Long Program: Too Loooooong?

[gkelly]

It's a torture almost using half time waiting the judging and only another half time to enjoy the competition.
ISU should do something to short the judging time.

It's not so much the judges as the tech panel reviewing elements afterward that takes so long.

Any way to shorten the amount of time people have to wait for the reviews after the program would make the results announced in the arena less accurate. The question is what would we (in general, including skaters, not only spectators) be willing to sacrifice for the event to move more quickly?

Possibilities, in decreasing order of accuracy for the skaters:

1) During the program tech specialists call downgrades in real time, as well as calling for reviews on all downgrades and other elements they need to see again. They verify the elements quickly at the end of the program without reviewing anything, and interim scores are announced in the arena with frequent reminders that the announced results are not final until after reviews.

During warmups and after the last skater of the event, the tech panel goes back and reviews all the flagged elements from the previous skaters and changes their calls, and the base values, accordingly. Judges do not go back and change their GOEs, so judges need to be more alert for catching rotation and edge problems during the performance.

At the end of the event, final scores standings are announced that may look different from the interim standings announced in the Kiss-and-Cry . . . which would make skater celebrations there premature.

Or there could just be no K&C, no announcements of scores and standings after each skater, only an announcement after the reviews are finished for each warmup group.

The results would be equally accurate to what they are now, whether you think that's enough or not, but the audience and skaters themselves would have to wait up to almost an hour (after the first skater in a men's freeskate group with 6 skaters) to know where most skaters placed.

2) Get rid of levels and therefore get rid of tech panel reviews of non-jump elements. The panel just calls the name of the element. Judges have the option to reflect difficulty or lack thereof in their GOEs.

3) Get rid of reviews for jumps as well. The tech panel just calls "downgrade" (with the current 180 degree cutoff) or "edge" (for blatant errors) or else just calls the jump as intended. There's no base value reduction for 90-180 degree underrotated jumps, but judges have a larger range of negative GOEs to reflect underrotation errors and unclear edges with or without additional errors such as falls, step outs, etc.

4) Get rid of the tech panel entirely, get rid of IJS as it now exists, and either go back to 6.0 or devise some other system. For example, judges could give general scores for "jumps" "spins" "steps" etc. reflecting their general impression of difficulty+quality of those element types across the program, as well as two or more component scores.

 

[Sydney Rose]

Or there could just be no K&C

The horror!!!

 

[jenaj]

It's not so much the judges as the tech panel reviewing elements afterward that takes so long.

Any way to shorten the amount of time people have to wait for the reviews after the program would make the results announced in the arena less accurate. The question is what would we (in general, including skaters, not only spectators) be willing to sacrifice for the event to move more quickly?

Possibilities, in decreasing order of accuracy for the skaters:

1) During the program tech specialists call downgrades in real time, as well as calling for reviews on all downgrades and other elements they need to see again. They verify the elements quickly at the end of the program without reviewing anything, and interim scores are announced in the arena with frequent reminders that the announced results are not final until after reviews.

During warmups and after the last skater of the event, the tech panel goes back and reviews all the flagged elements from the previous skaters and changes their calls, and the base values, accordingly. Judges do not go back and change their GOEs, so judges need to be more alert for catching rotation and edge problems during the performance.

At the end of the event, final scores standings are announced that may look different from the interim standings announced in the Kiss-and-Cry . . . which would make skater celebrations there premature.

Or there could just be no K&C, no announcements of scores and standings after each skater, only an announcement after the reviews are finished for each warmup group.

The results would be equally accurate to what they are now, whether you think that's enough or not, but the audience and skaters themselves would have to wait up to almost an hour (after the first skater in a men's freeskate group with 6 skaters) to know where most skaters placed.

2) Get rid of levels and therefore get rid of tech panel reviews of non-jump elements. The panel just calls the name of the element. Judges have the option to reflect difficulty or lack thereof in their GOEs.

3) Get rid of reviews for jumps as well. The tech panel just calls "downgrade" (with the current 180 degree cutoff) or "edge" (for blatant errors) or else just calls the jump as intended. There's no base value reduction for 90-180 degree underrotated jumps, but judges have a larger range of negative GOEs to reflect underrotation errors and unclear edges with or without additional errors such as falls, step outs, etc.

4) Get rid of the tech panel entirely, get rid of IJS as it now exists, and either go back to 6.0 or devise some other system. For example, judges could give general scores for "jumps" "spins" "steps" etc. reflecting their general impression of difficulty+quality of those element types across the program, as well as two or more component scores.

Interesting thoughts. I like the idea of getting rid of levels, at least for the "free" skate. 1 and 3 seem to be polar opposites, with 1 being absolute certainty as to jump elements and 3 being only certainty to the naked eye. Is there a middle ground?

 

[Mathman]

IMHO it's OK as it is.

 

[gkelly]

1) is the same amount of certainty that we have now, but with a delay in reaching that certainty and therefore a delay in finalizing the score. However, the time between the end of one program and the start of the next would be reduced significantly -- we just wouldn't know whether the scores for the previous program might change significantly before they're finalized.

I don't know any way to have "absolute certainty as to the jump elements" until there's some technological way to measure the amount of rotation and the correctness of the lutz and flip takeoff edges in real time without interfering with the execution of the jumps or the rest of the skating and without limitations based on sightlines in variously constructed arenas. Maybe that technology could also measure things like jump height, distance, and speed in and out. But until such technology is readily and affordably available, slow-motion replays are the best we can do, and those take time to review.

(Using two or more different camera angles might increase the accuracy of the calls, but it would increase the amount of time needed for the reviews and having extra cameras and camera operators on site would significantly increase the costs of holding competitions that are not being televised.)

2) through 4) would give you a final official score within a minute or two after the end of the program, but with less and less accuracy as to what was actually accomplished technically.

So the question becomes what is more important -- to give the skaters accurate credit for what they did accomplish and not for what they didn't, or to keep the competition moving along at a brisk pace?

 

[Raomina]

What if they did technical adjustments for each group during the warmup of the next group? The judges cannot change the GOEs but the technical panel can review and make adjustments to the calls?

 

[gkelly]

Yes, that was my suggestion 1).

It would save time. The drawback is that immediately after a skater gets off the ice and receives scores in the K&C a minute later, those scores might not be accurate. If the skater and the audience think s/he's in first place, and then after the reviews there are several changes to the base values that result in a lower placement, people would not be happy.

 

[hanca]

What if they did technical adjustments for each group during the warmup of the next group? The judges cannot change the GOEs but the technical panel can review and make adjustments to the calls?

I think that would raise a lot of conspiracy theories. Imagine seeing that one skater is 1st or 2nd for a while, then there is a warm up of another group and suddenly the order drastically changes...people would believe that the judges wanted to push their favourites and that they robbed some skaters. I think it is hard enough for some people to accept the results even now, but if the results could change and one could lose even perhaps five points and move a few places down whereas others would move up, it would cause outcry.

 

[Raomina]

Yes, that was my suggestion 1).

It would save time. The drawback is that immediately after a skater gets off the ice and receives scores in the K&C a minute later, those scores might not be accurate. If the skater and the audience think s/he's in first place, and then after the reviews there are several changes to the base values that result in a lower placement, people would not be happy.

Oh woops, I was skimming the thread and must've missed it! Looks like I typed almost the exact same suggestion. This way, I guess people who want to enjoy figure skating as a performance art can just enjoy the performances and those who want to keep track of the scores and standings can get the information at one go. If it was done this way, they can show more information about the scores for each skater and allow you to compare across different skaters as well, like the breakdown of the PCS.

 

[Raomina]

I think that would raise a lot of conspiracy theories. Imagine seeing that one skater is 1st or 2nd for a while, then there is a warm up of another group and suddenly the order drastically changes...people would believe that the judges wanted to push their favourites and that they robbed some skaters. I think it is hard enough for some people to accept the results even now, but if the results could change and one could lose even perhaps five points and move a few places down whereas others would move up, it would cause outcry.

I was thinking that they don't show any scores at all, and the skaters just perform one after another like in the gala. They then show all the scores at once after the group.

 

[hanca]

I was thinking that they don't show any scores at all, and the skaters just perform one after another like in the gala. They then show all the scores at once after the group.

Well, personally I prefer to see the scores after every skater. In gymnastics there is also a lot of time spent waiting for scores. And in some other sports too. I don't find it so unusual.

 

[Raomina]

Well, personally I prefer to see the scores after every skater. In gymnastics there is also a lot of time spent waiting for scores. And in some other sports too. I don't find it so unusual.

Yea, it's definitely not unusual and I don't remember minding it too much when I was watching live at Boston, but some people seem to have a problem with the length of the events. I also forgot that the next skater usually warms up while the scores are being reviewed, so that wait between skaters might be inevitable.

 

[gkelly]

Well, they wouldn't have as much time to warm up after the previous skaters if the scores were announced almost immediately, or not at all (closed marking).

The ice is empty during the wait, so they make use of it. They didn't and don't at competitions where the wait is much shorter.

 

[Khoai]

Tivi can just decide how many skaters they want to show. Let the rest perform their programs.

 

[hanca]

Yea, it's definitely not unusual and I don't remember minding it too much when I was watching live at Boston, but some people seem to have a problem with the length of the events.

We'll, what about those people who struggle with the length of the event coming only watch last two groups of skaters? No need to spoil it for everyone only because of some individuals with a short attention span.

 

[puremagic]

Unfortunately, not each skater can show a masterpiece. But when you see it - time goes on so fast that you probably will say why soooo fast? So it worth to watch boring long programs to see next the fleeting breathtaking masterpiece!

 

[Ares]

No, it's not too long unless I find some skaters boring - I dislike proposals encouraging shorter programs. Events take some time and there's hardly any way to reduce that unless you want less participants in competition which ISU did for SP at least. As for TV ... well they
hardly bother to show more than 2 groups of skaters already. Judging and simultaneous warm-up takes few minutes but I like watching them and listening to how commentators see things so even if there was a way to speed up (I can't see how it could be shorter without harm for accuracy) this process I'd not like it. I pity judges though that have to sit through and keep focus for so long though and it can skew their perception because of fatigue.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

It's not that big of a deal to me honestly.....I've just stopped watching the FS event altogether. I'll maybe watch one or two programs from an event that people seem to discuss. It's just far too time consuming for me. I love the SP's though and it's not because I prefer shorter programs but if I watch an event I want to see how the whole thing unfolds. Things like...how the judges scores compare from first to last group, finding some skater I've never heard of, what the Zambonies look like, all the different music, but most important to me is just seeing it all unfold because scores don't always make sense if you just watch one program from an event. The starting order and the success of the skaters can play a tremendous impact on how the event unfolds and is scored. I think by just selecting a few random skates to watch on YouTube really understates the mood of an event and ultimately understand certain aspects of the scoring,

Oh well.... I'm glad that so many of you have the time and patience for four hour events multiplied several times for multiple disciplines. I'm sort of Jealous TBH because even if if I have the time I don't think I would do it anyway

 

[gkelly]

Well, short programs take almost as long -- especially for junior ladies where there's only 40 seconds difference in the program length.

And at ISU championships and Olympics the short programs take longer because there are more than 24 skaters in the SP and only 24 in the free skate.

And for those who mainly want to watch the best skaters, the seeding for the FS usually makes that easier.

I also prefer to watch a whole event unfold and would rather watch all SPs in order than just a few FS . . . or vice versa.
But I usually don't have time to watch everything. So for the JPGs I've been watching at least one program from one discipline per week, sometimes two, rarely three, and switching off between short and free. Sometimes I'll watch all SPs and then search youtube for FS of interest after the fact, or vice versa.

Of course if I had taken time off and bought a ticket to attend an event in person, watching as much as possible would be my top priority over anything else that might be distracting in my real life. At home on video, not so much.

 

[hanca]

It's not that big of a deal to me honestly.....I've just stopped watching the FS event altogether. I'll maybe watch one or two programs from an event that people seem to discuss. It's just far too time consuming for me. I love the SP's though and it's not because I prefer shorter programs but if I watch an event I want to see how the whole thing unfolds. Things like...how the judges scores compare from first to last group, finding some skater I've never heard of, what the Zambonies look like, all the different music, but most important to me is just seeing it all unfold because scores don't always make sense if you just watch one program from an event. The starting order and the success of the skaters can play a tremendous impact on how the event unfolds and is scored. I think by just selecting a few random skates to watch on YouTube really understates the mood of an event and ultimately understand certain aspects of the scoring,

Oh well.... I'm glad that so many of you have the time and patience for four hour events multiplied several times for multiple disciplines. I'm sort of Jealous TBH because even if if I have the time I don't think I would do it anyway

ETA: Sorry, wrong thread