How Would You Explain And Apply GOE Rules? | Page 6 | Golden Skate

How Would You Explain And Apply GOE Rules?

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
when were senior B competitions ever shown on tv?

I think, more than CoP killing off US TV, it's the way the ISU thinks they can push for more and more $$ for the rights to show it. iirc that was a big complaint of ABC/ESPN towards the end. The I$U keeps upping the cost, and hasn't realized the US market isn't buying.

Add to teh fact that the man who put it on TV to begin with retired - the season before ABC's contract expired, and I think that also added to it. No one in the TV knowhow seems to care too much about it - anymore than they do with gymnastics. The months leading up to the olympics we get a bit more coverage, but I don't see it as any more accessable... it's not that people don't care to watch, there's just too many options (there are times I choose something else over skating, just because I'm not "in the mood." The Grand Prix was always hit or miss with me.)
 
Last edited:

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Again I ask, in theis era of a gazillion TV stations.....why is that?

It doesn't help if one ignores all the previous answers in this thread and in the course of several years and still ask the same question.;)

You have your opinions on this question. Other people have other people's opinions on the same question. We each have stated our opinions. Let's move on, shall we? On the other hand, no one would mind if you open a new thread to ask the same question.
 
Last edited:

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
when were senior B competitions ever shown on tv?

.)

Was wondering....is there prolonged history of ISU sanctioned Senior B events in USA....or was this the first?

My feelings are that even back in the day when we only had three TV networks....if Peggy, Janet or Dorothy were skating it would have at the least found it's way onto "Wide World of Sports by the following weekend.

And that is when there were only three stations.

Like I keep saying....today there are a gazillion chanels......

I have not heard one single worthwhile EXCUSE and conclude CoP skating can't find sponsors due to a lack of interest.

Remember Yuna's show that was broadcast in USA....what was it....a 1.7 rating....and those of us who watched it saw 90% of the sponsors/commercials were from Korea.

It doesn't take a genius to understand why ATS never did it again in USA..................
 

ILoveFigures

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
So far the vast majority American sporting fans are NOT buying it.
Skating and it's new secretive scoring sytem seems more dishonest than ever before.

That is why TV ratings are at an all-time low.

I think you really underestimate how much it helps a sport having a big star, like Michelle Kwan. 10 years ago the USA had 3 ladies among the top 4 at the Olympics. That itself gets people interested, and high TV ratings. 14 years ago, you had the rivalry between Tara and Michelle. 18 years ago, you had the whack to the knee, which was heard all over the world. Nowadays, the US ladies can barely compete for the podium at big championships. The US is left without a star. No one stepped up to the plate after Cohen and Kwan retired, and ratings plunged. You have Meryl and Charlie, but still, the US has always been about the ice princesses. You cannot argue that it's the scoring systems fault, because look to Japan, Korea, even Russia. The sport is still huge in those countries.
Do you think Italians would have cared much about skating had it not been for Carolina Koster, or Germans had it not been for Aliona and Robin? I don't think so. If we look at Finland for example, Kiira Korpi is a HUGE star.
Popular athletes are the ones drawing in the big ratings, not really the scoring itself. Look to Norway; handball would not be that popular had it not been for their ladies team dominating for the last few years. But because of them almost the entire population tunes in when they have a match to play.
Athletes are the main reason we watch sports, and national pride often becomes part of that. Most people are rarely interested in a sport, unless their country is at the top, and that IS a fact. Just my cents! ;)
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
I think you really underestimate how much it helps a sport having a big star, like Michelle Kwan. 10 years ago the USA had 3 ladies among the top 4 at the Olympics. That itself gets people interested, and high TV ratings. 14 years ago, you had the rivalry between Tara and Michelle. 18 years ago, you had the whack to the knee, which was heard all over the world. Nowadays, the US ladies can barely compete for the podium at big championships. The US is left without a star. No one stepped up to the plate after Cohen and Kwan retired, and ratings plunged. You have Meryl and Charlie, but still, the US has always been about the ice princesses. You cannot argue that it's the scoring systems fault, because look to Japan, Korea, even Russia. The sport is still huge in those countries.
Do you think Italians would have cared much about skating had it not been for Carolina Koster, or Germans had it not been for Aliona and Robin? I don't think so. If we look at Finland for example, Kiira Korpi is a HUGE star.
Popular athletes are the ones drawing in the big ratings, not really the scoring itself. Look to Norway; handball would not be that popular had it not been for their ladies team dominating for the last few years. But because of them almost the entire population tunes in when they have a match to play.
Athletes are the main reason we watch sports, and national pride often becomes part of that. Most people are rarely interested in a sport, unless their country is at the top, and that IS a fact. Just my cents! ;)

Thanks for your two cents - if fact I will give you a dollar and you can keep the change. :)

You make good points and I agree with them.
Others here, some who show open disdain for the"star factor" really have no argument.

Some posters write about the "hyping" of Gracie Gold like it is a "bad thing.":eek:
IMO from a National stand point there is little - and probably closer to the truth - NO hyping of Gracie.

She is unknown in USA to all but a very small and select group of skating fans.
There just isn't enough interest for any of the gazillion TV channels here in USA to broadcast the Senior B event where some genuine hyping of Gracie could have actually occured.

I think you are right that sports need stars......but if Gracie is the latest US hope does it really matter if when she competes in USA very , very ,very few people can see it?
 

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
The problem with hyping - from a media standpoint in figure skating is: no one seems to live up to it long enough to satisfy the media. This is true, really of any sport, but it seems in the ice princess and gymn princess sports it's even crueler. One misstep or not immediately hitting the top rung of the podium and it's all gloom and doom. That doesn't mean fans/skaters/commentators agree with it - just that the media as a whole dumps on them... and some of the girls take it so much to heart that they begin chasing themselves.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Here is the mission statement of U.S. Figure Skating

Under F, there's a mission "To organize and sponsor competitions and exhibitions for the purpose of stimulating interest in figure skating on the part of all persons"

And B also mentions methods of raising funds, which includes but doesn't specify income sources from broadcast rights and ticket sales.

If USFS were a for-profit organization whose mission was to produce an entertainment product that appeals to audiences and earns money by selling it to audiences, then those would be the primary goals of the organization.

As you can see, that is not the primary mission of the organization.
Instead, their primary goal is to regulate and govern the sport of figure skating within the US. Another important goal is to define and maintain uniform standards of skating proficiency.

When it comes to developing rules, if there's a conflict between appealing to non-skaters and maintaining standards of skating proficiency as the context in which participant skaters practice their sport, clearly the needs of the skaters should take priority.


I can't find a similar document for the ISU. The closest is the Objectives listed in the Constitution and General Regulations

The objectives of the ISU are regulating, governing and promoting the sports of Figure and Speed Skating and their organized development on the basis of friendship and mutual understanding between sportsmen. The ISU shall work for broadening interest in Figure and Speed Skating sports by increasing their popularity, improving their quality and increasing the number of participants throughout the world.
(I don't know whether the underscoring is meant for emphasis or to indicate changes from the previous constitution)

So we can say that increasing the popularity of figure skating and speed skating with participants is perhaps an equal goal with regulating, governing, and promoting these sports for the existing athletes.

But there's nothing in the statement about increasing popularity with audiences. Obviously the ISU does care about that to an extent, as a means to the end of earning money to support their primary mission. But it is not part of the mission itself.
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
But there's nothing in the statement about increasing popularity with audiences. Obviously the ISU does care about that to an extent, as a means to the end of earning money to support their primary mission. But it is not part of the mission itself.

You think ISU cares about the popularity of skating "to an extent"?

How about their entire existence depends upon it.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Their entire existence relies on the population of skating AS A PARTICIPANT SPORT.

It can exist just fine for that purpose with no spectators at all.

Of course it does better with spectators. Figure skating (at least the freeskating disciplines including free dance) is more geared toward spectators than speed skating or synchronized skating or pattern dances. Or school figures, although those no longer exist as far as the ISU is concerned.

But it is not in the business of producing shows for audiences. It's in the business of organizing competitions for skaters. It's just lucky for skating, compared to many other Olympic sports, in that some kinds of competitions happen to be of interest to audiences who are more interested in aesthetics as well as audiences who are interested in athleticism and technique.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
And that leads to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et17q4D1FzU

I used to think this was a horror of an SP but thanks to the "enlightening posts" by a few CoP experts I can see how my ideas ofwhat constitutes good competitive figure skating are simply outdated.

Patrick got fourth for that effort. Here is the skate that he beat, by Alban Preaubert (5th).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEv8_UMWJRg&feature=relmfu

Here is how the judges saw it.

http://www.isuresults.com/results/gpcan2010/gpcan10_Men_SP_Scores.pdf

In terms of base value for the jumps, Chan tried a quad compared to Preubert's triple loop. Patrick took a full -3 in GOEs for the fall on the quad and the fall on the triple Axel, and also took a substantial hit on the footwork sequence, in addition to the automatic -1 penalty for each of the three falls.

Preaubert didn't fall, got almost entirely 0 GOE on all elements, and tried to play to the audience to some extent. Preaubert lacked speed and complexity.

To me it was the difference between a great skater having a bad day and a pretty fair skater having his usual pretty fair day.

Where Patrick won his fourth place ranking was in the program components. Preaubert got high 6's across the board, while Chan scored in the high ssvens and low eights. It is hard to tell how much the judges penalized Chan in the PCSs for the falls. Although Chan scored well despite the errors, with a clean program he might have been a full point higher (high 8s - low 9s).

Nobunari Oda won the short program with a workmanlike skate (no quad). Kevin Reynolds did 4S+3T, 4T and 3A but was lacking in overall quality -- good enough for second. Rippon did OK (no quad, but a clean performance) and took third.

Was Patrick held up or favored by the system? He did net a total of 13.8 points on his first two jumps, which were fully rotated (according to the tech panel) but resulted in falls. His PCSs were satisfactory despite the obvious errors.

I don't know. I am all for increasing the penalties for falls. But I am having a hard time working up my outrage over this particular event.
 
Last edited:

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
.


It's just lucky for skating, compared to many other Olympic sports, in that some kinds of competitions happen to be of interest to audiences who are more interested in aesthetics as well as audiences who are interested in athleticism and technique.

That's where we differ - I think it has nothing at all to do with "luck."

Here is an "insider's view on skating and particularly with the people who run ISU.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMoRf-RPssQ
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
gkelly said:
(I don't know whether the underscoring is meant for emphasis or to indicate changes from the previous constitution)

To indicate changes from the 2010 version:

The objects of the ISU are the regulation, control and promotion of the sports of Figure and Speed Skating...

http://www.knsb.nl/bond/files/2009/08/ISU-reglement-algemene-bepalingen-2010.pdf

This part is still the same, though:

...improving their quality and increasing the number of participants throughout the world.
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
The ISU statement below means to keep skating attractive and popular enough to keep people particpating.

"improving their quality and increasing the number of participants throughout the world."

For people to see skating on TV also depends on this but in addition to particiants fans need to be included.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
^ True enough. But I think gkelly has a point, too. Granted we would all like to see skating regain some of its lost popularity in the U.S. as an entertainment medium.

But is this the job of the USFSA and the ISU or is it the job of Scott Hamilton (owner of Stars on Ice) or Dick Button (promoter of the World Pro competitions) or the job of Dorothy Hamill who owned Ice Capades, or of sponsors and television networks that used to use skating shows to attract audiences and sell products?

Here is the winning performance at the 1995 World Pro. Gosh I miss that event.

But it had nothing to do with the ISU.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlIfkInq9uU 100% :love: (-1 GOE for falling out of her closing pose. :laugh: )
 
Last edited:

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
Was Patrick held up or favored by the system? He did net a total of 13.8 points on his first two jumps, which were fully rotated (according to the tech panel) but resulted in falls. His PCSs were satisfactory despite the obvious errors.

I don't know. I am all for increasing the penalties for falls. But I am having a hard time working up my outrage over this particular event.

Actually it was bluebonnet who called it "scandalous."

I said it let me know my ideas about good skating were "outdated."

That SP more than any program I have seen in the CoP era made it clear to me I no longer understood or even recognized a sport I had watched for forty years.

So yes....the three fall SP stuck with me.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
yes but the ISU took over pro skating and killed it.

I guess so.

But the way they "took it over" was simply to allow Olympic eligible skaters to compete in ISU sanctioned pro-ams without losing their eligibility. The 1998 World Pro was under no obligation to invite Michelle Kwan and Alexei Yagudin to their show -- but they did.

Here is what they got out of Michelle:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzIMASKRm_4

It is hard to see how that hurt the popularity of the sport.
 

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
I guess so.

But the way they "took it over" was simply to allow Olympic eligible skaters to compete in ISU sanctioned pro-ams without losing their eligibility. The 1998 World Pro was under no obligation to invite Michelle Kwan and Alexei Yagudin to their show -- but they did.

Here is what they got out of Michelle:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzIMASKRm_4

It is hard to see how that hurt the popularity of the sport.

true... Dick Button giving it up (well before the CoP) can be blamed as well... once pro-ams took over people wanted to see MK, not her "has been" counterparts.
 

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
IMHO there is one problem with the suggestion that casual skating fans ought to exert themselves to learn more about the CoP. They are not going to. So maybe we need to move on to some sort of plan B.

Finally, I finished reading the whole thread.

The plan B is simple - to make figure skating go modern. Bring in Justin Bieber, I'm sure new fans of figure skating will come. ISU has already thought about it. The vocals will be introduced into singles skating after 2014. Don't worry about the old fans - they'll become dinosaurs before long.;)

Actually it was bluebonnet who called it "scandalous."

I said it let me know my ideas about good skating were "outdated."

That SP more than any program I have seen in the CoP era made it clear to me I no longer understood or even recognized a sport I had watched for forty years.

So yes....the three fall SP stuck with me.

You used that as a punch bag. I regarded that as an unfortunate rare case.
 
Last edited:
Top