That's because the men were extremely messy in those competitions. If someone like Hanyu skates clean, the TES-PCS gap will be as big as ever.
2018-19: New Season, New Rules, & Judging: Singles and Pairs
- Thread starter gsk8
- Start date
That's because the men were extremely messy in those competitions. If someone like Hanyu skates clean, the TES-PCS gap will be as big as ever.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
And if someone like Trusova skates clean (with 3 quads) her TES will be 2 time higher than PCS
But lets wait and see...
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2006
Now that the top seniors have started to compete in the Challenger Series, a few observations can be made on the PCS of single skaters. The madness that started in late fall 2013 seems to be (with a huge maybe) over for the time being?
The less than stellar performances of Medvedeva and Hanyu at ACI earned quite low PCS compared to the past. E.g. Hanyu in ACI 2017 was technically roughly the same, but still got PCS clearly over 9, now all below 9 (and one has to go quite far back in time to see that kind of PCS for him). Uno got very high PCS for his clean SP at Lombardia Trophy, but not so great for the FS which was riddled with technical problems (however, he got some lower 9s). Kolyada in Ondrej Nepela got fairly low PCS for his clean SP, but quite high scores (mostly lower 9s) for the FS which did feature one fall as its biggest problem. Satoko Miyahara got mid to high 8s for her programs in US International where she previously has gotten high 8s-low 9s for roughly similarly flawed performances. Different panels in each case, of course, but maybe an emerging trend?
The exception to this are the junior ladies who keep getting high PCS scores, but it has to be said that the top girls have been pretty amazing so far.
It will be interesting to see Zagitova on ice next week - how will she perform and how will she be scored.
E
The less than stellar performances of Medvedeva and Hanyu at ACI earned quite low PCS compared to the past. E.g. Hanyu in ACI 2017 was technically roughly the same, but still got PCS clearly over 9, now all below 9 (and one has to go quite far back in time to see that kind of PCS for him). Uno got very high PCS for his clean SP at Lombardia Trophy, but not so great for the FS which was riddled with technical problems (however, he got some lower 9s). Kolyada in Ondrej Nepela got fairly low PCS for his clean SP, but quite high scores (mostly lower 9s) for the FS which did feature one fall as its biggest problem. Satoko Miyahara got mid to high 8s for her programs in US International where she previously has gotten high 8s-low 9s for roughly similarly flawed performances. Different panels in each case, of course, but maybe an emerging trend?
The exception to this are the junior ladies who keep getting high PCS scores, but it has to be said that the top girls have been pretty amazing so far.
It will be interesting to see Zagitova on ice next week - how will she perform and how will she be scored.
E
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2018
Hanyu and Michal are both competing in both the same GP event twice, so we will see how it stacks up there because it is a bit hard to compare the PCs with different judges at different events.
And Michal really didnt have much competition and finish 1st in the FP but Hanyu did not perform well.
It is too hard to judge without them competing in the same event.
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
One thing that I find strange and hasn't been fixed is the way jump sequences are scored. I don't know why a sequence is scored as 80% of the entire sequence rather than, say, 60% of the second jump. As an example under the current system:
3A is worth 8.00 base value
3A+1A+SEQ is worth 80% of 8.00 + 1.10 which is 7.28 (lower than the original 3A?)
4Lz is worth 11.50 base value
4Lz+2A+SEQ is worth 80% of 11.50 + 3.30 which is 11.84 (just .34 in BV harder?)
It's a weird oversight.
3A is worth 8.00 base value
3A+1A+SEQ is worth 80% of 8.00 + 1.10 which is 7.28 (lower than the original 3A?)
4Lz is worth 11.50 base value
4Lz+2A+SEQ is worth 80% of 11.50 + 3.30 which is 11.84 (just .34 in BV harder?)
It's a weird oversight.
The new scoring system is like putting lipstick on a pig. The changes made were primarily 1. reduction of bv for certain high value jumps, 2. making jump goes weighted more heavily and having more GOE categories for each judge, and 3. (for men) removing one jump and making the FS shorter.
The main issues we concluded there were last year was the inability for the PCS to be fairly marked (and weighted relative to TES), and for the TES to properly punish certain issues in technique such as wrong edge or prerotation. The new changes, as we've now seen, do nothing to alleviate these issues. The same bad technique jumps are being rewarded, and the PCS gap is still little to none relative to differences in technical score. No one ever mentioned changing the number of GOE possible markings from 7 to 11 as a good idea. And if the goal is to make PCS worth more, why not change its system/make it worth more rather than reducing the value of jumps arbitrarily? The new GOE ratings make the judging even more unfairly subjective, IMO.
The main issues we concluded there were last year was the inability for the PCS to be fairly marked (and weighted relative to TES), and for the TES to properly punish certain issues in technique such as wrong edge or prerotation. The new changes, as we've now seen, do nothing to alleviate these issues. The same bad technique jumps are being rewarded, and the PCS gap is still little to none relative to differences in technical score. No one ever mentioned changing the number of GOE possible markings from 7 to 11 as a good idea. And if the goal is to make PCS worth more, why not change its system/make it worth more rather than reducing the value of jumps arbitrarily? The new GOE ratings make the judging even more unfairly subjective, IMO.
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2003
If I'd have to drop a jump, I'd drop the jump that was my least favorite, not done my best and worth the least. But all skaters must include a 2 or 3 Axel in their FreeSkate's so they can't takeout the Axel no matter how much it is their least favorite.
I am all for shorter programs. Actually I've always preferred the SP over the FS. At the end of the programs skaters seem to be so exhausted that even easier elements fail. So, I would like to see two short(er) programs, both of course with less elements. E.g. one short program with elements like it is and the other one with 4 jumping passes, but one spin less (i.e. 2) because spins take up so much more time than jumps. And with only 2 spins one can sufficiently demonstrate spinning abilities.
I say that as a skater myself and a fan. I am tired of all the slowing down 2nd halves and I am so tired of too many elements per program. I want to see *real* skating, edges and time for expressing the music.
One a side note: adult skaters have to do the same amount of elements like the (ladies) elite skaters (7 jumps, 3 spins and 1 step sequence) and they have to squeeze that into 3.10min. Mind you, on top of the same amount of elements in shorter time adults do skate much slower than the youngsters. I can only say, that's ISU lunacy. As stupid as killing 30s but just one jump.
I say that as a skater myself and a fan. I am tired of all the slowing down 2nd halves and I am so tired of too many elements per program. I want to see *real* skating, edges and time for expressing the music.
One a side note: adult skaters have to do the same amount of elements like the (ladies) elite skaters (7 jumps, 3 spins and 1 step sequence) and they have to squeeze that into 3.10min. Mind you, on top of the same amount of elements in shorter time adults do skate much slower than the youngsters. I can only say, that's ISU lunacy. As stupid as killing 30s but just one jump.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
This is what i found interesting in the new GOE system. Shoma for example could get max 3 GOE for some of his 'pre-rotated' jumps (the term posters are using here) because the jump lack one of the core bullet - good take off. Satoko who also has the same problem but also doesnt jump high could also get max 3 GOE for her jumps even she lacks two of the core bullets - good take off and very good height and distance. I just wanted to give an example (not to criticize skaters here) to explain my point - skaters who hit only one core bullet will possibly (if all the other GOE bullets are met) score the same GOE as the skaters who hit two core bullets!
Or none, but all three of the non-core bullets. They could all get +3.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
Oh yes. That looks wrong! (even it would be mathematicaly correct... But I guess that 'bicycle analogy' explains why that wont be always the case
)Editing: I think it would be better if only 5 bullets exist then. 'Element(s) match(es) the music' bullet probably could be stated in Composition and Interpretation of the music/Timing requirements as a part of Components score (if already is not?).
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
The 80% sequence deduction has always been pretty lame. I still don't know why they do it.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2012
Yukiko Okabe (ISU Judge) said there was unfairness because some judges forgot the rule and gave the score to the skaters who didn't have steps into solo jump in SP, so in new system, they decided to take preceding step as an element for GOE.
https://twitter.com/330_43_snow/status/1052202196530388992
https://twitter.com/330_43_snow/status/1052202196530388992
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2012
Found original report, it was actually TV program and Okabe and Kozuka talked about the rule change. The article has 6 pages but in Japanese though.
https://www.jsports.co.jp/press/article/N2018101610480406_6.html
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
The solo steps was always rather subjective anyways, and judges often overlooked this for the more popular skaters and always nailed lower-tier skaters for this. I don't like how this might encourage some skaters to not put any steps before their jumps but this can be reflected in the GOE and overall PCS (e.g. transitions). Although, steps preceding a solo jump in the SP has been around forever. At any rate, the best skaters will challenge themselves and be capable of doing preceding steps.... though, to be honest I'd rather see a clean jump without preceding steps than a load of transitions to meet a requirement followed by a sloppy jump as a result.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
It seems that tech panel is much more strict on judging the mens Flip. In SA short programes only Bychenko was awarded with clean edge on flip, all the others who tried it (Chen, Zhou, Yee, Ma) were judged with unclear edge (!), and Rizzo even got e (wrong edge) (We also had Sakamoto as a debated example of calling the flip edge at Japan open). Has something been changed in the rules with the judging of a Flip or it was just the strictier tech panel?
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2017
Considering what I saw in recent competitions and protocols - there is very alarming trend now in FS judging. When tech panel making calls based on mere suspicion of UR judging only by not ideal/curved jump exit - and not by actual UR (which should be counted towards direction of a jump in the air - not towards direction of the blade on ice after landing ). Which in turn creates many fake calls. Maybe I will try to post screenshots and analysis of fake URs calls later when the current competitions is over. In the beginning I thought it was a fluke or political decision against russian junior girls (fake Trusova's and Scherbakova's 4Lz calls) - but I was wrong. Judging by senior competitions - its deliberate policy now - at least in tech panels of jgp and gp events.
If that continues - I am afraid FS will turn in circus on ice where all would depend on a whim of tech callers. Maybe strict judging is good - but not to that degree. There were two great mistakes in ISU congress:
1) limiting bonus jumps only to 1 in sp/3 in fp (which destroyed all variety in programs as we can see already)
2) making more harsh UR calls rule (which turns competitions in judging farce)
If that continues - I am afraid FS will turn in circus on ice where all would depend on a whim of tech callers. Maybe strict judging is good - but not to that degree. There were two great mistakes in ISU congress:
1) limiting bonus jumps only to 1 in sp/3 in fp (which destroyed all variety in programs as we can see already)
2) making more harsh UR calls rule (which turns competitions in judging farce)
Would love to see this.
I agree with Jackie Wong that judges need to see the skate from MULTIPLE video angles, not just one.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
I agree harsher UR rule is bad! I mean, those kind of UR's are not even perceptable for a panel of judges (according to their scores they are giving in real time), even less for the casual viewers! I can find agreements with that kind of strictness only if GOE of pannel of judges stay intacted after the calls tech pannel can make after the review. Cause I dont think its right to be able to rework the GOE scores after tech pannel reviews, panel of judges should judge according to their own eyes, not with the eyes of tech panel/their equipment!
One of my problems with the scoring is that under-rotation, wrong edge, and popped jumps are SO heavily penalized that a fall could be better on a score than any of these. A fall on a jump that's fully rotated still gets base value before GOE is applied. A one-point deduction after that might still come up with a higher total point value than a low GOE applied to a 75% base value jump due to UR or wrong edge.
There was a lot of talk about wanting to apply points in a way that didn't allow 'splat fests' to win. But the math does not support that theory.
There was a lot of talk about wanting to apply points in a way that didn't allow 'splat fests' to win. But the math does not support that theory.
