Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 42 of 42

Thread: Modernization of PCS score

  1. #41
    On the Ice Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    35,211
    Country: United States of America

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    ... occasionally the discrepancies are so large that at least some judges choose to send an obvious message.
    I do not think it is the job of any referee, judge or official to send messages.

    A further reductio ad absurdam might be to require not only separate scores for each bullet point under each component, but also for each piece of each bullet point that contains the word "and" -- or for each piece of an expanded explanation.
    I think this is what judges are expected to do anyway, sort of informally and without actually writing down a specific score for each bullet point. Somehow they cogitate over "physical, emotional and intellectual involvement" (she did pretty good on that) and "comprehension of the music and execution of all movement" (that aspect could have been better -- she mistimed that cymbal crash) So all of that averages out to about 7.25.

    More satisfying for whom?

    Before asking fans (or casual viewers), or judges for that matter, I'd want to know what the skaters and coaches would find most useful or most satisfying.
    To me, more satisfying for the concept of sport.

    Should technical aspects of Composition (pattern and ice coverage as they reflect multidirectional skating, speed, and edge depth; and also temporal balance such as frontloading/backloading) be considered in the global technical mark and only the artistic aspects of Proportion and Pattern and Ice Coverage be considered in the "Presentation" or "Performance" mark?
    Details, details! I am content to let the ISU work all that out. There will always be an interplay between technical and artistic.
    Last edited by Mathman; 01-13-2019 at 12:44 PM.

  2. #42
    On the Ice Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    35,211
    Country: United States of America

    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Globetrotter View Post
    50:50 [the technical component versus the presentation component] may not be what everyone will agree to especially if the artistry factor (whatever it means) is what is valued more.
    Well, right now it is 40-60 (SS&TR versus the other three), so this wouldn't be much of a change. ("Artistry" would go down from 30% of the total to 25%, not counting GOE.)

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •