Thus ART is demonstrated in points - or is it?

[gsrossano]

For those interested in knowing the ISU descriptions of the PCs and each of the criteria, see the following ISU documents.

08A_ProgramComponentExplanations_2004_07_31.PDF
29_ID_DeterminationProgramComponents_CD_2004_07_31.PDF
30_ID_DeterminationProgramComponents_ODFD_2004_07_31.PDF

These can be found on the USFSA web site.
(Or you can make up your own definitions, because, gee, if the judges can define them any way they want, I guess so can every one else.)

 

[sorcerer]

Could gsrossano give me an answer to this question? Vaguely or precisely, whichever.

Why is the Choreography/Composition mark so similar to the other PCS marks in each of the protocols disclosed? This can be seen throughout practically every program of every skater.

If the other PCS marks are like 6.**, the Choreo/Compo mark is also 6.**; ... while if another skater with the same choreographer gets the other PCS marks like 5.**, the Choreo/Compo mark is also 5.**

To me, the biggest problem is that by the time you work in 7 triple jumps, three in combination; 4 spins, each with the required number of changes of position; your forward, then backward, then Biellmann, then dog-and-hydrant spiral sequence -- what opportunity is there to tell any story at all?

I feel the same way too, especially with the short programs, but on the other hand feel like "the more restrictions the more clarity of the ability of the choreographer".

As I read what ISU says, the originality of a choreo/compo is SUPPOSED to be the pursuit of a creative composition as inspired by the music and the underlying vision, and SUPPOSED to involve an individual perspective of movement and design.
And the "movement phrases" are SUPPOSED to be designed using an interesting and meaningful variety of patterns and directions of travel.

If a choreographer puts the priority in the ease of the skater obtaining TES marks, I imagine the above supposition would be considerably difficult.
If the skater has superb skill to realize her full TES mark potential even under such intersting (or unusual?) originality of the choreo, the ISU supposition may come true.

So if the Choreography/Composition points come out high, those extra points could be partly credited not only to the choreographer but to the skater as well.

 

[gsrossano]

Why is the Choreography/Composition mark so similar to the other PCS marks in each of the protocols disclosed? This can be seen throughout practically every program of every skater.

This is something many people have noticed from the beginning of IJS. All the PC marks seem to be kept very close together. If a skater is much stronger or weaker in one PC mark, very often all the PC marks are still nearly the same regardless.

I think there are several possible reasons for this.

1. Despite all the words the ISU has published for what the PCs are supposed to evaluate and how they are supposed to be scored on an absolute scale, many people think many of the judges are just using the PC marks to place the skaters.

2. Some people think the Assessment Commission and the "corridor" makes many judges fearful of spreading out their marks.

3. The PC criteria for PE, CH and IN are largely drawn from music and dance. If a judge does not have some education in music and dance (and most do not) it is hard for them to use the PC criteria they way they were intended. In the U.S. some attempt is made to educate the judges in these areas, but not enough. Motivated judges, in general, have to educate themselves to figure out how to use the PC criteria correctly.

4. Using the PC criteria correctly is hard work, and not everybody is willing to do it (so they just place the skaters). A friend who is an ISU official that was intimately involved in creating the PC criteria once told me that after judging a championship event they are mentally drained from the effort to get it "right". I wonder if most judges put that much effort into trying to get it right. It's just easier to fall back on old habits.

 

[enlight78]

Figure skating is sport. Even the artistic side need to have detail discriptions based on action not abstract ideas.
Interpetation for an example. I would understand if the guidlines say something about skater using sticato music should have sharp quick moviements or Allegro music should have brisk, lively and sweeping movements or adagio music should have slow and controlled movements. Simple and Obvious.
With guidlines like creating an invisible connection with the audience, you got to be kidding me. Are we judging actors or athletes? Underlying vision or purpose is a bit much if you ask me. A recognizable theme should be good enough. The only programs I see with a underlying vision or purpose are mostly dance teams.
Maybe PCS should be broken down into levels like spins, footwork, and spirals.

 

[gsrossano]

With guidlines like creating an invisible connection with the audience, you got to be kidding me.

You are getting at some of the things I don't like about the PC criteria. A few of them are not really judgable (IMO) and some of them I do not see the need to be judged.

 

[Mathman]

But the choreographer is not creating an unfettered artistic work for the ages under IJS, they are creating a work that will earn points.

I think figure skating is cutting off its nose to spite its face.

Why the push to make figure skating "more like other sports"? If we wanted "other sports," there are plenty of "other sports" to choose from.

What we (the ever-dwindling figure skating audience) want from figure skating is "unfettered artistic works for the ages."

Example: Rudy Galindo's YMCA = an unfettered, not to say jubilant, artstic work for the ages. For my money, it's better than any men's competitve program of the last 20 years.

 

[feraina]

These can be found on the USFSA web site.
08A_ProgramComponentExplanations_2004_07_31.PDF
29_ID_DeterminationProgramComponents_CD_2004_07_31.PDF
30_ID_DeterminationProgramComponents_ODFD_2004_07_31.PDF

Can someone kindly provide the links to these documents please? I mucked around the USFSA website and failed to find them. Thanks in advance!

 

[gsrossano]

Can someone kindly provide the links to these documents please? I mucked around the USFSA website and failed to find them. Thanks in advance!

The first one is here.

http://www.usfigureskating.org/content/JS08A-Programcompexplan.pdf

The other two have been included in ISU Communications, most recently ISU 1449. It covers what to look for in each PC and what mark to give.

 

[GoldMedalist]

Are we judging actors or athletes?

Both. That's what makes Figure Skating so interesting.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Figure skating is sport. Even the artistic side need to have detail discriptions based on action not abstract ideas.
Interpetation for an example. I would understand if the guidlines say something about skater using sticato music should have sharp quick moviements or Allegro music should have brisk, lively and sweeping movements or adagio music should have slow and controlled movements. Simple and Obvious.
With guidlines like creating an invisible connection with the audience, you got to be kidding me. Are we judging actors or athletes? Underlying vision or purpose is a bit much if you ask me. A recognizable theme should be good enough. The only programs I see with a underlying vision or purpose are mostly dance teams.
Maybe PCS should be broken down into levels like spins, footwork, and spirals.

Figure Skating is definitely a judged sport and therefore it is subjective even to say a back out side edge is more difficult than a back inside edge. Only a skater can tell you his own feelings about that. To define the criteria for individual tastes just can not be done.

There is the Sport of Diving which demands ballet-like positions, if you will, which is subjectively taken into account by the judges along with the big splash caused by the dive. The judges do not agree on their scores either.

My suggestion would be to let the skating judges give one mark to include the elements and the performance and be done with it.

Joe

 

[gkelly]

If you choose any year and look at 100 freestyle programs from that year chosen randomly or by the same criteria for each year you choose (unless you have a favorite era or favorite skater or choreographer and make your criterion "my personal favorite programs from that year"), I doubt you'd find 10 in any year that could be considered "unfettered artistic works for the ages."

(There are certain eras when I think that artistic coherence was especially important in ice dance and other years when the rules discouraged it, and other years when the rules more actively encouraged faithful imitation of off-ice social dancing or athletic difficulty, so I think the choice of year would make a much bigger difference for ice dance.)

I figure that competitive skating is a sport first and foremost. It happens to be a sport that can be very beautiful and musical and also allows some room for storytelling or characterization. And for the most part doing well with those artistic areas demonstrates more mastery of the technique than just executing the moves mechanically, and therefore they are rewarded when present, and most skaters make some effort to demonstrate those abilities.

But those who can go beyond the demands of technical-sport-with-room-for-some-artistic-expression to perform competitive programs that would hold up artistically against most of what you would expect to see in a stage dance performance, or in ice theatre or the more artistic touring ice shows, are few and far between. They transcend the medium and attract fans. But skating as a sport is still primarily about skating technique.

For fans who are more interested in artistic quality, there should be other venues to showcase the accomplished artistically inclined skaters doing what they do best, with the content, structure, and proportion of each performance determined by what each individual piece's concept requires, without the need to focus on maximum difficulty range of technical skills as required by "well-balanced programs" demanded by the competitive sport.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

gkelly makes a good point in differentiating the sport and the 'art' of figure skating. To use the phrase: The Art of *** (whatever) including The Art of Plumbing is to say that a certain plumber is a master craftsman.. However, when using the term 'Artistic' would you expect him to draw thousands of paying people to watch him work on those pipes in a way that is so special?

Plumbing is limited as an artistic expression. Figure Skating, as a Sport does not really have to be artistic. It's purpose is to determine who the best craftsman is that night of competition.

Flow, flow, flow over the ice is what figure skating's gift is to the world. All the rest are tricks from other sources and are not original to the world.

As a spectacle of artistic skating with artistic skaters, one must go to a John Curry type of originality which focussed on skating not necessarily calling a 180 degree spiral a work of skating art.

I would agree to changing the name of Figure Skating to Artistic Skating as it reads in other languages. It might even help sales for the sport.

Joe

 

[sorcerer]

Okay, so, as long as the present style of this single judge panel system is kept, it doesn't seem realistic to expect the judges to fulfill what are said in the ISU files.

It's been often suggested to have plural panels; however like Mathman has already told us, in Nebelhorn last year the 2-panel judging WAS tried out but turned down, seemingly disliked by the judges who tried it. (If inaccurate please MM correct.)

So the PCS marks (IN in particular) may only be indexes of skaters' tendencies.

All but still, for the skaters the PCS marks may function as hints on where to improve, no?
If you have ten or so judges giving you just around the same points, then it IS an aspect of your reality as a skater, ...I'd imagine.

 

[gsrossano]

Okay, so, as long as the present style of this single judge panel system is kept, it doesn't seem realistic to expect the judges to fulfill what are said in the ISU files.

I don't think I would go that far. I would say it is not reasonable to expect all judges to use the PC marks perfectly correctly at this time (for a variety of reasons), but some at least are starting to get close.

When IJS first came in I was told by USFSA and ISU officials it would take a few years before the judges were properly calibrated to use the PC marks correctly. Well it has been a few years and now the same people tell me they think it may take a generation before all judges are using the PC marks correctly. I find that rather discouraging. I am not that patient. I wish USFSA and ISU were more aggressive in getting the judges properly calibrated in using the PCs (and would also revise them to make them a little easier to use correctly.)

 

[Mathman]

I figure that competitive skating is a sport first and foremost. It happens to be a sport that can be very beautiful and musical and also allows some room for storytelling or characterization. And for the most part doing well with those artistic areas demonstrates more mastery of the technique than just executing the moves mechanically, and therefore they are rewarded when present, and most skaters make some effort to demonstrate those abilities...

I think it makes sense to distinguish, first, between children's sports and adult sports.

Sports for children serve many admirable purposes: excercise and fitness, team spirit and sportsmanship, social interaction and friendship, setting and achieving goals, and competing against others while while also pushing the limits of one's own dedication and talent.

Sports for adults, in contrast, fall into two categories, recreation and entertainment. Recreational sports means doing it yourself (the Thursday night bowling league). Sports as entertainment means watching other people do it (the Super Bowl).

So if the discussion is not about skating competitions for children and not about adult recreational skating, then it comes down to the entertainment value of the sport.

Again, IMHO, there are two ways that figure skating contests can be entertaining (school figures are not entertasining, that's why they were canned). The two ways are -- well, sport and art, LOL.

Here is an example. At 2003 Worlds there were two "performances for the ages."

Shen and Zhao delivered a performance that melted every heart and stirred each soul. That was art. (Of course, it wouldn't have been art without the technical mastery that supported it.)

Michelle Kwan's performance was sport. Earlier in the season it was not clear that Michelle would even compete that year. Many observers thought her time was past. Yet there she was, the Grande Dame herself. Go gently into that good night? Not she!

"If you can beat me, beat this!"

That's sport.

 

[Hsuhs]

Here is an example. At 2003 Worlds there were two "performances for the ages."

Were they really?

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Were they really?

Subjectively they were for those that feel that way. For others it was 2 other performances; and Still others are waiting for that kind of performance.

Joe

 

[emma]

Were they really?

I can understand that all performances/competitive outings are subject to this same question - for some they are 'programs for the ages' and for others they are categorically not, and for still others somewhere on the continum in between.

BUT, for me - there is simply no forgetting both Kwan's and Shen/Zhao's DC performances and for different reasons along MM lines. Of the two, Shen/Zhao's is the one I continue to re-watch when I need that feeling of total abandon - uplift - OMG this is amazing. I actually haven't re-watched Kwan's in quite some time (of course, there is always the problem of do I choose to re-watch 2003 or 2004)...so, in some way, Shen/Zhao's is a work of art for me (as is their meditation - and one or two of their shorts - without that one truly amazing outing of it).....for me, kwan has so many artistically inspiring programs I don't know where to start, but for me, 2003 isn't where I would start (yet, I like it so much....)

About judging...i'm at a loss with this one.

 

[Hsuhs]

So it is not a well-established fact.

 

[Mathman]

^ Well, I don't know if fact is quite the right word. But I don't know anyone who wasn't moved by Shen and Zhao's performance. And Michelle's was an athletic and competitive triumph, whatever one might think of the "artistic" factor.

Edited to add: Also, let's remember that this is performance art. The smell of the greasepaint, the roar of the crowd. Getting caught up in the moment.

Sometimes rewatching it on tape the next day, that factor is lost and you wonder what the big deal was. (But in the moment, it was, it was!)