Senior Ladies pre-event discussion

[feraina]

The -GOE is supposed to be applied according to severity, but looking at the protocols, it's pretty clear that each judge applies the -GOE based on whether he/she wants to promote or demote the skater.

That seems like a pretty serious claim. Do you have a specific example of this?

I haven't looked into the systematicity of how judges give out flutz GOE's (except noting that sometimes they actually give 0's). I seem to remember that at GPF, the same judge who gave Mao a -3 on her flutz also gave Kimmie a -3 on her lip, and that the remaining judges all gave -1's and -2's. This felt like to me that at least sometimes the spread is due to how harshly individual judges feel the edge error ought to be punished, instead of wanting to manipulate the score.

 

[chuckm]

That seems like a pretty serious claim. Do you have a specific example of this?

I haven't looked into the systematicity of how judges give out flutz GOE's (except noting that sometimes they actually give 0's). I seem to remember that at GPF, the same judge who gave Mao a -3 on her flutz also gave Kimmie a -3 on her lip, and that the remaining judges all gave -1's and -2's. This felt like to me that at least sometimes the spread is due to how harshly individual judges feel the edge error ought to be punished, instead of wanting to manipulate the score.

Sure, but Mao got mostly 1s for her flutz, while Kimmie got mostly 2s for her lip, yet Mao's flutz is much more obvious than Kimmie's lip.

 

[gkelly]

Sure, but Mao got mostly 1s for her flutz, while Kimmie got mostly 2s for her lip, yet Mao's flutz is much more obvious than Kimmie's lip.

You're comparing scores for Mao's lutz in the long program with Kimmie's flip in the short?

(Because Mao didn't do her lutz in the short, and Kimmie evidently fell on her flip in the long.)

The random order of presentation of judges would have been different from one program to the next, wouldn't it? If so we can't compare what any specific judges did from one program to the next.

Anyway, just comparing one jump from each skater doesn't prove anything. Mao could have had more positive qualities in other aspects of the jump to offset the minuses for the wrong-edge takeoff.

 

[feraina]

Sorry, I mis-typed. I meant at SC (SP), both Mao and Asada received one -3 for their respective flutz and lip, and they were given by the same judge. Actually, now I"m looking at the protocols, the same judge also gave out the lone -3 to Sarah Meier's lip and Ashley Wagner's flutz.

I know it's just an isolated example and it doesn't prove anything. It just happened to be one of the few instances when I compared GOEs for edge deduction across skaters at the same competition. I was left with the vague impression that at this competition anyway, one judge was particularly harsh.

I was asking if anyone else had looked at protocols in detail and noticed systematic ways in which a judge was manipulating the 'e' GOE's for different skaters, such since a charge was made.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I just don't understand the rules of figure skating. If one falls there is an automatic deduction -1 from the SCORE. If there is a wrong edge takeoff, the mistake is scored on how bad is seemed to individual judges. correct?

Why not just give a wrong edge take off a -1 from the SCORE. It would be uniform and fair to all skaters who repeatedly take wrong edge takeoffs because the penalty is so slight depending on the mood of the judges.

Joe

 

[chuckm]

I just don't understand the rules of figure skating. If one falls there is an automatic deduction -1 from the SCORE. If there is a wrong edge takeoff, the mistake is scored on how bad is seemed to individual judges. correct?

Why not just give a wrong edge take off a -1 from the SCORE. It would be uniform and fair to all skaters who repeatedly take wrong edge takeoffs because the penalty is so slight depending on the mood of the judges.

Joe

I'd be all for that. It would be removing just one more subjective opinion from the judges.

 

[Mathman]

I'd be all for that. It would be removing just one more subjective opinion from the judges.

But giving one more subjective opinion to the tech specialist.

 

[gkelly]

I just don't understand the rules of figure skating. If one falls there is an automatic deduction -1 from the SCORE.

There's an automatic deduction from the score for the whole program because they wanted to standardize a way of penalizing a program with a fall compared to one with the same technical content completed but no fall.

If the skater falls on an element, there will also be a penalty in the grade of execution for the element in addition to the fall deduction. If the skater falls on crossovers or other connecting steps, they can get positive GOEs on all the elements and would still get the fall deduction from the total score.

If there is a wrong edge takeoff, the mistake is scored on how bad is seemed to individual judges. correct?

Yes. There are many kinds of errors that vary in severity. Wrong edge takeoff is one.

Traveling on a spin, for example, is another. Don't you want to be able to penalize a spin that travels 8 feet across the ice more severely than one that travels only 3 feet?

Or a step sequence that has several small but visible stumbles (but no fall) more severely than a sequence with only one such stumble?

Each judge needs to draw the line for him- or herself between -1 and -2, or -2 and -3. They won't always agree with each other. Hopefully they'll at least be consistent about where they draw the line for several skaters who make errors of similar severity.

But that's preferable to saying that all spins that travel at all, regardless of how badly, must get exactly the same penalty.

The judges have to use judgment. Which is the point of having judges in the first place.

 

[ChrisH]

Emily is not to be under-estimated, she really has that fighter spirit and maximizes what talent she does have ... She looks so happy and victorious landing her barely-rotated jumps that the audience almost can't help getting to their feet and clapping for her as though she's the champion. .

Plus Emily skated well enough in last season's Nationals to win.

If Kimmie is feeling the pressure from the younger ladies, Emily must be feeling it even more. I wonder how loyal the USFS is. If Kimmie, Emily, or Ashley contribute to the US retaining 3 spots for the LA Worlds, I would prefer that they be slightly favored to fill those spots depending on how much they contribute. (BTW, I think that Kimmie + the better peformance of Emily or Ashley have a fair chance of retaining those 3 spots.)

I think she was unable to. Yu-na Kim won her JGPF and JW titles with 3-3's.

Okay, right. Looking back, I see that Kim was only able to do a 3T+3T (combo) at the age of 14.

Same reason why Joannie does a 3T-3S sequence -- it's easier, hence the 20% deduction from a full combo value.

Speaking of which, I figured out that Joannie's LP jump layout only yields 0.8 more base points than a regular 2 3Lz and 2 3F layout and yields 0.4 less base points than her layout of last season, which had a 2A+3T sequence (all calculations haven't accounted for 2nd half bonuses). Even without her 3-3, Kimmie is capable of beating a clean Joannie (and Nakano and Meier).

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

There's an automatic deduction from the score for the whole program because they wanted to standardize a way of penalizing a program with a fall compared to one with the same technical content completed but no fall.

If the skater falls on an element, there will also be a penalty in the grade of execution for the element in addition to the fall deduction. If the skater falls on crossovers or other connecting steps, they can get positive GOEs on all the elements and would still get the fall deduction from the total score.



Yes. There are many kinds of errors that vary in severity. Wrong edge takeoff is one.

Traveling on a spin, for example, is another. Don't you want to be able to penalize a spin that travels 8 feet across the ice more severely than one that travels only 3 feet?

Or a step sequence that has several small but visible stumbles (but no fall) more severely than a sequence with only one such stumble?

Each judge needs to draw the line for him- or herself between -1 and -2, or -2 and -3. They won't always agree with each other. Hopefully they'll at least be consistent about where they draw the line for several skaters who make errors of similar severity.

But that's preferable to saying that all spins that travel at all, regardless of how badly, must get exactly the same penalty.

The judges have to use judgment. Which is the point of having judges in the first place.

I think the matter of SPINS is a judgement on a definitive element and a judge could rate the GoEs as intended. .

However a Flutz is not recognized by the ISU, and therefore it is not a Lutz. That is clear to me. Rather than judge a non recognized element, a simple -1 from the total score would suffice an all round fair mark. The attempt to do an element could be judged on what is left of the jump.

(You will see perfect Lutzes the following year, trust me.)

Joe

 

[feraina]

Okay, right. Looking back, I see that Kim was only able to do a 3T+3T (combo) at the age of 14.

She started at 15, right? The beginning of the 2005-6 season on JGP.

Speaking of which, I figured out that Joannie's LP jump layout only yields 0.8 more base points than a regular 2 3Lz and 2 3F layout and yields 0.4 less base points than her layout of last season, which had a 2A+3T sequence (all calculations haven't accounted for 2nd half bonuses). Even without her 3-3, Kimmie is capable of beating a clean Joannie (and Nakano and Meier).

I think Joannie's doing the 3-3 sequence to build up to the 3-3 combo gradually, to gain some confidence along the way.

 

[feraina]

(You will see perfect Lutzes the following year, trust me.)

Or very few lutzes (and flips) altogether. And lots of attempts at 3T/3T & 3S/3T.

 

[mizu_iro]

She started at 15, right? The beginning of the 2005-6 season on JGP.

Yu-Na was 14 at the 2005 Junior Worlds. She had a 3T-3T at that point. At the 2006 Junior Worlds, when she was 15, she did a 3F-3T.

I think Joannie's doing the 3-3 sequence to build up to the 3-3 combo gradually, to gain some confidence along the way.

If she wants to build confidence, she better start completing the sequence cleanly...

Back to the topic, I would like nothing better than to see Mirai pull a tremendous upset and win the whole thing. Her LP this year is sooooooo much better than any of the other US ladies' programs, and it's probably my favorite program this season.

 

[feraina]

So between 2004 JGPF and 2005 JW, Yu-na mastered the 3T-3T enough to include it in her program, that's pretty impressive.

Common wisdom would suggest that Joannie started working on the 3/3 too late to make it consistent in competition... I wonder if she should concentrate on improving the GOE's of her jumps and spins, and getting higher PCS's. But I guess she knows that without the 3-3, even with her best effort at the rest, she will never win major championships.

I hope she proves the common wisdom wrong.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Or very few lutzes (and flips) altogether. And lots of attempts at 3T/3T & 3S/3T.

you took my remarks out of context. I repeat it here:

think the matter of SPINS is a judgement on a definitive element and a judge could rate the GoEs as intended. .

However a Flutz is not recognized by the ISU, and therefore it is not a Lutz. That is clear to me. Rather than judge a non recognized element, a simple -1 from the total score would suffice an all round fair mark. The attempt to do an element could be judged on what is left of the jump.

(You will see perfect Lutzes the following year, trust me.)

I was concerned with recognizing a non defined jump and judging it on how bad the error was. Just doesn't make sense to me. If there is an automatic -1 from the total score, one will see perfect lutzes the next year, or else.

Joe

 

[bekalc]

Yu-Na was 14 at the 2005 Junior Worlds. She had a 3T-3T at that point. At the 2006 Junior Worlds, when she was 15, she did a 3F-3T.



If she wants to build confidence, she better start completing the sequence cleanly...

Back to the topic, I would like nothing better than to see Mirai pull a tremendous upset and win the whole thing. Her LP this year is sooooooo much better than any of the other US ladies' programs, and it's probably my favorite program this season.

Yu-na's JGPF that year was disasterous, so who knows she could have been planning to do her 3 toe/3 toe but well that just didn't happen.

But in actuality, Yu-na did land a triple flip/triple toe (and that season also started doing her double axel/triple toe combo) And she did this in September of 2004 just a day before she turned 15. LOL! So technically LOL, she did have two triple/triples by the time she was 14, at least she hit them in competition by 14.

As for the flutz thing, I think Joe there is some incentive for having that lutz correct. At least in Mao's case. For example, Yu-na was getting more points for her triple lutzs than Mao was getting for her triple axel. When You consider the fact that Yu-na's getting plus 1 GOE for her triple lutz (sometimes more) well those points start to really add up. If you count the short program, thats four point's Yu-na gets over Mao. It begins to erase the base value advantage Mao gets over Yu-na.

 

[demarinis5]

Isn't this thread about U.S. Nationals.

 

[visaliakid]

Yes it is... and to bring it back on topic I will remind everyone that only the gal who wins the Gold Medal at Nationals (If she is age eligible for Worlds) gets an automatic ticket to worlds. The other two spots can and often are chosen by USFS.

If Caroline, Mirai or any of our other age ineligible ladies wins the title then USFS could well select whomever they wished, and they wouldn't necessarily have to have been on the podium. So if for example, if Alissa wound up with the Silver or Bronze, USFS knowing her inconsistancy with her jumps, could by-pass her for Worlds team and send her instead to Four Continents.

USFS should let the performance of the skaters determine the podium on down... and then use their descretion in selecting the best 3 age eligible ladies for our World Team.

 

[Mathman]

USFS should let the performance of the skaters determine the podium on down... and then use their descretion in selecting the best 3 age eligible ladies for our World Team.

I agree with the first part 100%. As for "discretion," that sounds too much like a euphemism for back-room shenanigans.

Personally, I think we are putting way too much stress on getting three U.S. ladies to the 2009 Worlds. If only two U.S. ladies go, that will open up a spot for a skater from some other country. Is that a bad thing? Even if only two U.S. ladies go to L.A. Worlds, those two can still win three spots for the 2010 Olympics.

Plus, the more I think about it, the more it looks like we are not going to win three spots at 2009 Worlds no matter how we manipulate the results of nationals. Based on the performances we have seen so far this season, I would have to say that all of Asada, Kim, Ando, Nakano, and Kostner are ahead of Meissner at the moment.

Emily is not skating as well this year as she did last, and I doubt that Ashley Wagner is a legitimate top ten candidate in her first senior worlds. The top two Americans could very well end up something like 6th and 12th.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

You gotit. Gloom and Doom is Looming over the 2008 Nats and Worlds. I think we are just judging Kimmie's capabilities from her last skate at GPF. She did win over several of the those mentioned above in SA and TEB, so maybe the GPF was a one-time thing.

(I don't think scores from different judges in different venues are valuable tools for comparing.)

I am optimistic that Kimmie can get at least a 5th. What worries me, can either of her two compatriots get an 8th? There is the unlikely possibility that Kimmie gets 6th and Emile gets 7th.

Joe