I am most unimpressed with dance this year. Though anyone of four teams could win I guess the gold and anyone of 3 Russian teams could sneak on the podium though I don't think gold _ I know weird scenario. I am just not a big fan of C/L; Chock and Bates must be reelingto be beaten by the faded stars C and L - Looks like Cand L are in the mix of mediocrity for gold.Seems like with S/K at SA, Shibutanis at SC and now C/L here team Marina have up the ante. They certainly came prepared this season :yes:
However, to get two level twos is unusual for a top team. It raises two potential explanations in my mind: either they were being gifted previously with level 3s, or, the Italian caller was really looking at their step with a microscope. Not sure which or either, but I'd be concerned. They are fortunate to have lots of time to work on this.QUOTE]
Bebe, Was the technical caller from Italy?
However, to get two level twos is unusual for a top team. It raises two potential explanations in my mind: either they were being gifted previously with level 3s, or, the Italian caller was really looking at their step with a microscope. Not sure which or either, but I'd be concerned. They are fortunate to have lots of time to work on this.
Bebe, Was the technical caller from Italy?
Well. Chock/Bates are qualified for the GPF.
The technical panel consisted of 2 Russians (the Referee and the Technical Controller), one Japanese (Technical Specialist) and one Italian _ the Assistant Technical Specialist. It's quite odd that a top team with high PCS would get 2 level 2s. In dance, when the technique is so-so, the artistry (program components) is adversely affected: technique and artistry are so interdependent ... interconnected.
C/L are very polished when they're on and they deservedly won here. Congrats! They have entertaining programs. It's true, though, that they tend to skate "small" and that Anna in particular doesn't have the greatest skating skills. That's something that sometimes trips them up later in the season when the other teams who are faster and have more power on the ice come out polished and with all guns blazing. They tend to look diminished in comparison.
No surprise there but I think they are lucky Weaver and Poje area also unimpressive and the Russians are too new or too recovering from injuries as well as the French are injured. As for the Italians they are still beatable.
Ice dancing is depressing this season. No team that makes you when these teams skate. How depressing if C/L somehow win another World title. That will equal D/W and V/M who were light years better then them. And people are always trashing Madison for her skating skills but Anna is not any better to be honest.
The tech panel has nothing to do with PCS though. A level 2 element can still get great GOE and the team can still get great PCS because PCS doesn't just look at element quality. Unless there are obvious mistakes that caused an element to be called level 2, I don't see how PCS should be down. If one edge wasn't good that will maybe affect SS a little bit (though one wrong edge in a whole program probably doesn't affect it that much) but the other parts of PCS have less to do with the technical aspect and more woth how the dance and choreography is built.
When C/L compete, rink-side feedback is that they are slower than the leaders of the field; and this competition was no exception. Shouldn't that lack of speed be reflected in the skating skills marks? I noticed that their base value is 3 points higher than C/B so if I'm understanding the scoring correctly, their technical score should have been higher; but C/B should have had higher PCS scores.
Well, I don't know exactly the purpose of the tech panel - to see that the protocols for techniques/elements/criteria are properly noted/observed in the judging process?
I have always wondered about the 'base values'. How are these developed ... calculated?
Well, I don't know exactly the purpose of the tech panel - to see that the protocols for techniques/elements/criteria are properly noted/observed in the judging process? Anyway, I don't necessarily say they are to be blamed for the anomaly (if you can call that) but what I am trying to do is to differentiate how different ice-dancing is from dance - one is primarily a sport, the other an art form (where sport's primary emphasis is winning, art has more to do with creating, expressing, and conveying a human experience thus dance is aptly viewed as a poetry in motion). In dance, technique and artistry are so interdependent _ if either one is questionable, the by-product or result is (presentation) is affected. I'm not an ice-dancer _ I was/am a dancer by training so I tend to view the performance from that perspective.
Did I say 'strange'? I thought 'harsher', and it was. And yes, I don't pretend to know the technical side but I've noticed that ISU does put a lot of weight on PCS so I can't help wondering why it is so when obviously ice-dancing is more of a sport than art. I guess, it pretends to be an art form when it obviously from the way it has been handled it is not.I understand and appreciate what you are trying to do, except this is still a sport and scores matter. And a good chunk of the ice dance technique and what is judged is not the same as in dance, so if you wish to make comments on their artistry, keep it to the choreography and the emotion, and leave the tech out, because as you say, you know little about it. As do I. Whenever I don't understand why a certain element only got level 2 or level 3 or whatever, I ask. Snow obviously has very good knowledge of what levels are about, and C/B's step seq seemed choreographed that way (which is strange).
Basically it just seems wrong to me to say some of the judges' calls are strange when you don't understand what the tech panel is about.
(Also this probably comes across way harsher than I intend so I apologize in advance.)
Did I say 'strange'? I thought 'harsher', and it was. And yes, I don't pretend to know the technical side but I've noticed that ISU does put a lot of weight on PCS so I can't help wondering why it is so when obviously ice-dancing is more of a sport than art. I guess, it pretends to be an art form when it obviously from the way it has been handled it is not.
Why should I keep out from commenting on technique? Now, I call that strange since, obviously, technique is part of artistry. It is like ignoring techniques used in drawing/painting, what good will it do when obviously the very application of this element/technique determines the outcome of the exercise/effort.
Yeah, in a way, I'm saying it is 'strange'. Judging in ice-dancing is convoluted and that is one reason why it has credibility issues.Ok, you said odd, I was going by memory. I'm not saying you can't comment on tech, I'm just saying that I thought it was weird that you first say it was odd that they got level 2 when they are a top team, and then go on to say that you don't know tech. A top team can still get level 2s, they're not exempt. PCS builds over years, with consistency and experience and pushing from the federation. It's very subjective and that's hard because they want Ice Dance as a sport, yet this makes it still a matter of taste (to some respect) and that is a struggle all artistic sports have (artistic gymnastics, rhythmic gymnastics, etc). Doesn't make it less of a sport, but does affect credibility. But high PCS doesn't necessarily show that a team is great. Rather the team has to be great in order to receive high PCS, and even THEN there are other factors that play in which seem to be necessary to actually get them. And that's where a lot of people differ in opinion.