Sonia Bianchetti's thoughts on U.S. Nationals

[netnuts]

From MK forum.
http://www.mkforum.net/forum/showthread.php?t=20772

A couple of days ago I have received the DVD on US Nationals that a friend kindly sent me.
I enjoyed all the events but was particularly interested in watching Weir’s and Lysacek’ free programs after the unbelievable tie and the turmoil that followed.

In my opinion, the two programs cannot even be compared! Frankly speaking I cannot even understand how possibly Evan won the free .

Johnny has an outstanding technique in all jumps, to me much better than Lysacek’s. He lands all the jumps on a perfect, long running edge. This happens also between the jumps in the jump combinations where the second jump is not started immediately after landing as if the skater could not keep the balance, but, again, after a beautiful long running edge. The triple Axel is one the best I have ever seen, jumping “out of the circle” as I used to say in judges’ seminars

As to the content it seems to me that the two programs are more or less the same, but the “quality” of each element was superior with Weir. Unfortunately the IJS, as we know, disregards the quality of the elements. This is one of the main reasons of the state of figure skating to-day.



In the Program Components there is no comparison possible. The difference should have been much more than 0.32!!!!!

Weir glides and moves on the ice as a feather. He reminds me of John Curry. Just the way they move their arms should give Johnny a huge advantage.

Weir has a very well choreographed program , all the time perfectly fit to the music and the impression I got was he was enjoying his skating. Most of the programs to day ( also in the ladies) give me a sense of anguish. The skaters are rushing from one element to the other, without even having the time to breath. When they finish I feel somehow relaxed. Well, Johnny was a different story and I hope that at the Worlds he will to give me “the artistic emotion” that I am missing so much now a days.

To conclude I am convinced that Johnny should have won the free skating and deserved to be the champion as most of the American fans think. I am sorry for Evan because it is not his fault if the results were wrong.

As to the ladies I have two different feelings. There is no doubt that Nagasu, Flatt and Zhang are all impressive for the number of triple jumps and jump combinations, unbelievable contortions in spins etc. they can easily execute, but, obviously they all lack the maturity which makes the difference between a “jumping bean” and a figure skater. Of the three, in my opinion, Zhang is the best. The problem is : will these young marvels develop into mature skaters, or will their bodies give up, as it is the case with Meissner? Is figure skating turning into gymnastics?

Shall young kids be forced to undergo the horrible training sessions imposed in gymnastics?

I have just watched a couple of videos on Youtube and was shocked.

Have a nice week

Sonia

 

[jennylovskt]

Thank you for posting it!

This will forever be a topic that would make USFSA embarrassing. Sorry, but who is Sonia Bianchetti?

 

[chuckm]

She used to be an ISU judge.

 

[Sylvia]

http://www.soniabianchetti.com/about_sonia.html

 

[feraina]

So she thinks Kimmie's body gave up on her? But Kimmie's not had that many injuries, and she was never known for contortionist moves. Plus her latest woes seem to be more mental (good practices beforehand) and technical (low jump height on the 3F and 3Z) than physical (injury, over-training, etc.).

Interesting that of the young ones, she thinks Caroline is the best. I wish she would've elaborated. Maybe she meant in regard to the transition from "jumping bean" to a mature skater.

 

[chuckm]

It stands to reason that Caroline is 'the best' because she has been competing at the Senior level this year and it has helped her skating. Flatt and Nagasu have competed only as Juniors except at Nationals.

 

[jennylovskt]

Thanks!

Intuition! It tells all. I believe her.

 

[feraina]

I guess Kimmie was nursing a foot injury most of this season, which hampered her training. When skaters don't have enough training, they are a little low on confidence in competition, which can destroy the jumps they're least comfortable with -- even if in the more relaxed atmosphere of a practice they still land them ok.

Ironically it was under the 6.0 system that Kimmie landed her only 3A... But that really seemed like a spur of the moment decision. She was practicing it well during that week, and so she decided to put it in at a competition where she was not expected to be a major contender.

In Sonia's "A World Without Sky" piece: http://www.soniabianchetti.com/writings_sky.html
she writes about "shooting stars" -- and here we are, seeing Yu-na battling with various chronic injuries just as her star seems to be ascending. It would be a real shame if Yu-na turns into another "shooting star", like the last two world champions we just had.

My biggest gripe about CoP, though, is that the PCS deprived the judging scheme of a place for "artistic merit" -- artistic beauty is what brings most of us fans to figure skating, without it and only with technical difficulty and/or skating speed, we might as well be watching gymnastics or speed skating (I do like gymnastics too, but I love skating more for the more ample dosage of artistic beauty it can deliver).

Figure skating is still known as "artistic skating" in some languages (e.g. French), I hope ISU gives it a chance to re-orient itself to its roots.

 

[Mathman]

To take up where Feraina left off...

Mrs. Bianchetti's views on the CoP are clear and consistent. She thinks it saps the soul out of figure skating and is killing the sport.

The reason why is what we just saw at U.S. Nationals. One skater (Weir) skated beautifully, the other (Lysacek) didn't. But the IJS gave Lysacek the victory in the LP and ultimately the championship.

This is wrong. The only thing we really ask of a judging system is that it give the top placement to the skater who skates best. The CoP doesn't. Indeed, the CoP doesn't seem to care whether the performers skate well or not.

Slightly off-topic (but still about the scoring controversy in the men's event at U.S. Nationals), here is what Mrs. has to say about the "rounding error"business (from GSRossano's site):

http://www.iceskatingintnl.com/current/content/A Question.htm

Evidently the Canadian federation is sponsoring a rules change proposal whereby the ISU will change it's rules to match the IceCalc computers, instead of insisting that IceCalc redo it's software to comply with ISU rules.

 

[jennylovskt]

Roughly glance, it seems that in CoP system, the numbers add up, the judges have no control of the outcome. But if you take a closer look, human bias played a major role on the numbers. In Weir and Lysacek's case, it was not totally the CoP's fault that made a wrong champion. It was the judges bias! If it was fairly judged, no matter how to add the numbers, how to calculate it, there would still be no way for Lysacek to win the free skate.

 

[feraina]

Maybe what's wrong with the CoP is that it allows the judges all this room to apply their little personal biases? Maybe even more than the old 6.0 system? Or at least no less? Even though all this complicated rules about base values and GOEs and levels and PCS are supposed to have taken care of that?

 

[Tigger]

I have been saying the same thing about CoP for the last two years. Not only has it changed nothing regarding a judging bias, but it's sucking the soul from skating like a vampire sucking blood from a victim. This system was rammed through w/out any pre testing or a reasonable amount of time to do the necessary things needed to make sure this was the right way for skating to go down. The ISU needed to be seen doing something after SLC to change the sport. They changed it alright.

And people are wondering why ratings are dead and skaters are getting injured so much these days. I'm amazed w/the contorisons they're forced to do for spins and all the Bielman moves in the Ladies we haven't seen more injuries frankly.

 

[Medusa]

Maybe what's wrong with the CoP is that it allows the judges all this room to apply their little personal biases? Maybe even more than the old 6.0 system? Or at least no less? Even though all this complicated rules about base values and GOEs and levels and PCS are supposed to have taken care of that?

Didn't someone say that the judging system doesn't prevent cheating, but just makes it easier and less detectable? For example giving Takahashi 2,43 + GOE for a Triple Axel - and everybody can look up at least 5 Triple Axels this season on Youtube that were at least as good and got a maximum of 1,5 + GOE (sorry, I just can't get over it...). Back when I was young it was so simple - if the Russian judge gave a 5.9 and everybody else gave a 5.5 - there was bias involved. Now it's a bit of GOE here, than a bit PCS there, not enough GOE deducted from a bad jump...

But we allow the judging system to influence us - you remember that after the Nationals lots of people here and lots of journalists said: well, actually it is Weir's fault - he should have included a change of edge to make it level 4, he should have tacked on a double toe... Instead of just saying: he was cleaner and better that day, he should have won. When someone has beautiful but rather simple footwork nobody cares about the beautiful but all about the simple.

When someone misses a medal by a few points - we talk about how he can increase the difficulty on his straightline-footwork. When Kostner was the first woman to get level 4 for her footwork we said "wow" - but watching it a second time I find her footwork pretty ugly and it looks very forced and wooden. We rarely talk about beautiful these days - most of the times we talk about levels and GOE's . But - every now and then a Lambiel or a Zhang seduces us to use the horribly subjective words "beautiful", "artistic" or "graceful". Hopefully these skaters don't get banned one day because they tend to induce emotions in people and therefore threaten the objectivity.

 

[Jaana]

The reason why is what we just saw at U.S. Nationals. One skater (Weir) skated beautifully, the other (Lysacek) didn't. But the IJS gave Lysacek the victory in the LP and ultimately the championship.

This is wrong. The only thing we really ask of a judging system is that it give the top placement to the skater who skates best. The CoP doesn't. Indeed, the CoP doesn't seem to care whether the performers skate well or not.

Yes, but the system has changed figure skating into a sport more than it was earlier, so to speak. It is not a question of who skates a beautiful programme which may look faultless, but in difficulty cannot be compared to the winning freeskate. Besides Weir did not skate the whole content of his programme, he should have done it. Anyway, it was real close, LOL.

About holding up skaters, the 6,0 system did it and so does CoP, nothing has changed in that, in my opinion.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I'm a big fan of Sonia, and I agree with her take on CoP diminishing the artistic side of figure skating. However, CoP has made figure skating into more of a sport. I do not think it is the perfect answer.

The big problem I see with the CoP are the definitions of the Program Component Scores. They seem to be duplicated here and there in other parts of the PCS as well as the GoEs. For example Skating Skills really needs a workover. I think the entire scope of the PCS definitions have to be rethought out.

Also it is not unusual when PCS scores are closely tied to the TS scores when it is clear that a skater's performance was so much better than the high tech skater. I think they should seriously think about two sets of judges - one for Tech; the other for Performance to eliminate this ambiguity which I believe gets meshed in a judge's mind.

In Tech, the penalties should become more uniform and automatic rather than allow 9 judges to decide on how bad the erros were. The Tech Asst Panel has the power to call these errors and the computer should just take off the automatic deductions. It would be fair all around and the judges need not judge mistakes. If it is shown that the Tech Asst Panel is wrong immediate measures should be taken to correct those errors and marks agains the Panel should be made.

All of the above is just my opinions and suggestions. I do not have any power to change the rules and regulations.

Joe

 

[demarinis5]

Yes, but the system has changed figure skating into a sport more than it was earlier, so to speak. It is not a question of who skates a beautiful programme which may look faultless, but in difficulty cannot be compared to the winning freeskate. Besides Weir did not skate the whole content of his programme, he should have done it. Anyway, it was real close, LOL.

About holding up skaters, the 6,0 system did it and so does CoP, nothing has changed in that, in my opinion.

I agree. I don't like it but that is the way it seems to be. As a fan sometimes it seems like I am being forced to change my perception of figure skating in favor of points. One thing that the 6.0 system has in common with the COP system is controversy and Nationals was a humdinger.

 

[Mathman]

But we allow the judging system to influence us - you remember that after the Nationals lots of people here and lots of journalists said: well, actually it is Weir's fault - he should have included a change of edge to make it level 4, he should have tacked on a double toe... Instead of just saying: he was cleaner and better that day, he should have won...

That is an outstanding observation, IMHO. The danger is that we will eventually forget that figure skating was once something more than just another sport.

 

[gkelly]

One thing that the 6.0 system has in common with the COP system is controversy and Nationals was a humdinger.

I think it's inevitable that there will be controversy, or at least differences of opinion, no matter what the judging system.

So many of the decisions that go into deciding which performance was better than another are qualitative and therefore subjective. Judges will disagree with each other, fans will disagree with each other, and fans will disagree with judges.

 

[feraina]

But we allow the judging system to influence us - you remember that after the Nationals lots of people here and lots of journalists said: well, actually it is Weir's fault - he should have included a change of edge to make it level 4, he should have tacked on a double toe... Instead of just saying: he was cleaner and better that day, he should have won.

In psychology it's called "rationalizing" -- and humans are remarkably good at it. We are very good at finding justifications for things, or looking for reasons to be content with the way things are, POST HOC, because in evolutionary terms, it makes sense to try to put up with things that we CANNOT CHANGE. It clearly helps survival.

But figure skating rules CAN CHANGE. How often has it happened with CoP judging that initially most fans and/or commentators thought things should come out one way, and then after the scores actually came out, found ways to justify how things should be another way instead? Just because we have this remarkable adaptive mechanism underlying our psychology, doesn't mean that we should be lulled into thinking that skating rules are UNCHANGEABLE, and that we should find ways to like it instead of finding ways to improve on it!

 

[feraina]

The specific changes I'm in favor of is to bring the beauty, soul, whatever you want to call it, back into figure skating judging system (as many other posters have also noted). Not only re-instate the beauty of figure skating, for the fans, the skaters, even the judges, but it also relates to the other issue of age limits, which is being discussed in the other Edge thread, and also a Junior Worlds thread (it seems the Chinese federation is fudging a young skater's age to qualify her early for international competitions). I'll quote myself from the other thread.

I don't think it's fair either that some federations adhere by the age rules and others don't. But how are you going to enforce that? Fudging of birthdates happen in other sports, too. I think it just doesn't make any sense to impose an age rule, which is in any case un-enforceable, and which only ties the hands of the fair players.

A much better solution, as I have said in other threads, is to bring back a real emphasis on artistic maturity. Children can learn jumps and spins and have great flexibility, but only years of study and training can help them attain artistic maturity -- and some never get there. Make it a key component of the scoring system, then young skaters would rarely make into the top tier of national competitions, never mind being very competitive at the international level.

It would also take the emphasis out of hard jumps and back/hip-breaking cortortionist moves in the training of young skaters, and focus more of their attention on the artistic aspect: choreography, music, audience connection, posture, etc. That would protect young skaters' developing bodies a lot more than some arbitrary age rule, which in any case is unequally enforced across countries.