2017 Scale of Value and Guidelines for GOE | Golden Skate

2017 Scale of Value and Guidelines for GOE

gsk8

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Country
United-States
Single & Pair Skating Scale of Values, Levels of Difficulty and Guidelines for marking Grade of Execution, season 2017/18 are now available.

This Communication replaces Communication No. 2000.


- Updated Scale of Values
- Updated Levels of Difficulty of Single/Pair Skating Elements (season 2017/18)
- Updated Guidelines for marking +GOE of Single/Pair Skating Elements (positive aspects)
- Updated Guidelines in establishing GOE for errors in Short Program and Free Skating
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
"As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error."

Yaaaaaaaasssssss! :rock:

So, 9.75s then? :sarcasm: :p
 

Tallorder

On the Ice
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
"As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error."

Yaaaaaaaasssssss! :rock:

So, 9.75s then? :sarcasm: :p

Well, one notices that these are referred to as guidelines. Not rules. And even with guidelines, they can be decided upon and published, but then there is execution and enforcement.

Especially given the fact that scores in these uppermost regions inevitably apply to medal deciding scenarios, it will be interesting to see how well these types of guidelines are in fact followed, how strictly referees will enforce them. There have been other clear guidelines regarding PCS components that are blatantly ignored. e.g., in ice dance if there is a fall then a skating skills score should not be >=9.0. Perpetually ignored.
 
Last edited:

HanDomi

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 27, 2014
"As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error."

Yaaaaaaaasssssss! :rock:

So, 9.75s then? :sarcasm: :p
"should" not be

I guess it will be the same as with following rules with steps to solo jumps in SP or recent trend of reward positive GOE jumps with hand down/step out
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
It will be interesting to see how well these types of guidelines are in fact followed, how strictly referees will enforce them. There have been other clear guidelines regarding PCS components that are blatantly ignored. e.g., in ice dance if there is a fall then a skating skills score should not be >=9.0. Perpetually ignored.

Well, unfortunately, the guideline says "should not be awarded" and not "must not be awarded". Hopefully 10's will be reserved for programs that truly deserve them. But I guess, judges will be judges. :laugh:
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Still, it is an acknowledgment of the ISU's intention that technical errors do have an effect on program components.
 

Neenah16

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
"As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error."

A fall I understand, but what is considered a "Serious error"? the only other reference to serious error I can find is the "e" for jumps, is there anything else?
 

Ender

Match Penalty
Joined
May 17, 2017
A fall I understand, but what is considered a "Serious error"? the only other reference to serious error I can find is the "e" for jumps, is there anything else?
ISU love arbitrary because they don't want to spend time explaining what is right or wrong. They want everything in the mix. I feel like my English comprehension is just below average when I read their communications.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
A fall I understand, but what is considered a "Serious error"? the only other reference to serious error I can find is the "e" for jumps, is there anything else?

I would say a pop is a serious error. Or a step out with hands down. Or a bailed spin. Or a distinct, disruptive stumble in footwork. Something that would merit a -3. An "e" to me is a big deduction on the element but not a serious, egregious error that detracts from a program's overall impact. Perhaps I would deduct from Skating Skills if a skater had an "e" call because that shows a lack of perfect edge control.

If your enjoyment of a program is contingent on an edge call, well, I guess everyone has their gripe.
 

Neenah16

On the Ice
Joined
Dec 4, 2016
I would say a pop is a serious error. Or a step out with hands down. Or a bailed spin. Or a distinct, disruptive stumble in footwork. Something that would merit a -3. An "e" to me is a big deduction on the element but not a serious, egregious error that detracts from a program's overall impact. Perhaps I would deduct from Skating Skills if a skater had an "e" call because that shows a lack of perfect edge control.

If your enjoyment of a program is contingent on an edge call, well, I guess everyone has their gripe.

It is not what I think, but what the document itself says.. Search for a serious error in the pdf linked, you will find that the description was used with edge calls. So apparently the ISU consider an edge call a serious error and they said in the part I quoted in my previous post that a serious error should not get a 10.

My question is what do they consider a serious error?
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
"As a guideline the score ten (10) should not be awarded for any of the components in a program containing a Fall or Serious error."

Yaaaaaaaasssssss! :rock:

So, 9.75s then? :sarcasm: :p

It's somewhat arbitrary. Should two "serious errors" cap any component to 9.5, or is only 10 something that requires something special? I do like deflating PCS to reflect errors, though. I thought Patrick and Yuzuru were way over scored on PCS in the Sochi LP, when both were very shaky.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
It's somewhat arbitrary. Should two "serious errors" cap any component to 9.5, or is only 10 something that requires something special? I do like deflating PCS to reflect errors, though. I thought Patrick and Yuzuru were way over scored on PCS in the Sochi LP, when both were very shaky.

I think a fall should immediately cap all PCS categories at 9.5. Two falls, cap it at 9. I'm tired of judges "saving" skaters, giving them 9.5s and 10s for errors that clearly adversely affect programs. It's like the judges have a predetermined score and they'll just dole it out regardless (okay, maybe 0.25 less if the skater falls 2-3 times). I'm also not one to accept the explanation that "the fall wasn't disruptive" or "it was just one fleeting moment in a 4 minute program". It's ridiculous that some skaters can go clean with excellent difficulty and get less components (especially things like Performance/Execution, than skaters with several falls).
 
Last edited:

karne

in Emergency Backup Mode
Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Country
Australia
I'd like to have seen them go even further with the PCS thing.

One serious error, cannot get 10. Two serious errors, cannot get above 9. Three serious errors, cannot get above 8. Four serious errors, cannot get above 7. Five serious errors, cannot get above 6...
 

xeyra

Constant state
Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 10, 2017
And does a serious error reflect equally in all PCS components? Should a hand down reflect the same in interpretation of the music as it does in performance? Or a pop? Do you deserve a major lowering of your skating skills score if you have a stepout on a jump? :shrug:
 

nolangoh

Steps and Spirals enthusiast
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 15, 2015
ISU love arbitrary because they don't want to spend time explaining what is right or wrong. They want everything in the mix. I feel like my English comprehension is just below average when I read their communications.

Thank you I am not alone. I was so confused when I first read their communication. The wordings and sentence structure is so weird.
 

xeyra

Constant state
Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 10, 2017
Thank you I am not alone. I was so confused when I first read their communication. The wordings and sentence structure is so weird.

I agree. They should learn how to clarify things. For example, they could start by defining what a serious error is. Is it anything that would be worth -3 GOE automatically (fall, stepout) or is it anything that would require any minus GOE (hand down, wonky landings?). What about pops? There have been 4Ts turned into 3Ts that are still graded with + GOE! Defining this would go a long way into understanding what they want judges to not give 10s in PCS for, just as an example. How about defining what creative, original skating movements/steps before a solo SP jump should entail in order to meet the requirements?
 
Last edited:

GF2445

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
There are also some minor modifications for the GOE in Level B Step Sequences.

Also note that next season, Junior Dance teams will only have One Step Sequence in the Free Dance.
 

FSGMT

Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
I'd like to have seen them go even further with the PCS thing.

One serious error, cannot get 10. Two serious errors, cannot get above 9. Three serious errors, cannot get above 8. Four serious errors, cannot get above 7. Five serious errors, cannot get above 6...

And does a serious error reflect equally in all PCS components? Should a hand down reflect the same in interpretation of the music as it does in performance? Or a pop? Do you deserve a major lowering of your skating skills score if you have a stepout on a jump? :shrug:

I do agree that this "guideline" is not as clear as it should be, but still we have to remember that it applies only to 10s: 10 should mean perfection, so anything but an absolutely flawless program should receive it (I would not agree to lowering all the other PCS marks according to the number of mistakes).
Of course if one has absolutely perfect SS, then a step-out cannot affect their perfection (so theoretically he/she should still get a 10 there), but I think that the aim of this thing is (more in general) to discourage judges from handing out 10s to pretty much every excellent skater.
(My personal opinion is that marks higher than 9, at least in PE and IN, should still be reserved to truly exceptional performances, as it was pre-2013)
 
Top