Article:"Rewarding Failure Diminishes Sport"

[skateflower]

http://savefigureskating.blogspot.c...howComment=1323705688434#c2937866097136708694

If you tuned into the men’s competition at the Grand Prix Final you must have felt like Alice in Wonderland, watching a totally different event from the one ranked by the judges. The worst part is that there was nothing peculiar about this competition. This pattern of madness repeats itself event after event. Little wonder the sport is losing its last shred of credibility.

Blatant favoritism is nothing new in figure skating, although it is reaching unprecedented heights when Patrick Chan takes to the ice. To belabor this well-known point is a tedious pursuit. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or ISU judge to realize the man couldn’t lose if he tried (which he usually does).

Common sense dictates that when a skater steps out of jump, puts his hands down, lands on his rear end, or crashes into the boards, he failed. Under the 6.0 system, the attempt was marked as such. A jump that ended in a bad fall was considered a non-jump. Under IJS, however, such fiascos are considered successful jumping attempts that get nearly full credit. If sufficiently rotated, a jump counts as done even if the skater plays Zamboni. The only difference between the splat and the jump landed vertically is a slight deduction for grade of execution.


Take a fall on a quad toe loop, for instance. What the judges do is start with the base value of 10.3, just as if the jump had been completed. Then they deduct a trifle, say 2.7 points or so, and you still rack up some 7.6 points! That's nearly as much as a perfectly executed triple axel! For an outright fall!


Where else but in figure skating is failure rewarded with such generosity? Imagine telling your boss you couldn’t complete an important project, but could he please give you that promotion anyway because you tried real hard and the task was so difficult? I don’t know about your boss, but mine wouldn’t take too kindly to this notion.

Are gymnasts awarded gold medals if they don’t stick a landing, never mind if they land flat on the mat or step out of bounds? Not funny. Then why should skaters be held to different standards?

Flame away...

 

[skateluvr]

She is right.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Monica Friedlander wrote the piece, not Sonia Bianchetti, as near as I can tell.

 

[skateflower]

Monica Friedlander wrote the piece, not Sonia Bianchetti, as near as I can tell.

My bad. Who is Monica Friedlander?

 

[skateflower]

Paolo: It is a good question, and I'm having a hard time trying to quantify how much a poorly executed jump should be penalized on the second mark. Much of it, in my opinion, depends on how badly it disrupted the program. A slight two-footing, for instance, takes nothing away from the performance. A bad fall or desperate attempt to save a jump does. Also, some skaters bounce back almost instantly from a misstep while others lose their focus or are dazed by the error and fall behind with the music or take a long time to recover. So it's very much a judgment call. But there's no way a program with multiple mistakes could have ever been rewarded with a perfect mark in the old system. A 6.0 or even 5.9 for presentation used to be reserved for near-perfection. Finally and maybe most importantly in this crazy Code of Points system, there's not one presentation mark, but many component marks. One of them is Performance / Execution. I would personally argue that should not be a component score but a technical one. Nevertheless, it is what it is. So how can someone like Patrick Chan miss two out of three jumps in the short program, slam into the boards, and get 9's for execution?! I rest my case.

Excellent poins.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

My bad. Who is Monica Friedlander?

Don't know. But Bianchetti really loves Chan, so it seemed wierd - the bolded rhetoric anyway.

 

[Violet Bliss]

My bad. Who is Monica Friedlander?

Exactly, who is Monica Friedlander?

Sonia Bienchetti, on the other hand, is highly esteemed in the figure skating world for 40 years as a judge under the 6.0 system, an Olympic referee, etc. with great influence and earned respect. She is also a big fan of Patrick Chan, having paid him the highest compliments over the last few years.

I think you have borrowed too much from today's so called journalists in your eagerness to discredit Patrick Chan, the reigning World Champion. You have also dishonoured Ms Bianchetti in using her name in your such pursuit.

This is what Sonia Bianchetti wrote about Chan's performance at Worlds 201:

Skated to the Phantom of the Opera, his free program was just breathtaking. His first jump was a quadruple toe-loop immediately followed, from the blue, by a fantastic quadruple toe-loop/triple toe-loop combination. He then executed five more triple jumps of the highest technical quality. His only mistake was a step-out on the triple Axel. His spins were excellent as well as the choreography of the program. But what makes him so captivating in presentation is the way he moves his body, his head, his arms, while skating on deep edges. He really flies on the ice. Every movement is wonderful; he really lives his music and makes you perceive his inner feelings. At the end of his program, I was crying. Patrick perfectly represents what I would define as the ideal male skater. Excellent in technique as well as in the artistic side of our beautiful sport, without becoming feminine. Thank you, Patrick, for the intense artistic emotion you gave me.

 

[skateluvr]

I haven't seen all the skates but did see his LP. Unless Daisuke skated really badly and missed a few jumps, Patrick should not have gold. CoP is in need of changes. I wonder which architect decided jumps should be not counted if under rotated or taking off on a wrong edge or landing on a wrong edge, but falls can have any points at all? It is so strange. Who is the primary architect (s) of the current CoP?

 

[Kwanford Wife]

Exactly, who is Monica Friedlander?

Sonia Bienchetti, on the other hand, is highly esteemed in the figure skating world for 40 years as a judge under the 6.0 system, an Olympic referee, etc. with great influence and earned respect. She is also a big fan of Patrick Chan, having paid him the highest compliments over the last few years.

I think you have borrowed too much from today's so called journalists in your eagerness to discredit Patrick Chan, the reigning World Champion. You have also dishonoured Ms Bianchetti in using her name in your such pursuit.

Oh, I don't know... whether it's Sonia, Monica, or my husband - Chan was overmarked at the GPF... it's just one of those things... he was still the best skater and should've won... granted, I'm so over CoP and its inherent flaws that I just ignore the marks and focus on the skating...

Having said that - whomever wrote this article is correct: modern skating allows for flaws in the chasing of points and it hurts the sport when champs are awarded outlandish scores for skating that is lacking. At this point, the judging system and the skaters should've merged together and yet the scores get higher while the skating gets weaker... regardless of who the champ is and who is writing about it...

 

[wallylutz]

Monica Friedlander : http://www.linkedin.com/in/monicafriedlander

Why "save skating"? Because our sport is in free fall. After enjoying its boom of the 1980s and 1990s, the popularity of figure skating is at an all-time low, especially in North America. TV audiences are vanishing, sponsors turning their back on the sport, and professional skating but a distant memory. Worst of all, those memorable performances that touched our souls are largely a thing of the past.

We still have quality skaters, but they're few and far between and have no future to look forward to after their last competition. And more often than not, the new judging system doesn't recognize their true abilities. We need change if we're to get back on the path that once made our sport one of the most popular in the world."

- This person has an agenda of her own, which appears to be one of those "CoP is the worst thing to happen to humanity since 9-11"

- She has no formal qualification to judge figure skating, therefore, her opinion is a personal and unqualified viewpoint

- She firmly believes that judging is corrupted and the results are pre-determined, it makes you wonder why is she still watching then?

 

[wallylutz]

I haven't seen all the skates but did see his LP. Unless Daisuke skated really badly and missed a few jumps, Patrick should not have gold. CoP is in need of changes. I wonder which architect decided jumps should be not counted if under rotated or taking off on a wrong edge or landing on a wrong edge, but falls can have any points at all? It is so strange. Who is the primary architect (s) of the current CoP?

Don't you think your opinion will be more informed if you actually watched all the skates, including the SP? Because if you actually watched, you'll realize Daisuke missed his jump combo in the SP, didn't even do the 2nd jump and UR & two feet his Quad attempt. Under the 6.0 system, he would have been sent to the bottom of the pack but instead, he luckily hung on to 5th while Chan was first. Even under 6.0 and assumed Daisuke did win the LP, he would still not have won because he was too far behind after the SP. So the point the author is trying to make is flawed but then again, if someone believes the CoP is sum of all the evils in this world, it's really hard to reason with such person to begin with.

 

[fscric]

wallylutz, do you think they would care that Daisuke made mistake in his SP? No, as long as they thought he should have won the LP, then he was the rightful winner of the WHOLE event.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

I haven't seen all the skates but did see his LP. Unless Daisuke skated really badly and missed a few jumps, Patrick should not have gold. CoP is in need of changes. I wonder which architect decided jumps should be not counted if under rotated or taking off on a wrong edge or landing on a wrong edge, but falls can have any points at all? It is so strange. Who is the primary architect (s) of the current CoP?

There isn't one primary architect of "current" COP. David Dore is given credit as the driving force behind the actual creation and implementation (yes, he's Canadian), but the rules go back and forth.

For example, it's false to suggest that URed or wrong edge jumps don't count whereas falls do. For example, Alena Leonova had an edge call on her lutz at Worlds (LP). She scored 5.4 points. Czisny fell on hers. She scored 3.9 points on that element.

The current COP was largely created in reaction to Vancouver, in my mind. We saw an increase in value for the 3A and the quad, with a commensurate decrease in negative GOEs applied. The consquence is that falls on elements don't damage the score as much.

 

[Violet Bliss]

Oh, I don't know... whether it's Sonia, Monica, or my husband - Chan was overmarked at the GPF... it's just one of those things... he was still the best skater and should've won... granted, I'm so over CoP and its inherent flaws that I just ignore the marks and focus on the skating...

Having said that - whomever wrote this article is correct: modern skating allows for flaws in the chasing of points and it hurts the sport when champs are awarded outlandish scores for skating that is lacking. At this point, the judging system and the skaters should've merged together and yet the scores get higher while the skating gets weaker... regardless of who the champ is and who is writing about it...

Equating Monica's or your husband's opinion with Ms Bianchetti's on figure skating is like equating any GS member's skating abilities with Patrick Chan's - a grand illusion.

You have the right to agree with any random Chan hater, but giving equal credit and weight to them as a highly respected expert is ridiculous. In any case, it's completly out of line to use Ms Bianchetti's name and to attribute a completely contrary view to her.

Now before I post this I see the thread title has been corrected. But the effect of attracting attention and giving undue importance to a random blogger is achieved in opening another Chan bashing thread.

 

[Kwanford Wife]

Equating Monica's or your husband's opinion with Ms Bianchetti's on figure skating is like equating any GS member's skating abilities with Patrick Chan's - a grand illusion.

You have the right to agree with any random follow Chan hater, but giving equal credit and weight to them as a highly respected expert is ridiculous. In any case, it's completly out of line to use Ms Bianchetti's name and to attribute a completely contrary view to her.

Now before I post this I see the thread title has been corrected. But the effect of attracting attention and giving undue importance to a random blogger is achieved in opening another Chan bashing thread.

Please. Flawed skating is flawed skating. I don't care WHO points it out... there is a reason skating is struggling and part of this is watching these flawed performances equated with brilliance. And if you choose to see that as a grand illusion, then fine. But don't confuse your illusion with the reality of the sport of figure skating...

 

[skateflower]

The current COP was largely created in reaction to Vancouver, in my mind. We saw an increase in value for the 3A and the quad, with a commensurate decrease in negative GOEs applied. The consquence is that falls on elements don't damage the score as much.

I think you're wrong. Jeffrey Buttle was famous for his 'quad' attempts and ridiculed by many people, and rightly so. A fall/severe error on a jump attemp should result in much more reduced points.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

I think you're wrong. Jeffrey Buttle was famous for his 'quad' attempts and ridiculed by many people, and rightly so. A fall/severe error on a jump attemp should result in much more reduced points.

And afterwards, they changed the rules to penalized under-rotated attempts more and increased the GOE penalty. The consequence, of course, is that we saw the first quadless winner in twelve years. After that, they increased the value. But because the quad skaters were weak elsewhere, they weren't able to make up the ground. Post Vancouver, those changes I mentioned occured.

ETA: How much of a penalty do you think falls should incur? Should visible errors have more weight than invisible ones?

 

[wallylutz]

Common sense dictates that when a skater steps out of jump, puts his hands down, lands on his rear end, or crashes into the boards, he failed. Under the 6.0 system, the attempt was marked as such. A jump that ended in a bad fall was considered a non-jump.

This is just plain false, I don't know where to begin with such misleading and incorrect information. Under 6.0, there are two rules, one for the SP and one for the FS. In SP, attempts that ended with falls were first given credit for those jumps as though they were clean. Then -0.4 for falls were applied from the base mark per each fall on a jump element. This is in fact very similar to how CoP evaluates jumps. In FS, falls on jumps didn't carry any mandatory deductions. Depending on how good the attempt was, judges would still give credit for the attempt - that is they take the quality and difficulty of the attempt into consideration. But 6.0 grading system wasn't linear or cumulative, so you can't add the theoretical values of all jumps together, then come up with a number. For example, When Ito was doing all kind of Triples up to the Axel while her closest competitor barely completed a Triple Loop, Ito may get 5.9 and 6.0 but her competitors were still getting values like 5.7 and 5.8 for Technical Merit. So what this means is judges usually look at the successful jumps in the FS first, then they lay any other consideration for good attempts but unsuccessful jumps on top of that. For example, a man did 8 Triples including two 3A but fell on the 4T attempt will be given credit for the 8 Triples, then depending on how good was the 4T, such as height, full rotations, distance and etc. judges will consider that in relation to what others did. The ordinal system didn't require judges to compare marks between skaters but it almost always ends up this way because judges had to give out comparative ordinal ranking. So if another skater also did 8 Triples but no Quad attempt, the judges will most likely give an edge to the skater who did the same number of Triples + Quad attempt for the Technical Merit mark. But it is possible that the 2nd mark may be lower due to the impression caused by the fall, so the net impact is uncertain. However to suggest, fall worths nothing is just plain wrong.

Under IJS, however, such fiascos are considered successful jumping attempts that get nearly full credit. If sufficiently rotated, a jump counts as done even if the skater plays Zamboni. The only difference between the splat and the jump landed vertically is a slight deduction for grade of execution.

I suppose that's why Asada shelved her 3A, Kostner shelved her 3Lz and Kim shelved her 3Lo, and Takahashi stooped his 4F attempts and the list can go on and on and on. Once again, such a misleading statement... IJS is in fact much more strict about successful jump attempts than the 6.0 system. All the edge calls and UR that were once rampant because skaters who did them would get credit for it under 6.0 would now be penalized. It is awfully hard for any ladies to get credit for 7 Triples these days when they were once quite common. I think Ms. Friedlander should ask herself why is that the case. Taking a 3Lz for example, the standard bearer for the ladies, the base value of 6.0 would be deducted by most likely 2.1 for a fall, then another 1.0 for MD, causing the total value received to be merely 2.9 For a Triple Toe, the residual value for a fall would be merely 1.0 All of the above values are correct provided there is no UR. If there are UR or << , the values dropped even further to almost nothing.

Take a fall on a quad toe loop, for instance. What the judges do is start with the base value of 10.3, just as if the jump had been completed. Then they deduct a trifle, say 2.7 points or so, and you still rack up some 7.6 points! That's nearly as much as a perfectly executed triple axel! For an outright fall!

I am now convinced this lady is not here to reason but to stir controversy. The value of Daisuke Takahashi's 4T attempt in the SP at the 2011 GPF is a mere 4.77 and he didn't even fall. Had he fell, the value would have been 4.20 - 1.00, a mere 3.20 or less than that of a Double Axel. In reality, few Quad attempts are given full credits to begin with. More often than not, a missed Quad attempt are also marked down for such things as < or <<, which greatly reduced their values. But if you read this woman's greatly exaggerated and sensationalized blogging, you'd think all Quads are born equal which they aren't. I suppose to the majority of Figure Skating audience, her knowledge looks profound. I think she may know a lot but her integrity is seriously questionable.

So how can someone like Patrick Chan miss two out of three jumps in the short program, slam into the boards, and get 9's for execution?! I rest my case.

I wish this woman knows how to count. There were 4 jumps in the SP, of which two were in combination. Patrick Chan landed two clean jumps, one 4T and one 3Lz, hand down on the 3A and fell on the 3T after hitting the board. Neither of these mistakes were disruptive to the program and hitting the board after actually landed the jump was penalized to a lesser extent with good reasons. In her own words:

Much of it, in my opinion, depends on how badly it disrupted the program. A slight two-footing, for instance, takes nothing away from the performance.

Look at how she just slapped herself in the face in the same post. She decried Chan getting high P/E mark for two errors but one of the error is in fact what she characterized as "taking nothing away from the performance." :sheesh: Again, there is no intellectual consistency in her thoughts. The mistake on the 3A was a single hand down, which was not even very noticeable. Only the slamming into the board was disruptive, to an extent, depending on how you evaluated Chan's recovery. But this example clearly illustrates her true agenda and her real "beef", which is very obvious.

 

[Violet Bliss]

Please. Flawed skating is flawed skating. I don't care WHO points it out... there is a reason skating is struggling and part of this is watching these flawed performances equated with brilliance. And if you choose to see that as a grand illusion, then fine. But don't confuse your illusion with the reality of the sport of figure skating...

The grand illusion I wrote about was the equating of credibility and importance of opinion givers on the subject while glorifying the views same as your own.

The opinion expressed by this Monica person pleases some, yet it is more flawed than the skating she criticizes and blames for the (localized) "demise" of popularity of the sport.

At this GPF, Takahashi was 5th in the SP, with indisputable reasons. He was able to finish second overall exactly because of the COP system. As a fan, I am happy for him. Yet there is so much bitterness from the fans who are forever complaining unless he wins. When it's impossible to justify his winning the event, they insist he should win the LP, resorting to focusing on a couple of discarded scores out of over 300 marks given to his LP.

There were no perfect performances in both programs from any competitor. But there were excellent performances, making it a truly exciting and enjoyable event. Yet some people can only focus on the win by someone they don't like, declaring the system hopeless and corrupted because Patrick Chan won. Get over it.

 

[skateflower]

ETA: How much of a penalty do you think falls should incur? Should visible errors have more weight than invisible ones?

Zero point for a fall on any jump. A fall is a fall, period. Reward more for difficult jumps that are well executed, penalize more for jumps that are poorly executed. Male skaters are always starting to try quads than ever due to the increased value assigned to quads. However, if you want to shoot for high values, you always need to be aware of the huge risks.

Any visible errors should be penalized more than invisible ones.