The Three Top Ladies of the Worlds | Page 6 | Golden Skate

The Three Top Ladies of the Worlds

Doggygirl

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2003
LOL Joe...

Joesitz said:
Ok if you understand their chatter. I just happen to like MM and DG tackling that subject in print on Golden Skate and I am sure many member do also. Let's not discourage them.

Joe

I can only speak for myself, but I WILL say that there is nothing out there that will discourage me from speaking my opinions on this topic, at least nothing that I know of today. :)

I will take this opportunity to encourage MM's analysis. I think it's very significant to understand the statistical importance of the things we only speculate about here - i.e. PCS score impact (or not) and GOE impact (or not). So MM, I can only hope you "bring it on" more in the off season, and help all of us more serious FS fans head into the Oly year a bit more educated.

DG
 

hockeyfan228

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Doggygirl said:
The combo where she might have done a 3 Loop was before her solo 3 Loop. It was:

3F/3T/2Lo
3L/2T
3Lo
2Lo
2A / 3S seq
3T
2A

The 2A + 3S SEQ was improvised after Kostner doubled the 2Lo, which was supposed to be a 3Lo/2Lo combination, like she did in the quali round:

3F/3T/2Lo
3L/2T
3Lo
3Lo+2Lo
3S
3T
2A
 

emma

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Mathman said:
Here's the link to the scale of values page that Doggygirl mentioned, if anyone wants to check it out.

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-152085-169301-64123-0-file,00.pdf

Well, like Emma, I am supposed to be working, but...

I just ran some of the spin statistics through a least-squares linear regression analysis to test the hypothesis that the judges are using the GOEs to give a double reward to the technically most challenging spins. This is, are you more likely to get positive GOEs for a hard spin or for a particularly well-done easy spin?

I used the data from the top ten ladies in the free skate at worlds (sample size 40, since each skater did 4 spins). First I ran "level" versus "average GOE." Is there a statistical tendancy for higher level spins to get higher GOEs?

The coeficient of correlation was r = .36. Informally, this means that only about 13% (r squared) of the variation in GOEs was correlated with variation in level of difficulty. (I also tried logarithmic and exponential correlation, but the relation was even smaller for those tests.)

The rest, 87% of variance in GOEs, was due to "other factors" -- i.e., presumably to proper judgments about the quality of the element independent of the level. Indeed, the .36 correlation probably reflects nothing more sinister that the fact that the best spinners do the hardest spins and do them well.

If instead you compare base value to GOE, the correlation is even lower: r = .14, so only two percent of the variance in COE is related to the base value (and presumably 98% to the judges' determination of quality).

So that shoots that particular conspiracy theory in the head.

BTW, in all but one of the spins (40 in all) done by the top ladies, they got a positive GOE. (The one exception was Ando's flying combination spin, which got a negative GOE of 4 one-hundredths of a point.) So this shows that the judges are not being very critical of weaknesses such as traveling. But at least they are ignoring these problems consistently across the board (IIRC Miki's combo spin was really attrocious).

Mathman

mathman....thanks for doing this. the analysis is so interesting, and truthfully, the results surprised me. It will, though, be interesting to see if the judges start making obvious deductions for traveling. Also, do you or anyone else know what factor speed of revolution plays in marking spins; what about MORE than the required rotation? thanks.
 

emma

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
hockeyfan228 said:
The 2A + 3S SEQ was improvised after Kostner doubled the 2Lo, which was supposed to be a 3Lo/2Lo combination, like she did in the quali round:

3F/3T/2Lo
3L/2T
3Lo
3Lo+2Lo
3S
3T
2A

thanks for clarifying that...still, as mathman said, quick thinking, good for her.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
emma said:
mathman....thanks for doing this. the analysis is so interesting, and truthfully, the results surprised me. It will, though, be interesting to see if the judges start making obvious deductions for traveling. Also, do you or anyone else know what factor speed of revolution plays in marking spins; what about MORE than the required rotation? thanks.
Here is the link to the rules about GOE.

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-152083-169299-64126-0-file,00.pdf

That's an interesting question about speed. The rules do not seem specifically to say anything about the rate of revolution, only about changes in speed. For instance, under the criteria for a -1 GOE it says (among other things) "slows down," while under 0 GOE it says "maintains speed" and under +3 GOE it says "accelerates during the spin."

About extra revolutions, that is one factor listed under +2 GOE.

About traveling, it says "travels slightly" under -1 GOE and "travels moderately" under -2 GOE.

Mathman
 

hockeyfan228

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Mathman said:
Indeed, the .36 correlation probably reflects nothing more sinister that the fact that the best spinners do the hardest spins and do them well.
Except that while the best skaters attempted some of the hardest spins, they did not always do them as well as some of the lower-level skaters did some of the easier spins. The travel in spins was as ignored as the flutz and the lip and most of Liashenko's obvious telegraphs. Slutskaya had to fall out of a spin before the score reflected a negative GOE. Lower-rated skaters did some beautiful, well-centered spins with clean transitions and some lovely, textbook jumps, but were rated as if they were mediocre in all elements.
 

slutskayafan21

Match Penalty
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
cianni said:
Hi Joe, I have no info just responding in error of course to your post. I thought you were counting Michelle out as if she didnt exist. My mistake. The top 3 dont particularly impress me though I think the judges could annoint one of them. My pick would be maybe Michelle if shes on but Arakawa could if shes on target . . My bet would be Irina will be gifted again with points over the top. I sure hope not buttttttttttttt my faith in honest judging is at an all time low. Another scandel and there goes the sport.

It sounds like a scandal for you is queen Michelle not winning another competition. Sorry but I think the sport will survive if that happens. :laugh:
 

CDMM1991

Medalist
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
slutskayafan21 said:
It sounds like a scandal for you is queen Michelle not winning another competition. Sorry but I think the sport will survive if that happens. :laugh:

slutzkayafan I don't think that's what she meant. I think she meant if Irina didn't deserve to win but did, and that caused a scandal, the sport would finally be viewed around the world as completely corrupt. Salt Lake is still on people's minds.
 

curious

Final Flight
Joined
Aug 15, 2003
CDMM1991 said:
slutzkayafan I don't think that's what she meant. I think she meant if Irina didn't deserve to win but did, and that caused a scandal, the sport would finally be viewed around the world as completely corrupt. Salt Lake is still on people's minds.


and we know the kween has not been gifted in the past like her recent fourth place in moscow right? :laugh:
 

gezando

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
curious said:
and we know the kween has not been gifted in the past like her recent fourth place in moscow right? :laugh:

Kwan's overall win and medals are well deserved. So where were the gifts?
 

slutskayafan21

Match Penalty
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
When you say somebody will be gifted again with points over the top(which makes it sound like all her wins are some sort of fixed farce), that the top 3 pretty much all suck(in a year Kwan was 4th at Worlds of course), and you dont want another scandal, what would one logicaly assume that person is indicating. :rofl:
 

cianni

On the Ice
Joined
Jul 28, 2003
Oh My

Havent been here to see the usual response to my post, All I can say is---- I know you believe you understood what you think I said but Im not sure you realize what you read is not what I meant. No point in saying anything else with these particular posters. Hi Joe and MM read some of your posts well said and my sentiments exactly. End of this subject for me on this particular thread. Cianni. Have a go at it
 

curious

Final Flight
Joined
Aug 15, 2003
The russians are always gifted but they quickly forget about all that nonsense when a russian coach or coreographer helps an american skater win right? Oh the Hypocrisy :biggrin:
 
Top