How Would You Explain And Apply GOE Rules?

[Bluebonnet]

What about them?

From pure technical point of views, why are a fall and a two-foot landing given the same minus GOEs?

 

[janetfan]

From pure technical point of views, why are a fall and a two-foot landing given the same minus GOEs?

If you followed the thread I believe none other than gkelly made it clear judges have some discretion about the use of negative GOE, particularly on two footed landings.

I for one, was relieved to hear that. (And hoping gkelly appreciates how hard I am studying!!! )

BTW, the NFL refs strike is over - but NOT before going viral and dominating the news across America.

Why do you suppose NFL refs make so much money and skating judges make nothing?

I suspect it has everything to do with required expertise in a sport that continues to capture the imagination of sports fans all over America.

I wish it was possible for ISU or atleast US Skating to use judges who truly demonstrated the qualities necessary for the sport of figure skating as opposed to judges that are forced to hide behind a shield of anonymity.

US Natls has seen some eye-opening results in recent years that might not have happened with better trained and more highly qualified professional judges.

 

[Bluebonnet]

If you followed the thread I believe none other than gkelly made it clear judges have some disgression about the use of negative GOE, particularly on two footed landings.

What is "disgression"? I can't even find this word in dictionary.

Waiting for your new thread in order to respond to your rest of this post and the post before this one.

 

[janetfan]

What is "disgression"? I can't even find this word in dictionary.

Waiting for your new thread in order to respond to your rest of this post and the post before this one.

"discretion"...thanks for pointing that out. Nice that we can agree once a day

 

[Bluebonnet]

"discretion"...thanks for pointing that out. Nice that we can agree once a day

Thanks! No, I did not agree with you.

I still want to ask this question. I sense it might have a very good reason to do so.

 

[janetfan]

Thanks!

But I still want to ask this question. I sense it might have a very good reason to do so.

Sorry, I am multi-tasking here....what is your question?

 

[Bluebonnet]

Sorry, I am multi-tasking here....what is your question?

Please read post #161.

 

[janetfan]

Please read post #161.

See gkelly's post # 8 - which is a far better answer to your question than I could ever hope to give.

 

[Bluebonnet]

See gkelly's post # 8 - which is a far better answer to your question than I could ever hope to give.

Ah, no. Only Mathman has addressed it:

I don't know why this is more heavily penalized in singles than in pairs -- I guess jumping is more of a "singles skill."

 

[Mathman]

From pure technical point of views, why are a fall and a two-foot landing given the same minus GOEs?

The more I think about it, the more I think I might be OK with this feature of the IJS.

Consider (a) a jump where the skater lands plop like a sack of potatoes with his weight evenly distributed on both feet.

And (b) a jump where the skater has correct form on the landing but cannot hold the edge and falls.

Which is actually a worse error from the point of view of technique? In both cases the program is disrupted and it takes a few seconds to get back into the flow if the performance.

 

[janetfan]

The more I think about it, the more I think I might be OK with this feature of the IJS.

Consider (a) a jump where the skater lands plop like a sack of potatoes with his weight evenly distributed on both feet.

And (b) a jump where the skater has correct form on the landing but cannot hold the edge and falls.

Which is actually a worse error from the point of view of technique? In both cases the program is disrupted and it takes a few seconds to get back into the flow if the performance.

If the skater had such good form they most likely would have had the balance upon landing not to splat across the ice.

BTW, an earlier post (#8) from gkelly puts the kibosh on you and bluebonnet.

A fall or a two footed landing does not automatically receive the same -GOE.

Geez.....:disapp:

 

[Tonichelle]

If the skater had such good form they most likely would have had the balance upon landing not to splat across the ice.

So did they never had good form (like ever), or they just lost it in that moment?

 

[janetfan]

So did they never had good form (like ever), or they just lost it in that moment?

Ice is slippery so anything is possible.

But many times when we see a skater fall if we are watching carefully we see it start to go wrong before they splat.

But not always - for one thing the camera coverage is not always so great.

If my studying is paying off what needs to be recognized here is that the range of - GOE for jumps or two footed landings is the same - up tp -3 but not automatically the same.

The amount o f -GOE is up to the judges.
That's what I picked up from reading gkelly's comments about this

 

[Mathman]

The fall itself is supposed to factored into the GOE at -3. This can be mitigated by positive factors. Here is an example. Check out Patrick Chan's opening 4T+3T combo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar5vpBC7CGI

The judges' GOEs on the element were -1, -3, -2, -1, -3, -3, -2, -2, -3. The positive features were speed, air position on the quad, and tremendous ice coverage on the quad. In fact, his horizontal was so great that he ran out of real estate and hit the boards, causing the fall.

(For the hand down on the triple Axel he got -1 across the board, with one 0.)

For a two-footed jump, the important point is that the rules list two separate deductions. A -3 GOE for "landing on two feet in a jump," which also requires negative total GOE on the element regardless of positive factors, and a -1 for "touch down with one hand or free foot," for which the total GOE for the element is not restricted. Presumably the judges have to decide which of the two categories to put a particular attempt in.

I will try to find an example of a jump that is so badly two-footed that it deserves the full -3 deduction. I think this is rare, compared to falls.

 

[janetfan]

The fall itself is supposed to factored into the GOE at -3. This can be mitigated by positive factors. Here is an example. Check out Patrick Chan's opening 4T+3T combo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar5vpBC7CGI

The judges' GOEs on the element were -1, -3, -2, -1, -3, -3, -2, -2, -3. The positive features were speed, air position on the quad, and tremendous ice coverage on the quad. In fact, his horizontal was so great that he ran out of real estate and hit the boards, causing the fall.

(For the hand down on the triple Axel he got -1 across the board, with one 0.)

For a two-footed jump, the important point is that the rules list two separate deductions. A -3 GOE for "landing on two feet in a jump," which also requires negative total GOE on the element regardless of positive factors, and a -1 for "touch down with one hand or free foot," for which the total GOE for the element is not restricted. Presumably the judges have to decide which of the two categories to put a particular attempt in.

I will try to find an example of a jump that is so badly two-footed that it deserves the full -3 deduction. I think this is rare, compared to falls.

Thanks for the explanation. I have been thinking about this one single aspect of the CoP for a couple of days now and still don't know if I even have it right in a very general sense.

I would never try to explain it to another casual fan for fear of ruining their enjoyment of figure skating.

 

[Mathman]

OK, here is an example of a -3 two-footed landing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBqfWXN3-BA&t=3m20s

Here is a -1 two-foot on the same element.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFPEchPbJH0

And here is a solid one-foot landing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mVVy25e-vk

 

[Mathman]

I don't see any way for any sport to thrive and even exist for very long in today's world without good marketing and exposure to it's fan base.

I think the point gkelly is insisting upon is that figure skating is primarily a sport of, by, and for the participants, and not so much about fan bases. If this is so, then it might be more relevant to compare skating to, say, breeding and showing dogs, than to soccer or baseball.

Dog shows are of intense interest to breeders, trainers and owners. For outsiders, maybe there are one or two big shows on TV once a year where you can check out the beautiful animals and root for your favorite. Or you can attend in person, which is pretty cool. Participants do not make any money in this sport -- indeed, people pay thousands to participate. Most of them are well off, so that doesn't matter very much.

As for the rules and standards that the judges are supposed to go by, these are lengthy, involved, and quite bewildering to a casual once-a-year viewer. No one outside the participatory perimeter has any interest in trying to memorize all the standards for each breed, or even for one breed. The sport retains about the same level of popularity year after year.

 

[janetfan]

I think the point gkelly is insisting upon is that figure skating is primarily a sport of, by, and for the participants, and not so much about fan bases. If this is so, then it might be more relevant to compare skating to, say, breeding and showing dogs, than to soccer or baseball.

Dog shows are of intense interest to breeders, trainers and owners. For outsiders, maybe there are one or two big shows on TV once a year where you can check out the beautiful animals and root for your favorite. Or you can attend in person, which is pretty cool. Participants do not make any money in this sport -- indeed, people pay thousands to participate. Most of them are well off, so that doesn't matter very much.

As for the rules and standards that the judges are supposed to go by, these are lengthy, involved, and quite bewildering to a casual once-a-year viewer. No one outside the participatory perimeter has any interest in trying to memorize all the standards for each breed, or even for one breed. The sport retains about the same level of popularity year after year.

True...but the dogs are shown in NYC in Madison Square Garden.

Where were the skaters last year....Ontario, CA? I never heard of it before and judging by how empty the little arena was neither did many others.

Your point is well taken - but does it ignore the past - remember former days of glory when skating events were in the biggest arenas in the biggest cities and the joint was jumping and sold out.

I know you remember those days......so why set the standards so low for the future?

 

[Tonichelle]

As for the rules and standards that the judges are supposed to go by, these are lengthy, involved, and quite bewildering to a casual once-a-year viewer. No one outside the participatory perimeter has any interest in trying to memorize all the standards for each breed, or even for one breed. The sport retains about the same level of popularity year after year.

But the commentators do their best to summerize what the judges look for and the standard of the breed and stuff so the casual viewer isn't completely at a loss to understand it - even if we can't SEE it, we trust it...

problem is the media loves thes scandal of the judging issues in skating, so we've had decades of not trusting the judges... so you can call it something else, score it differently, but you still have a lot of folks who remember only the crookedness of judging.

 

[Bluebonnet]

A fall or a two footed landing does not automatically receive the same -GOE.

I wasn't asking that in the first place.

I will try to find an example of a jump that is so badly two-footed that it deserves the full -3 deduction. I think this is rare, compared to falls.

Here is a perfect example that you are looking for:

Justus STRID's SP from 2012 World Championships:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfInTc4sfnw

His 3F - 3T received -3 GOEs from all judges except one who gave him -2.