ISU: New Range of Grade of Execution | Golden Skate

ISU: New Range of Grade of Execution

gsk8

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Country
United-States
Release by ISU on 9/19/18:

Since the ISU judging system has been introduced in 2003 in international competitions, the ISU has been constantly developing and fine-tuning the system. The ISU Congress in 2018 adopted some important changes to adapt the system to the development of the sport. In order to have more possibilities to evaluate the quality of elements performed by the skaters, the range of the Grade of Execution (GOE) has been expanded from -3 to +3 to now -5 to +5 in all Figure Skating disciplines. There are now a total of 10 Grades of Execution. Together with the GOE, a new Scale of Value for the elements has been created, which is based on the percentage principle. Each plus or minus step in the GOE results in increasing or decreasing the value by 10 % in Single and Pair Skating and by 16 % in Ice Dance.

In Single and Pair Skating, there are six bullets that judges are looking for when awarding the positive GOEs for each element. The more bullets are fulfilled, the higher the GOE is. However, for +4 and +5 GOE, the three most important bullets are mandatory.
+1 – 1 bullet
+2 – 2 bullets
+3 – 3 bullets
+4 – 4 bullets
+5 – 5 bullets or more

In cases of errors, judges reduce the GOE depending on how big the error is.

For example, in jumps the bullets for positive GOEs are:
1. very good height and distance
2. good take-off and landing
3. effortless throughout (including rhythm in a combination or sequence)

4. steps into a jump, unexpected or creative entry
5. very good body position from take-off to landing
6. element matches the music
The bullets in bold are the three mandatory ones for +4 and +5 GOE.

The reductions for errors are:
Fall: -5
Landing on two feet, stepping out: -3 to -4
Two three-turns between jumps in a combination: -2 to -3
Wrong edge (“e”): -3 to -4
Unclear edge (“!”): -1 to -3
Downgrade (“<<”): -3 to -4
Underrotation (“<”): -2 to -3
Poor speed, height or air position: -1 to -3
Touch-down with both hands: -2 to -3
Touch-down with one hand or free foot: -1 to -2
Loss of flow or rhythm in combination or sequence: -1 to -2
Weak landing: -1 to -3
Poor take-off: -2 to -3
Long preparation (telegraphing) -2 to -3
For all elements positive bullets and errors have been identified. For spins for example, positive bullets include:
Good speed and acceleration during the spin
Good, controlled, clear positions
Effortless throughout

Maintaining a centered spin

Negative bullets include:
Travelling -1 to -3
Touch down with free foot or hand: -1 to -3
Poor, awkward positions: -1 to -3
Slow, loss of speed: -1 to -3

For lifts, judges count as bullets:
Very good take-off and landing
Good speed, flow and ice coverage
Effortless throughout (including rotation and changing of positions)

Very good air positions
Smooth footwork of the man
Element matches the music

And the reduced the GOE for example for:
Slight problems in the lifting process: -1 to -2
Serious problems in the lifting process: -3
Lady starts or lands on two feet: -2

In Ice Dance, smoothness, elegance, originality and creativity are important features for positive GOEs for elements. Musicality is a set criteria.

Judges are evaluating the cleanness and sureness of steps and turns in twizzles and step sequences, the speed across the ice and maintenance of speed or acceleration during the element such as lifts, step sequences and spins as well as the body lines and poses of both partners.

Negative features are stumbles (-2 per stumble), loss of balance (-1), element does not reflect the character of the chosen rhythm (-1 to -2), poor execution, labored, uncontrolled (-1 to -2)

As a result of the change of the range in the GOEs, all statistics start from zero for the season 2018/19. All previous statistics are now historical.

The ISU Technical Committees Chair for Single and Pair Skating as well as for Ice Dance give a detailed explanation of how the GOEs are determined in webinars that can be viewed on the ISU YouTube Development Channel here.
 
Last edited:

balabam

🥕🥕🌵🌵😈😀
Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Country
Slovakia
OK, so for me (and maybe for us fans and maybe also for some judges) this is unclear:

As I understand it and as, in my opinion, it should be, judge, according to rules and with his/her subjective perspective, counts positive bullets and the given sum reduces of negative bullets (therefore these are called reductions).
Why, then, any fall is given -5 (from the protocols I nocited yet under new system)?

Shouldn't the fall from completed jump with good height, take off, completely rotated, with preceded steps, body position have -2 (all criteria except good landing are fullfilled and good landing is mandatory for +4 or +5) so +3 on the positive side and -5 deduction for fall, so +3-5=-2)

Whereas fall from badly executed jump surely have to have -5.

And this can be, I suspect, very ambiguous in other cases too, if deduction should be an absolute value or value to be deducted from all positive aspects (I am for the latter). By the way, I did not find this clearly explained in above mentioned ISU videos. In fact, these videos are very brief and therefore messy, as of negative bullets / deductions.
 

rikaquegira

On the Ice
Joined
Nov 30, 2017
OK, so for me (and maybe for us fans and maybe also for some judges) this is unclear:

As I take it and as, in my opinion it should be, judge, according to rules and with his/her subjective perspective, counts positive bullets and the given sum reduces of negative bullets (therefore these are called reductions).
Why, then, any fall is given -5 (from the protocols I nocited yet under new system)?

Shouldn't the fall from completed jump with good height, take off, completely rotated, with preceded steps, body position have -2 (all criteria except good landing are fullfilled and good landing is mandatory for +4 or +5) so +3 on the positive side and -5 deduction for fall, so +3-5=-2)

Whereas fall from badly executed jump surely have to have -5.


Some quotes that I think clarify these questions:

These guidelines are tools to be used together with the minus GOE charts. The final GOE of a performed element is
based on the combination of both positive and negative aspects. It is important that the final GOE of an element
reflects the positive aspects, as well as any possible reductions that may apply.
The final GOE of an element is calculated considering first the positive aspects of the element that result in a starting
GOE for the evaluation. Following that a Judge reduces the GOE according to the guidelines of possible errors and the
result is the final GOE of the element.
To establish the starting GOE Judges must take into consideration the bullets for each element.


GOE evaluation
In case of significant error (e.g. fall, landing on two feet, stepping out of landing, wrong edge (e),
downgraded (<<), serious problems on the descent of the lift, serious problems on the catch of the Twist) the
starting GOE for the evaluation cannot be higher than +2.


In theory:
A jump that, without the fall, would be a +5 already starts with a +2. So you give a -5 for the fall. That's a -3.

But, most jumps are not +5 jumps. Perhaps that's why you've mostly seen -5.


With that said, I think the judges are completely lost. :laugh2:


Just look at these marks given for a 3Lz+3T< :

-5 -4 -3 0 -2 -4 -2 -4 -1

Or for a 3Lz<+3Lo<< :

-3 -5 -5 -2 -3 -5 -5 -4 -4



I mean... :confused2:
 

xanda

Spectator
Joined
Mar 2, 2018
With that said, I think the judges are completely lost. :laugh2:


Just look at these marks given for a 3Lz+3T< :

-5 -4 -3 0 -2 -4 -2 -4 -1

Or for a 3Lz<+3Lo<< :

-3 -5 -5 -2 -3 -5 -5 -4 -4



I mean... :confused2:

I'm pretty sure this entire season will have many controversial scores due to disagreement on rules interpretation.. geez
 

Andrea82

Medalist
Joined
Feb 16, 2014
OK, so for me (and maybe for us fans and maybe also for some judges) this is unclear:

As I understand it and as, in my opinion, it should be, judge, according to rules and with his/her subjective perspective, counts positive bullets and the given sum reduces of negative bullets (therefore these are called reductions).
Why, then, any fall is given -5 (from the protocols I nocited yet under new system)?

Shouldn't the fall from completed jump with good height, take off, completely rotated, with preceded steps, body position have -2 (all criteria except good landing are fullfilled and good landing is mandatory for +4 or +5) so +3 on the positive side and -5 deduction for fall, so +3-5=-2)

Whereas fall from badly executed jump surely have to have -5.

And this can be, I suspect, very ambiguous in other cases too, if deduction should be an absolute value or value to be deducted from all positive aspects (I am for the latter). By the way, I did not find this clearly explained in above mentioned ISU videos. In fact, these videos are very brief and therefore messy, as of negative bullets / deductions.

I've seen a fall getting -3 in a couple of cases this season which is in line with the guidelines as reported by rikaquegira above (starting GOE at +2 because of a serious error and -5 deducation applied to +2)
 

Shayuki

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 2, 2013
"1. very good height and distance
2. good take-off and landing
3. effortless throughout (including rhythm in a combination or sequence)"
I hope that these being mandatory will actually start getting enforced this season. Otherwise, they might as well not have that clause. That's how it's been during the JGP thus far.

I also am not sure, are you supposed to add up the positive GOE before deductions or will it just be the sum? For instance, if a jump hits a whopping 5 GOE bullet points but only 2 of the mandatory ones, and then has a error worth -3 GOE, would that jump be graded as +2 or 0 by the rules?

Also, Tuktamysheva's fall at Lombardia got -2 GOE by 2 judges, I wonder what the logic there is...
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I'm pretty sure this entire season will have many controversial scores due to disagreement on rules interpretation.. geez

And also different judgments as to what qualifies as "very good" height and distance or "good takeoff and landing," etc. "Good" and "very good" are subjective judgments and can't be firmly quantified considering that they have to be evaluated by the human eye in real time, applied to skaters of different body sizes (and different shapes, which may be more relevant to evaluating spin positions than jump size).

Even if we can get 100% agreement on exactly what the rules/guidelines mean, there will never be 100% agreement about how they apply to each and every element executed.

I've seen a fall getting -3 in a couple of cases this season which is in line with the guidelines as reported by rikaquegira above (starting GOE at +2 because of a serious error and -5 deducation applied tp +2)

I expect we'll see more as the elite senior season gets underway, which is where we'll see more jumps with "very good" height and distance and more effortless elements.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I also am not sure, are you supposed to add up the positive GOE before deductions or will it just be the sum? For instance, if a jump hits a whopping 5 GOE bullet points but only 2 of the mandatory ones, and then has a error worth -3 GOE, would that jump be graded as +2 or 0 by the rules?

I was wondering about that too. The most likely example I could think of would be a big, effortless, well-positioned flutz with preceding steps and well timed to the music. No "good takeoff and landing" bullet if the takeoff is incorrect, and the "e" call is supposed to get -3 to -4 GOE reduction.

I think it would start at 3 and then lose at least -3 for the wrong edge to end up at 0 (or negative if the judge thought the wrong edge was egregious or felt that it contradicted other positive bullets in addition to the good takeoff and landing one).
 

ancientpeas

The Notorious SEW
Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 11, 2014
What I think is: people will have +2 and -2 more stuff to complain about.

I think that all falls should get a -5 and +5 should only be for exceptionally performed elements: T/M's twist for example or some of P/C's really beautiful elements or Hanyu's axel. It should be special. But I fear they will be tossed around like candy.
 

draqq

FigureSkatingPhenom
Record Breaker
Joined
May 10, 2010
- Ultimately, there are so many positive and negative bullet points in the system now, almost all of them subjective, that I feel like the judges just don't have enough time to do all the mathematics to come up with a perfect final grade all the time. What do you do if you see a two-jump combination that has one downgrade, maybe another double downgrade, but great height, an unexpected entry, and maybe 1 or 2 other positives but maybe that one negative thing was worse than what you thought so-oh-my-gosh-that's-a-lot-I'll-just-go-with -2.

- Overall, the system tries to be more precise but it also means wider discrepancies. For instance, Komatsubara/Koleto had the following GOEs for their MiSt2 in the FD:

0 1 0 0 -3 3 1

One judge gave +3 and another gave -3? Just what happened there?

- At the same competition, Satoko Miyahara's 3Lz<+3T< in the short program had the following GOEs:

-5 -3 -2 -4 -4 -1 -2

Which goes to show that there's some confusion as to what the judges should do in these complicated situations with multiple errors and positives.

- I have the opinion that a significant error (under-rotation, fall, flip-out, aborted lift, trip on footwork, etc.) supercedes any positive qualities an element may have. If a skater falls on a jump, I don't particularly care if the jump had good height, a spread eagle take-off, and a nice air position because at the end of the day none of those positives meant much because the skater fell. If you fall, you get a -5. The end.

If the jump had been landed properly, then by all means give +3s, +4s, and +5s since you should reward the skater for performing a high-quality jump. But the idea that you should reward a supposed "high-quality error" doesn't sit well with me.
 

champs

Final Flight
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
My opinion:
I think the "for +4 and +5 GOE, the three most important bullets are mandatory" already is and will be a cause of a lot of judges doing the math wrong, and the long un-intuitive list of the range of reduction values for various types of errors is another point of failure in judges' math, And I agree with the above, that doing all the required math won't allow the judges to focus on watching the ongoing performance. (Not that it was free of such problems until last season. )

Another thing is, judges only enter the final GOE for each element and not the breakdown of the math in any of them done by the judges, thus it's hard to identify whether a certain GOE value handed out by a judge is an anomaly due to wrong math or due to subjectivity in quality assessment. Maybe it feeds nerdy fs fans with fun subjects to analyze but it also sows seeds of conspiracy theories.
 
Top