Program Component Scores

[SeaniBu]

I think someone with a good year of training from a dance theater background would qualify for that. SS is more tricky, but the reality is comparison to what you have seen thru out the sport and than applying it to marks. Not too far fetched, but I do see the need for a judge that has been interested in the sport for sometime at the least.

I guess the real idea behind wanting fresh judges stems from the hang-ups they carry over from the old sys. A well trained judge should be able to fairly and effectively judge any sports competition they are trained for IMO.

In all honesty I believe you are right, but the idea does not strike me as all that far fetched. *shruggs*

Really IMO, the fact they are not payed for judging and not subject to post evaluation every time is the most important to address. I say heart rate and blood pressure monitors on them during the judging.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

No, I don't think so. Judges need to know figure skating very well.

then why do people continually say figure skating is like ballet on ice? Do these same people know ballet very well?

Choreography in Dance or in any other media is choreography, and it does take a connoisseur of the arts to evaluate it properly. However, your point is well taken. Joe Inman is an expert in Music and he would make an excellent PCS judge

Joe

 

[gkelly]

I was going to post something similar to morninglight's "non-skater judge" post, but morninglight beat me to it.

If nonskaters were to be brought in to judge PCS, I think it would need to be for Performance/Execution, Choreography, and Interpretation only.

Interpretation should be easy enough with a music or dance background. (For compulsory or original dances, familiarity with the specific ballroom rhythms being used, the history and variants of their associated dances, would be very useful.)

For the other two, background in any performing art would be useful, or visual arts also for some aspects of choreography. For some of the criteria, it's useful to know why skating rewards some sorts of movements, movement patterns, or positions over others, and that some expectations from other media ballet can't be expected to be replicated in skates, but most of this could be learned relatively easily if the person wants to make the effort to learn about skating practice, both historically and cross-sectionally across skill levels, so as to be able to put whatever levels they're judging into context. Definitely require some seminars and trial judging or judging at unimportant competitions before letting them decide events that will really count for the skaters.

For judging Skating Skills and Transitions, it's really best to have skating experience oneself, the more the better. Failing that, e.g., parents of skaters who become judges, years of experience in rinks watching skaters at all levels and internalizing how to recognize indicators of quality . . . and the relative difficulty of various turns and other transitional moves. Keep these components for experienced skating judges to judge.

So how would it work to bring in nonskater arts experts to judge the artistic components only?

Don't expect these people to be paid for their services, other than expenses. So you wouldn't get people who would need to make a living through their expertise. Probably not celebrities in their field either, unless they love watching skating enough that they'd volunteer quite a few weeks a year to learn to judge it and then to do so.

Would it be better to bring in the arts judges only at the highest levels and stick to one panel for novice and below, for club competitions, maybe for the first level(s) of qualifying competitions in the larger skating countries? Or to have the arts judges work their way up just like technical judges do, judging lower level events for years before being turned loose on important elite events?

In international competition, would these arts judges represent national federations? Or be assigned independently as individuals? If the latter, would there be any restrictions against multiple individuals from the same country judging the same event?

Decisions that would need to be made before any nonskater judges could be integrated into the judging system.

 

[redhotcoach]

If nonskaters were to be brought in to judge PCS, I think it would need to be for Performance/Execution, Choreography, and Interpretation only.

I will be the devil's advocate here........ask yourself the question "Why should anyone unfamiliar with a sport that requires more than 10,000 hours of practice to become proficient at the high level - be allowed to decide the rankings and therefore, the fate of the skaters who put so much of their time, energy and hundreds of thousands of $$$$ to reach even the Junior or Senior level?

If you want a sport that the general public likes to watch and agrees with the placing outcome....create a 'Stars on Ice" system.

But if we truly want figure skating to remain a sport, then we have to ensure that the only people deciding the outcome of the athlete's performance -- are experts in their assessment of figure skating and truly understand the mechanics of the sport. No ballroom dancer can appreciate the skill it requires to perform ice dance - the steps are different, the interpretation in compulsory dances is different, the actual freedance is unique because of the freedom gliding on ice gives and the sheer difficulty of rotating while moving or precariously balanced -

Therefore, would it not make sense to ensure that all members of a judging panel understand the sport at a personal level - either as former elite skaters or coaches - rather than hand the fate of skaters to a panel of celebrities or 'out of sport' 'experts"

The use of music in figure skating, is far different from the sport of say, gymnastics or ballet, as our element requirements are much different. Interpretation in a program is a combined result of the skills required, the athlete's sense of performance and the influence of the choreographer and coach. Choreography in skating is not the same as in the dance world, for much the same reasons. No other sport glides on ice while being expected to jump, rotate and be flexible at the same time.

Perhaps the problem many have with the awarding of the PCS - is not that the system is wrong, but that the fans have expectations for their skaters and haven't a clear understanding as to how these scores are arrived at by the experts trained in our sport.

Or, just maybe the judging panel is out to lunch and they need serious remedial training in just what is required.

Fuel for thought.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Choreography in skating is not the same as in the dance world, for much the same reasons. No other sport glides on ice while being expected to jump, rotate and be flexible at the same time.

Choreography is choreography whether in Dance, Sports (watch a football formation and how it changes), Film (watch an Ingmar Bergman movie), Architecture (how the skylight changes}

An artist knows his choreography. If he has seen one competition, he's seen them all, and would be quite capable of creating his own, and judging others.

Joe

 

[emma]

I have a question about choreography. Skaters hire choreographers - so my question is how much of 'choreography' marks are actually marking the hired choreographer versus the skater and then how do we separate that (the skater's performance or execuation of the choreography) from the skater's interpretation and performance (execution) marks?

 

[gkelly]

There are some specifics to skating choreography that people outside the skating world might be ignorant of and would need to understand to judge skating choreography effectively.

For example, one of the primary thing that's judged in skating is how the skater directs the blades to glide in curves on one edge at a time. Being able to curve in both directions, moving both forward and backward, and to turn from forward to backward and vice versa in both directions, including changing the direction of the curve at the same time, are highly valued in skating.

Skating on two feet or in straight lines (on flats), with few exceptions, show less skill and therefore are less valued and should be used only as occasional contrasts to the curves or to achieve specific choreographic effects, not as significant portions of the skating content. Body positions that allow deep lean over the edges are generally favored over those that rely on remaining upright.

Toe steps, heel steps, posing or dancing in place, sliding on knees or other body parts, etc., all can be effective choreographic choices. But again, they don't really show skating skills so they're expected to be used as brief highlights to contrast the gliding on edges, not as the bulk of the choreography.

Moving out across the ice with efficient speed is valued. Control of acceleration and deceleration and thus variation in speed are valued. Using all the corners of the ice, center, and in-between areas is valued. Placing elements right up against the boards usually indicates a problem.

Placing elements in unexpected locations or as a surprise with the music, preceded by moves that seemed to be leading in a different direction, can be examples of creativity, but judges can only know what's unexpected if they've already internalized the usual, expected patterns.

Well-balanced program rules and the need to earn points for elements demand certain numbers of jumps, spins, step sequences, etc. The choreographic concepts needs to allow for inclusion of those elements. Similarly, all programs of a given type need to fit within a specified length of time.

Some choreographers and others in the performing arts are used to working in proscenium-style theatre setups and would need to adjust their thinking for an arena configuration in which there are spectators on all sides and the skater is of necessity constantly turning and curving.

My point was that a nonskater arts expert could learn most of what they would need to know to judge this component as well as people with a skating background. Perhaps as easily as people with only a technical skating background could learn aesthetic concepts like Proportion, Unity, Phrasing and Form.

But they would need to learn these things. You couldn't just take even the most expert creator or evaluator of stage choreography and expect them to do a good job evaluating skating choreography without that knowledge.

 

[emma]

gkelly,

I really appeciate your post but I am still confused - most of what you wrote strikes me as 'skating skills' (basically all of it up to 'well balanced ...'). Am i wrong?

and with well balanced programs - my question really is - what part is actually the skater being judged and what part is actually the choreographer? I, think it is fine that it might be the choreographer being judged - part of skating is having a good team - I'm just trying to understand what the choreography mark really means as separate from skating skills and perfomance/execution.

 

[gkelly]

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vnavsite/page/directory/0,10853,4844-152055-169271-nav-list,00.html

See JS 08A Program Component Explanations for some official expansions on the criteria for each component.

For choreography,

Choreography / Composition
Definition: An intentional, developed, and/or original arrangement of all movements according to the principles of proportion, unity, space, pattern, structure, and phrasing.

Criteria:
Purpose: (Idea, concept, vision, mood)
To reward the intentional and quality design of a program.

Proportion (equal weight of all parts)
Each part and section has equal weight in achieving the aesthetic pursuit of the
composition.

Unity – purposeful threading of all movements
A program achieves unity when: every step, movement, and element is motivated by the music. As well, all its parts, big or small, seem necessary to the whole, and there is an underlying vision or symbolic meaning that threads together the entire composition.

Utilization of Personal and Public Space
Movement phrases are distributed in such a way they communicate from every angle in a 360 degree skater-viewer relationship.

Pattern and Ice Coverage
Movement phrases are designed using an interesting and meaningful variety of patterns and directions of travel.

Phrasing and Form (movement and parts are structured to match the phrasing of the music)
A phrase is a unit of movement marked by an impulse of energy that grows, builds, finds a conclusion, and then flows easily and naturally into the next movement phrase.
Form is the presentation of an idea, the development of the idea, and its conclusion presented in a specific number of parts and a specific order for design.

Originality of Purpose, Movement, and Design
Originality involves an individual perspective of movement and design in pursuit of a creative composition as inspired by the music and the underlying vision.

Shared Responsibility of Purpose (Pair Skating, Ice Dancing, and Synchronized)
Each skater has equal roles in achieving the aesthetic pursuit of the composition with equal steps, movements, and a sense of purpose in unifying the composition.

I really appeciate your post but I am still confused - most of what you wrote strikes me as 'skating skills' (basically all of it up to 'well balanced ...'). Am i wrong?

A lot of it was about skating skills -- some examples of what skating values so that outsiders would understand why certain choreographic choices are more valued than others in skating when there might be no such hierarchy, or a different hierarchy, in whatever dance forms they're familiar with. Especially under Pattern and Ice Coverage.

and with well balanced programs - my question really is - what part is actually the skater being judged and what part is actually the choreographer? I, think it is fine that it might be the choreographer being judged - part of skating is having a good team - I'm just trying to understand what the choreography mark really means as separate from skating skills and perfomance/execution.

Choreography is the one component where the work of another team member besides the skater is directly judged. Unless the skater is his or her own choreographer or contributes enough ideas and details to be considered a co-choreographer.

Of course the skater does have to execute it well enough that you can tell what the intention was. But that would be rewarded more under Performance/Execution and Interpretation.

I think it's an ongoing process, even for experienced judges, to figure out how to reward all these aspects of the skating. The new system gives a lot more detailed guidelines and breaks down the marks more than the old system, but it's only four years old so not even long-time judges have many years of experience with it yet.

I'm kind of thinking out loud here, figuring it out for myself.

 

[emma]

I'm kind of thinking out loud here, figuring it out for myself.

I really appreciate your 'thinking out loud' - it clarifies a lot. Thanks!

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

There are some specifics to skating choreography that people outside the skating world might be ignorant of and would need to understand to judge skating choreography effectively.

For example, one of the primary thing that's judged in skating is how the skater directs the blades to glide in curves on one edge at a time. Being able to curve in both directions, moving both forward and backward, and to turn from forward to backward and vice versa in both directions, including changing the direction of the curve at the same time, are highly valued in skating.

Isn't curving on the ice a skating skill? Edges are basic. I should think this would be judged elsewhere in this confusing PCS instructions. I don't think the Haydenettes could be in the group if they couldn't glide their edges. That's technical.

Toe steps, heel steps, posing or dancing in place, sliding on knees or other body parts, etc., all can be effective choreographic choices. But again, they don't really show skating skills so they're expected to be used as brief highlights to contrast the gliding on edges, not as the bulk of the choreography.

And the hired choreographer is responsible for these variations

Moving out across the ice with efficient speed is valued. Control of acceleration and deceleration and thus variation in speed are valued. Using all the corners of the ice, center, and in-between areas is valued. Placing elements right up against the boards usually indicates a problem.

Speed for me, should be controlled, and should be a technical score.

Well-balanced program rules and the need to earn points for elements demand certain numbers of jumps, spins, step sequences, etc. The choreographic concepts needs to allow for inclusion of those elements. Similarly, all programs of a given type need to fit within a specified length of time.

I agree. I also find figure skating elements are quite limited because of the inability to bend the foot. A hired choreograher can make a well balanced program for the type of skater he gets.

Some choreographers and others in the performing arts are used to working in proscenium-style theatre setups and would need to adjust their thinking for an arena configuration in which there are spectators on all sides and the skater is of necessity constantly turning and curving.

Given the experienced choreographer (most have worked in the round as well) he/she can adjust. John Curry was at ease with proscenium as well as arena.

My point was that a nonskater arts expert could learn most of what they would need to know to judge this component as well as people with a skating background. Perhaps as easily as people with only a technical skating background could learn aesthetic concepts like Proportion, Unity, Phrasing and Form.

Agree!! Choreographers of major esteem do it all the time. With figure skating limitations, it would not be difficult.

But they would need to learn these things. You couldn't just take even the most expert creator or evaluator of stage choreography and expect them to do a good job evaluating skating choreography without that knowledge.

Yes, but how many skaters all look like they had the same choreographer because, imo, the artform has not developed. Same old opening lutz, followed by more jumps and then same old camel, and spirals to the swells in some schmaltzy music.

Emma - The line between the skater and the choreographer is not defined. How much they contribute to the program is moot(sp). Other than the tricks, how much input did the skater have?

Joe

 

[Mathman]

But if we truly want figure skating to remain a sport, then we have to ensure that the only people deciding the outcome of the athlete's performance -- are experts in their assessment of figure skating and truly understand the mechanics of the sport. No ballroom dancer can appreciate the skill it requires to perform ice dance - the steps are different, the interpretation in compulsory dances is different, the actual freedance is unique because of the freedom gliding on ice gives and the sheer difficulty of rotating while moving or precariously balanced...

This makes sense to me.

Plus, ISU judges are volunteers and are nominated by the member federations. National skating federations are not going to turn suddenly to people outside the sport, ignoring the commitment and sacrifice that skating insiders have made in attending seminars and working their way up the ranks from judging local and regional events.

 

[morninglight]

More standardizion in the training for PCS judging?

As I think of it while reading others' posts, I feel that having non-skater judges may help separate Interpretation and Chore/Composition from more technical aspects, although skater judges who can also evaluate Skating Skills and Transitions would still be more practical.

At the same time, I don't really think that PCSs needs to reflect the greatest appreciation of arts. Given that we have numerous judges in the world, a good scoring system would need to be standardized.

Someone suggested that one of the reasons why Program Components Scores for an individual skater look too narrowly distributed without much discriminatory power is partly due to the judges’ uncertainly/confusion with the New System. I wonder if the training sessions for PCS judging are standardized enough to help judges translate the ISU definitions and criteria tangibly and concretely.

 

[morninglight]

Performance/Execution?

I am a bit confused by Performance/Execution.

Execution (i.e., the quality of movement and precision in delivery. This includes harmony of movement in pairs and ice dancing) seems to overlap with GOE of elements while Performance (i.e., the involvement of the skater/couple/teams physically, emotionally and intellectually as they translate the intent of the music and choreography) seems to have to do more purely with artistry.

When we look at Performance/Execution scores, how shall we interpret the results?

 

[morninglight]

The relationship between Skating Skills & Difficulty in Jumps

As I noted before, I have had an impression that difficulty in jumps seems to be one of the driving force that affects skating skills. I acknowledge that skaters with more difficult jumps are more likely to have better skating skills. But not always. Yet, it seems to me as if the level of jumps more or less sort out skaters into hierarchical order, where more highly ranked skaters get more scores on skating skills, which also affects the scores on the other elements of PCS. Any thoughts?

 

[iloveaxel]

As I noted before, I have had an impression that difficulty in jumps seems to be one of the driving force that affects skating skills. I acknowledge that skaters with more difficult jumps are more likely to have better skating skills. But not always. Yet, it seems to me that the level of jumps more or less put into skaters into hierarchical order, where more highly ranked skaters get more scores on skating skills, which also affects the scores on the other elements of PCS. Any thoughts?

Is that a bad thing? When there's only 1.5 points difference between a 3lutz and a 3toe, inflating PCS of a better jump may be the only way to go.

 

[morninglight]

Is that a bad thing? When there's only 1.5 points difference between a 3lutz and a 3toe, inflating PCS of a better jump may be the only way to go.

It sounds more like a resistance against the system at the individual level. But if we have the written rules that everyone shares and judges do not conform, what's the point of having rules then? If they think that the 1.5 points difference is too narrow (with which I agree), the rules on jumps need to be revised, rather than using PCS as a black box.

 

[Mathman]

2 points difference.

To some extent I think that the judges are holding on to the PCSs as the equivalent of the old second mark. You decide who you thought skated the best, who you thought was second best, etc., then arrange the scores to make it come out that way. If I were a judge, I would be dragging my feet, too. If everything is cut and dried, you don't need judges at all.

On the other hand, the ISU is working hard at their judges' training seminars and tutorials. I think over the years the judges will get used to the new system.

If I believed in conspiracy theories it would be fun to cast this in terms of the ongoing conflict between Speedy (who would like to break the power of the national fedeartions vis-a-vis the ISU by having all officials including judges appointed directly by the ISU) and the federations who want to keep the power over who wins and who loses in their own hands.

 

[iloveaxel]

If I believed in conspiracy theories it would be fun to cast this in terms of the ongoing conflict between Speedy (who would like to break the power of the national fedeartions vis-a-vis the ISU by having all officials including judges appointed directly by the ISU) .

Like Pope annoints his Cardinals (??? sorry for my religious ignorance) in each country?

 

[Mathman]

Yes, except that they would all serve at large, rather than representing a particular country.

In the aftermath of the Salt Lake City judging controversy there was a lot of support for the idea that the problem was not so much corrupt judges but rather judges who were under the thumb of their national federations. Like Madame LeGoyne, who had no choice but to go along with whatever deal the French Federation cooked up with the Russians.

This is the reason for the anonymous judging provision (the idea is that this would allow the judges to doublecross their own federation without anyone being the wiser). It was also the reason that during the Interim Judging period while they were working on the CoP the judges were listed only as "ISU judges" instead of being identified by country. It is also the reason why so much power was invested in the technical specialist and his crew -- in principle the technical specialist works directly for the ISU, not for any member federation.

It's actually kind of an interesting situation. Speedy serves at the pleasure of the majority of the federations, but at the same time he is the dictator over them.

Sort of like the U.S. model of national government. Every four years we democratically elect a dictator.