Interview With an Olympic Judge

[figureskatingfan22]

Because too many people think that the result of men`s event was unfair.

do they realy? After watching the competition three times; i dont see how any other result would be fair

I think it's rather the old debate: sport/jumps/risk vs. art/overall skating/no risk . Under that aspect several results would probably have been possible (independently of the judging system).

 

[Mathman]

This part of the interview was also interesting to me. Mr. Ibens cofirms what we always thought, that judges use the program component scores as place-holders for ordinals, just as in 6.0.

TW: But this system is supposed to make it so that you are marking a skater against a 10-point scale, not pitting the skaters against each other. Do you think the reason that happens is because there is too much going on at once?

PI: Yes and no. As i said, our sport is out of the “sport”. Sport is that one is better than two is better than three. You can only come up with that result by comparing. If you call it speed skating, then there’s a clock but of course there are no marks for skills and artistry– they only have to be fast! Scoring only on a scale of 10 is impossible in a competition.

Ibens also says that this comparison is a little harder under the CoP because it is difficult to remember how all the numbers came out for previous skaters.

We also do not know our previous marks so it is possible that you accidentally gave the higher mark to the other skater although as a good judge you have your ways to get around that!

TW: Please explain the last part in more detail.

PI: If i gave, say, a 7.25 to skater A, then skater B is ten skaters later and in my opinion he is better, but gave him a 7.00, then I accidentallly gave “first place” to the wrong skater for that component.

But, as a good judge you add up all of your components for the first skater, which we will say makes an avarage 7.00. Then you remember that and when the next skater comes on you do the same. If he is better all-around on the components, your average should obviously be higher than 7.00!

 

[janetfan]

This part of the interview was also interesting to me. Mr. Ibens cofirms what we always thought, that judges use the program component scores as place-holders for ordinals, just as in 6.0.



Ibens also says that this comparison is a little harder under the CoP because it is difficult to remember how all the numbers came out for previous skaters.

A judged sport was and always will be comparitive. I see no way around it if the judging is honest.

What CoP has done is to make it much easier to give out big artistic marks/pcs to skaters like Joubert and Plushy while holding down skaters like Jeremy and Johnny.

It still seems to be where close decisions are won and lost - in the reputation based pcs.
It seems in certain ways less honest and worse than 6.0 when it comes to judging IN, CH and TR.

And SS should be part of TES, no?

 

[Mathman]

And SS should be part of TES, no?

I don't really think so. The Total Element Score is the sum of base values and GOEs of each element taken separately.

The Skating Skills component is about what you do throughout the program (speed, ice coverage, edging, stroking), so it is part of the Program Component Scores, not the Element scores.

Comparing to the old 6.0 marks, the technical mark would (I suppose) correspond to the base values of the elements, plus Skating Skills and Transitions. The second mark would be GOEs on individual elements together with INT. CH, and P/E.

A different kind of split and mix than under 6.0, and an interesting one. I am not sure which I like better.

 

[janetfan]

I don't really think so. The Total Element Score is the sum of base values and GOEs of each element taken separately.

The Skating Skills component is about what you do throughout the program (speed, ice coverage, edging, stroking), so it is part of the Program Component Scores, not the Element scores.

Comparing to the old 6.0 marks, the technical mark would (I suppose) correspond to the base values of the elements, plus Skating Skills and Transitions. The second mark would be GOEs on individual elements together with INT. CH, and P/E.

A different kind of split and mix than under 6.0, and an interesting one. I am not sure which I like better.

Thinking of Michelle and Irina - there were nights when Irina showed some outstanding skating skills. Fast, crisp, good edges, etc.
But under 6.0 this was not really confused with Michelle's IN and CH and PE.

Had 6.0 considered that Irina was so much fatser than Michelle and put that in the artistic mark it would have been very difficult for Michelle to ever beat her.
PE is interesting - it is where Evan and Sasha both excell - and yet I never saw two such different skaters.

Irina had great skating skills - but skating fast and having good edges still is not the same thing as beautiful,, emotionally driven IN and CH.

I don't see how they fall in the same category.

 

[Audrey19]

I really like this guy. What wisdom he has to understand that Takahashi deserved to win.

I wish more judges would share his (and my) view... Takahashi sooo should have won this
Gooooo honest judges!!! (the few that exist, unfortunately)

Thanks for posting the interview, it was a very insightful read!

 

[gkelly]

PE is interesting - it is where Evan and Sasha both excell - and yet I never saw two such different skaters.

Yeah, it's almost as much a mishmash of not-necessarily-related criteria as the old second mark was.

It's perfectly possible for a skater to have beautiful carriage and body line but execute the program by rote.

Or to have great "physical, intellectual, emotional involvement, " great charisma and projection to the audience, but terrible carriage and line. (Philippe Candeloro is my poster boy for that combination.)

And then some judges also take into account the execution of the elements under this mark because of the "execution" in its title.

Irina had great skating skills - but skating fast and having good edges still is not the same thing as beautiful,, emotionally driven IN and CH.

I don't see how they fall in the same category.

And they're not part of the same mark.

The fact that they're under the same category (i.e., program components) means no more than the fact that jumps and spins are both under the technical elements category -- it's perfectly possible for a skater to be good at one and bad at the other and be marked accordingly.

Again, it's now possible for a skater to earn a much higher mark for skating skills than for interpretation, or vice versa.

Of course judges have to be willing to separate them when appropriate.

Also, don't forget that skating skills and speed were at one point considered under the presentation mark in the short program, with only the elements contributing to the required elements mark.

 

[janetfan]

Yeah, it's almost as much a mishmash of not-necessarily-related criteria as the old second mark was.


And they're not part of the same mark.

The fact that they're under the same category (i.e., program components) means no more than the fact that jumps and spins are both under the technical elements category -- it's perfectly possible for a skater to be good at one and bad at the other and be marked accordingly.

Again, it's now possible for a skater to earn a much higher mark for skating skills than for interpretation, or vice versa.

Of course judges have to be willing to separate them when appropriate.

.

A good answer - but it doesn't seem to work out as you are suggesting or hoping for.
All we have to do is see Joubert beat Jeremy on pcs or for Rachael to tie Mira on pcs and we know the system is askew.

Part of what I am talking about will always be hard to define and never be easy or clear cut by points. It is PURELY comparitive. Even Mishin said as much when the CoP was introduced.

Many object to Evan's style - and yet he is doing everything Cop asks for. That is why he is the Olympic champion.
But many think Dai was the best skater - and best performer in Vancouver.

There doesn't seem to be room for a mark for "soul" under CoP. That is is understandable because art at a point becomes difficult to measure by points. It is about a feeling and about taste and what we like.

Cop has declared Evan Olympic champion. But many thought Dai showed the best skating.
Go figure.......

 

[gkelly]

There doesn't seem to be room for a mark for "soul" under CoP. That is is understandable because art at a point becomes difficult to measure by points. It is about a feeling and about taste and what we like.

Eh, if a judge happens to be extremely moved by the "soul" a skater demonstrates in a performance, there's plenty of room for them to reward it under Performance/Execution and/or Interpretation.

Of course you or I may disagree that the performance was all that special. That kind of criterion is the most subjective.

Cop has declared Evan Olympic champion. But many thought Dai showed the best skating.

And how often did that happen in the old system as well?

If we want qualitative and especially emotional and other such highly subjective qualities to be rewarded, we have to expect that we won't always agree with who deserves what rewards.

 

[Layfan]

A good answer - but it doesn't seem to work out as you are suggesting or hoping for.
All we have to do is see Joubert beat Jeremy on pcs or for Rachael to tie Mira on pcs and we know the system is askew.

Part of what I am talking about will always be hard to define and never be easy or clear cut by points. It is PURELY comparitive. Even Mishin said as much when the CoP was introduced.

Many object to Evan's style - and yet he is doing everything Cop asks for. That is why he is the Olympic champion.
But many think Dai was the best skater - and best performer in Vancouver.

There doesn't seem to be room for a mark for "soul" under CoP. That is is understandable because art at a point becomes difficult to measure by points. It is about a feeling and about taste and what we like.

Cop has declared Evan Olympic champion. But many thought Dai showed the best skating.
Go figure.......

I think I agree with your general point. COP divides the artistry portion into all of these little elements and doesn't really allow judges to judge the general or final effect. That's why many audience members can't understand why Rachael is judged to be as good an artist as Mirai, etc.

But just to nit pick, it's not entirely fair to say COP declared Evan the Olympic winner instead of Dai. Dai fell and I would bet would have ended up third under 6.0. just like Michelle did in Salt Lake City even though she is a better skater fundamentally than Sarah Hughes.

It's true that Evan worked COP exceptionally well. But he mostly won by having two near perfect skates, something neither Plush or Dai did. I suppose you could make an argument that Plush would have won under 6.0. But interestingly, it's not because of PCS. It's because under 6.0. he wouldn't have been punished as much in his technical scores for his shaky landings and construction of his program.

True, you could argue that Dai should have been way ahead of Evan in PCS. But even with that, he had two costly mistakes in the LP that I don't think would have put him ahead of Evan either under COP or under 6.0. Or at least the one mistake, since I suppose he wouldn't have gotten dinged for his underrotated triple under 6.0.

 

[Mathman]

A good answer - but it doesn't seem to work out as you are suggesting or hoping for.

All we have to do is see Joubert beat Jeremy on pcs or for Rachael to tie Mira on pcs and we know the system is askew.

Although if we are talking specifically about the Olympic long programs, Mirai beat Rachael on all five of the program components, and Abbott clobbered Joubert on all five (7.80 to 6.75 in Transitions -- the judges must have got the Joe Inman memo. )

About "soul," I think the Performance/Execution score is the easiest for most casual viewers to relate to. When we see a WOW performance, like Mirai's LP in Vancouver, we know it!

In contrast, I for one do not know enough about choreography to make an informed judgment, or about music to decide whether the skater's movements reflected the phrasing.

Coming back to the interview, I was interested that Mr. Ibens' all-time favorite performance was Sale and Pelletier's Love Story at 1999 Skate Amerca. It brought "tears to his eyes." (if I remember correctly, Mr. Ibens -- or maybe it was another judge who was equally moved -- got in trouble for saying this. Judges are not supposed to gush on about, that was the most moving program in the history of the sport, when they are judging a competition. )

 

[LongTimeLurker]

Wow, great interview! We need more judges like him.

 

[Blades of Passion]

I'm fairly certain most people held that opinion. Certainly Robin Cousins on the BBC and Chris Howarth on Europsport both said that had Takahashi not had his jump problems he would have taken the title.

I think he deserved the title even with the failed Quad (as does this judge, since he answered "Takahashi" even when the interviewer asked him who should have won between Lysacek and Plushenko).

 

[Tony Wheeler]

No he didn't, he was joking around to avoid saying either Plushenko or Lysacek, and make a joke about it. You see he goes on to say that SINCE Takahashi did have his mistakes, he'd easily have chosen Lysacek. But in the event they all skated clean, then it would have been Daisuke.

 

[Blades of Passion]

Nah, I get the feeling that he thinks Takahashi deserved to win anyway. The question asked to him was "who do you think should have won" and not "who do you think should have won if everyone skated clean". He's saying that Takahashi couldn't be considered for the Gold in terms of how ALL the judges perceived him after the fall and therefore between the skaters who did have enough overall respect to be considered Gold medal worthy (Lysacek and Plushenko), Lysacek deserved to win. HAD Takahashi skated clean, then he thinks it should have been a rather blow-out victory.

 

[Tonichelle]

I would think the interviewer would have a better idea as to what the interviewee was saying.

 

[Tony Wheeler]

Trust me, I did the interview and I asked him about it. He knows Takahashi took himself out of contention with the cheated (and fall) quad attempt and then having another downgraded jump. The quad alone you figure that it was like him only having 7 jumping passes, since a downgraded quad is with 4.0, minus 3.0 for the fall and then another 1.0 for the fall itself = 0.0. Right there is too many points alone, even though some of his other jumps are beauties, to really compete with someone who gains decent points on all 8 of their jumping passes, and all other elements. He does say that he felt Takakashi deserved to win the short program, though, and I think a lot of people thought he had the best programs components-wise of the top three, so skating clean or near clean would have been enough to win. I don't know whether he thinks it would have been a blow-out victory. Maybe I'll do a part two to the interview eventually, and ask that as well as some other questions I've thought of since I put the interview up.

I would have saved a lot of confusion by, instead of asking who the champion should have been, just right away asking Lysacek or Plushenko. I'm sure he still would have joked and said Takahashi, but on that night, he knows Lysacek deserved the title, and not because the other judges took Daisuke out of contention

 

[seniorita]

Since Mr judge is in Belgium I think we should have a talk face to face and after 2hours blah blah of me I m sure that he will answer Plushenko to get rid of me :boohoo:and you will avoid any Takahashi confusion

 

[Blades of Passion]

I would think the interviewer would have a better idea as to what the interviewee was saying.

Haha, yes that's fair, but I still detect the judge was insinuating "I'm not ALLOWED to say Takahashi deserved to win after he fell, but I still think he actually did deserve to win anyway".

Takahashi took himself out of contention with the cheated (and fall) quad attempt and then having another downgraded jump. The quad alone you figure that it was like him only having 7 jumping passes, since a downgraded quad is with 4.0, minus 3.0 for the fall and then another 1.0 for the fall itself = 0.0.

Hopefully you understand that many people feel the downgrading system is unfair and needs to be fixed. A fall on a Quad attempt being scored the same as a fall on a Double Axel is quite ridiculous and his other jump shouldn't have been downgraded in the first place.

 

[Tony Wheeler]

Since Mr judge is in Belgium I think we should have a talk face to face and after 2hours blah blah of me I m sure that he will answer Plushenko to get rid of me :boohoo:and you will avoid any Takahashi confusion

Haha.. don't you dare