Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Results 121 to 130 of 130

Thread: New Season, New Rules, & Judging: Singles and Pairs

  1. #121
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    419

    3 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Neenah16 View Post
    I haven't seen any fall get -2 GOE, mind giving an example please

    For the positive GOE bullets, for a jumping pass that ends with a fall

    1) very good height and very good length (of all jumps in a combo or sequence) - Possible
    2) good take-off and landing - Not possible
    3) effortless throughout (including rhythm in Jump combination) - Not possible
    4) steps before the jump, unexpected or creative entry - Possible
    5) very good body position from take-off to landing - Not possible
    6) element matches the music - Possible

    So, theoretically, a fall (on a jump) can check 3 positive bullet points without having to satisfy the required points. However, the rules says that a fall caps the positive GOE at +2. With the -5 deduction that would be -3 for a wonderful jump that for no reason ended in a fall. If there were other issues with the jump that require extra deduction (which is usually what happens anyway), then we will see -4 and -5 as the final GOE
    Tuktamysheva 3T+3T: http://www.fisg.it/upload/result/480..._SP_Scores.pdf
    Shoma Uno 3A+1Eu+3F: http://www.isuresults.com/results/se..._FS_Scores.pdf

  2. #122
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    207

    2 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by cohen-esque View Post
    Thank you for finding this.. I can see why those falls did not get -5 across the board since the jumps had some really good aspects to them, but -2 is definitely wrong and against the rules. I wonder if the ISU did anything about it.

  3. #123
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    28

    4 Not allowed!
    I do enjoy the new rules and judging system, but I REALLY am bummed that the one last vestige of fair, neutral, proper, unbiased calls -- the technical panel -- is even LESS empowered under the new system. I am REALLY frustrated with the dance judging. Stepanova/Bukin (who I love) go out and look completely stiff and uncomfortable in that Tango Romantica first section, to the point where they get a '<' call for an interruption of less than 4 beats. And it was a base level pattern at that. And what do the judges give it? Positive GOE. Only ONE of the nine judges (USA) gave them a negative GOE, and even she only went -1. They got a '<' call for the second section of the TR too, and still got all 2's and 3's.

    The differences between the levels are JUST not that big a deal. Even the step sequences -- now there's just the one in the short and one in the free -- it used to be that that's where the rubber meets the road for the good teams and the GREAT teams. If you lost a level on a step sequence in the past, it was a lost of 1.5 points. If you lost a level on Twizzles, it was a full point. And it all came from the TECH PANEL. Now it's not a big deal -- only 0.5 difference every level for step sequences, and even less for twizzles, cause you get 2 separate calls now. Teams that are challenging for the world podium are out there doing MiSt2 or MiSt1, but when you only lose 0.5 points a level, and you get 3's and 4's from the (often blind) judges, then you still rack up 10 points or more.

    Anyone remember the Olympics Short Dance? Papadakis and Cizeron skated a sloppy (for THEM!) short dance, with problems on Twizzles and Step Sequences. They got the call for Level 4 on the Twizzles, cause they technically did them, even if their spacing and their sync was way off. The judges were supposed to grade that. DID THEY? NO! under the old +3 system, they got 2-2-2-2-3-3-3-3-2. And not only that, but they beat a crisp and perfect Virtue and Moir in COMPONENTS (which is the LOL of the century for me). The reason that competition came down the way it did was SOLELY because the tech panel correctly called a level 3 Step Sequence on their pattern. They lost 1.5 points, and because of that were 1.7 points behind V/M after the SD.

    But under this system? I guarantee you that Gabby and Guillaume would have won the Olympics under -5/+5. This system puts even more in the hands of the judges. The tech panel still calls the things that need to be called. But they have been effectively neutered. The scores can be wildly manipulated by the judges in the -5/+5 system, and the tech panel's calls don't mean what they used to.

    I know some of you may have thought that they tech panel was not truly fair -- and I'll grant that no subjective system CAN be -- but I do think we can agree that the tech panels TRY to be fair, because they have to work together. At the very least, the tech panels are more fair and unbiased than the judges. I think that's evident.

    The issue is the ISU, in it's wisdom, realized that by going with -5/+5, the scores could go up dramatically. So instead of leaving the spacing of the levels in dance where they were, and alter the factor for the PCS for ice dance; they decide to leave the factor the same, but reduce the numerical values associated with each level, and a consequence of that was each level got closer to each other. They did this so the TSS and the PCS are generally half and half.

    What they SHOULD have done (and what I pray they do at the 2020 Congress) is realize their mistake, and set the levels back or closer to what they were, and just multiply by a different factor for PCS -- like it's NOT THAT HARD.

    /rantOver

  4. #124
    Bona Fide Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    4,172

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Neenah16 View Post
    I wonder if the ISU did anything about it.
    lol

  5. #125
    Bona Fide Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    11,477
    Country: Canada

    2 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Neenah16 View Post
    Thank you for finding this.. I can see why those falls did not get -5 across the board since the jumps had some really good aspects to them, but -2 is definitely wrong and against the rules. I wonder if the ISU did anything about it.
    This might be because the first element in the combo was done well. Still not okay though, IMO. I've yet to see a -2 on a solo jump fall.

    The ISU won't do anything for outliers. And these get cancelled anyways.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2N7AXQBDrk#t=3m55s
    http://www.isuresults.com/results/se..._FS_Scores.pdf
    (the first judge gave a +2 for that ; they also gave a -2 for the 3-jump series that clearly was a -3/-4 at the very best if you add up all the deductions in the combo)....

    edit: and before certain people react, I'm condemning the judge, not the skater.

  6. #126
    Bona Fide Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    11,477
    Country: Canada

    2 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by BrentWolgamott View Post
    I do enjoy the new rules and judging system, but I REALLY am bummed that the one last vestige of fair, neutral, proper, unbiased calls -- the technical panel -- is even LESS empowered under the new system. I am REALLY frustrated with the dance judging. Stepanova/Bukin (who I love) go out and look completely stiff and uncomfortable in that Tango Romantica first section, to the point where they get a '<' call for an interruption of less than 4 beats. And it was a base level pattern at that. And what do the judges give it? Positive GOE. Only ONE of the nine judges (USA) gave them a negative GOE, and even she only went -1. They got a '<' call for the second section of the TR too, and still got all 2's and 3's.

    The differences between the levels are JUST not that big a deal. Even the step sequences -- now there's just the one in the short and one in the free -- it used to be that that's where the rubber meets the road for the good teams and the GREAT teams. If you lost a level on a step sequence in the past, it was a lost of 1.5 points. If you lost a level on Twizzles, it was a full point. And it all came from the TECH PANEL. Now it's not a big deal -- only 0.5 difference every level for step sequences, and even less for twizzles, cause you get 2 separate calls now. Teams that are challenging for the world podium are out there doing MiSt2 or MiSt1, but when you only lose 0.5 points a level, and you get 3's and 4's from the (often blind) judges, then you still rack up 10 points or more.

    Anyone remember the Olympics Short Dance? Papadakis and Cizeron skated a sloppy (for THEM!) short dance, with problems on Twizzles and Step Sequences. They got the call for Level 4 on the Twizzles, cause they technically did them, even if their spacing and their sync was way off. The judges were supposed to grade that. DID THEY? NO! under the old +3 system, they got 2-2-2-2-3-3-3-3-2. And not only that, but they beat a crisp and perfect Virtue and Moir in COMPONENTS (which is the LOL of the century for me). The reason that competition came down the way it did was SOLELY because the tech panel correctly called a level 3 Step Sequence on their pattern. They lost 1.5 points, and because of that were 1.7 points behind V/M after the SD.

    But under this system? I guarantee you that Gabby and Guillaume would have won the Olympics under -5/+5. This system puts even more in the hands of the judges. The tech panel still calls the things that need to be called. But they have been effectively neutered. The scores can be wildly manipulated by the judges in the -5/+5 system, and the tech panel's calls don't mean what they used to.

    I know some of you may have thought that they tech panel was not truly fair -- and I'll grant that no subjective system CAN be -- but I do think we can agree that the tech panels TRY to be fair, because they have to work together. At the very least, the tech panels are more fair and unbiased than the judges. I think that's evident.

    The issue is the ISU, in it's wisdom, realized that by going with -5/+5, the scores could go up dramatically. So instead of leaving the spacing of the levels in dance where they were, and alter the factor for the PCS for ice dance; they decide to leave the factor the same, but reduce the numerical values associated with each level, and a consequence of that was each level got closer to each other. They did this so the TSS and the PCS are generally half and half.

    What they SHOULD have done (and what I pray they do at the 2020 Congress) is realize their mistake, and set the levels back or closer to what they were, and just multiply by a different factor for PCS -- like it's NOT THAT HARD.

    /rantOver
    Real talk. I love S/B, but that was outrageous judging, especially on their TR section 1. I know that it's a whole section, not just that part, but to me a well-done section with a major mistake should still score lower grade of execution that the same section performed only average or slightly above average. It's like when some skaters have to fight for +1 or +2 GOE with a clean jump because they're not popular, while under -5/+5 a popular skater can make a major error and be dropped down to a +2 with the judge citing "Oh, well, I was going to give them a +5 otherwise."

    Especially in ice dance, this +5/-5 system can really affect the standings and "save" skaters with mistakes, which isn't right.

  7. #127
    Tripping on the Podium
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    527

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by BrentWolgamott View Post

    Anyone remember the Olympics Short Dance? Papadakis and Cizeron skated a sloppy (for THEM!) short dance, with problems on Twizzles and Step Sequences. They got the call for Level 4 on the Twizzles, cause they technically did them, even if their spacing and their sync was way off. The judges were supposed to grade that. DID THEY? NO! under the old +3 system, they got 2-2-2-2-3-3-3-3-2. And not only that, but they beat a crisp and perfect Virtue and Moir in COMPONENTS (which is the LOL of the century for me). The reason that competition came down the way it did was SOLELY because the tech panel correctly called a level 3 Step Sequence on their pattern. They lost 1.5 points, and because of that were 1.7 points behind V/M after the SD.


    /rantOver
    The spacing during one of P/C's Twizzles was the only noticeably "off" thing in that program. Beating a supposedly "clean" V/M on Components may be LOL of the century for you, or it may be that your basic literacy in reading movement is just that, basic.

  8. #128
    ~ Figure Skating Is My Passion ~ Ladskater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    5,208

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by cruzceleste View Post
    Just me?
    I think for the sake of the skater's health and over all physical safety with the way these skaters push themselves to do out do one another we can miss 30 seconds. It's not that much time really. Why not just enjoy watching the program and finesse of each skater?

  9. #129
    ~ Figure Skating Is My Passion ~ Ladskater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    5,208

    0 Not allowed!
    This is an interesting post. I remember when figures were removed from competition. Sure it changed the way skating was judged forever and the out come of a competition to some degree. Perhaps over time we will see if there is any benefit to cutting the programs to 30 sec. less.

  10. #130
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    202
    Country: United States of America

    1 Not allowed!
    We are well though the season, now, and I miss the extra seconds of skating, so much! I've mourned the lost time at every competition, every skate (well, almost every skate). If skaters are stressed and many spectators are unhappy, then shame on the governing body for continuing to cater to TV networks.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •