PCS/Reputation Judging

Globetrotter said:

I like your proposal. As TR out of elements are part of positive GOEs, it does make sense to reward skaters there and I love the proposal of judges checking off GOE bullets. It will make things way more transparent and hold accountability in a more public fashion. As FS is technically a sport, I will say keep the TES and GOEs as you propose and keep the two more subjective elements, say SS and PE. Have PE just encompass the whole package of interpretive skills and choreo. Perhaps just set both on a grade of say 10 each. Those two scores can add to the TES and GOEs for a final score. Of course I am not saying the implementation is easy (e.g. Time spent to check bullet point boxes) and some factoring will be needed to ensure that SS and PE becoming relatively more important to ladies as their TES are lower. But it's a start.

Click to expand...

Well, time to check bullets - there are not so many bullets, and it does not take sooo long to check some boxes out of 6 for a jump GOE, for example.
I believe the score should be as clear as possible, so the skater, the audience and the feds and coaches know what boxes were checked for each jump, for example. This would allow contesting scores - because anyone could come and say "hey, you guys checked this box here, but it does not really apply".

I would also try to make the bullets as objective as possible. Such thing as "creative" dont really belong in TES, because you can use it for anything.

Blades of Passion said:

It constantly is. Judges in the past always gave an overall "presentation" score that included the artistry of the skater. This mark, the "PCS", was specifically called "artistic impression" during the 1990's. As for as other forms of judging art in the world, you can also look at film reviews and see how critics assign a score to movies, trying to approximate their overall feeling of the worth, success, and artistic merit of a film. This can also be seen in how awards are given out for novels, painting, theatre, etc - a statement of people comparing and contrasting art, trying to approximately rank and assess the quality of each work.

Click to expand...

Maybe in the past, aka 6.0 system. And that was wrong because you cant objectively judge art like that. That kind of judging is prone to mistakes because its include your own attitides, prejudices and unrelated observations of reallity. And it does not suppose to be a part of Olympic sports by the way those sports are defined... Beacuse of that, COP system is different and doesnt include pretensions to judge art... edit: and your example with movies review is not what i asked - 1) movie is not an olympic sport 2) 'judging' there is different.. actually that is not judging by measurment, but descriptions... And im not saying that there is no ART in figure skating, just that art itself is not a part of scoring system

Jackie Wong did a great analysis of just this issue

http://www.rockerskating.com/news/2...k-trophy-all-components-are-not-created-equal

JustMe said:

And elimination of judges' nationality? Not sure what that means, lol.

Click to expand...

RD means that figure skating judges should be appointed directly by the ISU (like the tech panel is) instead of by their National Federations. Not a bad idea actually, but I don't think it can be done within the current framework of the ISU as a confederation of national federations.

moriel said:

Transitions should be incorporated into TES, and skating skill, i suppose, into GOE.

Click to expand...

To me, the beauty of the current IJS is the division into the Element scores -- so much for a triple Lutz, so much for a flying combination spin -- and the Program scores that you get for doing good stuff continuously throughout the program. The part of the "full skating vocabulary" that is currently classified under Skating Skills and Transitions is not anything that is attached to one particular technical element or another.

GGFan said:

ETA: 3) There is also a valid argument about all of the PCS categories being scored together as one. Several posters have made it. My opinion is that there are too many PCS categories, while others feel differently, but again this has very little to do with Kostner's scoring in particular.

Click to expand...

I think there should be two PCS categories. SS and TR are part of the tech side -- the sport side if you will. They could be combined into one score (called, imaginatively, Skating Skills and Transitions). It would be worth 25% of the total. The the other three could be combined into one, called Artistic Impression -- NO, NO, JUST KIDDING. It would be called Presentation.

That would give 75% sport and 25% art. That ought to satisfy everybody.

Let's not dance around this issue: PCS has nothing to do with falls or popped jumps; that is, as the rules are currently written. If a fall or popped jump causes a noticeable disruption, then yes, the judges will mark lower overall (like with Pogo's Skate Canada free), but apart from that, the judges don't consider them for deductions that much - maybe a .25 loss in components and that's about it. As far as they are concerned, the mandatory 1-point deduction covers the fall.

Now, whether or not popped jumps and falls should factor more significantly in PCS is a different story.

I've seen a lot of people here comment that Kostner is overscored, but somehow they don't mention Medvedeva at the same competition. If Kostner was overscored in PCS for a pop and a fall, then Medvedeva was also overscored with a fall and a turn-out. To the judges, Kostner has better components than Medvedeva if they're skating on an equal playing field, so when they gave Med a 74 in PCS they gave Kostner a 75. Even I was surprised since Kostner was given a 73 PCS at Rostelecom for a much cleaner performance, but the judges marked themselves into a corner. You might even want to chalk this up to just Olympic season inflation.

The other point is whether people think that technical mistakes necessarily mean a drop in PCS. Does Kostner falling on the triple salchow part of the combo mean that she had worse transitions, worse choreography, worse interpretation, and worse skating skills? Not as great of a performance, I agree, but by the way the guidelines for the components are concerned, the Performance is the only component that should be lowered.

Another thing is whether the skating audience knows how to judge PCS in the first place. From what I see in comments, some here and some on Youtube, I would say that a certain portion simply say that the skater he or she personally likes should deserve more PCS and then blame the other side for being nonsense (you're just a Canadian fan so you like Osmond, or all you like are Russian skaters, or whatever). I have no idea whether viewers look at timing, the difficulty of the turns, the ice coverage, the speed, the closeness of holds (ice dance and pairs), edge quality, intention, body line, etc. I think more people here (I mean, this IS a figure skating forum) consider these more of these aspects as longtime fans who are knowledgeable or even skaters/judges themselves, but there's always a helping of confirmation bias and fandom thrown in.

There are many solutions to this problem, though I would just focus on the TES instead of the PCS for now. I would just say to increase the penalty for mistakes in the technical mark. A fall on an element should nix anywhere from 50-75% its base value through GOEs.

temadd said:

Jackie Wong did a great analysis of just this issue

http://www.rockerskating.com/news/2...k-trophy-all-components-are-not-created-equal

Click to expand...

Great work by Wong. He hit on all the major points clearly and concisely.

draqq said:

Another thing is whether the skating audience knows how to judge PCS in the first place... I have no idea whether viewers look at timing, the difficulty of the turns, the ice coverage, the speed, the closeness of holds (ice dance and pairs), edge quality, intention, body line, etc. .

Click to expand...

I think it is safe to say that even people who enjoy figure figure skating as a spectator sport and have seen a lot of it, have not the foggiest what any of these things means. I know I don't. (Well, I know what speed means, but I can't judge it on TV) What is "timing" in ice dance? What is "intention"?

"Physical, emotional and intellectual commitment," on the other hand -- now you're talking!

moriel said:

I think there was some sort of misunderstanding =)
I disagree with your " People are so desperate for some real unfettered skating that Carolina is being held up as a symbol". Many people arent - many people find her programs boring and are not at all desperate for more of that.

Click to expand...

Yes many people find her current programs boring, that's exactly the point I was making. Her skating is not at the level of the most impactful performances/programs in the history of skating, but people see her as someone who is at least trying to keep some of the qualities alive that would create a more "transcendent" level of skating. Carolina's skating is not achieving this level of transcendence, but the judges are rewarding her for trying, for showing glimpses of a higher level of refinement.

moriel said:

As for all the artistry pushing, I am still waiting for ISU to actually make a study of what people want from figure skating, and what it would take to actually make more people watch figure skating.

Click to expand...

It's not much different than what draws people to other forms of performance/visual art. People want emotion (which includes "fun"), or something that transports them, or something that makes a meaningful statement, something that engages the senses and brain in a heightened way.

Blades of Passion said:

Yes many people find her current programs boring, that's exactly the point I was making. Her skating is not at the level of the most impactful performances/programs in the history of skating, but people see her as someone who is at least trying to keep some of the qualities alive that would create a more "transcendent" level of skating. Carolina's skating is not achieving this level of transcendence, but the judges are rewarding her for trying, for showing glimpses of a higher level of refinement.



It's not much different than what draws people to other forms of performance/visual art. People want emotion (which includes "fun"), or something that transports them, or something that makes a meaningful statement, something that engages the senses and brain in a heightened way.

Click to expand...

I think the problem with Caro's programs is that there is a lot of stalking the jumps - 10 years ago that would have been acceptable.

We have gotten so used the programs under the IJS that reward linking steps and I do think it adds to the excitement and interest of the program.

moriel said:

Well, time to check bullets - there are not so many bullets, and it does not take sooo long to check some boxes out of 6 for a jump GOE, for example.
I believe the score should be as clear as possible, so the skater, the audience and the feds and coaches know what boxes were checked for each jump, for example. This would allow contesting scores - because anyone could come and say "hey, you guys checked this box here, but it does not really apply".

I would also try to make the bullets as objective as possible. Such thing as "creative" dont really belong in TES, because you can use it for anything.

Click to expand...

Actually, it's not so simple. You are only taking into account what constitutes the positive aspects of GOEs and not the negative. GOE combines positive and negative aspects of the element and there are a lot of negative aspects for judges to consider as well. Some of the deductions are also subjective, and judges can give a range of deductions for under-rotations, step outs etc.

temadd said:

Jackie Wong did a great analysis of just this issue

http://www.rockerskating.com/news/2...k-trophy-all-components-are-not-created-equal

Click to expand...

sorry i stopped reading after he claimed that "high quality crossovers" (whatever those are) should be rewarded as difficult transitions LMAO

Every skater does crossovers and the quality varies significantly; they are absolutely part of judging the components. You've belly flopped with that attempted shade.

Blades of Passion said:

Every skater does crossovers and the quality varies significantly; they are absolutely part of judging the components. You've belly flopped with that attempted shade.

Click to expand...

I could be wrong but I see crossover quality as part of SS but not transitions

If we get rid of all the performance aspects of skating and just make it a stroke to each element sport, it'll have the same appeal as those niche winter sports that might get showcased once in a while during the Olympics except regular people will find skaters rotating in the air 3 or 4 times without much else to be a lot more boring than aerials or free-style snowboarding. Maybe if figure skating changes to the ice version of free style in-line skating then it'll be more fun to watch and we know what a premier sport freestyle inline skating is...

Blades of Passion said:

Every skater does crossovers and the quality varies significantly; they are absolutely part of judging the components. You've belly flopped with that attempted shade.

Click to expand...

Absolutely true. There really are differences in the quality of crossovers, and I think people (mainly online fans) are surprised when they are considered when evaluating PCS. Some crossovers are preferable to the meaningless and often crudely done transitions that are only there to check some boxes for GOE. It’s like Debbie Allen and her school of over-choreographed ugly dances taught the judges.

Well, I think PCS should reflect the skating quality. There are some huge differences in terms of this. When it comes to skaters like Lambiel, Mao, Virtue/Moir, Sui/Han etc I can enjoy a program even with 3 falls. I agree that the emotion, the way you feel the skating is subjective. But there is something that in the end can be judged. Something which makes me agree that Patrick Chan or Carolina Kostner are special, even if I'm not a fan of them.

To me this is way more interesting than crossovers and I’d boost a skaters PCS most certainly for such an entrance into a jump. At least more than I would for crossovers or extended gliding in. I’m talking Skating Skills, Transition, Performance, Choreography, and maybe Interpretation of the Music if in fact it highlights the music. Especially the little dude in white skates!!

https://instagram.com/p/BbHK7yaB5Tn/

I’d never consider awarding crossovers to the same degree or most likely not at all.

I think PCS should remain, but skaters that don´t have at least one successful quad and two good triple axels in the freeskate should not get real high PCS. PCS should depend on technical content more than today, IMO. I like artistry and I think that many top skaters have both and good programs.

Raomina said:

Actually, it's not so simple. You are only taking into account what constitutes the positive aspects of GOEs and not the negative. GOE combines positive and negative aspects of the element and there are a lot of negative aspects for judges to consider as well. Some of the deductions are also subjective, and judges can give a range of deductions for under-rotations, step outs etc.

Click to expand...

Well, negative aspects can be added as easily.
In fact, I would change some of the bullets, such as flow in and out, and also height and distance, to a scale instead of a checkpoint, so the judge needs to pick one of bad/average/good, for example, where bad subtracts 1 point and good adds one point.
Deductions for URs, stepouts, falls and so on should not be done by judges. They should be computed automatically by the system based on the tech panel evaluation.

As for subjective deductions, there should not be such when evaluating *technical* aspects of skating.

UpNorth said:

So say Kostner falls/pops several jumps, while one of the Japanese/SK/US girls has a great program. It seems like that wouldn't matter. Kostner would receive such a ridiculously high PCS that she is untouchable, even with errors.

Click to expand...

The tragedy is not that Carolina receives strong PCS for absolutely gorgeous skating. The tragedy is that Mao did not receive the same for her Madame Butterfly in 2016. More ladies should work for what those two bring to the ice, IMO.