The new onscreen technical panel

[GabrielleBaker]

I’ve only just noticed this with the start of the Grand Prix season ( they don’t show the Challenger series in my country). I’m just wondering about everybody else’s view on the new techical panel that appears onscreen. I rely on it as I don’t have the instinctually knowledge to know a lutz from a flip at any given camera angle. I find the new panel really bad, with the most crucial elements unreadable. I can’t watch the skating on my tv, and even watching on the iPad is difficult. The most important parts to me is the element and the scores, that is a type size that is impossible to see. In particular the execution scores in white on a pale green background makes things worse. Is there anybody else who feels the same as me?

In the Cup of China there was no technical panel onscreen for almost all of the men’s short program, and frustratingly the commentator wasn’t calling out the jumps as he normally does.

 

[DonnaR]

They either need to change the execution colour to a different shade of green or change the font to black. I agree, it is not legible.

 

[Mathematician]

I rely on it as I don’t have the instinctually knowledge to know a lutz from a flip at any given camera angle.

For singles, you can easily tell by observing if they take a turn into the jump or not. If they do, it's a Flip; if its a straight entry, it's a Lutz. Of course, the prerequisite is that it's a pick-jump, which should be obvious.

That is, if it's a turn-entry, it's a Flip or a Toe loop. If they turn CCW and use their right pick, it's a Flip, and left for Toe loop. Vice versa for CW.

This works literally 100% of the time for singles. People have tried to tell me otherwise but I have used this method exclusively and out of hundreds or likely thousands of jumps I have not mistaken a Lutz for a Flip once in my life. Using only this queue.

For throws however, you will need to look at the edge, unfortunately. Sometimes the streaming angle simply does not allow this.

 

[GabrielleBaker]

For singles, you can easily tell by observing if they take a turn into the jump or not. If they do, it's a Flip; if its a straight entry, it's a Lutz. Of course, the prerequisite is that it's a pick-jump, which should be obvious.

That is, if it's a turn-entry, it's a Flip or a Toe loop. If they turn CCW and use their right pick, it's a Flip, and left for Toe loop. Vice versa for CW.

This works literally 100% of the time for singles. People have tried to tell me otherwise but I have used this method exclusively and out of hundreds or likely thousands of jumps I have not mistaken a Lutz for a Flip once in my life. Using only this queue.

For throws however, you will need to look at the edge, unfortunately. Sometimes the streaming angle simply does not allow this.

I live in Australia ice skating isn’t much of a winter sport here, none of our waterways freeze in winter. I’ll take in mind what you said. While I’m getting better recognising singles jumps, the throw jumps are totally mystifying to me and rely on the technical panel or the commentator.

 

[frompolandwithlove]

In particular the execution scores in white on a pale green background makes things worse. Is there anybody else who feels the same as me?

In the Cup of China there was no technical panel onscreen for almost all of the men’s short program, and frustratingly the commentator wasn’t calling out the jumps as he normally does.

Absolutely agreed, white numbers on bright green background are barely visible. I kind of understand the whole visual rebranding thing, but still, how did they not notice it at the production stage is a mystery to me.

I think Cup of China was just a mishap tho. Chris was also couple of seconds late with his comments on Women's free (or short, I don't remember), so something went wrong with technical aspects at that event. Hopefully won't happen again.

 

[Reah]

[...] I rely on it as I don’t have the instinctually knowledge to know a lutz from a flip at any given camera angle. [...]

Since I am only involved in pair skating, I am not lazy and make a list of the order of the elements of the pairs that really interest me so that I can “have my say” even before the technical display panel is updated. This allows me to play judge myself and, above all, to immediately vent my frustration at the lack of agreement between myself and the judges.

In most cases, the pairs stick to the routines they have practiced for months (unless they want to optimize the program), and also so as not to “test” or annoy the judges. The type of elements and their sequence can be researched in advance, most easily by consulting the previous “JudgesDetailsperSkater” PDF.

 

[GabrielleBaker]

Since I am only involved in pair skating, I am not lazy and make a list of the order of the elements of the pairs that really interest me so that I can “have my say” even before the technical display panel is updated. This allows me to play judge myself and, above all, to immediately vent my frustration at the lack of agreement between myself and the judges.

In most cases, the pairs stick to the routines they have practiced for months (unless they want to optimize the program), and also so as not to “test” or annoy the judges. The type of elements and their sequence can be researched in advance, most easily by consulting the previous “JudgesDetailsperSkater” PDF.

Yes, I know there are places where I can see the rundown of proposed elements, but when things happen and the program deviates, then you need to rely on the technical panel. For many elements, there’s only a downgrade to the execution score, but for others, like combination jumps missing the combination, and or rotations the base value changes. The new technical panel looks pretty, but if there’s no benefit to having it because the important parts are unreadable. When I go to my sisters farm at Xmas I want to have a look on her huge tv screen to see if the same issues persists. I need to work out whether this new design is optimised for particular screen sizes. Then I will email the ISU.