CoP: Beneficial or Detrimental?
- Thread starter CDMM1991
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2005
I think it might be a little too early to say; couldn’t we have an “I’m not sure” category?
Certainly it has been a mixed bag. I do like the semi-specificity of the PCS much better than the values skaters used to receive for artistic impression. I like the idea of assigning each technical element a value and then adding or subtracting points based on the quality of its execution. However, I think the disparities in values needs to be looked at, especially in singles. Why should a 4T/4T combination; which must be more difficult than a 4T/3T/3L combo, have an identical base value? When skaters and pundits go on about steps being as difficult or perhaps even more difficult than triple jumps, why aren’t they worth as much as say a 3L?
It seems that because many elements are not listed elements, like positional jumps, they are being omitted by skaters. While skaters do not receive technical points for doing these elements, they might be reflected by favourable PCS.
Some have commented on the fact that this system has allowed some skaters to proceed further and finish higher in completions than under the old 6.0 ordinal system. Whether or not this is true is a matter of some debate. Whether or not it is beneficial to the sport as whole seems more a matter of personal preference, as in, do you enjoy these skaters more and therefore like that they are placing higher than if another judging system was in place?
I don’t like the fact that a computer selects the judges’ scores to be used at random, and then, not giving us the names and nationalities of said judges. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t see how this is supposed to give the impression of transparency in judging. This system does not, as some have claimed, effectively solve the problem of one or two crooked judges exerting an undue influence on the overall results.
Regardless of the scoring system, passions, preferences and pride will always lead to debates over results, and I’m afraid nothing can cure that. Quiet frankly, the debates over competitions are often more exciting than the actual event. So from that point of view, CoP has been great, as it’s given us one more thing to argue about.
No system of judging is perfect, (except our own!) but I think if it continues to evolve apace, and good people put good ideas and this leads to careful and well thought-out tweaks and modifications, then CoP will be better than the system it replaces.
I’ll give the system another year or two before I pass a final judgment though.
Certainly it has been a mixed bag. I do like the semi-specificity of the PCS much better than the values skaters used to receive for artistic impression. I like the idea of assigning each technical element a value and then adding or subtracting points based on the quality of its execution. However, I think the disparities in values needs to be looked at, especially in singles. Why should a 4T/4T combination; which must be more difficult than a 4T/3T/3L combo, have an identical base value? When skaters and pundits go on about steps being as difficult or perhaps even more difficult than triple jumps, why aren’t they worth as much as say a 3L?
It seems that because many elements are not listed elements, like positional jumps, they are being omitted by skaters. While skaters do not receive technical points for doing these elements, they might be reflected by favourable PCS.
Some have commented on the fact that this system has allowed some skaters to proceed further and finish higher in completions than under the old 6.0 ordinal system. Whether or not this is true is a matter of some debate. Whether or not it is beneficial to the sport as whole seems more a matter of personal preference, as in, do you enjoy these skaters more and therefore like that they are placing higher than if another judging system was in place?
I don’t like the fact that a computer selects the judges’ scores to be used at random, and then, not giving us the names and nationalities of said judges. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t see how this is supposed to give the impression of transparency in judging. This system does not, as some have claimed, effectively solve the problem of one or two crooked judges exerting an undue influence on the overall results.
Regardless of the scoring system, passions, preferences and pride will always lead to debates over results, and I’m afraid nothing can cure that. Quiet frankly, the debates over competitions are often more exciting than the actual event. So from that point of view, CoP has been great, as it’s given us one more thing to argue about.
No system of judging is perfect, (except our own!) but I think if it continues to evolve apace, and good people put good ideas and this leads to careful and well thought-out tweaks and modifications, then CoP will be better than the system it replaces.
I’ll give the system another year or two before I pass a final judgment though.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2005
Given the choices here I voted for beneficial, because I think it has already had some positive effects and hope it will continue to evolve into a truly beneficial system. That said, I still think it is a bit early for a final judgment.
CoP is not perfect, but the ISU are changing it every season it seems, so maybe they will manage to get it more or less right at a later date; though as always, sooner, rather than later would be nice!
Here’s hoping.
CoP is not perfect, but the ISU are changing it every season it seems, so maybe they will manage to get it more or less right at a later date; though as always, sooner, rather than later would be nice!
Here’s hoping.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2003
CDMM1991 said:Heldentenor said:
CDMM, Your strategy worked in my case - force me to choose!!
I voted for the benefits of COP. I agree fully with Heldentenor that there are still flaws, but all in all I like it better than 6.0.
All of this of course is IMO - I'm sure others might see things I call "flaws" as "benefits" in either system. All depends on your point of view.
I think the biggest flaw of 6.0 was the clear advantage that skate order gave or took away from a skater. As an example, I think it's fair to say that at the Oly's, a top seeded skater drawing to skate first (or very early) in the SP absolutely held back scoring to the extent that the SAME skate later on would not only get a higher score (which in and of itself didn't matter) but result in a higher ordinal. In the current implementation of COP, I think this is still an issue on the PCS side (and I hope we see future improvement there), but I think the situation on the TES side is improved.
Another big flaw of 6.0 was lack of definition for technical and presentation elements. While the sport of FS will always have subjective elements to the judging, I think the attempts under COP to add specific values for tech elements and at least make an attempt to improve definitions on the presentation side are positive.
Another thing I like about COP is that there is a clear point difference that puts distance between skaters in the results, v. just an ordinal. Someone who skates WAY better than the next person in the SP will carry that competitive "distance" forward. I realize in some situations this might seem to make the LP less exciting (i.e. there were comps last season where Irina carried large margins forward that became almost impossible to beat). But in fairness to the athletes themselves, I like the idea that if they EARN a point advantage going forward, they get what they've earned. (assuming no craziness in PCS, which I know is still a problem as noted above).
It saddens me greatly when I read the "history books" where it just seemed like totally expected practice to reward skaters based on reputation. That's just the way the system was. i.e. baring a complete meltdown, judges were just expected to place a country's number 1 skater ahead of that same country's number 2 skater, and stuff like that. Skaters had to "wait their turn" to become "crowned." While I think old customs like that will die hard because we still have PCS and GOE to "make it happen," I like that in theory anyway, the new system provides more objectivity. I hope under COP some of the old customs that detracted from rewarding skaters for their performance that day die sooner rather than later.
By far the biggest issue I have with COP is sekret judging. But they brought that out under 6.0, so even without COP that would have still been an issue. I hope they fix that one in a hurry.
And ITA with Heldentenor - In my selfish viewpoint the new system does give us a lot more details to debate post competition.
DG
Similar threads
