But it has everything to do with the question of whether the Program Component Scores can really do what the ISU advertises.
So true!
But it has everything to do with the question of whether the Program Component Scores can really do what the ISU advertises.
I don't know what I feel about this. I think it's different at the elite level than for kids who are trying to pass their pre-juvenile tests.:agree:100%, that is what really happens. Is that good? - is it meant as some way to make a career more important?
So make the "numbers" fit what ever fits in the fans mind, seems reasonable if the marks are just there for us anyway?
In principle, the Grand Prix series is supposed to work like that, IMHO. You have a "regular season" culminating in a title match. Then you go on to the "post season" with Four Continents, Europeans and -- the Super Bowl of figure skating -- Worlds.Could it be the sport should put more emphasis on a "season" much like many sports do? ~ usually by "play-off" style. It would seem that having a "score earned in year" as a "benchmark" might work. ???
IMHO the balance struck by the current version of the ISU judging system is not bad. A triple flip is 5.5 points, cut and dried. If you wow the audience by emoting to the music, that's more subjective, but the judges have ample opportunity to reward you for it.A balance???
I have never read anything that the ISU is aware of or should be aware of that sports is first and foremost entertainment. That to me, seems to be one minority thought. Most sportsminded people have a personal interest in sports and another interest in threatrical performances. I presume you combine the two into one general sweep, smile, and get back to your more serious statistics.At the elite level, I think the ISU is very aware -- or at least it should be -- that big time sports is first and foremost entertainment. Send the people home happy and wanting more.
Exactly, the sport is in a downward spiral (pun intented). Judges do have an ample opportunity to reward you for wowing the public or to disaward you. That's what subjectivity is all about.Personally, I think this is a good format. The only problem is, the overall interest in the sport is not sufficient to sustain it. IMHO the balance struck by the current version of the ISU judging system is not bad. A triple flip is 5.5 points, cut and dried. If you wow the audience by emoting to the music, that's more subjective, but the judges have ample opportunity to reward you for it
Tosca preferred Art and Love, so maybe the whole thing is entertainment and we should go to Basketball and watch a real game of sports.Sport and art, LOL.
I think the bottom line is this. Can anyone tell me, by referring to the ISU rules and guidelines, what the difference is bewteen a 5.25 performance and a 5.50 performance in the category, say, of Transitions?
So the question (for me) is, what can be done to the PCs and the process of scoring them to do better than the 10-15%? How can the criteria be improved to achieve this? How can markers and better guidelines be added? It is not fair to the skaters to say we will select the places to within 0.01 of a point (1/200 of 1% of the total score in the men's event) when the judges currently are floundering with scores that are spread out by 10-15% for an individual judge and uncertain by 1-2 points for even a 10 judge panel as a whole (and some USFSA clubs are using 3 judge panels with IJS -- OMG!).
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsrossano
(But what this has to do with the meaning of Interpretation beats me. Seems we have gotten a bit off topic!)
But it has everything to do with the question of whether the Program Component Scores can really do what the ISU advertises.
I think the bottom line is this. Can anyone tell me, by referring to the ISU rules and guidelines, what the difference is between a 5.25 performance and a 5.50 performance in the category, say, of Transitions?
Personally, I am very doubtful that this question will ever be satisfactorily addressed.So the question (for me) is, what can be done to the PCs and the process of scoring them to do better than the 10-15%? How can the criteria be improved to achieve this? How can markers and better guidelines be added?
:yes:emma said:I do like that judged sports rely, well, on judges.
Just a technical question here. Do moves in the field, like Ina Bauers, split jumps, spread eagles, hydoplaning, etc. count in the Transitions category?I think it would be a good idea to have a table for component scores, so that judges have something concrete to help them out. For example, for transitions, you could have:
0 - no transitions between elements (so one jump, stop, turn around, do a spin, stop, do another spin, etc.)
1- exclusive unidirectional crosscuts between elements
2- Crosscuts in all directions (forward, backward, clockwise, counterclockwise)
3- Some transitional moves here and there (like 3 or 4 in the whole program, for an LP)...
Just a technical question here. Do moves in the field, like Ina Bauers, split jumps, spread eagles, hydoplaning, etc. count in the Transitions category?
What about a Charlotte? Is that a spiral to be judged under TES, with added GOEs, or is it a Transition?
What about standing on your toe pick and doing a couple of chorus line high kicks, like Michelle did in her Fate of Carmen 1998-99 short program?
But about having a ten-point table like this to help the judges out, again the problem is that you would have to number your list from 1 to 40. And there would have to be language that would allow the judges to distinguish between level 27 ( a PCS of 6.75) and level 28 ( = 7.00).
I am not saying this to discredit, but...For example, have a friend pick ten strangers and dress them up all the same. Put a bag over their heads so you don't know their age or sex. Put them in front of a large white background with no markings on it, one at a time, in the middle of a field 100 feet away like they were at center ice, in random order of height. All you get to guide you is one view of a 6 foot tall person at the beginning of the experiment. Try and correctly determine the height of each person to within one inch. Ain't gonna happen.
gkelly, can you give some examples that might be available on You Tube of programs that have great quality in the transitions but little variety or difficulty?
Would you say Michelle's Kwan's Aranjuez or Tosca would fall into this category?
What about the other way around?
I see your "white background with no markings on it," but this is not a realistic comparison. "One" knows how high the boards are around the rink, "One" knows how big the rink is, and as a matter of "ratifying" "One" knows which direction they are facing prior to the jump. So there are things around to gauge these things - although none of my examples had to do with height.
Anyone to reply who has the answer:
(The best way to get speed is with crossovers, ok?) so a skater does a number of crossovers (you know a jump is coming up) so in order to satisfy the regulation to do some transition into an element, he/she does (and this is quite common after all those crossovers) a Rocker - cross free foot, forward step into mohawk into a Flip. For me that's just a big deal and transitions didn't really happen, except in their most primitive form.
My question: does this satisfy the question of transitions?
There is another approach: from what I saw in Tokyo.
It seem to me that Mao did do a series of mixed steps which finished with a choctaw into a Triple Axel. Quite rare in competition where skaters usually just take off with a long (almost too long) back outside edge into a 3A.
My question: Are the judges aware of this or are they just interested in the 3A?