- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
This thread was inspired by SeaniBu’s observations/questions on the “French” thread. Under the new judging system, how exactly are the judges supposed to evaluate these two program components?
Let’s say a skater goes to Lori Nichol for a program. Nichol says, OK, we’ll do Beethoven’s Fifth. On the four beat of pum-pum-pum-PUM, you do a triple Lutz in the far corner. Then you do a figure eight pattern back to the center into a layback combo, be sure to skate from the center of your body outward and don’t forget to point your toe.
The judges say, wow, Lori totally nailed old Ludwig Van on that one. Lori’s “original arrangement of all movements according to the principles of proportion, unity, space, pattern, structure, and phrasing” was awesome (quote is from the ISU document, “Components with Explanations”).
I’ll give the skater an 8.75 for “Choreography/Construction.”
Now we turn to the program component “Interpretation.”
How well did the skater interpret Lori Nichol’s interpretation of Beethoven’s interpretation of whatever inspired him to compose this piece in the first place? Did the skater “(maintain) the character and style of the music throughout the entire program by use of body and skating techniques to depict a mood, style, shape, or thematic idea as motivated by the structure of the music: melody, harmony, rhythm, color, texture, and form?”
Well, maybe so on the set-up to her triple Flip, but I wasn’t really feeling Beethoven on her flying camel. I’ll say a 7.50.
Is this the intention of these two program component scores?
Can you think of examples of recent programs that had good choreography but bad interpretation, or vice versa?
Here is the relevant ISU document, with point by point explanations (pages four and five).
http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-152086-169302-64121-0-file,00.pdf
Let’s say a skater goes to Lori Nichol for a program. Nichol says, OK, we’ll do Beethoven’s Fifth. On the four beat of pum-pum-pum-PUM, you do a triple Lutz in the far corner. Then you do a figure eight pattern back to the center into a layback combo, be sure to skate from the center of your body outward and don’t forget to point your toe.
The judges say, wow, Lori totally nailed old Ludwig Van on that one. Lori’s “original arrangement of all movements according to the principles of proportion, unity, space, pattern, structure, and phrasing” was awesome (quote is from the ISU document, “Components with Explanations”).
I’ll give the skater an 8.75 for “Choreography/Construction.”
Now we turn to the program component “Interpretation.”
How well did the skater interpret Lori Nichol’s interpretation of Beethoven’s interpretation of whatever inspired him to compose this piece in the first place? Did the skater “(maintain) the character and style of the music throughout the entire program by use of body and skating techniques to depict a mood, style, shape, or thematic idea as motivated by the structure of the music: melody, harmony, rhythm, color, texture, and form?”
Well, maybe so on the set-up to her triple Flip, but I wasn’t really feeling Beethoven on her flying camel. I’ll say a 7.50.
Is this the intention of these two program component scores?
Can you think of examples of recent programs that had good choreography but bad interpretation, or vice versa?
Here is the relevant ISU document, with point by point explanations (pages four and five).
http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-152086-169302-64121-0-file,00.pdf