2017 Skate Detroit

[Mathman]

If only figure skating scoring rules were that simple. It's not what the skater intends but what he or she actually does on the ice that makes the technical caller yell "Lutz" or "flip."

I still can't get around the case of the skater who does three-truns into a flip, but then loses concentration and rocks over onto the wrong edge. Does this get 6.0 points for a completed Lutz?

The rules governing under-rotations have been the source of constant debate and revision by the ISU, too. Not an easy question at all, although the current rules seem pretty straightforward and unobjectionable. (Not that this stops people from objecting to them. ) The one thing we cannot expect is that the scoring rules be consistent and commonsensical. That just doesn't seem possible. The main thing is that the skaters win who skate the best. Does the IJS do a pretty good job of this, or do we need more tweaking of the scoring conventions?

 

[TontoK]

If only figure skating scoring rules were that simple. It's not what the skater intends but what he or she actually does on the ice that makes the technical caller yell "Lutz" or "flip."

I still can't get around the case of the skater who does three-truns into a flip, but then loses concentration and rocks over onto the wrong edge. Does this get 6.0 points for a completed Lutz?

The rules governing under-rotations have been the source of constant debate and revision by the ISU, too. Not an easy question at all, although the current rules seem pretty straightforward and unobjectionable. (Not that this stops people from objecting to them. ) The one thing we cannot expect is that the scoring rules be consistent and commonsensical. That just doesn't seem possible. The main thing is that the skaters win who skate the best. Does the IJS do a pretty good job of this, or do we need more tweaking of the scoring conventions?

Gracie Gold does this. It drives me crazy. It's her jump out of footwork in the SP. Those three-turns set the edge up so well, I think even I could maintain it. But... no.

Instead, it's three turns into triple pretend-flip.

 

[Mathman]

^ I don't know why Gracie's people don't substitute a loop for the flip. 5.1 points versus 5.3. Even setting aside the edge question, the flip is the jump that Gracie pops or flubs most often.

 

[Ender]

^ I don't know why Gracie's people don't substitute a loop for the flip. 5.1 points versus 5.3. Even setting aside the edge question, the flip is the jump that Gracie pops or flubs most often.

Big question to ask Frank Caroll...

 

[gkelly]

The main thing is that the skaters win who skate the best. Does the IJS do a pretty good job of this, or do we need more tweaking of the scoring conventions?

So how do we define "skates the best"?

If we all agree on several things that are important and one skater is clearly ahead of the rest of the field on most of them, we'll all (fans and judges and skaters) agree on who was best in that competition, and almost any scoring system will produce the "right" result.

(If a scoring system fails even in that scenario, then it definitely needs tweaking.)

But some people think takeoff edges and complete rotation and landing on one foot are most important and others think remaining upright at all costs is more important and others that going for the hardest jump content should prevail, then we might not even agree on who jumps the best.

And yet others may believe that the basic skating or the overall performance quality (which may mean different things to different people) are more important than jumps.

Any time you get skaters who are close in total ability with opposite strengths and weaknesses, or the much better skaters having bad days while the weaker skaters put out their best, you're going to get disagreements between judges on the panel, or between the judges and the tech panel, as well as disagreements between fans with different priorities, not to mention fans disagreeing with officials.

Is it possible to reach agreement on what aspects of a performance should carry the most weight? Or on how to balance out all the important aspects to approximately equal weight regardless of the personal preferences of the officials on each panel?

 

[Mathman]

So how do we define "skates the best"?...

Is it possible to reach agreement on what aspects of a performance should carry the most weight? Or on how to balance out all the important aspects to approximately equal weight regardless of the personal preferences of the officials on each panel?

The easy answer is to say, no, no, of course there will never be any agreement about that. I think, though, that the ISU judging system is not just flailing around in the dark but is actually making progress toward something that is an acceptable compromise among a large body of skating experts. I think that when the ISU makes revisions to the IJS, the most important factor is that they have data from all the competitions since the last revision, and that they can say, hey, this guy walloped the other guy at this event, but the other guy brought a lot to the table, too. Maybe we should dwiddle the base values for triple Axels.

Even under 6.0 I am pretty sure that there was widespread agreement among judges as to what they were looking for in an outstanding program.

IMHO the torturous path that the ISU has taken since 2002 about how to score an under-rotated jump or a wrong edge take-off is not just aimless wandering but on the contrary is narrowing in on something. One criticism that I have of the process,though, is that when they try to address a problem they often seem to overcorrect, and then drift back the other way the next time around. The other problem is that there will always be loopholes that clever skaters and coaches can exploit, like getting extra points by throwing up a Biellmann or putting all your jumps in the second half.

What will always remain an issue is that the fans in the stands will see things differently than will the expert technical specialists and judges. This can't be helped -- although I do think that on TV the commentators do a pretty good job of saying, that was a great performance but her score will depend on the review of possible under-rotation on her triple flip. I think audiences understand that. (Although Rachel over Mirai at 2010 U.S. Nationals... )