I would assume it's exactly the same as now i.e. GOE based on the highest value element in the combination i.e. a 3T-3T would be 4.2 + 4.2 i.e. 8.4 base value, then GOE would 2.1 i.e. 50% of 4.2, total 10.5. Of course I may be wrong also..., but it would be a big departure if it was based on the whole combination, and I'm sure we would have heard something by now (has anyone?).
2018-2019 Season - New rules
- Thread starter enzofv
- Start date
I would assume it's exactly the same as now i.e. GOE based on the highest value element in the combination i.e. a 3T-3T would be 4.2 + 4.2 i.e. 8.4 base value, then GOE would 2.1 i.e. 50% of 4.2, total 10.5. Of course I may be wrong also..., but it would be a big departure if it was based on the whole combination, and I'm sure we would have heard something by now (has anyone?).
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2017
I feel like we see a big jump and go THAT NEEDS ALL OF THE GOE!!!
Even when it doesn't really earn many bullets
and if that continues, I'll be very upset...
also, how are we quantifying "good jump height"? I think everyone except Satoko has good height on their jumps....
Even when it doesn't really earn many bullets
and if that continues, I'll be very upset...
also, how are we quantifying "good jump height"? I think everyone except Satoko has good height on their jumps....
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
satoko isn't the only one who doesn't jump very high... let's stop blaming her for all of the small jumps... plenty of the ones you love have smaller jumps too
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
Will an unclear edge nullify the “clean take off” bullet which will force recalculation of the GOE. If somehow it got +4. Seems complicated and messy!
Thanks for this. Does anyone have details of what they expect the 5 or 6 bullet points to be? Looks like things have moved on a bit from the Massimiliano Ambesi Facebook page earlier on the thread which I completely missed.
Well, if all it has going for it is that it's big, effortless, with good takeoff and landing, it could get +2 in the current rules and, if I understand correctly, +3 in the new rules.
To get "all the GOE" it would need something else in addition.
Because you think a big clean effortless jump that was telegraphed and had no relation to the music should earn exactly the same as a big clean effortless jump with a difficult or unusual entry and/or exit and/or air position that was perfectly timed to the music?
The top senior competitors tend to have good height on their jumps. For lower ranked seniors, and juniors and novice, it's less common. The same GOE rules apply to all.
These are as proposed (pending ISU approval Congress June 2018):
1. Very good height and very good distance (in all jumps in a combo/sequence)
2. very good take-off and landing
3. effortless throughout (including rhythm in jump combination)
All of the above 3 have to be met to consider awarding a +4 or +5
Others:
4. Steps before the jump unexpected or creative entry
5. Very good body position form take-off toe landing ("form" is assumed to be a type and is really from). We were told this is where tano would "fit"
6. Element matches the musical structure
Deductions (selected)
-5 fall
-3 to -4 landing on two feet
-3 to -4 stepping out of a landing in a jump
-5 SP: Jump element not according to the requirements final GOE must be
1. Very good height and very good distance (in all jumps in a combo/sequence)
2. very good take-off and landing
3. effortless throughout (including rhythm in jump combination)
All of the above 3 have to be met to consider awarding a +4 or +5
Others:
4. Steps before the jump unexpected or creative entry
5. Very good body position form take-off toe landing ("form" is assumed to be a type and is really from). We were told this is where tano would "fit"
6. Element matches the musical structure
Deductions (selected)
-5 fall
-3 to -4 landing on two feet
-3 to -4 stepping out of a landing in a jump
-5 SP: Jump element not according to the requirements final GOE must be
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2017
How are we quantifying very good though? I might thing skater A has very good height but someone else might think A has relatively good height... :think:
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
Yes, desicion of one judge never was a factor per se, but average opinion of nine judges. New proposals wont make subjective judging any more or less important, for worse or better to final results
Then we don't need the other bullet points. As long as people meet the three bullet points they all get +4/+5 (and "very good height" is subjective, which makes it easier for judges to favor skaters from their own countries). People no longer need to do steps before jumps or match music.
You misunderstood.
A skater's jump has to be good enough to get 1, 2, AND 3 to be eligible for getting +4 or +5. Only if they achieve that, then the skater has to hit 1 of 4-6 to reach +4 and 2 of 4-6 to reach +5.
If a skater does not achieve all of bullets 1, 2, and 3, then they are capped at +3 even if acheive 4-6 plus only 2 of 1-3.
That makes more sense. Thanks for your clarification.
Another question: what does "very good take-off" mean? Does that mean you can't pre-rotate anymore? I'd like to see this new bullet point gets added.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2017
Yeah, I'm saying that a big clean effortless but telegraphed jump shouldn't get +3's automatically for being big the way it does now
I think the main problem is a lack of quantifiability for jump height. What defines good height? What separates good height from great height? It's very murky.
Thanks for this.
Trying to equate what I did before i.e. see what you need to do under the new system, as proposed, to get back to the old scores and beyond, this is what I’ve come up with.
N.B. As there’s 6 bullet points and only 5 GOEs it’s based on the assumption that there’s 1 new bullet point per GOE, but for +4 and +5 you must have all 3 main/mandatory ones e.g. +5 GOE = 5 bullets, but 3 are the main ones, plus 2 others.
For quads (base values reduced by 10%, plus 10% per GOE).
Old Base Value score (zero bullets) = reduced Base Value score + 1 GOE (1 bullet). This will be harder for the skater to achieve as before they didn’t need any bullet points - will be less of a problem for triples though as base values will only have dropped a small amount there.
Old BV +1 GOE (2 bullets) = new Base Value +2 GOE (2 bullets). This should still be harder for the skater to achieve as 8 bullets have effectively been compressed into 6 i.e. each new bullet is, in general, harder to achieve than an old one.
Old BV +2 GOE (4 bullets) = new BV +3 GOE (3 bullets). This should be fairly even, everything else being equal i.e. before you needed 4 out of 8 bullets, now it’s 3 out of 6, though my gut feeling is it’ll be a little bit harder. Before you could ‘pick and choose’ which of the bullets to aim for, now they’re very general ones with no obvious hiding place – I like them!
Old BV +3 GOE (6 bullets) = new BV +4 GOE (4 bullets, including 3 main ones). If anything this might be easier to achieve. For example now you need 6 bullet points, but it looks to me as if the 3 main bullet points cover 4 to 7 inclusive of the existing ones. Hence if you were to say add matched to the music it would mean you only need 5 old bullet points to get the equivalent points you would have got from 6. There is the caveat though that one of new bullet points is 'very good height and distance' rather than ‘good’, hence it might really be ‘5.5 bullet points’.
New BV +5 GOE (5 bullets, including 3 main ones). This looks to me as if it’s about 7 of the old bullet points to achieve. You don’t need all of them, so in this case it looks as if the points are a bit easier to achieve – you’re effectively getting an extra 10% for that one extra bullet point. However I wouldn’t say it’s excessive, that ‘very good height and distance’ still comes into play, meaning you can’t just get a +5 for a jump that has everything, but only average/good height and distance.
Overall, I would say it doesn’t look too bad, notwithstanding any ‘judging issues’. In addition there’s less bullet points for the judges to consider which can’t be a bad thing – can we have the same for PCS please?
Other thoughts.
Winners and losers.
I would have thought the big winners under the new system would Kaetlyn Osmond (especially combos) and Yazuru Hanyu (difficult to see how any jumping pass executed well wouldn’t get a +4 or even +5), neutral would be Alina Zagitova, it would depend if her jumps are regarded as having very good height and distance (I would have thought so), but she may lose out on the flow through her combos e.g. 3F-2T-2Lo. The big loser should be Evgenia Medvedeva though (if judged correctly). It’s difficult to see how she could get ‘very good height and distance’ on her jumps with the possible exception of the 3Lo, plus these days she really muscles her combos, especially the 2nd part of her triple-triples - what may happen, and across the board, is you’ll get a sacrificing of arms in the air, a minor bullet point, in order to achieve much better flow throughout, and so achieve one of the main ones.
Finally if ‘gaming the system’, the obvious one to go for is element matches the musical structure. At the moment you need 2 bullet points for every GOE increase, but now you only need one. Hence if you get a good choreographer who can match the jumps to the music you should be able to get a few easy GOE points without needing a 2nd bullet point to go up by 1.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2014
Yeah, but 3t combos will always have better height comparing to 3lo combos. It is just dinamic of the combo itself. Im pretty sure for Zagitova (or any other skater who aims for loop combos) is still the same possibility to score bigger Goe considering that. Medvedeva sometimes has not such a good height on her combos, but her solo jumps will be in category of very good height and distance. Its not the excelent high and distance like for example Daleman, Osmond, Sotskova, Tsurskaya or Chens jumps, but it is still fine i guess. So i dont think GOEs will change that much (knowing that already Daleman was getting better goes for her combos).
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2017
Okay, I am waiting for Nathan and Vincent's GOEs
Watch Nathan get +4/5s for his scratchy jumps.[To be completely clear: I actually like Nathan and I think he has a lot of potential to become a great skater. He needs fix his jumps+PCS before I can consider him one though, and I absolutely disagree with the scores he got in Milan and PC for his FS]
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2018
And there I was, thinking they‘d put some restrictions on backloading. Apparently to get more „art“. Now they‘re doing what exaxtly? Cut down 30 seconds in the men and pairs FP so that there‘s even less time for choreography? Good god. Even a ban to backloading would have been a better idea than this.
I‘m not very positive all these bullet points will actually change anything. So, what, you‘re just going to have Satoko get no GOES at all because her jumps are tiny? Figure skating is and was always highly subjective. „Good height“ is like no indicator at all for a good jump. Because, you know, there are fast rotators who have small jumps (Satoko, Evgenia to an extent) but also ones who jump high but don‘t rotate that fast (Kaetlyn, Daleman). So, do we really want to say that one style is superior to the other? I‘m also a bit afraid that this is going to lead to even more controversy. As one judge might find a jump „effortless throughout“ whereas the other doesn‘t, for what reason it may be. So, how are these changes going to affect anything? Or even make figure skating more artistic like they said what these new rules would be about? If anyone could explain the logic behind this, I‘d appreciate it, because right now, frankly, I‘m not getting it. At all.
I‘m not very positive all these bullet points will actually change anything. So, what, you‘re just going to have Satoko get no GOES at all because her jumps are tiny? Figure skating is and was always highly subjective. „Good height“ is like no indicator at all for a good jump. Because, you know, there are fast rotators who have small jumps (Satoko, Evgenia to an extent) but also ones who jump high but don‘t rotate that fast (Kaetlyn, Daleman). So, do we really want to say that one style is superior to the other? I‘m also a bit afraid that this is going to lead to even more controversy. As one judge might find a jump „effortless throughout“ whereas the other doesn‘t, for what reason it may be. So, how are these changes going to affect anything? Or even make figure skating more artistic like they said what these new rules would be about? If anyone could explain the logic behind this, I‘d appreciate it, because right now, frankly, I‘m not getting it. At all.
