- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
That's great to know! Now I can continue to obsessively pore over the numbers in scoresheets and devise more conspiracy theories.
Fair/Over/Underscoring - Tricky Subject, Tread Softly
- Thread starter prettykeys
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
I hear the issue of YuNa's TES being competitive with the guys being brought up frequently (probably because it is frequently competitive 
). YuNa lacks the quads and 3axel, so this seems counterintuitive.
The reason for her high TES is that when she lands her jumps, she gets huge bonuses on her GOE's. Whether they are merited or not is another debate, but it seems to me that those GOE's are given compared to the ladies' field, and not as absolutes. Does anyone agree or disagree with me?
And if you agree with me, do you think that's how it should be? I think that principle seems reasonable. i.e. If YuNa were actually competing in the Men's field, she would not (should not) be given such high GOE's on her signature jumps if it turns out the men jump higher and with more speed for say, a 3Lutz. But as a Ladies' standard, many of her jumps really are breath-taking, and so I'm not really convinced by the argument that her TES are "over the top" merely because they are competitive with the Men's TES.
). YuNa lacks the quads and 3axel, so this seems counterintuitive.The reason for her high TES is that when she lands her jumps, she gets huge bonuses on her GOE's. Whether they are merited or not is another debate, but it seems to me that those GOE's are given compared to the ladies' field, and not as absolutes. Does anyone agree or disagree with me?
And if you agree with me, do you think that's how it should be? I think that principle seems reasonable. i.e. If YuNa were actually competing in the Men's field, she would not (should not) be given such high GOE's on her signature jumps if it turns out the men jump higher and with more speed for say, a 3Lutz. But as a Ladies' standard, many of her jumps really are breath-taking, and so I'm not really convinced by the argument that her TES are "over the top" merely because they are competitive with the Men's TES.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Actually, we can do a direct comparison. In the short program at Skate America, the top lady and the top man did exactly the same jumps
Yu-na Kim:
3Lz+3T, base value 10.00, GOE 2.20
3F, base value 5.50, GOE 1.80
2A, base value 3.50, GOE 1.60
Evan Lysacek:
3A< = 2A, base value 3.50, GOE -0.28
3Lz+3T, base value 10.00, GOE 1.00
3F, base value 5.50, GOE -0.40
Totals: Base value, 19.00 for each, GOEs, Kim 8.40, Lysacek 0.12.
(Second place lady Rachael Flatt also had 19.00 base value, but had a fall (-3.00 GOE) and 0 GOes on her other two jumps.)
So the question is, was the quality of Yu-na's jumps 8 points better than the quality of Lysacek's, or was she just "better for a girl?"
Yu-na Kim:
3Lz+3T, base value 10.00, GOE 2.20
3F, base value 5.50, GOE 1.80
2A, base value 3.50, GOE 1.60
Evan Lysacek:
3A< = 2A, base value 3.50, GOE -0.28
3Lz+3T, base value 10.00, GOE 1.00
3F, base value 5.50, GOE -0.40
Totals: Base value, 19.00 for each, GOEs, Kim 8.40, Lysacek 0.12.
(Second place lady Rachael Flatt also had 19.00 base value, but had a fall (-3.00 GOE) and 0 GOes on her other two jumps.)
So the question is, was the quality of Yu-na's jumps 8 points better than the quality of Lysacek's, or was she just "better for a girl?"
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
MM - i'm just wondering if Kim's GOE you've included the steps and spins because on the jumps alone 2.2+1.8+1.6= 5.6 not 8.4
In any event Evan was going for a 3A not a 2A, the fact it was underotated means that the GOE was going to take a hit. His flip has an edge change so that is also going to take a hit. Overall I think it's a combination of by anyone's standards two of Evan's three passes were flawed, compared to all 3 of Kim's passes being very good.
Ant
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
MM - i'm just wondering if Kim's GOE you've included the steps and spins because on the jumps alone 2.2+1.8+1.6= 5.6 not 8.4
Let's see... No, I have it right here in my calculator: 2.20+1.80+1.60 = 8.40.
Let me check it: 1.6+1.8+2.2 = 9.92.
:yes:
It's not an "idea" - it is a copyrighted judging system using element judging.
Perhaps, it would depend on just how different it would be. Nevertheless I doubt that the ISU is going to dump their judging system for another one remotely similar to one that the PSA used in its professional competitions. I feel sure they are "wedded" to the current system and will continue to tweak it as they see fit.
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
That's absolutely right (subject to random slight variations across other jurisdictions).
A judging system cannot be protected by copyright law - if the rules are all written down, they could be protected by literary copyright, similarly if there are diagrams explaining the elements those could be subject to artisitc copyright. But they would have to be original works, so descriptions of elements that have been done for years as part of a sport would not likely qualify for copyright protection and the descriotion of judging something can be modified sufficiently to not run into copyright trouble.
I agree with that, but in reality i doubt we will see a new judging system brought in anytime soon, it would look too much like the current one has failed so i think COP will be around for a significant period of time before another judging system is used.
Ant
