Fantasy scoring for 2016 Worlds

[skylark]

Let me add my voice to the people who've found this thread interesting and are glad that you posted it. I enjoyed reading your analysis and comparing your scores to the actual judging.

As is apparent, I enjoy using people's questions or opinions as a springboard for opening the discussions up into tangential directions as well. To me, these sorts of questions and tangents make a discussion forum much more interesting.

Gracie Gold
My protocol: https://snag.gy/KbJdCE.jpg
My score: 61.02/68.32 | 129.34
ISU score: 66.01/69.85 -1.00 | 134.86

Comments: I realized after I did this that the ISU credited Gracie with a fall on that crab-walk position she ended up in after the opening combo, whereas I didn't.

I'm curious whether you found Gracie's 3Lz-3T to be underrotated. I'm far from being a UR hawk, but I thought Gracie's toe was UR.

I recall Mirai's remark that once a skater gets URs called, the callers tend to be pickier. So I'm wondering whether Gracie's jump didn't get called because Gracie doesn't get called on URs, or whether this really wasn't a UR. Johnny Weir thought it wasn't completely around, and I've seen one or two comments around here to that effect; otherwise I wouldn't mention it because tech calls aren't my highest priority.

 

[Daniel1998]

It's hard to tell exactly when her blade touches the ice from the regular view we get during the performance. I slowed that down to 0.25 speed and watched it, but I assumed that she got it around.

When you asked, I went back to the video and found a different angle that NBC showed after the performance was over where you could tell if it was rotated or not.

https://snag.gy/80j1sO.jpg

That's where she landed it.

https://snag.gy/kJVZcl.jpg

And that's where the full rotation should be.

So you're right, it is underrotated. It's tough to tell from the traditional side angle though, so the caller might have missed it if he/she only looked at that angle.

 

[skylark]

thanks for your answer. By the way, I read that that jump was called as a fall because most of her weight was on the back of her skates and on her hands. I think 70% was the relevant number, but I could be mis-remembering. I wondered about it too.

 

[Ares]

thanks for your answer. By the way, I read that that jump was called as a fall because most of her weight was on the back of her skates and on her hands. I think 70% was the relevant number, but I could be mis-remembering. I wondered about it too.

In Figure Skating even things like determining falls could be subjective as long as you don't fell on your butt

 

[gkelly]

A while ago, a generous poster gave us a link to a nifty score calculation sheet that he/she created, so that we could all become judges.

I decided to put that to use, and score the third and fourth groups of the 2016 World Championship Ladies FS the way that I would, to see what the results would be.

Thanks for starting the thread, Daniel1998. I always think it's fun to see how various fans would score the skating.

I figure there are different ways to approach fantasy scoring:

For casual fans:
1) Just list which performances you liked best, rank them in terms of your enjoyment including whatever you know and notice about difficulty or technical quality.

For more knowledgeable fans who are more interested in overall impression:
2) Rank the skaters by a 6.0-like process, taking into account general difficulty, technical quality, and presentation according to your own weighting.

For knowledgeable fans who are interested in the intricacies of IJS rules and technical nitpicking and the different aspects of the various program components:
3) Pretend you're a technical specialist, identify and call edges and rotation on jump elements, call levels on the non-jump elements, apply rule-vetting etc.
4) Pretend you're a judge and assign GOEs to every element and score all five PCS for each skater in real time the way a judge would
5) If feeling ambitious and wondering how the event would have come out if you were the only person making all the decisions, watch at least twice and do both of the above and also apply deductions, bonuses, etc.

To score a competition from a previous era by today's rules, or to compare performances from different years:
6) Decide which year's rules and scale of values to apply, maybe make some compromises to the SP requirements or well-balanced freeskate rules to put everyone on an equal footing, and do 5) above

If you like the idea of a detailed code of points but are not satisfied with all the details of this year's or any year's scale of values, program content rules, technical panel rules or judging guidelines:
7) Make up your own code, and then apply it to a real competition or other collection of programs

I like to do 4-6 by myself for fun, just being one judge.

It can be even more fun to get a bunch of fans to each take on the role of one judge or one tech panel member and put our decisions together into a combined result for, e.g., a Golden Skate panel.

Now, I used a seven judge scoring system, and gave GOEs for each judge that I thought were a fair representation of what I thought the element should score. I used seven judges for more accuracy; for example, there are some elements that aren't necessarily a +1 or +2, but somewhere in between. Having seven GOEs helps keep that accuracy.

This is a little strange to me, because I always only pretend to be one judge when I'm fantasy judging. If I think an element is borderline between two GOEs, I make a note of why and make a decision one way or another as I would have to do if I were really out there judging.

Do you just use these 7 judges as 7 people who think just like yourself and split the GOEs to break ties in your own mind on borderline elements? Or do you give them each specific nationalities or stylistic biases or tendencies to score high or low in general or to use wide ranges, etc.?

*Obviously, this is my own opinion, and before anyone barrages me with angry messages about how I scored this skater and that skater, please respect my judgment, as I respect yours.*

Respect for doing all that work and explaining your thought processes.

Groups of fans are bound to disagree with each other, just as groups of experienced judges will, especially on the more subjective qualitative judgment calls. I find it interesting to discuss what we saw or evaluated differently and why, without passing judgment that those I disagree with (other fans or official judges) were wrong. When it comes to handing out GOEs and especially PCS, there's no firm wrong or right -- just different degrees of collective agreement about the range of quality associated with each number.

Tech panel calls tend to be more correct or incorrect, except for ambiguous "gray areas" -- which may be affected by camera angle and video quality.

So some disagreements there can just be chalked up to different video experiences or different understandings of the written tech panel guidelines. If some written guidelines are being ignored or apparently misunderstood, that could be worth pointing out.

Here's the thing I don't get, Daniel1998. You're trying to proclaim that you're being more nitpicky and harsh regarding the jumps with edge calls/UR/<</GOE. That's fine. I'm always way more harsh than the TP inevitably is.

But you set a double-standard in your post, which is what I certainly took objection to when I first read it last night and what I think some of the others took objection to. You hammered everyone except Satoko Miyahara. If you didn't call her PR,

PR = prerotation?

The official tech panel guidelines for calling prerotation are much more lenient than for underrotation on the landing end. The rules say

A clear forward (backward for Axel type jump) take-off will be considered as a downgraded jump. The toe loop is the most commonly cheated on take-off jump. The TP may only watch the replay in regular speed to determine the cheat and downgrade on the take off (more often in combinations or sequences).

So downgrades should only be called if the skater/blade was clearly facing forward (or backward for an axel) before leaving the ice without benefit of slow motion replay.

There's nothing in writing at all about how to handle jumps in which the blade takes off sideways or beyond (but not fully forward, or backward for an axel) with respect to the direction of the entry edge. Some curving on the ice, tightening the curve of the entry edge, is inevitably part of the technique for multirevolution jumps.

These rules seem to give benefit of the doubt to the skater for prerotations, so those elite skaters who do tend to prerotate by less than 180 degrees are officially able to get away with it in real life, and therefore in a fantasy simulation of the applying real life rules.

Elite skaters who can takeoff with almost the same diameter to the entry curve right up to the takeoff, and then tighten the rotation after they're fully in the air, can earn the GOE bullet point for delayed rotation.

Screen captures are not as accurate as it might seem for assessing prerotation on edge jumps because there will always be a split second when the skater is already in the process of lifting into the air and there is no weight on the blade but the front part of the blade is still in contact with the ice.

And also, I find your docking of GOE because of "too many tanos" rather petty.

I don't think tano by itself guarantees the next higher GOE, but if it deserves credit for one jump then it should deserve the same credit for another jump of similar quality, whether performed in the same program or a different one perhaps by a different skater.

For some position variations, if it's not very difficult and/or it seems like the skater is doing the variation because it's actually easier for them than the standard position, then I might stop rewarding for doing what seems like their standard technique.

For lack of variety, I'd reflect it in the Composition mark, and Transitions if the problem is reusing the same entries/exits.

 

[skylark]

In Figure Skating even things like determining falls could be subjective as long as you don't fell on your butt

 

[Ruffles78]

A while ago, a generous poster gave us a link to a nifty score calculation sheet that he/she created, so that we could all become judges.

I decided to put that to use, and score the third and fourth groups of the 2016 World Championship Ladies FS the way that I would, to see what the results would be.

Could someone provide us a link to this score calculation sheet? I'd love to do this, too.