Ladies Free - Notes & Results

[thisthingcalledlove]

with all the things I like about CoP, this would be in the no-noes. It really is not fair that a skater tries a jump, doesn't do it right and to top it all it gets recognize as a lesser one and taken the points out of it. That really needs to be changed. In fact, I believe I read somewhere that if someone changes, lets say, from a triple to a quad, they have deductions ? can someone verify this, perhaps I'm mistaken.

What happens is if they fail in the attempt, it gets downgraded, then the deductions come in. They get deductions for a poorly executed triple, say, if they try a quad toe loop...then, if they have other triple toes in the program, forget it! They get the Zayak deductions, too, for repeating a jump!

 

[sk8tngcanuck]

with all the things I like about CoP, this would be in the no-noes. It really is not fair that a skater tries a jump, doesn't do it right and to top it all it gets recognize as a lesser one and taken the points out of it. That really needs to be changed. In fact, I believe I read somewhere that if someone changes, lets say, from a triple to a quad, they have deductions ? can someone verify this, perhaps I'm mistaken.

Firstly, Hikaru, you are mistaken about there being a deduction if a skater plans a quad and changes to a triple. There is NO deduction. It doesn't matter what a skater has planned for their program, it matters what they execute. Now, on the flip side of the coin, a skater who attempts a quad but under rotates it and falls, would only receive credit for the triple jump AND would have a deduction for the fall and GOE. This is where we are seeing many points lost. For example, yesterday, a skater under rotated a 3 lutz, and had a fall. Rather than being marked at 5.3 (I think this is the base score) for the triple, they recieved a 2.8 (again I think this is the score) PLUS they recieved -1 for the fall, therefore only scoring a mere 1.8 pts. for a triple lutz attempt.

As for those nay sayers who are condemning Cynthia's win with 2 falls, I think this is a perfect showing of how this new CoP system can benefit SKATING and not jumping. I remember countless threads in this forum about skating becoming all about jumps and there was no reward for artistry, extension, spins, spirals, footwork, and all those other things that make for a beautiful sport. Cynthia won her Skate Canada gold medal on the credit of her skating, NOT her jumping. The reason she was able to stay ahead of Onda was on the grace of all those other things. Onda only had Level 1 spins/footwork/spiral sequences, while Cynthia had Level 2 on all of those other elements. CoP is finally rewarding all those other important elements and thats why we are seeing some of the unusual results this year. Had the old 6.0 system been in force for this even, I would venture to say Cynthia would have been lucky to even make the podium.

The bottom line is we can't have it both ways, people. You can't complain that skating is becoming all about jumps and only the jumpers win medals and then turn around and complain that she had 2 falls on jumps, and therefore didn't deserve the win. Cynthia Phaneuf was rewarded for SKATING excellence, NOT jumping ability, which is what 99% of us here prefer to see.

Now as to the comments about MK and Sasha Cohen benefitting and winning everything with the new CoP, I couldn't agree more. Of course it will happen, because they skate at a level far and above most of the other skaters. They too will be winning their medals on spins, spirals, footwork, and artistry, NOT on jumps.

I don't feel at all that skating has taken steps backwards, rather the opposite. The whole package finally matters, as was proven this weekend at SC.

As another example, Jeff Buttle did not have his best skate, but by the grace of his artistry and technique on the "in between stuff" he was able to stay ahead. Jeff Buttle only scored 9th in the technical score but was 1st in the component score, making his FS score 5th overall. When did you ever see that with the 6.0? Presentation marks used to basically follow the technical marks within .1 or .2 Jeff's high scores in the component mark brought his FS up to 5th place overall, while on the 6.0 he surely would have placed no better than perhaps 7th or 8th.

Additionally, when on the 6.0 system would we EVER have seen a skater move from 7th after the short to winning the event overall? Emanuel Sandhu did that with a brillian performance last night. He didn't have to depend on the others to fall apart to move him up the ladder - he had to depend on himself to pull out all the stops. With the old system, it wouldn't have mattered if every other skater had popped singles for every jump, there is no way a 7th place skater would have been able to elevate to #1.

I think we are seeing some extremely interesting results this year, and I truly believe this CoP is definitely a step in the right direction.

Canuck

 

[Hikaru]

Firstly, Hikaru, you are mistaken about there being a deduction if a skater plans a quad and changes to a triple. There is NO deduction. It doesn't matter what a skater has planned for their program, it matters what they execute

Ouch!, ok, Sorry, my mistake. But actually I wasn't talking of a skater planning a quad and changing it later on for a triple. It was the contrary, planning a triple, and THEN changing it for a quad, for example. The reason I mention this, is because I read this document on the ISU website:

JS 12 Singles - GOE Short Program

On page 2, they mention the following
"If a skater has more revolutions in a jump than described (e.g. quadruple instead of a triple jump), the Judges GOE must be in the “minus grades”
for that element an the value of the jump will be change to the value of a jump with revolution required"

They do not mention this in the free skate though, but then again, what does this mean? if a skater changes a triple for a quad, do they get penalized? I'm confuse yet again.

 

[Vash01]

Keep in mind that, even with two falls, Phaneuf completed the same amount of triples that Onda did-five. Therefore I don't have a problem with her finishing ahead of Onda. Onda's performance wasn't exactly perfect, either. Though she's come a long way artistically, I think Phaneuf still beats her in that category.

It is not just the number of jumps. I thought the COP was going to deduct some points for falls on jumps.

I agree with Mathman. The judges just decide which skater they like more, and give higher component marks to that skater. How can one skater be better than another in absolutely every category? The judges are not marking the way they should. I don't know if that would have changed the final result, but it does show a flaw in the system that could create very strange results in major competitions where there are more skilled skaters.

Vash

 

[Mathman]

About Nadine's basic complaint, I don't see any reason a priori why the switch to the CoP should cause the sport to become any more "artistic" or any less "athletic." Cynthia Phaneuf just won this event even though she fell twice on triple jump attempts. If anything, this ought to encourage skaters to try the hardest stuff in their arsenals, because (unlike the 6.0 ordinal system) a fall is not necessarily disastrous.

Also, the CoP has a built-in mechanism for maintaining a balance between the technical scores and the component scores. Right now the factor is 1.6. You multiply the TCS by 1.6 before addiing it to the total tech score. If this ratio gets out of balance, the 1.6 can be changed (to 1.5, for instance). Unfortunately we won't get to see Michelle (6 perfectly ececuted triples, two in combination, together with 6.0 artistry, at Campbell's) and Sasha in the Grand Prix this year, so we won't have the gold standard in both tech and presentation before us in making this judgment.

I look forward to seeing what kind of scores Shizuka will get. Last year Sasha got total scores of 197. That's 40 points higher than the winning totals this year. I can't believe that Sasha is that much better, so they must have made a lot of adjustments between last year and this.

That was the complaint of the Russian federation. That the CoP is at best a work in progress, and it won't really be ready in time for Worlds in March.

Will the CoP push the strongest athletes to even greater heights? Well, if everything else had been the same, but Yoshie Onda had done a triple Axel (9 points) she would have won Skate Canada.

Mathman

PS. I second Hikaru's question about the rule for an extra revolution in the SP. I did not understand what that rules means, either. Can anyone help?

 

[LBC]

The skaters and the judges need to adjust to the new scoring system. The first few years are the experimental stage. The problems is the standards for component scores are yet to be established. What is a 7 suppose to look like? Is 10 unattainable? What is excellent? 8 or 9?. Is average 5? Since the system will be used by all levels eventually you've got to save the 1,2, and 3's for the lower levels. I'm sure there are some guidelines but I don't think most of us know what it is. Everybody can have a different idea of what constitutes average, above average, good, very good, and excellent.

I am going to be interested to see what kind of component marks Arakawa gets. We've had 2 competitions without arguably the 3 best presentation skaters in the world. The total scores have been much lower than the higest scores of last year. Nobody has come near Sasha and Evgeny's totals. Have they changed the component stadards? Will everyone be marked lower? We may have an idea next week at NHK and when Plushy skates at CoR.

 

[April]

CoP

Is it safe to say that winning or doing the very best in the SP sets a buffer zone/scale up for skaters that may bomb in the LP? Does is seems that some skaters with faulty jumps, but good artistry can win it all with an "x" amount of falls?

 

[hockeyfan228]

The bottom line is we can't have it both ways, people. You can't complain that skating is becoming all about jumps and only the jumpers win medals and then turn around and complain that she had 2 falls on jumps, and therefore didn't deserve the win. Cynthia Phaneuf was rewarded for SKATING excellence, NOT jumping ability, which is what 99% of us here prefer to see.

 

[hockeyfan228]

How can one skater be better than another in absolutely every category?

The problem I see is that instead of evaluating whether the judges' scores deviate from the written code, they are evaluating how much the judges deviate from each other. That drags everyone down to the lowest common denominator.

 

[SailorGalaxia518]

Cynthia Phaneuf won because she skated better artistically than Yoshie Onda. I am glad Yoshie is getting better with her artistry. It will be great to see Phaneuf at the Grand Prix Final. She may have potential to get into the top six at worlds. Who knows?

 

[lise]

I want to congratulate Cynthia on a well deserved win.

For those who are still a little upset about the results, she did land the same number of jumps as Yoshie did; the jumps she missed simply didn't mare the program. The rest of the program was well balanced and her presentation skills were better than Yoshie.

I think in this case, the right person won.

Lise

 

[Vash01]

I agree with Nadine. Skating has taken a huge leap backward. First (in the 6.0) it was all about jumps. Now it's all about everything else, and jumps don't matter. The problem is that there are no standards to determine the components scores, other than who the judges like better. That is totally subjective, and it is very easy for a judge to manipulate those. Even the 6.0 system had well defined criteria for presentation marks. We are going to see some very strange results before the year is over.

 

[Mathman]

I agree with Nadine. Skating has taken a huge leap backward. First (in the 6.0) it was all about jumps. Now it's all about everything else, and jumps don't matter.

I don't think we can really say this. Looking at the breakdown in the technical scores for Phaneuf, for instance:

The base value for Cythia's whole program was 52.0. Of this, 39.7 was for jumps and only 12.3 was for spins, moves in the field, etc. So more than 75% of the tech score was about jumps.

Of the potential 39.7 points, Cynthia actually earned 32.7 points. Her two falls cost her dearly (as they should). On her 3Lz, instead of the 6.6 base value she received only 2.6 points after the mandatory -3 GoE and -1 dedection. On her 3S, with a base value of 5.0, she ended up with only 1.0 points after the negative GOE and deduction.

Yoshie Onda had a base value of 39.0 for jumps and 11.7 for all other technical elements. Again more than three-quarters of the tech score was for jumps. Yoshie's base value was a little less than Cynthia's because Yoshie doubled one of her jumps and so only got a base value of 1.3 (and a GOE of -0.48 to boot).

Her actual score for jumps, after factoring in the GOEs, was 36.52. So Yoshie gained about 4 points over Cynthia on her jumps, heavily reflecting Cynthia's two falls.

I do not have any big problem with this breakdown. Jumps are still where it's at. Landing the jumps is all-important, as well as the difficulty and quality (don't pop your triple into a wonky double).

Then there are the component scores. As with any judging system, this is subjective. It is pretty hard to lay down objective criteria for who interpreted their music best. (Did you like Irina's Tosca better, or Michelle's?) I don't think that any judging system will be able to take the judging out of judging.

So overall, I do not see any big problems with CoP judging at this event. (Even though I had Yoshie in the GS picks contest )

Mathman

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I agree with Nadine. Skating has taken a huge leap backward. First (in the 6.0) it was all about jumps. Now it's all about everything else, and jumps don't matter. The problem is that there are no standards to determine the components scores, other than who the judges like better. That is totally subjective, and it is very easy for a judge to manipulate those. Even the 6.0 system had well defined criteria for presentation marks. We are going to see some very strange results before the year is over.

Absolutely, Vash. the theory behind the CoP is the biggest innovation in judging figure skating, really gets to the whole sport! But the human element is still in there. The random drawings, the dropping of highs and lows, will help to rid some of the national and ethnic biases but not totally, and cheating on the plus and minuses on the component scores are going to prevail, if not deliberate, they will be scored subjectively. If they would allow for judges' names and nationalities to be shown, this would cut down the cheating 90 per cent and for non cheating, we would understand the rationale of biased judging. JMO.

In spite of all this, I do think we are heading in the right direction. I think eventually, the names and nationalities of the judges will be known to the public.

Joe

 

[Mathman]

Joe -- I, too, hope they throw out the secret jugding before the Olympics, and the random draw, too. The effect of the random draw could just as well increase the effect of regional bias as diminish it.

The whole point of the CoP, pushed through under pressure form the IOC, was to address the public perception that the whole sport was just a cold war political football, with the winner determined (in advance) by whomever could finagle, pressure or bribe his way into a position of influence.

IMO the random draw and the secrecy aspects of the new judging system will make casual fans, who watch the sport only every four years, just roll their eyes and mutter, "same old, same old."

Mathman

 

[millie]

Canadian skaters

I don't understand you figure skating fans. I am a Canadian fan of all figure skaters, no matter what country they come from. Now that Sasha and Michelle are injured, you guys have to pick on the Canadian champion. Why don't you sit back and enjoy the sport instead of nitpicking.undefined

 

[Piel]

Hey we are equal opportunity nitpickers ! Evaluating the judging is as much fun as evaluating the skating. Cynthia should be honored to be nitpicked here at GS...it means she has arrived.

 

[Mathman]

Hey, Millie, thanks for registering for Golden Skate and for posting. Go Cynthia! :agree:

Mathman

PS. To make the buttons work right for bold, color, etc., first click on "Enhanced Mode" at the upper left of the dialogue box when you post.

 

[Sk8n Mama]

I watched the ladies LP> Cynthia and Yoshie did the same number of triples (5). Cynthia's spins and choreography are of a different caliber and the CoP rewards that. The CoP rewards figure skating rather than figure jumping. I think it's hard to get used to the CoP scoring because we're so used to jumps being the deciding factor. I think the programs were scored fairly, based on the CoP. In the longrun, the CoP will definitely be better for skating.

As for what's the big deal about Cynthia...I want to wait til Canadians/Worlds to see this program really come together. Canadians know what is the big deal because we saw the program she put out at Canadians last year. Everyone expected a battle between Joannie and Jenn, then out came this little French ballerina with the big tricks to back it up. I love her and I love her ability to come back fighting when she's had a fall. Look forward to seeing her at the GPF.

 

[millie]

The new scoring system

Thank heavens fot the new scoring system. Now the skaters will be judged on their skating, not the screaming fans, standing ovations and on how many triple triple they can do. Out with the 6.0's and in with true judging of the skaters . Now when the skaters go on the ice they will be judged fairly. Enjoy the skating.