The new GOE system in dance is even more confusing for me, especially in the Rhythm Dance. I'm confused how a level 1 on a pattern can get GOEs of +4 or +5. From my layperson's view, this is just another method of giving obvious reputation scores.
Unless the technical panel makes a call, what you’re seeing in real time is probably what the final +/- GOE (after factoring) will be. To give an example: say a skater lands a triple Axel, which has a base value (BV) of 8 points, so the maximum +/- GOE is 4. Let’s say the skater has a serious fall, so the GOE displayed in real time is -4.0 (in red), next to the name of the element and its BV; we already established the 3A is worth 8.0 points, so with -5 GOE from the judges for the fall, half of the element’s BV has been deducted, so the element has only earned 4 points.
However, upon review, the TP determines that same 3A was under-rotated. The skater has already left for the K&C and the real-time TES box has disappeared. But an under-rotated 3A (3A<) has a BV of 6.0, not 8.0. The fall warranted a unanimous -5 from the judges in GOE, and half of 6.0 is 3.0. When you check protocols, you should then see 3A< listed as an element, with the scores of the panel being -3.0. You can see something similar here if you look at Nathan Chen’s SP (third on the list). He fell on his quad flip, and every judge gave him a -5 in GOE — this means we don’t have to worry about what the average is — and the technical panel marked the jump as under-rotated. The 4F’s BV is 11.0, but because it was under-rotated, the BV became 8.25, and half of 8.25 is 4.12 (more or less). If a skater’s final TES (shown when they get their total score in the K&C) is a few points less than their TES shown when leaving the ice, then that’s largely due to the technical panel making various calls that reduce an element’s base value.
What you’re seeing in real time is the average being calculated as the judges input their GOE for a given element. If two elements closely follow each other, the first one may be replaced before all marks were submitted and the final average calculated. (Keeping in mind that the highest and the lowest value are both removed before the average is taken.) So sometimes, a skater will have a visible error but the first judge will feel that the element had enough positive features that offset the negative and award it, say, 0 or +1. Then other judges will input -1, and the GOE will change from being green/positive to red/negative in real time.
With the exception of the Choreographic Sequence in the free skate, one level of GOE is 10% of the element’s base value. This is NOT affected by the 10% BV bonus for jumps performed in the second half. A 3A done as the final jumping pass and in the second half of the short programme is worth BV +10% of BV, or 8.0+0.80 or 8.80. The GOE range is still +4 to -4, not +/-4.4.
If you can do the percentages in your head and keep track of all the rules, GOE is relatively straightforward even in real time. You can find the values for every element here, which I don’t recommend consulting when watching. But if you can get a sense of what +3 on a common element is — for the 3A, it’s 2.4 points — you can make sense of the real time average, as you rarely see unanimous GOE grades except in cases of serious error. Using Jason Brown’s first element as an example: the +3 and one +5 are dropped before taking the average (the +3 is the lowest mark and one of the +5s has to be dropped as the highest). That leaves two +4s and five +5s. If you do the subsequent computations, you’ll realize that you aren’t going to arrive at a whole number such as +4 or +5, which is why the final GOE is +2.50, a value between 2.12 (+4) and 2.65 (+5). If you can get used to the idea that +4 is about 2.10 and +5 is 2.6, then you can see a real time GOE of 2.5 and immediately recognize that 2.5 is closer to 2.65 than 2.12 and that the average GOE includes some very favorable marks.
(For more fun with averages, look at Samarin’s 3A. One of the 3s and one of the 1s are tossed, leaving five +2s and one +1 and one +3... and when calculating the average, the +1 and +3 effectively cancel each other out and become another +2, which is why his GOE is precisely +1.60 points, or exactly 20% of 8.0. +2 was also the modal value given by the judges. In the case of Jason’s flip, his actual average GOE is 4.71, but the modal value was 5, which is the more common scenario — a judging split.)
The new GOE system in dance is even more confusing for me, especially in the Rhythm Dance. I'm confused how a level 1 on a pattern can get GOEs of +4 or +5. From my layperson's view, this is just another method of giving obvious reputation scores.
Thank you!!!! This is fantastic and very understandable!!!!!
Dave Lease of TSL is working on a guide to the pattern. And if you have Twitter, you could always ask him for the tips he sent to Jonathan. I take TSL with a Dead Sea’s scoop worth of salt on a number of things, but they’ve been really on top of discussing the pattern and ID in general.Indeed, it would be extremely helpful if the ISU (or anyone really) provided a video every year of what the key points in the rhythm dance actually are and how the technical panel comes to the decision of whether the key point gets a Yes or a No. I imagine that the common person, and even longtime figure skating fans, have no idea how key points are assessed. I, for one, just sort of accept things like a +3 on a Lvl 1 +NNYN step without being able to comment specifically on why that happened.
Indeed. I’ve read the technical manual for ID but it doesn’t help much when much of the TR is shown on camera from the waist-up. You can tell whose pattern has the most ice coverage, “pizzazz,” etc., but you can have a huge pattern with a great performance and still miss every KP due to timing.From what I comprehend, it can come down to an edge being too flat (how flat is too flat?), a turn not being clean (what does that mean?), or a hold not being exact (what does the correct hold look like?).