- Joined
- Apr 22, 2014
Fine. Take out the data operator and am I correct, though? It's not just the TS but the whole panel.
2015-16 SOV Tables for Singles and Pairs released
- Thread starter GF2445
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2013
Yes, that is correct.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
Are you certain on this? I remember from Sochi discussions that a 2 out of 3 majority could overrule the TS on edge calls. Can you/do you know of a link from ISU that details this?
There are three people deciding the calls: Technical Specialist, Assistant Technical Specialist, and Technical Controller.
From what I've overheard at local competitions, if there's a planned program content sheet, the ATS announces what kind of element (jump, spin, steps) the skater is planning to do next. The TS calls what they actually do.
For leveled elements, especially in pairs and dance, each of the three panel members may have specific features to look for.
After the element is complete the ATS and the TC would say whether the skater/team met the criteria they were looking for.
Then the TS would call the level.
Any of the three can then say "Review."
The Data Operator just enters the codes. The Video Operator just tags the video so they can find the elements easily afterward when it's time for reviews.
During the reviews, usually they just say what they're verifying and they each say yes or no. I think the TS and the ATS are both supposed to say what they call, and then if they disagree the TC will break the tie. That's where the 2 out of 3 comes in -- the TS is one of the 3. The data operator is not. If the ATS and TC agree with each other and disagree with the TS, they overrule the TS.
Sometimes there may need to be discussion if the skater did something weird that they have to figure out how to fit that element into the rules. For simple decisions like was the jump rotated or not, was the takeoff edge correct or not, they can just say yes or no.
The Data Operator will change the code in the computer if the tech panel changes the call after the review.
Data operators and video operators often also have judging and/or tech panel appointments, but 1) it's not required and 2) they're not allowed to give input into the decisions when they're sitting in the data or the video seats. If they change seats for the next event and become tech specialists or controllers, then they have input into the decisions for that event.
The ISU description of the process is here:
http://www.isu.org/en/single-and-pair-skating-and-ice-dance/isu-judging-system/introduction
US tech panel information is here:
http://usfigureskating.org/New_Judging.asp?id=302
From what I've overheard at local competitions, if there's a planned program content sheet, the ATS announces what kind of element (jump, spin, steps) the skater is planning to do next. The TS calls what they actually do.
For leveled elements, especially in pairs and dance, each of the three panel members may have specific features to look for.
After the element is complete the ATS and the TC would say whether the skater/team met the criteria they were looking for.
Then the TS would call the level.
Any of the three can then say "Review."
The Data Operator just enters the codes. The Video Operator just tags the video so they can find the elements easily afterward when it's time for reviews.
During the reviews, usually they just say what they're verifying and they each say yes or no. I think the TS and the ATS are both supposed to say what they call, and then if they disagree the TC will break the tie. That's where the 2 out of 3 comes in -- the TS is one of the 3. The data operator is not. If the ATS and TC agree with each other and disagree with the TS, they overrule the TS.
Sometimes there may need to be discussion if the skater did something weird that they have to figure out how to fit that element into the rules. For simple decisions like was the jump rotated or not, was the takeoff edge correct or not, they can just say yes or no.
The Data Operator will change the code in the computer if the tech panel changes the call after the review.
Data operators and video operators often also have judging and/or tech panel appointments, but 1) it's not required and 2) they're not allowed to give input into the decisions when they're sitting in the data or the video seats. If they change seats for the next event and become tech specialists or controllers, then they have input into the decisions for that event.
The ISU description of the process is here:
http://www.isu.org/en/single-and-pair-skating-and-ice-dance/isu-judging-system/introduction
US tech panel information is here:
http://usfigureskating.org/New_Judging.asp?id=302
Last edited:
Changes in ISU judging system for 2015-2016 season
Hello!! Here are some changes that will be from next season !
Jump
Change of Base Value
3T: 4.1–>4.3
3S: 4.2–>4.4
In the case of UR:
If 70% of BV is given (V):
3S: 2.9–>3.1
3A: 6.0–>5.9
4T: 7.2–>8.0
4S: 7.4–>8.1
If 50% of BV is given (V1):
4F: 6.2 8.0
4Lz: 6.8 8.4
*V: UR or wrong edge
*V1: UR AND wrong edge
For quadruple jumps:
GOE -1.0–>-1.2
GOE -2.0–>-2.4
GOE -3.0–>-4.0
[Positive GOE maintain the same; 4A: +1.2, +2.4, +3.6]
Landing of Jump:
- Fall: GOE -3
- 2 feet: GOE -3
- Step Out: GOE -2–>GOE -3
Lacking rotation (no sign) including half loop in a combo: GOE -1
In Short Programme, if the skater cannot complete a combination jump, the jump must be graded as -3 for GOE.
ChSq (Choreographic sequence):
Addition to GOE criteria:
Inability to clearly demonstrate the sequence: GOE -2 to -3
Loss of control while executing the sequence: GOE -1 to -3
Does not correspond to enhance the music: GOE -2 to -3
StSq (Step Sequence)
Two different combinations of 3 difficult turns executed with a clear rhythm within the sequence (for level 4 the 2 combination must be on different feet)
Type of turns and steps are combined and some are taken out:
Type of difficult turns and steps: twizzles, brackets, loops, rockers and Choctaws
Minimum variety: 5 different turns and steps from the list above, none can be counted twice
Simple variety: same as above but 7 different; Variety: 9
Complexity: 11 different turns and steps, none can be counted twice and 5 types must be executed in both direction
GOE criteria:
Good clarity and precision use of various steps during the sequence
Spin
For Layback Spin: One clear change of position backwards-sideways or reverse: at least 3 2 revolutions
For BOTH flying spin (with no change of foot and only one position) and spin with flying entrance are required: a clear visible jump, basic landing position must be reached within first 2 revolutions after the landing and from the moment this position is initially reached it must be held for 2 revs after the landing
Definition of “Both direction immediately following each other in sit or camel spin”: “Long curves of exit after the first part or entry into the second part are reflected in GOE” added
Addition to GOE criteria
Slow or reduction of speed (used to be slow or travelling): GOE -1 to -3
Poor fly (flying spin entry): GOE -1 to -3
Organised and writen by: http://yulialipnitskaya.tumblr.com/
Overall , i think they become really really strict and will be difficult to see new world records both in men and women . At first , you will see that some bv of the jumps are higher but negative GOEs become really strict. Especially , as i understood , if you fail to do the combination jump you will take immediately -3 GOE in the jump you managed to perform. Thats A DISASTER ! I can remember of Julia Lipnitskaya in the europeans last year of failind to do a combination but then she put the jump in an another compination. Now that will remove you points?? Then , i saw that 4Lz UR will go from 6 to 8. For one moment , i thought they made it so that Yuzuru will beat Patrick Chans world record.
I also believe that 3T and 3S BV is good that is incresing and that they dont punish really hard the e calls , the wrong edge and the underrotated. Generraly , i dont think the rules becoming better.
Whats your opinion of these changes?
Hello!! Here are some changes that will be from next season !
Jump
Change of Base Value
3T: 4.1–>4.3
3S: 4.2–>4.4
In the case of UR:
If 70% of BV is given (V):
3S: 2.9–>3.1
3A: 6.0–>5.9
4T: 7.2–>8.0
4S: 7.4–>8.1
If 50% of BV is given (V1):
4F: 6.2 8.0
4Lz: 6.8 8.4
*V: UR or wrong edge
*V1: UR AND wrong edge
For quadruple jumps:
GOE -1.0–>-1.2
GOE -2.0–>-2.4
GOE -3.0–>-4.0
[Positive GOE maintain the same; 4A: +1.2, +2.4, +3.6]
Landing of Jump:
- Fall: GOE -3
- 2 feet: GOE -3
- Step Out: GOE -2–>GOE -3
Lacking rotation (no sign) including half loop in a combo: GOE -1
In Short Programme, if the skater cannot complete a combination jump, the jump must be graded as -3 for GOE.
ChSq (Choreographic sequence):
Addition to GOE criteria:
Inability to clearly demonstrate the sequence: GOE -2 to -3
Loss of control while executing the sequence: GOE -1 to -3
Does not correspond to enhance the music: GOE -2 to -3
StSq (Step Sequence)
Two different combinations of 3 difficult turns executed with a clear rhythm within the sequence (for level 4 the 2 combination must be on different feet)
Type of turns and steps are combined and some are taken out:
Type of difficult turns and steps: twizzles, brackets, loops, rockers and Choctaws
Minimum variety: 5 different turns and steps from the list above, none can be counted twice
Simple variety: same as above but 7 different; Variety: 9
Complexity: 11 different turns and steps, none can be counted twice and 5 types must be executed in both direction
GOE criteria:
Good clarity and precision use of various steps during the sequence
Spin
For Layback Spin: One clear change of position backwards-sideways or reverse: at least 3 2 revolutions
For BOTH flying spin (with no change of foot and only one position) and spin with flying entrance are required: a clear visible jump, basic landing position must be reached within first 2 revolutions after the landing and from the moment this position is initially reached it must be held for 2 revs after the landing
Definition of “Both direction immediately following each other in sit or camel spin”: “Long curves of exit after the first part or entry into the second part are reflected in GOE” added
Addition to GOE criteria
Slow or reduction of speed (used to be slow or travelling): GOE -1 to -3
Poor fly (flying spin entry): GOE -1 to -3
Organised and writen by: http://yulialipnitskaya.tumblr.com/
Overall , i think they become really really strict and will be difficult to see new world records both in men and women . At first , you will see that some bv of the jumps are higher but negative GOEs become really strict. Especially , as i understood , if you fail to do the combination jump you will take immediately -3 GOE in the jump you managed to perform. Thats A DISASTER ! I can remember of Julia Lipnitskaya in the europeans last year of failind to do a combination but then she put the jump in an another compination. Now that will remove you points?? Then , i saw that 4Lz UR will go from 6 to 8. For one moment , i thought they made it so that Yuzuru will beat Patrick Chans world record.
I also believe that 3T and 3S BV is good that is incresing and that they dont punish really hard the e calls , the wrong edge and the underrotated. Generraly , i dont think the rules becoming better.
Whats your opinion of these changes?
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
Here's the main link: http://static.isu.org/media/207718/1944-sptc-sov-communication-2015-2016.pdf
edit: posted because my response was originally to another thread, but since it's been moved to this main thread, there's really no point
edit: posted because my response was originally to another thread, but since it's been moved to this main thread, there's really no point
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2014
The fact falls, two foot, and step out all have the same -3 GOE is absurd to me. I know falls have a 1 point deduction also, but that's just ridiculous.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2014
I totally agree! Like, how does that make any sense?
(As I've already said many times re: falls, it wouldn't matter so much if they were properly penalized in PCS for disrupting the program but...)
Similar threads
