GP Final Analysis and Predictions

[ImaginaryPogue]

Weaver & Poje skated brilliantly in Kitchener at Skate Canada in 2009, winning their first GP medal (bronze) and beating Bobrova & Soloviev for the first time. This truly was "home ice" for Andrew as he trained at the Aud in Kitchener for years. The hometown fans roared for them when they took the ice and the building was electric. W&P fed off that energy and skated with energy and intensity.

They had a massive stumble during the footwork in their FD - I felt they were better in CoC that season in the FD. Though technically, their CD and OD were good, but their FD wasn't.

 

[hurrah]

after setting aside all the factors that affect skaters performances, what non-performance factors remain that help to determine their scores?

Judges determine the scores!

For most part, CoP is good at controlling subjectivity in judgment, but controversy can arise in areas where quality is marked. One aspect (which has been addressed and is far less problematic now) is the degree to which GOEs determine outcome; some skaters appeared to be getting more and more GOEs for doing the same and winning on the strength of their GOE. Another aspect (which has not been addressed yet) is underrotation; depending on the technical caller, what qualifies as full rotation is variable and leaves question marks.

There's also reputation marking.

Because of the leeway in CoP system for subjectivity in judging, anonymous judging will always be controversial.

 

[skatinginbc]

it's been noted in numerous psychology studies that so called home field advantage plays little to no measurable role in performance among athletes. While crowd participation may boost performance in some cases, it can also decrease performance just as often.

Based on your statement, it appears what the research studies are suggesting:
Mean performance in competition at home (μ[SUB]home[/SUB]) = Mean performance in competition afield (μ[SUB]afield[/SUB]), although performance variance in competition at home (σ[SUP]2[/SUP][SUB]home[/SUB]) > performance variance in competition afield (σ[SUP]2[/SUP][SUB]afield[/SUB])

If that's indeed what the studies have shown, I would argue that the increase of variance could increase the chance of getting on the podium. Say, a skater competed three times abroad and three times on home ice and received the following ordinal scores or placement:
Abroad: 4, 5, 6 (μ[SUB]afield[/SUB] = 5, σ[SUB]afield[/SUB] = 1)
Home: 3 (crowd-boosted performance), 5, 7 (crumbled under stress) (μ[SUB]home[/SUB] = 5, σ[SUB]home[/SUB] = 2)

Although the two distributions have an identical mean performance, the skater had 33.33% chance of getting onto the podium while skating at home, whereas he had no chance while skating abroad.

Stefan LINDEMANN, a German skater who won the bronze medal at the 2004 World championships in Dortmund, Germany, seems to be a fitting example. He had the skate of his life on home ice, a performance that was not in his "normal" distribution when skating abroad.

The home field advantage in performance may not concern so much the mean as the increase of variance.....It's just my intuition or guess.

Of course, the home advantage in judging will further increase the skater's chance of getting onto the podium.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Judges mark the PC scores based on their opinions. Entertainment can not be quantified. It's in the mind of the beholder. Some like it hot; others like it cool, and that varies frm discipline to discipline. Somelike Dai's firery approach; somelike Evgeny's showoff approach while still others like Lambiel's classic approach, and these traits go into the scoring. Pick your choice.

 

[mskater93]

You are neglecting the scoring corridor in your comment, Joe. If you aren't in the corridor for the given skater, you will be questioned...

 

[silver.blades]

I think there is some merit in the officials being swayed, for lack of a better word, by the home crowds cheers. It's not that they're purposely favouring the home side, it's that they're human and when there is a close call that you're not 100% sure of the opinion of the crowd gets in the way of you sorting it out objectively and reasonably. You have to make a decision quickly and when you have a bad angle on a play it's not always obvious. I'm a soccer official and I know that's how I make calls sometimes. Although I'm more likely to favour the team with the nicer coach than the home one.

It seems like mental toughness would be one of the factors that affect performance. As for strength of opposition, over the course of many seasons and averaged over all teams, the typical team would play just as many good teams as bad, at home and away, and this would be a statistical wash. Yet still the home team wins 60% of the time.

Anyway, in figure skating the strength of the opposition should not (in principle) affect your score.

So the question still remains: after setting aside all the factors that affect skaters performances, what non-performance factors remain that help to determine their scores?

 

[Mathman]

Stefan LINDEMANN, a German skater who won the bronze medal at the 2004 World championships in Dortmund, Germany, seems to be a fitting example. He had the skate of his life on home ice, a performance that was not in his "normal" distribution when skating abroad....

That is the canonical example. Lindemann gave the skate of his life before the home crowd. But in addition he got the nod from the judges, who could certainly have scored Lambiel higher for the bronze.

It was the perfect storm for Lindemann. His performance was good enough that the judges felt justified in going with the feel-good choice of the home-town skater.

 

[Olympia]

Another example is probably Sebastyen for the European Championship that year, which was held in Budapest. That was a moment! Sebastyen had been skating for years by that time, and the win was a wonderful pinnacle for her. It must have been something for her to hear the entire audience singing the Hungarian National Anthem with her.

 

[Mathman]

That's fine, but I get tetchy when Tara's skating is torn apart often by fans of another skater (not you, Mrs. P), when their favoured skater's weaknesses aren't likewise mentioned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88xpDflZ-lU&feature=youtu.be&t=4m03s

That's further proof that I'm not hallucinating or creating a conspiracy theory.

Skaters who flutz need to change their edge more subtly, without making that big "S" -- then they'd get away with it more often.

But in comparing 6.0 with CoP, wrong edge take-offs and under-rotations were not invented by the new scoring system. It's just that in ordinal judging each judge served as his own computer, adding up all the little plusses and minuses to come up with a final score.

Both Tara and Michelle were criticized by the judges and lost points for bad Lutz take-offs. Especially Tara in the first part of the 1997-98 season. Judges told Richard Callaghan (Tara's coach) straight out that the reason they gave Tara a 5.6 instead of a 5.7 was because of her flutz.

Likewise under-rotations. We don't know the exact penalty that each judge factored in, but certainly the commentators were not shy about saying things like, "That jump was under-rotated. He managed to save the landing, but could not get any flow out." Or "That jump was severely under-rotated and that's why she fell."

 

[snowflake]

I am impressed with Alena's attack and jumping at Cup of Russia. Not many ladies manages six triples including a great 3-toe/3-toe with speed in and out. Mao was "saved" by higher PCS and high levels on non-jumping-elements. That's how the judging system works.

I'm fine with the result, but to be honest, how many thought Mao would win the FS after seeing her skate it? Even she herself looked dumbfounded when she saw her score and first place

The final ladies are close with different weaknesses and strenghts. As said in other posts, anyone can win.

Predictions Ladies:
1 Mao (if she just skates as at CoR and nail a few more jumps. No 3-axel needed)
2 Elizaveta (consistent tech and no nerves. I admire her a lot)
3 Carolina (she should medal if she does what she can. I hope she or Akiko wins)

Men
I wouldn't mind the same people on the podium as at Cup of Russia, but I predict:
1 Chan (If he does his things he is outstanding. Can afford some mistakes)
2 Fernandez (his quads look solid and many other elements too. Seems in great shape)
3 Hanyu (he has to do his toe-quads properly, otherwise Takahashi beats him)

My faith in Jeremy is sadly not strong... but you never know

Pairs
1 Volosozhar/Trankov (I have a feeling they will win this, Europeans and Worlds…)
2 Savchenko/Szolkowy (Hope they can fix all difficulties, but maybe not yet… crossing my fingers)
3 Kavaguti/Smirnov

Dance
1 Davis/White
2 Virtue/Moir
3 Pechalat/Bourzat

 

[Mrs. P]

Skaters who flutz need to change their edge more subtly, without making that big "S" -- then they'd get away with it more often.

But in comparing 6.0 with CoP, wrong edge take-offs and under-rotations were not invented by the new scoring system. It's just that in ordinal judging each judge served as his own computer, adding up all the little plusses and minuses to come up with a final score.

Both Tara and Michelle were criticized by the judges and lost points for bad Lutz take-offs. Especially Tara in the first part of the 1997-98 season. Judges told Richard Callaghan (Tara's coach) straight out that the reason they gave Tara a 5.6 instead of a 5.7 was because of her flutz.

Likewise under-rotations. We don't know the exact penalty that each judge factored in, but certainly the commentators were not shy about saying things like, "That jump was under-rotated. He managed to save the landing, but could not get any flow out." Or "That jump was severely under-rotated and that's why she fell."

Well of course COP didn't invent those deductions; I'm just saying that skaters didn't get penalized as much for them (at least in my view).

 

[doctor2014]

Men
I wouldn't mind the same people on the podium as at Cup of Russia, but I predict:
1 Chan (If he does his things he is outstanding. Can afford some mistakes)
2 Fernandez (his quads look solid and many other elements too. Seems in great shape)
3 Hanyu (he has to do his toe-quads properly, otherwise Takahashi beats him)

My faith in Jeremy is sadly not strong... but you never know

Hanyu probably can’t do quads or even triples properly in GPF, coz I heard that he sprained his right ankle before CoR. Doctor advised him to stop practicing jumps and even skip CoR, but his federation asked him to skate nonetheless.

And that was why he failed on both quad attempts in SP and FS. Even worse, the sprain got more serious after the competition, and now he can hardly do any jumps. His Japanese fans seem to worry about his Japanese Nationals.

I don’t read Japanese and use google translator, so I may have misread something. If someone here understands Japanese, then plz help find this out.

 

[snowflake]

^
Oh no, I hope you have misread something. This sounds terrible. How could he skate so well in CoR with a sprained ankle?

 

[SerpentineSteps]

Hanyu probably can’t do quads or even triples properly in GPF, coz I heard that he sprained his right ankle before CoR. Doctor advised him to stop practicing jumps and even skip CoR, but his federation asked him to skate nonetheless.

And that was why he failed on both quad attempts in SP and FS. Even worse, the sprain got more serious after the competition, and now he can hardly do any jumps. His Japanese fans seem to worry about his Japanese Nationals.

I don’t read Japanese and use google translator, so I may have misread something. If someone here understands Japanese, then plz help find this out.

I could help, if you provide the actual link to the article you're reading... not finding anything on my end.

 

[Becki]

Hanyu probably can’t do quads or even triples properly in GPF, coz I heard that he sprained his right ankle before CoR. Doctor advised him to stop practicing jumps and even skip CoR, but his federation asked him to skate nonetheless.

And that was why he failed on both quad attempts in SP and FS. Even worse, the sprain got more serious after the competition, and now he can hardly do any jumps. His Japanese fans seem to worry about his Japanese Nationals.

I don’t read Japanese and use google translator, so I may have misread something. If someone here understands Japanese, then plz help find this out.

Do you have an article on this?? O__O I am so shocked. And I agree, there's no way he was able to skate that way with a sprained ankle.....

 

[Mathman]

Well of course COP didn't invent those deductions; I'm just saying that skaters didn't get penalized as much for them (at least in my view).

I don't know whether this is true or not. In the current scoring system, let's say a skater badly under-rotates a triple Lutz, has the base value lowered to a double, and gets negative GOE on top of that. The skater loses 4 points or so. If that skater's total score is 100 points, that's a "decduction" of 4%.

Under 6.0 ordinal judging, it seems entirely possible that a judge's overall evaluation of the performance is diminished by more than 4% because of such an error. In a close contest it might be the diffrence between a first place ordinal and a second place, just like with the CoP.

If in addition the skater falls, the CoP reduces the point value of that element only another 2 points of so. In 6.0 a fall was regarded as much worse than just an extra 2% devaluation of the program as a whole.

 

[wallylutz]

I don't know whether this is true or not. In the current scoring system, let's say a skater badly under-rotates a triple Lutz, has the base value lowered to a double, and gets negative GOE on top of that. The skater loses 4 points or so. If that skater's total score is 100 points, that's a "decduction" of 4%.

Under 6.0 ordinal judging, it seems entirely possible that a judge's overall evaluation of the performance is diminished by more than 4% because of such an error. In a close contest it might be the diffrence between a first place ordinal and a second place, just like with the CoP.

If in addition the skater falls, the CoP reduces the point value of that element only another 2 points of so. In 6.0 a fall was regarded as much worse than just an extra 2% devaluation of the program as a whole.

Your reasoning is not correct because you can't quantify the 6.0 system the same way you do about CoP. Is it justified that a skater who did a Quad/Triple along with a total 8 Triple jumps only score 0.1 more (out of 6.0) than another who did 8 Triples? How about Ito's FS at the 1989 and 1990 Worlds? She had everything up to the Triple Axel and her closest competitors barely had 4 different kind of Triples yet the difference in Technical Merit is hard to comprehend by today's standard.

It seems to me your "beef" has consistently be with the fact that <<fall is not penalized enough under CoP as it was under 6.0>>. Like I stated before, falls have been explicitly stated in the old rules for not being a valid reason to prevent a skater/team from winning under the ordinal system. Also, whether a fall is really penalized depends on the element and how the fall happened. From the 90's onward, with the explosion of Triples in ladies and later Quads among men, top skaters who tried extra hard elements and fell were not necessarily penalized for them as much as you remember. Reason: There is no actual penalty or deduction for falling and credits were given for good attempts. Also, you are forgetting that there was no official limit on the number of jumping passes so a lady could land 7 Triples but fall on a 3A attempt. On the other hand, under CoP, a fall on the 3A attempt may take out one of the jumping pass, thus prevent her to land 7 Triples afterward. So the case of fall really penalizing a single skater is highly contingent on the competition he/she faces - a more relative situation as the ordinals call for. But CoP is more absolute, and more independent of what your competitors do. For Ice Dance, it's even worse. For the better part of the 1990's, until G/P retired, falls were pretty meaningless for top teams. In many cases, the judges deemed the falls as being "not interrupting" to the performance and chose not to penalize at all. Then mandatory deductions were introduced later, which was carried over into the CoP.

 

[FTnoona]

Hanyu probably can’t do quads or even triples properly in GPF, coz I heard that he sprained his right ankle before CoR. Doctor advised him to stop practicing jumps and even skip CoR, but his federation asked him to skate nonetheless.

And that was why he failed on both quad attempts in SP and FS. Even worse, the sprain got more serious after the competition, and now he can hardly do any jumps. His Japanese fans seem to worry about his Japanese Nationals.

I don’t read Japanese and use google translator, so I may have misread something. If someone here understands Japanese, then plz help find this out.

Aww man.... It was bound to happen sooner or later. He takes such hard falls when he practices his jumps from what I've seen. Well at least we'll get to see Nan Song if Yuzuru pulls out. Is there any word if he is going to back out of the final?

 

[Mathman]

Your reasoning is not correct,,,

Well...OK. But there were no examples of reasoning, either correct or incorrect, in the post that you quoted.

 

[wallylutz]

Well...OK. But there were no examples of reasoning, either correct or incorrect, in the post that you quoted.

Take a look at this statement:

If in addition the skater falls, the CoP reduces the point value of that element only another 2 points of so. In 6.0 a fall was regarded as much worse than just an extra 2% devaluation of the program as a whole.

Part highlighted in blue omits considerations for the opportunity cost of falling under CoP, the best example to illustrate this is the fact that Mao Asada has stopped doing the 3A. If the penalty were really just a mere another 2 points or so, why would Mr. Sato asked her to stop for now? Part highlighted in green is not true as per the previous post.