Serious Question about Patrick Chan's skating ability compared to other skaters

[Dodhiyel]

"Where in the actual 2010-11 rules does it say anything about how falls are supposed to affect the Performance/Execution score or how when each fall occurs is to be considered?"

That's why I said "supposed" rules. It is painfully obvious what the words Performance and Execution really mean. I reiterate, the performance was sloppy. The execution of the programme was inadequate. Maybe I can spare it a P/E of 5.50, but that's all.

 

[skatinginbc]

Why does one need to be a frequent poster on a message board in order to be knowledgeable on a given subject? I seem to detect a note of unwarranted sarcasm in your post. Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm no knowledge expert on sarcasm or anything.

I do, however, agree with trains original post.

You read too much in between the lines and totally misinterpreted my post. His obvious expertise plus his infrequent posting make him intriguing and "mysterious" (as said in my post). I suspect a possibility that he is either a judge or an established figure skating celebrity. I said I sincerely enjoyed his post and you questioned my sincerity. That certainly made my integrity sound cheap.

 

[Mathman]

So the real question is how did those falls affect the skater's physical, emotional, and intellectual involvement? the carriage? the style/personality? the clarity of movement? variety and contrast? projection?

Maybe most of those qualities went out the window for a couple of seconds during and after each fall...

When you put it that way, sometimes those qualities go out the window for a few seconds even while doing a quad or other element successfully.

I think the judges ought to up the P&E when the jumps contribute the to overall performance (timed to the music, rousing the audience) and lower it appropriately when highlight elements are poorly performed or are disconnected from the concept of the program as a whole.

Example -- Ryan Bradley's jumps in his chamber music LP last year totally made the program.

 

[Nadine]

Lol, this thread has taken all sorts of twists & turns.

My only contribution to the height debacle is that one should also take into account this scenario:

you've been invited to a private after-party, amongst hundreds of other invitees, to see your favorite singer/actor/etc. (you pick), and in walks this phenomenal creature whom simply radiates this "aura", which makes him/her appear larger than life! You're so spellbound you think s/he is taller than s/he really is.

Seriously, I'm sure you have all met people in your life (not necessarily big shots) that simply radiate, glow, and as a consequence appear bigger than they really are.

And as it relates to skating, hey Scott Hamilton is only like 5'2" tall, so there's no specific body type or height that makes one a champion! Lets hear it for the small guys! *clapping*

 

[wallylutz]

Where in the actual 2010-11 rules does it say anything about how falls are supposed to affect the Performance/Execution score or how when each fall occurs is to be considered?

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vnavsite/page/directory/0,10853,4844-153889-171105-nav-list,00.html
http://www.isu.org/vsite/vnavsite/page/directory/0,10853,4844-152055-169271-nav-list,00.html

Back in the first year or so of the new judging system, there was indeed a rule or guideline that judges were supposed to one point from Performance/Execution for each fall. But they didn't do it consistently (there was no way to tell whether they were doing it at all, but in most cases apparently not), so the rule was changed so that the tech panel would deduct one point from the total score for each fall. The judges have the option to reflect falls in the P/E score or any of the other component scores, but they are not required to do so.

Here are the guidelines for marking program components:
http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-152086-169302-64121-0-file,00.pdf

Notice that there is not a single word about falls.

There is a word about "clarity of movement." That tends to be lacking during a fall or other gravity-related error. But how would that affect the score for a skater with especially good clarity for most of the program, aside from a couple of seconds here and there during technical errors, vs. a skater who makes no outright errors but is less precise in blade placement and/or body alignment throughout the whole program?

Each judge would have to balance that out for each individual performance. But a judge who ignores the rest of the program and the written Performance/Execution criteria to judge that component primarily on the number of errors would be the one who would be ignoring the rules.

So the real question is how did those falls affect the skater's physical, emotional, and intellectual involvement? the carriage? the style/personality? the clarity of movement? variety and contrast? projection?

Maybe most of those qualities went out the window for a couple of seconds during and after each fall, maybe a total of 10 seconds out of approximately 2:50. How about the other 2:40?



Well, obviously it's not purely arithmetic. There's always still judgment involved.

Very well said as usual, gkelly. However, I am concerned that logic and a discourse based on the actual rules are not possible given how emotional and agitated some people are here.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Of course each of the components is judged and counted. I was discussing skating skills only.
Here are competition report cards. This is what the skaters receive after the competition. The first one happens to be Tomas Verner, but only for an example. You can see how all the components are evaluated, and the technical score, element by element, is added together.
http://www.skatecanada-centralontario.com/Irma/Octoberfest 2010/smde.pdf

Well, I'm not totally dumb about the CoP scoring system. But I am not sure you understand the Component Skating Skills any more than most.

You seem to be saying that all the components cover the presentation of a skater, and that skating skills is just one more. That's ok, if you can explain what it is in Skating Skills that is not in the other components?

Most fans think it is only about basic school figure turns and flow over the ice. I do too, but at the Senior Level, that's not a problem for the elite skaters. And it also takes in opinions of judges and fans.

There is a skating skill when music is played. Check out Ice Dance. Timing, rhythm, beat, are all apart of it. Sad that all this is covered under Interpretation along with story lines, antics, pseudo ballet, etc. and which assumes all the skaters have musicality.

One other thing, if a skater is held up because of Skating Skills, does it mean the others did not score well in Skating Skills in that one component. I do not want to mention names but Nobi's Skating Skills in that recent comp were second to none.



Elite skaters have an advantage over others based on nationality, favoritism and prior competitions. The component Skating Skills is a useful tool for the elite. Nothing less than elite will benefit from Skating Skills.

 

[gkelly]

You seem to be saying that all the components cover the presentation of a skater, and that skating skills is just one more. That's ok, if you can explain what it is in Skating Skills that is not in the other components?

Um, the skating skills? The skill with which the skater uses the blades across the ice.
That's not really "presentation" in the old sense, but rather the technical merit of the basic skating that happens in between the elements and other highlight moves. The steps and edges and stroking.

Most fans think it is only about basic school figure turns and flow over the ice. I do too, but at the Senior Level, that's not a problem for the elite skaters.

It's not just a question of "Are turns and flow on the ice a problem for this skater? Yes/No" and then everyone who gets the answer No gets the same score.

It's a question of How much speed can the skater generate over the ice and with what kinds of techniques? How smoothly do the blades flow across the ice? How deep and steady are the edges? How much control does the skater have over the rhythm of the strokes? How fluid (or stiff) is the movement? How much time is spent on one edge and transitioning between edges all on one foot, vs. gliding on flats or on two feet? How much time is spent executing difficult turns vs. simple stroking, threes, and mohawks? How much time is spent turning in the skater's nonpreferred direction (e.g., clockwise turns and forward crossovers by a counterclockwise jumper) and how often, how easily and unexpectedly can the skater change direction between clockwise and counterclockwise edges?

Those are not yes/no answers and the answers are not going to be the same for every skater who is competent enough to reach the elite levels.

If the answers are mostly OK, good enough, sometimes, occasionally, a little bit, etc., maybe the skater would deserve 5s for skating skills. If the answers are more like very good, a lot, wow, excellent, most the time, etc., that skater might deserve 9s.

There is a skating skill when music is played. Check out Ice Dance. Timing, rhythm, beat, are all apart of it. Sad that all this is covered under Interpretation along with story lines, antics, pseudo ballet, etc. and which assumes all the skaters have musicality.

No, it doesn't assume that all skaters have musicality. It's supposed to measure how much musicality each skater shows in each performance.

On a structural level (was the jump planned to land on an accented beat? was the step sequence planned to start and end with a new phrase of music?) that would be part of the Choreography component, among other things. On the more micro level, how well the skater expresses the nuances of each phrase of music is reflected under Interpretation. The skater who is always on the beat and always finding little details in the music to express with a turn of the head or hand or a sway of the hips or lilt in the knees will deserve higher scores for Interpretation than the skater who smiles and hits a few obvious highlights.

There's definitely room for many judges to improve the way they score these components, and for many skaters to improve the way they skate so as to deserve higher scores.

 

[Tonichelle]

And as it relates to skating, hey Scott Hamilton is only like 5'2" tall, so there's no specific body type or height that makes one a champion! Lets hear it for the small guys! *clapping*

according to his book he's 5'3 and 3 quarters" tall... "when you're short every little bit counts"

had to throw it in there.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Um, the skating skills? The skill with which the skater uses the blades across the ice.
That's not really "presentation" in the old sense, but rather the technical merit of the basic skating that happens in between the elements and other highlight moves. The steps and edges and stroking.

That is your opinion as is the whole concept of Skating Skills as opinions. I have not seen anything about edges and strokings which I believe the elite skaters have in the Senior division. However, they could be evaluated in Juveniles, Novice and maybe Juniors. The subject of Skating Skills has come up with relation to a Senior skater as cause for his rise to 1st place. It never mentioned other skaters having skating skills which were equal to or better than the skater in question. A high scoringt Tech and PC skater was pushed aside to make room for the senior skater in question based on skating skills. Steps, Edges, and Stroking are important in Tech and other Components as well.

It's not just a question of "Are turns and flow on the ice a problem for this skater? Yes/No" and then everyone who gets the answer No gets the same score.

I don't think I said that, but I do agree with your note. Everything about figure skating is built on skills and at the senior level those steps, edges and strokings are well covered by the Elite Senior Skaters. If that is what is meant by Skating Skills I will agree with you but are the judges actually looking at the skills or are they supposed to look at these skills? Personally, I think the name of the component should be changed to Basic Skills because Skating Skills are needed in every facet of figure skating.

There's definitely room for many judges to improve the way they score these components, and for many skaters to improve the way they skate so as to deserve higher scores.

We can all agree with this.

 

[mskater93]

I don't think I said that, but I do agree with your note. Everything about figure skating is built on skills and at the senior level those steps, edges and strokings are well covered by the Elite Senior Skaters. If that is what is meant by Skating Skills I will agree with you but are the judges actually looking at the skills or are they supposed to look at these skills? Personally, I think the name of the component should be changed to Basic Skills because Skating Skills are needed in every facet of figure skating.

Not all elite level skaters have the same quality of skating skills, hence the reason why there is a wide disparity of scores (in the same way all Juvies or Intermediates have the same quality of skating skills). Skating skills have actual bullets that supposed to be judged/taken into account when scoring. If you go and watch skaters live, you can SEE the difference between what you might score a 4 and a 5 or between a 6 and a 7. The biggest problem with the PCS mark is that they are supposed to be independent but I think Mathman did a regression analysis and there's too much commonality across the scores to think that judges weigh each separately. Also, when the judges are asked to start with different components (start with TR instead of SS) the marks change.

 

[gkelly]

Not all elite level skaters have the same quality of skating skills, hence the reason why there is a wide disparity of scores (in the same way all Juvies or Intermediates have the same quality of skating skills).

This. (You mean not all Juvies or Intermediates have the same quality of skating skills, right? )

The biggest problem with the PCS mark is that they are supposed to be independent but I think Mathman did a regression analysis and there's too much commonality across the scores to think that judges weigh each separately. Also, when the judges are asked to start with different components (start with TR instead of SS) the marks change.

What's the solution? More training for the judges? Choose a different component to present first on the judges' screens all the time or randomize them? Have some judges mark GOEs and Skating Skills and another set of judges mark the rest of the components?

 

[Mathman]

^ No solution, but it is quite an interesting psychological phenomenom.

It seems to be the case that the judges pay most detailed attention to the first component to be scored. If it is Transitions, they work hard to get the transitions scores right, then -- relaxing their diligence a little, as is only human -- they sort of figure that if a skater had outstanding transitions then his skating skills must be pretty good in order to do them, plus good transitions can only help the musical interpretation and choreography, right?

Having invested such concentration on Transitions, we are asking quite a bit of the judges simultaneously to be keeping eqaually close track of

...how well the skater expresses the nuances of each phrase of music is reflected under Interpretation.

The skater who is always on the beat and always finding little details in the music to express with a turn of the head or hand or a sway of the hips or lilt in the knees will deserve higher scores for Interpretation than the skater who smiles and hits a few obvious highlights.

(Great post (#87), BTW.)

 

[mskater93]

This. (You mean not all Juvies or Intermediates have the same quality of skating skills, right?

What's the solution? More training for the judges? Choose a different component to present first on the judges' screens all the time or randomize them? Have some judges mark GOEs and Skating Skills and another set of judges mark the rest of the components?

Oops! Yes, that's what I meant.

I don't know the solution, but I do know that there's a correlation with regard to "corridor scoring" of the PCS factors on each judges' card (so if the first thing to pop up to score is SS and I score that an 8.0, everything is +/- around that score). Maybe it should be scored like freestyle skiing where each judge is responsible for a mark and the whole thing gets added up.

Relative scoring is typically the "best" type of solution for performance sport (so 6.0 scale would return). I think I read GRossano's argument to this fact and I thought he was right...

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Not all elite level skaters have the same quality of skating skills, hence the reason why there is a wide disparity of scores (in the same way all Juvies or Intermediates have the same quality of skating skills). Skating skills have actual bullets that supposed to be judged/taken into account when scoring. If you go and watch skaters live, you can SEE the difference between what you might score a 4 and a 5 or between a 6 and a 7. The biggest problem with the PCS mark is that they are supposed to be independent but I think Mathman did a regression analysis and there's too much commonality across the scores to think that judges weigh each separately. Also, when the judges are asked to start with different components (start with TR instead of SS) the marks change.

There should not be that much disparity in the scores among Senior Elites. Yes, there is disparity in scores among Seniors and Novice, and rightfully so. When one talks about a contest where a skater is lagging behind, the question is how many points are needed to catch up with the lead skater who also has beautiful skating skills. Even if the former receives scores higher than his rival, there probably are many points also going to the rival.

One doesn't weigh or compare skaters in the CoP nor does it base its scores on the subjective quality. It should be quantifiable. It's not 6.0, but it could be nationality or favoritism.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

What's the solution? More training for the judges? Choose a different component to present first on the judges' screens all the time or randomize them? Have some judges mark GOEs and Skating Skills and another set of judges mark the rest of the components?

To simplify the arguments of Skating Ability would be, in my estimation, to change the name to Basic Skills to cover speed and ice turns.

 

[gkelly]

There should not be that much disparity in the scores among Senior Elites.

Why not?

Let's say the minimum skating skill required or expected to qualify as a senior-level skater is somewhere around 4.0 or 4.5 or 5.0. If you can barely achieve that minimum, you're probably not going to make it to international competition if you come from a country with a lot skaters, or you're probably not going to make the cut for the long program at Worlds and might not make it at Euros or 4Cs either.

What if you achieved that minimum when you passed your senior tests or when you had the skate of your life at your national qualifying competition, but then when you get to the international stage you're nervous or injured or watered down the multidirectional and one-foot skating to give yourself more rests and a better chance of landing your jumps successfully?

But you still get to compete at senior B events, maybe at Worlds or Euros/4Cs if you're from a small country, maybe at your home GP event if you're a French or Chinese lady, etc.

So you will see some skaters in international senior competition who deserve Skating Skills marks in the 4s and even 3s, competing against the elite skaters.

Then you'll see a bunch of senior-level skaters who are reasonably solid senior-level skaters. They're almost always going to deserve at least 5.0 for skating skills and on a really good day might verge into the 6s. Some of these skaters can do all the triple jumps -- you'll even see quads sometimes from men with this skill level who happen to be talented jumpers. This is probably the majority of senior level competitors. Some of them -- whoever has a good day with the jumps -- will skate in the long program at Worlds or qualify for the Olympics. They're fighting for medals at the senior B events. Some of them might make top 10 at Euros/4Cs. Some of them will get invited to Grand Prix events. They're competing right up there with the elite of the elite, and if they happen to have a really good day at the same time an "elite" skater has a really bad day, they might even get to say they once beat a former/future world medalist, in a short program at least.

But they might achieve those results by landing a bunch of clean jumps. The quality of their actual skating is still only average for senior level and only deserves scores of 5-point-something.

Then you have a smaller number of skaters whose skating skills are better than average, but not exceptional, deserving scores in the 6-point-something range. They might be in and out of the top 10, on and off the GP or their countries' world/Euros/4Cs teams from year to year. Maybe some have strong technique but weak athleticism, or vice versa, which keeps them from joining the truly elite ranks. Maybe they can do difficult steps and turns with strong edges, but choose to keep their in-between skating simple because that's the only way they have enough energy to complete their program with all the jumps. We might call these the almost-elite group -- if they're still young, maybe they'll make their way to elite level in the near future.

And then you have the real elite skaters -- the ones who have the really strong skating skills deserving scores in the 7s or even 8s. When they can also land a bunch of jumps, they're in the hunt for medals.

And every so often, a skater stands out whose basic blade skills are even stronger than the rest of the elite skaters. If we're lucky, there might be more than one such skater, even a whole handful, competing at the same time. Other years, there might not be anyone at that level on the scene. But those are the skaters the 9+ scores are for, whenever they do come along and have a good day.

And when they have a bad day, they may still get some 8s, because they're still better at the particular types of skills judged in the Skating Skills mark than most of the other elite skaters, and definitely better than the almost-elite group.

 

[Bluebonnet]

Correct me if I'm wrong. After all these skating skills education, I concluded that those with high skating skills are those who can skate like ice dancers. Then they can easily have more transitions. It seems to me that skating skills generally are developed in pre-senior levels. I didn't see any skaters improve their skating skills greatly through out senior years. So once a skater has developed a certain skating skills level, he/she would probably stay in that level. Therefore, skaters like Patrick Chan would automatically, from the moment he jumped onto the senior scene, have higher skating skills and transition marks while skaters like Brian Joubert and Brandon Mroz would get the opposite.

So CoP is tailored for skaters like Patrick Chan.

 

[Mathman]

Correct me if I'm wrong. After all these skating skills education, I concluded that those with high skating skills are those who can skate like ice dancers. Then they can easily have more transitions. It seems to me that skating skills generally are developed in pre-senior levels. I didn't see any skaters improve their skating skills greatly through out senior years. So once a skater has developed a certain skating skills level, he/she would probably stay in that level. Therefore, skaters like Patrick Chan would automatically, from the moment he jumped onto the senior scene, have higher skating skills and transition marks while skaters like Brian Joubert and Brandon Mroz would get the opposite.

Still, it seems like it takes a while for judges to start noticing.

I just looked up Patricks PCS for his first couple of seasons in seniors. In 2006-07, at age sixteen he got fifth place at TEB with PCSs in the low sixes. Joubert won with PCSs in the mid sevens. (Another smoothie, Kozuka, finished 6th, with PCSs in the high 5's.)

At 2006-07 NHK he finished 7th with PCSs in the high 5's. Talkahashi and Oda got scores in the mid to high 7s, and Kozuka moved ahead of Patrick with PCSs in the mid to high 6's. (The Japanese fans were pleased; Patrick did not do Skate Canada that year. )

The next year was Patrick's big break-out season. At Skate America he got third behimd Takahashi and Lysacek. Chan's PCSs were in the low sevens. Lyasacek's PCSs ranged from 6.90 (transitions) to 7.80 (interpretation ). Lysacek beat Chan by 3 points in PCSs. Takahashi's PCSs were in the mid to high 7s.

Patrick won the 2007 Eric Bompard against a weak field overall. with PCSs in the low 7's.

So Patrick does seem to be getting better -- or at least the judges feel that he has paid his dues.

 

[gkelly]

Correct me if I'm wrong. After all these skating skills education, I concluded that those with high skating skills are those who can skate like ice dancers. Then they can easily have more transitions. It seems to me that skating skills generally are developed in pre-senior levels. I didn't see any skaters improve their skating skills greatly through out senior years.

I wouldn't necessarily say that. I've certainly seen skaters develop more (and more effortless) speed and deeper edges as they get more experience -- and in some cases as they finish growing. I saw a big difference in Michelle Kwan and Todd Eldredge, for example, between 1995 and 1997 seasons. With Kwan there was physical maturation involved. I also think the confidence of wearing the title "world champion" helped them both. And of course they had the basics skills down to begin with.

I thought Shelby Lyons and Jenny Kirk went from below-average basic skating skills, by world-class senior standards, when they first started in seniors to solidly average by the time they retired.

I could name some ice dancers I saw similar improvements from over the course of their senior careers, but that wouldn't be relevant to your point.

I haven't attended as many elite competitions in person recently to be able to give more recent examples.

So once a skater has developed a certain skating skills level, he/she would probably stay in that level. Therefore, skaters like Patrick Chan would automatically, from the moment he jumped onto the senior scene, have higher skating skills and transition marks while skaters like Brian Joubert and Brandon Mroz would get the opposite.

So CoP is tailored for skaters like Patrick Chan.

It's also hard to learn triple jumps after senior level, but those are pretty much required for a senior singles career.

Skaters who have talent for neither jumps nor skating skills will never make it to the elite level.

Those who are OK at jumps and good at skating can build their career in one direction, and those who are OK at skating and good at steps can take a different emphasis, whatever they can do to maximize their own strengths.

If they're great at skating and can't do difficult jumps at all, they can do ice dance. If they're great at difficult jumps and average or below at skating, they can compete singles but only earn good results when better skaters mess up.

The ones who are good or great at both can fight for medals.

Still, it seems like it takes a while for judges to start noticing.

. . . So Patrick does seem to be getting better -- or at least the judges feel that he has paid his dues.

Well, they were teenagers. I wonder how much a combination of physical maturation and skating with more confidence after gaining more experience allowed them to skate with even more speed and lean in those later events.

We could go back and watch videos of recent and 4-year-old competitions to see whether we see a difference. Of course it's impossible for anyone to compare live the same skater years apart.

 

[colleen o'neill]

This is a really fascinating , informative and thought provoking thread. So far , I judge that gkelly rules....I'm really appreciating your detailed breakdowns.