2016 Cup of China Data Analysis - Men

Data Analysis - 2016 Cup of China Mens SP

---

Official Event Page | Results (SP) | Judges Scores (SP) | Panel of Judges (SP)

---

* Top 6 skaters are color coded, so it's easier to spot where they are in each category.
* If you spot any mistake or if you have any suggestions/questions, please let me know! Thank you!

---

Other GPS Data Analysis List: 2016 Senior Grand Prix Data Analysis - Men

Data Analysis - 2016 Cup of China Mens FS

---

Official Event Page | Results (Overall) | Results (FS) | Judges Scores (FS) | Panel of Judges (FS)

---

* Top 6 skaters are color coded, so it's easier to spot where they are in each category.
* If you spot any mistake or if you have any suggestions/questions, please let me know! Thank you!

---

Other GPS Data Analysis List: 2016 Senior Grand Prix Data Analysis - Men

Thank you GOI. Positions 2-5 are all within 2 pts.!:shocked: Good luck guys, skate well, skate deep, no falls, no pops! This is one of the most hair-raising GP competitions.

I have high hopes that Patrick will break away tomorrow.:hap85:

this is very good. I think that for those complaining about some scores, it makes it easy to see where their faves won or lost points.

WOW thanks! TBH : personally, it makes me feel even better how the event was judged. People saying for instance that Patrick is given points when he is below average on steps, because he lost a level, should think twice... if he were just given points, judges/tp could easily award him more in steps and nobody would even notice... also, people should notice here that spins make a difference... almost the equivalent of a 3t... sometimes

Thanks! This is great! I'll be ready with my nit-picking glasses and my GOE monitor as well as my PCS gauge when the Free Skating is finished.

This is amazing !!! Thank you so much !

Good stuff. Thanks! :agree:

Thank you everyone! I'm so happy that you think it's helpful!!

A bit of my "personal" opinion on PCS of SP here. At first I also thought JIN was low-balled on PCS, but if you take a look at the PCS tables, it's not that bad. I actually think SAMOHIN was the one got low-balled slightly on everything. I personally don't think CHAN was "rescued" either. Maybe it was again the ice condition, most of the skaters had difficulties.

SS - We can tell from the sound of his edge, that CHAN's skating is superb. I'd also move up BREZINA about same as YAN, and give both of them better marks. Their skating skill is just brilliant. Effortless glides, deep edge, solid control... Well, they SO/fell, that makes their SS marks lower than their actual "pure" skating skill alone, maybe? But IMO, "skating" occupies most of the program time so fall or jumping ability should not influence TOO much on SS marks.

TR - I am still not sure & learning what exactly judges think as a "good transition". But I think CHAN blends in transitions so beautifully. Which I LOVE now, but before it was hard to see because of my lack of knowledge about skating, not knowing the difficulty and quality of what he does.

PE - This one, I'd put JIN ahead of CHAN. I know he has his awkwardness still, but his "joy of skating" was vibrant! I don't know if HE connected with the audience, but I felt it was the other way around - audience wanted to connect with him. SAMOHIN should've gotten a lot more IMO. He is such a good performer. But ATST not superficial at all. I can't believe it's his 1st year at senior level!

CO - I'm happy with this except I would still put BREZINA slightly ahead of JIN. That program is so well choreographed with lots of ice coverage. This is where more refined skater like CHAN and BREZINA has more advantages, I think.

IN - Hmm. Maybe more points for SAMOHIN because his posture, gesture and face were all in line of the mood/tempo of the music. Or maybe a bit more points for everyone! I don't know... IN is such a subjective area (well, that's what figure skating judging is?) so I wish there wasn't so much gap in b/w. Where SS, I think there should be more clear difference b/w REALLY good skaters and not so good skaters.

Great analysis GOI, can't wait to hear form you about FS!:agree:

4everchan said:

this is very good. I think that for those complaining about some scores, it makes it easy to see where their faves won or lost points.

Click to expand...

Or where your fave got over-scored when we look at the full protocols because this here doesn't really give a proper picture. To talk about the jump GOE that was rewarded it cannot be bunched up like this because it's meaningless, it has to be done one by one (though I am of course, very grateful for the hard work and it is very useful overall).

Love this, Geek on Ice! I alwasy suspected judges love Michal almost as much as I do (and deservedly so :dev3: ), and it's quite clear in your tables Agre 200% on SS remark, Han Yan and Michal are great! Especially Han Yan, I can't understand why he doesn't get higher marks on SS, he's clearly one of the best in buissness in that aspect!

Will you be doing a break down for Transitions/Crossovers too, if you have time? That was quite helpful to understand scores (and gave a reason to be mad at some judges )

Yatagarasu said:

Or where your fave got over-scored when we look at the full protocols because this here doesn't really give a proper picture. To talk about the jump GOE that was rewarded it cannot be bunched up like this because it's meaningless, it has to be done one by one (though I am of course, very grateful for the hard work and it is very useful overall).

Click to expand...

Thank you for your opinion, Yatagarasu!
I'm sorry that you found this analysis not giving a proper picture and meaningless because it's bunched up. :sad21:

Actually I have more detailed data w/ each elements name/level etc on my PC so I "could" share one by one.
However, my main purpose for this analysis was to GROUP things together.
I find judges scores are a bit "all over the place", so I always wanted to see things "grouped/ordered", so we can see general ideas and compare things differently. It may not be detailed as you like, but I was hoping that it could be a starting point for some skating fans.

TBH, if you really want to nail on a particular element, you can do so by looking at the Judges score, like you probably have been doing so already. I think you can even find website that allows you to search/compare each elements in past events etc.

Let me know if you have any other suggestions! :agree2:

I found it really interesting actually and I appreciate your hard work.

My word to Jin? Work your spins. He was 9th in spins.

The judges still like Han. I hold out hope for him.

Geek On Ice said:

Thank you for your opinion, Yatagarasu!
I'm sorry that you found this analysis not giving a proper picture and meaningless because it's bunched up. :sad21:

Actually I have more detailed data w/ each elements name/level etc on my PC so I "could" share one by one.
However, my main purpose for this analysis was to GROUP things together.
I find judges scores are a bit "all over the place", so I always wanted to see things "grouped/ordered", so we can see general ideas and compare things differently. It may not be detailed as you like, but I was hoping that it could be a starting point for some skating fans.

TBH, if you really want to nail on a particular element, you can do so by looking at the Judges score, like you probably have been doing so already. I think you can even find website that allows you to search/compare each elements in past events etc.

Let me know if you have any other suggestions! :agree2:

Click to expand...

Not sure, but I think maybe Yatagarasu was saying that the only way to tell if someone was overscored in GOE is to look at the individual element on video and then compare it to what the judges awarded him?

I personally love what you've done here (and thank you again for all your work!) because it shows an overall picture of where skaters are gaining (or losing) points. It also shows generally how the judges rank a skater's execution of jumps or spins relative to others. For example, it seems like the judges thought Patrick's spins were far better than everyone else's - or at least, that's how they awarded the GOE. In contrast, Daniel Samohin had the highest BV for his spins but the lowest GOE. I also think it's really interesting to see the individual PCS components broken out and compared one by one. For example, people often comment on Han Yan's SS and say he was under marked in PCS, but this chart shows that he received the second highest mark for SS (whether it should be closer to Patrick's is another subject).

Boyang received so little +GOE, he had a few excellent jumps.

I think his jumps today for the LP weren't as great as in the SP.. for instance, his opening 4Lz was stiff and he couldn't put his 3T at the end of it... the 4S worked out but wasn't a wow jump... then he lost a bunch of GOE on the fall for his 4T... the 3A combo was really close to the boards and was scary... i can understand not getting major +++ there... you can look at it various ways I suppose... I tend to look at judges scores and assume they are right. Then I try to find out how they have marked, why and on what basis... Some people prefer to give their own marking and then call the judges wrong.... for me, it's counterproductive as I seek to understand what works with the judges and what doesn't... Patrick's jumps, when on, are very impressive because he is not the fastest rotator so his jumps are bigger sort of slower in the air... which, combined with his exquisite position, brings lots of positive GOE.... I think that's what the judges perceive...

qwertyskates said:

Boyang received so little +GOE, he had a few excellent jumps.

Click to expand...

Just wanted to thank Geek on Ice for this... it's so revealing. And I too, prefer the grouped method as it allows us to see a general tendency, which for GOE I find important because one fall/pop will really have an impact on the BV/TES.... and sometimes when we look at individual elements we don't keep that in mind.... that other elements can have stellar quality but there was one fall... or that sometimes, there is no fall nor pop but elements are not really that stellar... etc

Geek On Ice said:

Thank you for your opinion, Yatagarasu!
I'm sorry that you found this analysis not giving a proper picture and meaningless because it's bunched up. :sad21:

Actually I have more detailed data w/ each elements name/level etc on my PC so I "could" share one by one.
However, my main purpose for this analysis was to GROUP things together.
I find judges scores are a bit "all over the place", so I always wanted to see things "grouped/ordered", so we can see general ideas and compare things differently. It may not be detailed as you like, but I was hoping that it could be a starting point for some skating fans.

TBH, if you really want to nail on a particular element, you can do so by looking at the Judges score, like you probably have been doing so already. I think you can even find website that allows you to search/compare each elements in past events etc.

Let me know if you have any other suggestions! :agree2:

Click to expand...

Yes, I use protocols.

My point was referring to the 4everchan's statement above, about seeing where points are lost and won (and the two of us had this conversation in the SP thread). In the case of the jump GOE which I specified, bunched up numbers don't tell us anything apart from the end score. In the CoC men's SP, we had positive GOE for a hand down for Patrick Chan. This is not visible in the sum itself which is why you cannot really use it to have a conversation about the GOE won or lost in this case, or if someone was over-scored or not. In the FS it doesn't say more than Boyang got very little GOE but not where any of it was lost which would then give us a discussion point. It doesn't show Patrick's 3As and the GOE he gets for them which are very much a question. The only option is to do it jump by jump and that's just creating unnecessary work for you as it's, in essence, just reading the protocols which we can all do.

I mean I certainly see why some people will like the jump GOE grouped too, as it covers all the little curiosities they'd rather have covered.

Anyway, apart from the jumps, as I said it's very useful overall, and I personally think that the PCS bit of this is incredibly useful, as well as letting us see some trends. Thanks again.

4everchan said:

I think his jumps today for the LP weren't as great as in the SP.. for instance, his opening 4Lz was stiff and he couldn't put his 3T at the end of it... the 4S worked out but wasn't a wow jump... then he lost a bunch of GOE on the fall for his 4T... the 3A combo was really close to the boards and was scary... i can understand not getting major +++ there... you can look at it various ways I suppose... I tend to look at judges scores and assume they are right. Then I try to find out how they have marked, why and on what basis... Some people prefer to give their own marking and then call the judges wrong.... for me, it's counterproductive as I seek to understand what works with the judges and what doesn't... Patrick's jumps, when on, are very impressive because he is not the fastest rotator so his jumps are bigger sort of slower in the air... which, combined with his exquisite position, brings lots of positive GOE.... I think that's what the judges perceive...

Click to expand...

Boyang's Lz, 3As and Flips were all textbook, he had a lot of flow out of his 3Lz-3T combo, I remember it was better than Han's. The Euro guys were remarking his jump technique is impeccable. So the total GOE is puzzling, as I remember he had transitions going in and out too, for a few jumps.

Yatagarasu said:

Yes, I use protocols.

My point was referring to the 4everchan's statement above, about seeing where points are lost and won (and the two of us had this conversation in the SP thread). In the case of the jump GOE which I specified, bunched up numbers don't tell us anything apart from the end score. In the CoC men's SP, we had positive GOE for a hand down for Patrick Chan. This is not visible in the sum itself which is why you cannot really use it to have a conversation about the GOE won or lost in this case, or if someone was over-scored or not. In the FS it doesn't say more than Boyang got very little GOE but not where any of it was lost which would then give us a discussion point. It doesn't show Patrick's 3As and the GOE he gets for them which are very much a question. The only option is to do it jump by jump and that's just creating unnecessary work for you as it's, in essence, just reading the protocols which we can all do.

I mean I certainly see why some people will like the jump GOE grouped too, as it covers all the little curiosities they'd rather have covered.

Anyway, apart from the jumps, as I said it's very useful overall, and I personally think that the PCS bit of this is incredibly useful, as well as letting us see some trends. Thanks again.

Click to expand...

wow.. value judgment much... what GOE grouped gives is not a cover up of things we want to hide... it's a general impression of the program. Sometimes a skater can have the best jump in the world, land it with great success in a program but other jumps have very little flow... this affects judges perception..... so even if a quad something or a great triple axel could gain lots of GOE, sometimes some skaters will have issues on other simpler jumps... will land them but they are a bit stiff... etc... and they do not get rewarded for those.... we see all of this in the protocols ...

BUT : what I find interesting is HOW GOE is applied OVERALL as a tendency for a skater who will have great jumps all over the program.. not high and lows.

I think it's especially valuable for men, especially in the LP.
The SP is a high risk program for men at this point... 3A for most skaters is a high risk element (except for Yuzu!)
Solo Jump: most use their quad... High risk element for everyone
Combo : many use quads here as well or harder triple-triple... again high risk...

So in the SP, if the risky elements are landed, that's already quite an achievement...for most.

In the LP : it's very different IMHO. There is a combination of high risk elements with some much easier elements... How will a skater land a 3Lz or a 3L for instance will matter in the GOE. Some jumpers land incredibly difficult jumps but with less quality. Boyang's 4Lz which was brilliant in the SP wasn't as good today in the LP... which means that another lesser difficult jump which will receive positive GOE cancels the difficulty.... so overall, the BV, which is made of harder and simpler elements, gets GOE on all these elements, and then a TENDENCY comes out of this.... a skater with higher GOE throughout shows a certain level of quality that is spread throughout the entire program. That's why it's important to see grouped GOE. It's not to hide certain elements... we all know for instance that Patrick and Boyang lost 4 points in GOE on their fall... but how was the general tendency in the LP.... Patrick was cleanly landing with quality, pretty much everything else..

Now, I am not interested to read once again that there was a hand down or a lack of difficult entry or exit or tano etc.... I have seen your several posts about this. You can take it to the judges if you disagree... As I have explained, what I find interesting is not to act as a judge and assign my own marks to the skaters.... what I find interesting is to look at the scores and try to see how a skate was perceived by them... what kind of jump they like to reward... are they after quality? btw... exit of a jump that is gliding and flowing on a beautiful edge can be seen as impressive rather than going right into some "masking" steps covering up lack of flow...

just my two cents....

I repeat, for me, these tables are extremely interesting and can lead to more objective analysis...