PCS/Reputation Judging | Page 4 | Golden Skate

PCS/Reputation Judging

moriel

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 18, 2015
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.

This.
Which basically means that it is not like "True artistry is rewarded with high PCs", but "some selected skaters get top PCs whatever they do".

While I´m more sport person, I could live with the "PCs reward artistry" thing. But its not really, because Mao was not getting 75 PCs for a program with 4 triples. Mao was not getting random +2/+3 on all her elements just because she is Mao.
 

Miller

Final Flight
Joined
Dec 29, 2016
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.

I wonder if this is something to do with the talk of separate artistic and technical programs which has only just been put forward this season. Are the judges trying to put some sort of statement forward e.g. with Carolina's scores? My gut feel this season is that PCS scores are on the low side e.g. Cup of China, and that Carolina's scores are only trying to emphasise this.
 

charlotte14

Medalist
Joined
Aug 16, 2017
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.
But honestly, I would rather watch complex set of footwork than almost 70 crossovers in a free skate. I mean come on...
Most men do around 40 crossovers in their free skate. It is ok. But like 70? Nope. I am not preferring that.
 

draqq

FigureSkatingPhenom
Record Breaker
Joined
May 10, 2010
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! :)

Intention is pretty much the commitment you defined. It's whether the skater(s) move "like they mean it". For instance, Adam Rippon's free at NHK is full of intention. When he moves his head, or arm, or leg, he means to put it there for an effect. Hanyu's Seimei and Chopin programs also have a lot of intention, with plenty of movements that are timed and held to the music. When we say that a skater is just going through the choreography, it describes the opposite, that the skater is just "moving for the sake of moving".

Timing is just whether the skaters moved to the beat of the music and phrased their choreography to the music with precision. For instance, a cha-cha has that 1-2-3-and-4 rhythm, and skaters who can hit those 3-and-4 beats clearly have better timing. So if a piece of music has a pronounced beat (particularly electronic music), seeing the skater emphasize that beat is rewarded more since it's much more difficult to do than just skating through the beat.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
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.

I think there are two perspectives to consider: figure skating as a spectator sport and figure skating as a participatory and recreational sport. The goal of a spectator sport is to please the audience. Without the performance art aspect, figure skating is "just another sport" -- and not a very popular one at that.

But on the participatory side as well, many young people (and also adult and recreational skaters) are attracted to the performance, artistic and self-expression characteristics of skating. Skaters enjoy performing choreography, skating to music, and creating beautiful looks on the ice. Without this, skating would disappear altogether.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Intention is pretty much the commitment you defined. It's whether the skater(s) move "like they mean it". For instance, Adam Rippon's free at NHK is full of intention. When he moves his head, or arm, or leg, he means to put it there for an effect. Hanyu's Seimei and Chopin programs also have a lot of intention, with plenty of movements that are timed and held to the music. When we say that a skater is just going through the choreography, it describes the opposite, that the skater is just "moving for the sake of moving".

Timing is just whether the skaters moved to the beat of the music and phrased their choreography to the music with precision. For instance, a cha-cha has that 1-2-3-and-4 rhythm, and skaters who can hit those 3-and-4 beats clearly have better timing. So if a piece of music has a pronounced beat (particularly electronic music), seeing the skater emphasize that beat is rewarded more since it's much more difficult to do than just skating through the beat.

Thank you for the reply.

This is why I never get too flustered about the judging of some of these criteria. One judge will think that Adam Rippon's head movements are full of intent and commitment; another judge will think he is just moving his head.

For me, I am content if a performance pleases the eye and satisfies the emotions. (Reason number 483 why I am not a figure skating judge. :) )
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I could be wrong but I see crossover quality as part of SS but not transitions

Exactly.

Quality of crossovers is absolutely something important that gets evaluated in PCS -- in the Skating Skills component. They are not difficult transitions.

Intention is pretty much the commitment you defined. It's whether the skater(s) move "like they mean it". For instance, Adam Rippon's free at NHK is full of intention. When he moves his head, or arm, or leg, he means to put it there for an effect. Hanyu's Seimei and Chopin programs also have a lot of intention, with plenty of movements that are timed and held to the music. When we say that a skater is just going through the choreography, it describes the opposite, that the skater is just "moving for the sake of moving".

Yup.

Timing is just whether the skaters moved to the beat of the music and phrased their choreography to the music with precision. For instance, a cha-cha has that 1-2-3-and-4 rhythm, and skaters who can hit those 3-and-4 beats clearly have better timing. So if a piece of music has a pronounced beat (particularly electronic music), seeing the skater emphasize that beat is rewarded more since it's much more difficult to do than just skating through the beat.

Yes. "Timing" is primarily relevant to ice dance. And it's even more relevant to the pattern dances specifically, where every step has a very precise timing. If you're doing the pattern dance part of the short dance, or at lower levels a pattern dance on its own, and you hit a step on count 2 or 4 that's supposed to happen on count 3, that's a real error, not just a difference in interpretation.

I think there are two perspectives to consider: figure skating as a spectator sport and figure skating as a participatory and recreational sport. The goal of a spectator sport is to please the audience. Without the performance art aspect, figure skating is "just another sport" -- and not a very popular one at that.

But on the participatory side as well, many young people (and also adult and recreational skaters) are attracted to the performance, artistic and self-expression characteristics of skating. Skaters enjoy performing choreography, skating to music, and creating beautiful looks on the ice. Without this, skating would disappear altogether.

Some skaters are mostly in it for the choreography, music, and creating beautiful looks. If that's not part of the sport, those skaters would find something else to do. Unless they also really enjoy the feeling of gliding while they dance and look beautiful and would rather dance on ice without having a place to compete than find a different musical beautiful activity that doesn't involve gliding at speed.

And really, if they hate the athletic side and just want to focus on beauty and music interpretation, they're probably never going to be elite competitors.

Some skaters are mainly in it for the gliding, for the technical challenges, the feeling of flying when they jump, etc. If they love the feeling of athletic skating and executing technical tricks, they would keep doing it without the artistic side to competition. In fact, some might prefer to get rid of the foofy stuff and just concentrate on the athletics. So a version of competitive skating that was all about the jumps and spins and speed with no music or choreography or fancy costumes would still have some participants and might gain a few that avoid the sport now because they're daunted or turned off by the artistic side.

Some skaters love all of the above, the contradictions and the interactions between art and sport. Those skaters would love it less if the artistic aspects disappeared completely, but they wouldn't all walk away from the sport as long as it still contained some of what they love.
 

rabbit1234

On the Ice
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
http://news.livedoor.com/article/detail/13792591/
For reference, I will introduce the impression of Japan's kaori sakamoto after the ISU GP Rostelecom Cup 2017.

Kaori sakamoto competed against the top senior class, says skating of Costner (Italy) who was second to be overwhelmed especially. "The flow after getting off the jump was beautiful and the growth of skating was quite different."

I think that there is a reason for skating of Costner being evaluated.

Personally, I think that the definition and idea of PCS is not clear.
I do not know whether evaluation is made including the result of the element, whether it evaluates except the part affecting GOE of Elements and Elements.
If you evaluate PCS, including the success and failure of Elements, it will be evaluated in double and triple count.
On the contrary, If you exclude whether success is around the element and evaluate other time, I think that time will be extremely short. Because it is already evaluated by GOE including the part before and after the jump.

As for PCS, I think that the way of thinking and definition is not clear and it is confusing.

A certain competitor records his best PCS even after fall three times. However, on the other hand, some competitors are greatly reduced by fall.

If figure skating is part of art, I think that arrangement of music should be considered more. Arrangement of music by many figure skaters is too ugly. Strange music flows in the middle of Mozart's piano concerto, or when classical music performers listen, it is an arrangement that will frighten with too much awfulness.
 

David21

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
No, the judges ARE supposed to be judging art within the PCS. Not in skating skills of course, but in the other components.


Nope. Skating to the music is judged. Interpretation of the music is judged. Lines are judges. But art in itself is not judged.


This is definitely what's happening. People are so desperate for some real unfettered skating that Carolina is being held up as a symbol, even though her skating is not on the same level. She's just the closest to it and is being protected like an endangered species.


Kostner isn't held up in general. Her scores are mostly well deserved based on her skating quality.
 

David21

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
This.
Which basically means that it is not like "True artistry is rewarded with high PCs", but "some selected skaters get top PCs whatever they do".

While I´m more sport person, I could live with the "PCs reward artistry" thing. But its not really, because Mao was not getting 75 PCs for a program with 4 triples. Mao was not getting random +2/+3 on all her elements just because she is Mao.


Kostner wasn't competing with Mao in 2016 so you cannot compare these scores. And if I remember correctly Mao got often higher PCS than Kostner in the same competition which was debatable.
 

yume

🍉
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
Kostner wasn't competing with Mao in 2016 so you cannot compare these scores. And if I remember correctly Mao got often higher PCS than Kostner in the same competition which was debatable.

It did not happen often. Mostly in their last quad 2010-2014. Even with a disastrous skate, Kostner was above most of the time. Ex: 2014 worlds free skate.
 

David21

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
It did not happen often. Mostly in their last quad 2010-2014. Even with a disastrous skate, Kostner was above most of the time. Ex: 2014 worlds free skate.


Post 2010 Kostner mostly got higher PCS, yes. 2010 and before, it was Mao, and often by quite big margins.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Nope. Skating to the music is judged. Interpretation of the music is judged. Lines are judged. But art in itself is not judged.

I thonk you are using the word "art" too narrowly. To me, the criteria that you mentioned are part of the "performance art" aspect of skating.
 

ask

Match Penalty
Joined
Oct 20, 2017
Post 2010 Kostner mostly got higher PCS, yes. 2010 and before, it was Mao, and often by quite big margins.

And that should have never been the case. They should receive similar tier PCS, the difference should be small and should base on actual choreo, actual P/E of the day. Of course, Caro should always have a 1 point margin over Mao in SS.
She got the wrong end of the stick pre 2010 and right end post 2010. Mao, the reverse.
 

Baron Vladimir

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
I thonk you are using the word "art" too narrowly. To me, the criteria that you mentioned are part of the "performance art" aspect of skating.

I think he is right. Because it isnt who interpret music better what supposed to be judged, but who interpret music more throut the programme and with more commitment. Also, it isnt more beautiful/baletic lines what supposed to be judged, but using of whole body to create lines and creating of more different lines acording to the ice surface and music structure. Not beauty of performance, but who perform more etc etc. Im pretty sure that is what judges are judging. They are not judging if Caro or Mao skating is more gorgeous than others like someone mention before (thus Mao never got highest PCS -because its not gorgeousness, nor any other art category what is judged).
 

David21

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
And that should have never been the case. They should receive similar tier PCS, the difference should be small and should base on actual choreo, actual P/E of the day. Of course, Caro should always have a 1 point margin over Mao in SS.


Correct.

I think he is right. Because it isnt who interpret music better what supposed to be judged, but who interpret music more throut the programme and wirh more commitment.


Well, Mathman still has a point. It also comes down to how you define art. One could argue that the skater who shows more committment to the musical interpretation interprets the music better.
 

Baron Vladimir

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Well, Mathman still has a point. It also comes down to how you define art. One could argue that the skater who shows more committment to the musical interpretation interprets the music better.
Yeah, im not saying he is wrong. But i would use word performance, instead of art to describe that. Cause art include some more aestetic categories than perfomance itself. The one who show more committment will interpret more than the one who can interpret aesteticlly better but interpret just a little part of the programme...and the first one will probably get higher marks. That was my point.
 

Sam-Skwantch

“I solemnly swear I’m up to no good”
Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Country
United-States
I think he is right. Because it isnt who interpret music better what supposed to be judged, but who interpret music more throut the programme and with more commitment. Also, it isnt more beautiful/baletic lines what supposed to be judged, but using of whole body to create lines and creating of more different lines acording to the ice surface and music structure. Not beauty of performance, but who perform more etc etc. Im pretty sure that is what judges are judging. They are not judging if Caro or Mao skating is more gorgeous than others like someone mention before (thus Mao never got highest PCS -because its not gorgeousness, nor any other art category what is judged).

I don’t believe the rules are set in stone nor do I like to take the “my way or the highway” approach to discussing the scoring. We shouldn’t forget that the panel consistents of nine separate opinions and with that come different scales of value so there is no “correct” opinion. I only bring this up because you are saying the judges are supposed to judge who is doing something better. In fact the guidelines do specifically state that the judges are not supposed to judge this way.

Judges
Under the ISU Judging System the Judges focus entirely on evaluating the quality of each element performed (Technical aspect) and the quality of the performance. Their scores will be based on specific quality criteria for each element and will provide a comprehensive assessment of each team’s skills and performance, without comparing each team in relation to all others. The Judge enters the scores through a touch screen unit. At ISU Events Judges may review, in real time, certain elements of the teams’ performances by means of an instantaneous Video Replay System.

So while I do believe the judges note things like skating order, overall difficulty, impact of performance, and interpretation of music in relation to the other skaters the intent of CoP is to avoid it as much as possible.
 

rabbit1234

On the Ice
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
When talking about PCS, it should be discussed according to the exact term of PCS.
When discussing it by changing the words, I think that the objects of different perspectives come in and the discussion is only confusing.
What someone is asking for figure skating other than the rule gets mixed in.

Someone who is watching figure skating for a long time thinks that PCS and artistic impression are the same thing. But it is different.
 
Top