2016 Rostelecom Cup Free Dance

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Because the judges are supposed to hand out levels and not actually judge what happened on the ice? You're taking this to a whole new level. It makes me question how much you actually know about ID.

How much I know? You're the one who said they got the same levels in the SD and that C/B lost the FD due to not getting their levels when they got all level 4 except 1 (which was still the highest levels of the field and way higher than V/M).

I'm not saying the levels weren't correct but if there truly was obvious home advantage, you would imagine there would be less of a technical discrepancy whereby C/B get two level 3s and V/M get seven level 3s. Bear in mind that tech specialists are also making subjective calls when determining levels - and it's especially dubious in ice dance when it's wayyy harder to ascertain levels.

 

[coldblueeyes]

How much I know? You're the one who said they got the same levels in the SD and that C/B lost the FD due to not getting their levels when they got all level 4 except 1 (which was still the highest levels of the field and way higher than V/M).

I'm not saying the levels weren't correct but if there truly was obvious home advantage, you would imagine there would be less of a technical discrepancy whereby C/B get two level 3s and V/M get seven level 3s. Bear in mind that tech specialists are also making subjective calls when determining levels - and it's especially dubious in ice dance when it's wayyy harder to ascertain levels.

I was talking about C/B losing in Russia for not getting their levels. In Canada they lost because V/M got better PCS.

 

[Astrid56]

And where even does this come from?? I'm hard pressed to think any of the top teams would agree to lose points by settling for a lesser level step sequence, or a lift level three or a spin level two, anything that's not level four. The technical panel calls the levels on the ice during the competition. If a team cleans all the turns and edges, rotations, keypoints they are going to get a level four, if not, the level is reduced.

Here's my source: http://www.usfigureskating.org/story?id=84064 (I couldn't locate ISU ruling but this basically tells it as it is).

The technical panel is generally made up of five persons: technical specialist, assistant technical specialist, technical controller, data operator and video replay operator. This panel works in direct communication with each other as each skater performs a program. In real time as the skater performs, the technical specialist identifies the elements the skater performs. For example, for spins, they identify the type of spin and the level of difficulty of that element based on published pre-set criteria. The work of the technical specialist allows the judges to concentrate on marking the quality of each element.

It's impossible for these judges to concentrate on marking the quality of the element's levels if the elements and levels have not been identified before the performance and given preset base scores. In that ISU ruling, it is made clear that the coaches have been informed - maybe not before the team and coach decide and choose the elements (training stage) but before the competition, they are apprised of the level of each element being judged. The only portion of the program that is left entirely to the mercy of the judges is the PCS (used 'mercy' as I hope for fair treatment). At least with the Technical Scores, the participants have a quantifiable base to judge/compare the quality of execution and grades on based on predetermined levels. About the PCS - they can only hope for the best - judges' perspectives adequately align with theirs.

 

[Mrs. P]

So...just want to say I like Weaver and Poje's FD. Some nice lifts and different for them ,but still makes good use of their strengths.

 

[Astrid56]

Yeah, I actually like W/P's FD. I think this much softer look highlights their strengths and it clearly shows coaches' differences in styles. Their previous FDs mirrored Angelica's competitions' FD - angsty, kinda hard-edged (in a somewhat melodramatic way).

 

[coldblueeyes]

Here's my source: http://www.usfigureskating.org/story?id=84064 (I couldn't locate ISU ruling but this basically tells it as it is).


It's impossible for these judges to concentrate on marking the quality if the levels have not been identified before the performance and given preset base scores. In that ISU ruling, it is made clear that the coaches have been informed - maybe not before the team and coach decide and choose the elements (training stage) but before the competition, they are apprised of the level of each element being judged. The only portion of the program that is left entirely to the mercy of the judges is the PCS (used 'mercy' as I hope for fair treatment). At least with the Technical Scores, the participants have a quantifiable base to judge/compare execution levels and quality, with the PCS - they can only hope for the best - judges' perspectives adequately align with theirs.

It's said right there that the technical panel - separate entity from the judges - call the levels in real time. The work of the judges is just to award GOEs. Levels are not called prior to the competition, otherwise there's no sense in even competing. The same step sequence can be awarded a level two or level four, level one even, it just depends on how it's executed, and it doesn't matter if the step sequence is one level or the other, the quality of the skating is what the judges value. It's the same with single skaters or pairs earning more points in GOE than others competing with a higher base value.

The pre-set criteria are the 'bullet points' each team needs to check to get those levels, not that they are set prior to the competition. It's one of the reasons judging something after the competition ended is easier, we can review elements a thousand times and dissect everything about them.

 

[Sugarpova]

Lol @ hypocrisy continues

Nothing changed from yesterday
Idk how sneakers & other ppl have the patience to argue

 

[rosy14]

Tessa at SC type mistake on the Twizzles for Bates. I hope Poje wasn't watching. Like the falls in Turino these things spread.

Bates's mistake is much more evident and serious (for score and placement)

 

[rosy14]

Chock/Bates make so many errors.............but they usually get away with it.

Unless the errors are too evident to be overseen by the judges. It happened last year at Cup of China and two years ago at GPF. Otherwise no one seems to recognise them.

 

[Astrid56]

The pre-set criteria are the 'bullet points' each team needs to check to get those levels, not that they are set prior to the competition. It's one of the reasons judging something after the competition ended is easier, we can review elements a thousand times and dissect everything about them.

You hit the nail on its head - yes, pre-set _ with the time alloted or allowed for judging, they _ the judges_ have to know what they are grading and on what level as the grades given have pre-set values. Are they going to give an element of a +3 or -3? The grade matters where point values are concerned. For example, an STw3 has a base value of 5.6 whereas STw2 has only 4.6 so a +3 can elevate the execution grade by 1.8 effectively elevating the level resulting in a score of 6.4 _ a level 3, not quite level 4. In Skate Canada, C/B's level for their Twizzle was assigned a level 4, in COR after the mishap was reduced to a level 2 _ effectively losing .57 even from that adjusted level (base value for STw2 is 4.60). Evan was heavily penalized and rightly so but surprisingly not in PCS,. In Skate Canada, they technically were great and the PCS should have registered a better score but in here, they were not but PCS was great and despite the dismal twizzle, they deserved the PCS score. So one can say that bias in Skate Canada was blatant although in COR, home advantage still played a role. For instance, the SD scores for B/S and C/B should not have been that close but it was. Oh well! What can we say? We have to help the home team if it is reasonably OK, and it was OK - B/S's performance was OK though, comparably not as well as C/B's.

 

[rosy14]

You're right. I misread the score.

Still reeling over the PB for B/S and I'm a huge fan of theirs. But still. Oy veh.

This year every couple can reach higher points than previous years, because they have more features to do, both in SD and in FD. Hence the scores of this year cannot be compared to those previous ones, if of course they skate clean.

 

[coldblueeyes]

You hit the nail on its head - yes, pre-set _ with the time alloted or allowed for judging, they _ the judges_ have to know what they are grading and on what level as the grades given have pre-set values. Are they going to give an element of a +3 or -3? The grade matters where point values are concerned. For example, an STw3 has a base value of 5.6 whereas STw2 has only 4.6 so a +3 can elevate the execution grade by 1.8 effectively elevating the level resulting in a score of 6.4 _ a level 3, not quite level 4.

Well, if the judges want to help someone with the GOE, they do that with an agenda. The judges's only job is to award points for the quality of the elements skated, while the technical panel's only job is to award the levels for the elements, that will automatically add up with the GOE. With their experience, the judge probably knows what level an element will get, but they don't scrutinize it as hard as the tech panel - it's not their job, that's why everything is done live in competition. The judges might watch the skaters in training, but a lot of them don't even execute the entire programs in official practice, which would go against the idea of called levels prior to the competition.

And this is why I think all this cry about homecooking, in this case in particular, sounds jarring to my ears. Both teams executed their dance really well in the SD, and got the same BV, with C/B getting more GOE, and B/S more PCS points - which kind of goes against the idea of the entire panel of judges inflating only one of the scores.

In the FD, however, C/B had two points less in BV, and they lost GOE too. Even W/P that had the same BV that B/S had lost on GOE because of the twizzles. You can say that B/S were helped in the PCS in this segment, but they didn't have any major problems in their elements.

 

[Tallorder]

the levels are settled or agreed upon by both the technical panel and coaches before the performance takes place and evaluated during the performance as expressed in GEO adjustments.

Could you please explain how you came up with this statement?

 

[Astrid56]

Bates's mistake is much more evident and serious (for score and placement)

Yeah, it was serious - he didn't complete the 1st Twizzle and that effectively reduced the level of that element. If that was just a bobble, the grade of execution would be lessened by maybe a half point but not completing it would reduce the level and it was indeed downgraded to level 2. One judge did not score it at all which was good but the rest gave them either a -1 or -2. One judge gave them a +1 but that was dropped because the high and low gets drop in the calculation.

 

[slider11]

Chock and Bates (Evan specifically) stumbled through the first third of his twizzles. One judge gave the GoE as 0, another as +1. And neither was American! To me, this is just an example of poor judging. Either they missed the first part of the twizzle or think the remainder of the twizzle made up for the beginning. The 0 is suspect but the +1 just wrong. The US judge gave it a -1. -1 or -2 seems accurate. I get it that the level 2 was the ultimate "penalty" but you can't stumble through a twizzle and get an above average execution.

 

[CAS]

Here's my source: http://www.usfigureskating.org/story?id=84064 (I couldn't locate ISU ruling but this basically tells it as it is).


It's impossible for these judges to concentrate on marking the quality of the element's levels if the elements and levels have not been identified before the performance and given preset base scores. In that ISU ruling, it is made clear that the coaches have been informed - maybe not before the team and coach decide and choose the elements (training stage) but before the competition, they are apprised of the level of each element being judged. The only portion of the program that is left entirely to the mercy of the judges is the PCS (used 'mercy' as I hope for fair treatment). At least with the Technical Scores, the participants have a quantifiable base to judge/compare the quality of execution and grades on based on predetermined levels. About the PCS - they can only hope for the best - judges' perspectives adequately align with theirs.

I keep having to look at the thread title to be sure I am in CoR thread but this needs to be quoted again so that anyone else who thinks this is how it works is set straight. This is completely inaccurate.

Competitors/their coach or their fed (whoever assumes the responsibility for this work) sends in their Planned Program Content for any given competition. Here is a sample of what that might look like:
http://skatecanada.ns.ca/wp-content...stic-Skating-Events-Planned-Program-Sheet.pdf
These are entered into the computer prior to the competition by, for example, data entry person.
At ISU competitions, at least, the tech panel is required to attend official practices. These Planned Program Content sheets have been printed out for them ahead of time and they identify and verify the order of the elements AND check their levels in practice. It has happened that a skater and their team believe they created a L4 lift to discover later the panel disagreed but they don't go looking for the coach and tell them "look this is only a L2, do you agree?". It's something they find out when they get their protocols after competition. Most times lost levels are because of execution during competition because at this level everyone is aiming for L4. Sometimes you find out what you thought would pass won't (different interpretation of rules) and you will be informed of that after a competition.

As for the judges. They also may have a printout of the Planned Program Content. Some use them to write notes on, helps them in round table discussions remember why they did what they did because when you have a lot of skaters you can forget specifics afterwards. Some have their own shorthand/symbols they use so they know what it means when they go back to look at their sheets and they aren't distracted from watching the program too much by trying to write out full words. As each element is performed and once the tech panel has called out the element and level and it is entered into the computer by data entry it shows up on the judges screen and they assign GOE and PCS by pushing the appropriate button on the touchscreen.

This post is long enough but it's important, I think, to fix misconceptions about how this works and what you wrote and believe is not the way this works at all.

Now as to Rostelcom FD. The only FD I had yet to see was by W/P. A bit disappointed by both programs by them and I think a big part of it is I feel Morozov is using the strategy he used with I&K on them. Choreography aside I didn't feel the connect between the lifts and whatever story they are trying to tell and while I don't think I'd put W/P high on my list of fave lifts I think previously all their lifts had more of a purpose. In these programs their lifts say to me "here is my difficult entry, here is my change of position, here is my difficult and unexpected exit" similar to lifts by many Russian teams (Bobrova Soloviev, imo, have good lifts ) I hop it gets better for them and maybe they spent so much time on the new SD that they neglected the feeling and purpose in the FD because I'd hate to see them really slip but at this point my gut feeling is they are in danger. This is a team that with Krylova had programs with lots of content, transitions, difficult holds and passion and at this stage Morozov has really stripped them bare. And not in a good way that Montreal has done with V&M.

 

[Mrs. P]

Now as to Rostelcom FD. The only FD I had yet to see was by W/P. A bit disappointed by both programs by them and I think a big part of it is I feel Morozov is using the strategy he used with I&K on them. Choreography aside I didn't feel the connect between the lifts and whatever story they are trying to tell and while I don't think I'd put W/P high on my list of fave lifts I think previously all their lifts had more of a purpose. In these programs their lifts say to me "here is my difficult entry, here is my change of position, here is my difficult and unexpected exit" similar to lifts by many Russian teams (Bobrova Soloviev, imo, have good lifts ) I hop it gets better for them and maybe they spent so much time on the new SD that they neglected the feeling and purpose in the FD because I'd hate to see them really slip but at this point my gut feeling is they are in danger. This is a team that with Krylova had programs with lots of content, transitions, difficult holds and passion and at this stage Morozov has really stripped them bare. And not in a good way that Montreal has done with V&M.

I do agree I missed the closed holds I saw from them last year. Surely, there's a happy medium between bare open programs and closed hold programs that are difficult to execute.

 

[rosy14]

Why C/L 4th at NHK? Maybe H/B or S/K stronger than them? I don't think so...

Assuming S/K are there. It seems Katsalapov is injured.

 

[MidnightSkater]

What do you mean home cooking? It's not like they beat their personal best FD by 4 points, and overall total personal best by 8 points.

"There is no home cooking in Russia." No, none at all.

It's only home cooking when it's in Russia then ?. Coz Skate Canada last week was some of the worst biased home judging I had seen in years.

 

[rosy14]

There's a difference when a historically second tier skater who has never really had a great skate smashes their personal best or they had a great skate before judges started giving higher GOE/PCS (as is the case with Osmond).

Both Osmond at SC and B/S at RC are home inflation - but it seems people are unwilling to admit the latter (even though it's laughably obvious) simply because they love to rail on North American teams and events while thinking Russia (I mean, Russia - of all places!) isn't prone to favourable judging that benefits their own.

I think each country makes its home cooking, sometimes in a better, sometimes in a worse way. And furthermore there are "agreements" between judges. And the coach's name means a lot too( i.e. Shpilband, but non only him).
So some couples are always overscored, anywhere and anytime they skate (Chock Bates, Papadakis Cizeron), others are often, or have been often, underscored (Weaver Poje, Shibutanis, Gilles Poirier). That's my thought, of course, but the more I follow ice dancing in these years, the more I'm convinced of that.
In the other disciplines things are a little fairer.