This. I would like to see on the scoring sheet them checking off the bullet points they are applying. Then adding the total up at the bottom. So you don't get to just write +3, you need to check off the bullets you are giving. IE. Good Height and Distance, difficult entry, good flow etc. Because I also feel like GOE is given arbitrarily. Yes it's subjective, but I want to see you giving a bullet for good flow then the jump lands with zero flow at all.
Ideas for how to rescore figure skating?
- Thread starter lzxnl
- Start date
This. I would like to see on the scoring sheet them checking off the bullet points they are applying. Then adding the total up at the bottom. So you don't get to just write +3, you need to check off the bullets you are giving. IE. Good Height and Distance, difficult entry, good flow etc. Because I also feel like GOE is given arbitrarily. Yes it's subjective, but I want to see you giving a bullet for good flow then the jump lands with zero flow at all.
- Joined
- May 19, 2011
My only suggestion is that the judging panel be split into a technical panel and a components panel. It's ridiculous to expect a judge to accurately measure all of the bullet points of the components (of which there are 5 and each of the 5 has multiple bullet points) and also pay attention to the bullet points of each technical element. Having a dedicated panel to judge the jumps, spins and steps, and one for the components would free up the judges' giving them more time to evaluate each performance.
That's all I've got though... Only other thing would be to end the biased way GOE and PCS are awarded but there is no way to do that so
That's all I've got though... Only other thing would be to end the biased way GOE and PCS are awarded but there is no way to do that so
My only suggestion is that the judging panel be split into a technical panel and a components panel. It's ridiculous to expect a judge to accurately measure all of the bullet points of the components (of which there are 5 and each of the 5 has multiple bullet points) and also pay attention to the bullet points of each technical element. Having a dedicated panel to judge the jumps, spins and steps, and one for the components would free up the judges' giving them more time to evaluate each performance.
That's all I've got though... Only other thing would be to end the biased way GOE and PCS are awarded but there is no way to do that so
Let's hope that IdF judging was the judges realising that their previous scoring ways were woefully biased af.
Good jump quality, including correct and clean take off, great height and distance, good air position, nice flow out, etc, should be rewarded more.
Remove extra negative GOE on UR jumps. It is already reflected in the lower BV. I prefer the protocol “matches” the general feeling of watching the program.
For jumps, penalize falls more.
Negative GOE on ugly body positions in spin and other elements, even they may be high level.
Remove extra negative GOE on UR jumps. It is already reflected in the lower BV. I prefer the protocol “matches” the general feeling of watching the program.
For jumps, penalize falls more.
Negative GOE on ugly body positions in spin and other elements, even they may be high level.
What is a great jumper and what is a very good jumper?
Say for today, who is an example of 1st and who's of 2nd?
Could we say Chen vs Hanyu are good examples?
The result is on the tableau...
So how could the balance be tilted more toward quality of skating and less toward difficulty of jumping?
Some possibilities:
Raise the multiplying factor for the Skating Skills component significantly
Lower the point values of all jumps
Lower the total number of jumps allowed in a freeskate
Allow or require one or two additional edge-based elements so that skating quality contributes to TES in more than just the step sequence and choreo sequence and to some extent in jump takeoffs and landings
Restructure the competition format so one competition phase emphasizes jump difficulty and another is purely skating-based with no jumps involved at all (and maybe yet another, like the current SP, would be a compromise between these approaches)
(this could mean bringing back figures, or introducing a solo free dance-type program or solo rhythm dance-type program with a compulsory pattern in addition to creative parts)
Great jumper: Trusova (obviously)
Very good jumper: Kihira, Kostornaia. Both have 3As, both have landed 2/3 3As cleanly in competitions this season with one UR each. Kihira is still slightly injured, but her 3F/3Lz, when healthy, never attract edge calls, so Kihira edges out Kostornaia slightly in the jumps department. Both are lovely skaters and should be similar in components while greatly outclassing Trusova, whose TES will outclass theirs in turn.
I don't agree with lowering the values of jumps. It is still important to encourage a suitable amount of risk-taking. Also, we need to have more jumping passes than there are jumping types available to encourage skaters to actually learn all the jump types. In the men, for instance, top skaters already don't do all the jumps. When was the last time Nathan jumped a loop? Yuzuru didn't jump a lutz all last season.
BUT as I mentioned in my original post, we could make more use of the PCS scale. Actually use the 4s and 5s and 6s. I do agree with adding more contributions to TES from skating skills. Maybe we could raise the standards and point values of step sequences; more turns per cluster? More clusters required?
I have an unwelcome thought the PCS of Trusova are so disturbingly low just because the ISU board decided so and Russian local board supported that decision.
Her only weakness outside of the jumping is too long preparation before any quad. Maybe 4T is improved to the GOE++ level but other quads are still problematic.
This by itself is a problem and together with having no 3Ax makes her vulnerable.
Would she fix any one of her weaknesses and the whole season is hers.
Her only weakness outside of the jumping is too long preparation before any quad. Maybe 4T is improved to the GOE++ level but other quads are still problematic.
This by itself is a problem and together with having no 3Ax makes her vulnerable.
Would she fix any one of her weaknesses and the whole season is hers.
Possibly something like 5 or 6 jump passes in a more well-balanced (less jumpcentric) freeskate, with 2 or 3 combinations or sequences of which one can be a 3-jump combination.
That would allow for 8-10 actual jumps.
Then introduce a bonus for using all different takeoffs. One suggestion: 2-point bonus for 6 different takeoffs successfully executed with at least 2 revolutions, 4-point bonus for 6 takeoffs successfully executed with at least 3 revolutions (or at least 2.5 for ladies to allow the axel to be double), or 4-point bonus for 8 different takeoffs with at least 2 revolutions (if we add double and triple walley and inside axel to the Scale of Values).
I don't think we need to add a bonus for doing 5 different types of quads. The reward would be the high base values for all those quads.
Do you watch JGP events? Junior Worlds? Senior B events? All of Europeans and Four Continents? Those scores ARE already being used for junior and lower-level skaters as well as for average and below-average seniors.
If the good skaters start getting those scores, then what numbers would be left to award to weaker skaters in the same event?
The exceptions might be in Interpretation and to some extent Composition, where it's possible to do a good job constructing and interpreting a program with a lower skill level, and it's also possible for strong skaters to ignore those parts of the performance.
So more encouragement for judges to separate their scores for the same performance and score several points higher on IN than on SS, or vice versa, based on what that skater actually does in each of those areas.
Remind the judges that the "corridor" evaluation for program components explicitly allows for spreading their marks between the different components and maybe make it even more true and more evident to judges that they will not be penalized for doing so.
Especially at junior and below, where there is no Choreo Sequence, maybe make a cluster of multiple difficult turns on 1 foot a separate kind of element that can be executed outside of a full-rink step sequence with its own base value and GOE. Maybe one on each foot with few or no steps in between to qualify as the scored element.
In the step sequence, I'd make "variety/complexity of [one-foot] turns" and "variety/complexity of steps (including choctaws, closed outside mohawks, and maybe some other specific difficult steps)" as separate features so that you have to meet the "complexity" standard on both to earn level 4, but it would be possible to earn level 3 by doing both plus sufficient rotations in both directions, or by doing only one or the other plus the rotations and body movement.
I also like the idea of adding back the leveled spiral sequence as an optional element in the freeskate, with more level features based on the blade work and a limit of 2 features based on body position.
Add a leveled "school figures variation" type of element that could earn a base value depending on difficulty along with GOE.
If there were a way to add a leveled field moves sequence and low-rotation jump sequence as optional elements as well, maybe all of the above could replace the choreo sequence.
So a well-balanced freeskate for seniors could include:
*either 5 or 6 jump elements (3 can be combos)
*either 3 or 4 spins (each with different codes, at least one must fly, at least one combo, at least one in one position)
*1 full-rink leveled step sequence
*1 or 2 optional elements chosen from
-cluster or school figures variation
-leveled spiral sequence or field moves sequence
-low-rev jump sequence
Total 12 elements. Juniors could have a total of 11 elements and it would be their choice
For some of these elements, level 4 should be worth at least 4.0 points in base value.
There would still be plenty of opportunity for good jumpers to rack up points with difficult and high-quality jumps. And if they can also earn high points in the other element types as well, they can win or at least win the TES.
For skaters who max out their jump difficulty at triple lutz or lower, they can fit in all their triples and then use non-jump elements to earn higher scores on blade-to-ice skills.
I could also argue for giving the Skating Skills component a factor of 2.0 for short programs and 4.0 for freeskates, for women as well as for men, with the other components at least 1.0 and 2.0 for SP and LP respectively.
For example if both are clean Trusova will beat Kostornaia because of the quads, even though Kostornaia is obviously a far superior skater. That isn't the way the sport should be judged. This isn't ice jumping, its ice skating. Jumps are important, but not as much as it is now.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
Would we be having this argument if we were comparing a woman skater who did the 3Lz, 3S, and two 3Ts versus one who did all the doubles through the 2A? None of us would say the latter should have an edge, regardless of the artistic differences between them.
Figure skating is a sport. People shouldn't win just because they are our favorites or the most enjoyable to watch.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I don't know whether that thought is unwelcome or not, but it does seem to be pulled out of thin air without any supporting data.
First, what is the "ISU board"? If we mean the ISU Council that makes decisions between Congresses, are we talking about ISU President speed skater Jan Dijkema (Netherlands) and his sinister co-conspirators led by Vice President for Figure skating Alexander Lakernik (Russia). Or is it the ISU Deep State consisting of unelected employees and national federation representatives who conspire in the hallways against Alexandra Trusova -- "Bwahaha, my pretty, you can only get an 8.5 in SS, and your little dog, too"?
What possible motive would they have for unfairly picking on Trusova rather than, say, Kostotnaia?
Figure skating is a sport and all the other aspects of skating other than jumping require just as much if not more athletic aability. Jumping has far too much weight in the scoring, that's all people are saying. For example Kostornaia is a far superior skater to Trusova, inluding jumps other than quads. Doing quads should narrow the gap, not give Trusova the win. This is a sport of all skating aspects, not just how many rotations one can do.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
Other aspects also require athletic ability, but jumps account for most of the risk in figure skating, and most of the variability in the scoring. I agree that Alena is superior to Sasha at many things, including the quality of the triple jumps. Trusova doesn't get sky-high GOE or PCS, so she has to make up for that by attempting difficulty that would compete for podium spots in the biggest men's events. We agree that Kostornaia is beautiful to watch, but I don't agree that we need to manipulate the scoring system to ensure that she wins when her top competitors are doing quad lutzes (and everything else really well).
Its exactly the way a sport should be judged. Everything else would be a scandal. Art is not objectively mearsurable hence it doesn't make sense to force (the current PCS system is already a stretch). It doesn't away any of aljonas beautiful performance if she gets second. Guys if u are only interested in the beauty of the skating go whatch shows or ice dance
Another person that misses the point. To say that jumps are athletic and every other aspect of skating is art is ludicrous. Skating corectly with proper form and speed gracefully requires MORE athletic skill than jumping. They have barrel jumping contests if jumping is all you care about. And risk should be rewarded, slightly. Doing an easier jump properly is more important than doing a difficult jump poorly.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2018
Some kind of appeals process might help judges be more transparent and objective. If they had to be prepared to be able to explain their scores if someone objects, they can't just hand out half-assed numbers.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2018
- Country
-
That’s just not feasible in the time they have between elements.
