/olympics/.../columns/story?columnist=caple_jim&id=4916817

In the opinion of ESPN, "the scoring system was supposed to save the sport but is instead ruining it."

Before the Frank Carroll bashers go nuts keep in mind Mishin called the scoring in Vancouver "disgraceful" and from articles I have read he is not a fan of the CoP either.

Joesitz (RIP) · Jul 20, 2011

^^^
I am in ageement with Carroll and Mischin and Weir who thinks it against creativity. I've been saying that all along. All the skaters do the same tricks, and concentrate on their preparations for a trick identically. The musicality sucks even with the best of choreographers. It's far too rigid to show a flowing sport (which is its greatest asset) of elements skated to music. Can you imagine a baseball player getting partial credit for almost making it Home or a Diver attempting to do a double twist but not succeeding?

However, there are posters on Boards who were taught never to question authority. Baseball and Diving are secure in there sports and they will defend partial credit because authority says so.

I would like to see more of ESPN's take on the CoP. They had many years of 6.0 as did figure skating.

I don't see CoP losing out on its scoring system, but I would like it to revise those strange regulations that hinder the Skater's freedom to perform.

Judging the "Old-Fashioned" Way

janetfan

Match Penalty

gkelly

Mathman

Mathman

Mathman

Joesitz (RIP)

Joesitz (RIP)

Mathman

ImaginaryPogue

Joesitz (RIP)

Mathman

ImaginaryPogue

janetfan

Match Penalty

Mathman

janetfan

Match Penalty

Joesitz (RIP)

silverpond

Joesitz (RIP)

janetfan

Match Penalty

Joesitz (RIP)

Similar threads

Connect with us