ITA. A bigger, better competition would attract more viewers, TV companies etc. The GPF seems like a bit of an afterthought after the main GPs, plus you've got the bizarre situation of warm up groups of 3 for Pairs and Dance. Talk about a passion killer. You've just had 3 couples skating then you've got to wait 7 or 8 more minutes for the final 3 because of the extra warm up group.
Changing Process for Qualifying to GPF
- Thread starter Ella5555
- Start date
ITA. A bigger, better competition would attract more viewers, TV companies etc. The GPF seems like a bit of an afterthought after the main GPs, plus you've got the bizarre situation of warm up groups of 3 for Pairs and Dance. Talk about a passion killer. You've just had 3 couples skating then you've got to wait 7 or 8 more minutes for the final 3 because of the extra warm up group.
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2012
- Country
-
The rules were changed a few years ago. Now a skater can only do a maximum of 2 GP's.
Although only having 2 assignments is unfortunate for those who may drop out of contention of a GP Final place due to having a disappointing skate in one of their four programmes, I think that is fairer all round, as it gives more skaters the opportunity to compete in what is supposed to be the "A" tour.
CaroLiza_fan
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
3+3 should beat 2+4 because although a silver is better than a bronze no doubt, two podiums even if bronzes is better than just one.
That's how I see it anyway
That's how I see it anyway
I like the GPF the way it is, it makes it a very elite competition. There will always be deserving skaters left behind, but that's just the game. You either deliver at two competitions or not. I don't see any reason to have more skaters qualify for the final, as there is still Worlds, where everyone can compete for the podium.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
I agree
But...
Mariah Bell did deliver at both her competitions though, a podium at both. Yet others who did not medal at both competitions are above her in the rankings... I think that's the main issue here for some
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2012
For suggestion #1 (following the football or baseball model, and expanding to eight teams), the reason that works out so nice in those sports is that 8 is a power of 2, so you can match up the teams 2x2 and it all works out to a single winner.
But no matter how many entries are allowed, there will always be someone who is the best of the skaters who don't make the cut and are left out "unfairly." If we invite twelve skaters, that 13th guy is going to be disappointed, and so are his fans.
AMEN. The idea of a wildcard is interesting but then WHO chooses who the wildcard is and is it based on points (Jin and Bell for example) or what would be the guidelines. There will always be a skater left out that could probably "kill it" in the finals but that's the sport. I guess the GPF doesn't carry much weight with me anymore. It's a nice competiton and it's also nice to see some of the best skaters but......
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2018
- Country
-
I totally agree!
Then I started wondering about the possibility that perhaps the system could be changed to mean that if a skater/team medals at both of their GPs, that should be enough to qualify to the final. Theoretically, this would mean that if the same skater/teams won medals at each of their two events, you'd end up with 9 teams/skaters in the final for each discipline. (Eg: if a/a, b/b, c/c medal at SC and SA, d/d/, e/e, f/f at NHK and IdF, and g/g, h/h, i/i at Coc and RC, you'd end up with 9 teams having medaled at two gps.) It would be unlikely to happen as neatly as that though, as, often a team/skater medals at one GP but not at their second.
Putting this theory to the test, based on last year's Ice Dance results, this would mean that the following would have qualified to the final:
Hubbell / Donohue
Guignard / Fabbri
Zahorski / Guerreiro
Sinitsina / Katsalapov
Stepanova / Bukin
Gilles / Porier
Then, if you work on the idea of a final of nine, you could add the skaters/teams with the next highest number of points, which last year would've been:
Hawayek/Baker
Hurtado / Khaliavin
McNamara / Carpenter
(If, say, 7 teams had qualified based on the 'two-medal' rule, you'd only add 2 teams. Equally, if only 4 qualified by 'two-medals', you'd add 5 teams etc.)
HOWEVER, I can see that this idea could still potentially leave those who could challenge for the podium out of the GPF. Equally, I'm not sure what you'd do about tie-breaking the 'extra' skaters, if some ended up with the same amount of points. Also, warm-up groups would be an issue in the pairs field, as only 4 teams can warm up at a time, so you'd have to have 3 flights of 3 pairs.
This is just an idea that came to me, and I'd be curious to know what people think. Would that be too many skaters/teams in the final? Would it actually be any more fair than the current system?
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
I thought it would be a good idea to make the GPF a "Top 10 best from the GP events"
While this works well for singles with 2 groups of 5 skaters each, it doesn't work for the couples either.
While this works well for singles with 2 groups of 5 skaters each, it doesn't work for the couples either.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
I thought that way at first, too. However, it's kind of arbitrary that three people get medals in most sporting events. Removing the hardware factor, I do think 1+5 > 2+4 > 3+3, even though only the latter earned two medals.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
The drawback is that conditions can vary from event to event, so a high score could have resulted from more generous judging, or better quality ice, etc. Using placements at least means we can see how the skaters ranked against competitors facing the same conditions.
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2018
- Country
-
You are never going to get a system which everyone thinks is fair, the sheer variance in the different GPs makes it impossible. I cheered like crazy for Boyang's Cup of China win but the fact remains, the same score would have been second at IdF and third at Skate Canada. Bell has two bronzes, true, but had she put up her IdF score in Kelowna she's have been fourth and her COR one would have gotten her sixth place at SC and a lot of tut-tutting.
Plus Tennell's combined scores to get her 2+4 is higher than Bell's 3+3 so probably should be worth more in the long run... but Satoko's 2+4 is lower. Whiiiich brings in the dreaded lack of standardisation in judging (averting one's eyes from last weekend).
Whatever system you use is going to be skewed at some point. And the fans of those who get knocked out by the skew are always going to think it would be better another way (me and all, I'm still sulking over some of my boys)
Plus Tennell's combined scores to get her 2+4 is higher than Bell's 3+3 so probably should be worth more in the long run... but Satoko's 2+4 is lower. Whiiiich brings in the dreaded lack of standardisation in judging (averting one's eyes from last weekend).
Whatever system you use is going to be skewed at some point. And the fans of those who get knocked out by the skew are always going to think it would be better another way (me and all, I'm still sulking over some of my boys)
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2012
- Country
-
I wish to keep the system as is. Although I agree that another system (whether it's bringing in more skaters or otherwise through what should be the tiebreaker or bringing in two additional skaters) might in some cases be more fair - hey, I want Boyang in as much as anyone - it would be less fair in others. I genuinely like the idea in place to have the 6 highest at the GPF. I realise this means some deserving better will be left out. But that will happen in any system. I could also plead for a more country based system (I don't), a system with a more even set of skaters per Grand Prix event (although that's difficult to envisage with the withdrawals, the way to achieve standing points - nobody discusses those but they also have aspects which leave much to be desired) or anything. Nobody's going to be satisfied in any case because one's favourite might not pass. I really like certain skaters and couples who won't get there this year (Lisa. Lisa, Lisa!) but in another system some others will be left out. And...don't forget. There is a kind of B-final (look at the line up) in Zagreb!
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2019
Definitely not "fan-votes." I've seen enough reality shows to know that fan-voting is a pretty terrible idea. This is after all a sport first and foremost. (Now say if you were to invite more skaters for the gala, then yes, fan voting for that would be great!)
I think part of the prestige of the GPF is because it's limited to the top 6 "best performing" skaters/couples from the GP series. I don't think allowing a guaranteed berth for GP gold medalists would work (what if that person only had one GP to begin with. Say Han Yan won CoC instead of Boyang. Would it be fair to send him straight to the GPF?)
The biggest problem I see with the current system is how skaters are assigned to the GP to begin with. Since the Feds get choose who goes where, then you end up with rather lopsided fields. Then add in withdrawals and the fact that strong alternates (like Young You) get skipped over. But since I don't see that part changing, I suppose the only other way I could think of is to take the top 6 six "combined" scores. That would eliminate situations where the 1st alternate has a higher score than the qualifier.
But then again... I kind of like this speculation where you're not really sure who's qualifying. Like how some skaters can be "spoilers" or "blockers" or how a series of certain events has to happen for someone to make it (the perfect script happened for Bradie for instance). The GPF analysis thread is pretty fascinating! It definitely makes things more interesting.
I think part of the prestige of the GPF is because it's limited to the top 6 "best performing" skaters/couples from the GP series. I don't think allowing a guaranteed berth for GP gold medalists would work (what if that person only had one GP to begin with. Say Han Yan won CoC instead of Boyang. Would it be fair to send him straight to the GPF?)
The biggest problem I see with the current system is how skaters are assigned to the GP to begin with. Since the Feds get choose who goes where, then you end up with rather lopsided fields. Then add in withdrawals and the fact that strong alternates (like Young You) get skipped over. But since I don't see that part changing, I suppose the only other way I could think of is to take the top 6 six "combined" scores. That would eliminate situations where the 1st alternate has a higher score than the qualifier.
But then again... I kind of like this speculation where you're not really sure who's qualifying. Like how some skaters can be "spoilers" or "blockers" or how a series of certain events has to happen for someone to make it (the perfect script happened for Bradie for instance). The GPF analysis thread is pretty fascinating! It definitely makes things more interesting.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2019
Grand Prix edits
Senior Grand Prix
a) 8 Grand Prix(s) based on medal table at worlds for the 2019-2020 season (Russsia, USA, China, France, Japan, Kazakhstan, Canada, Italy SUBS Czechia, S. Korea, Austria)
b) Having 16 Slots at each grand prix for Ladies and Men, 12 for Ice dance, and 10 for pairs(max 4 spots for a country), points will work like JGP
c) Top 30 from seasons best and WS get 2 spots each
d) JGPF and JWC medalists get 2 (if age eligible)
e) Top 12 at worlds get 2 spots (Top 13-16 get 1 spot)
f) Each event nominates a couple of local wildcards for each category to be on standby in case there are last minute withdrawals.
g) eac warm up group 1st is 4 2nd and 3rd have 6
h) ice resurfacing happens after the 2nd group
Junior Grand Prix
a) max for each country 3 spots
b) host get to have up to 5 entries per discipline (which will incentivize bidding for JGP events)
c) 8 Junior Grand Prix's
Junior Grand Prix Final
a) Top 10 qualify
Tiebrakers
b) consistency is key 3rd and 3rd will beat 2nd and 4th
c) higher cumulative score
d) higher combined PCS score
e) all skaters will qualify
exceptions
f) if you win you will qualify automatically (unless you finish below 6th)
g) if you medal and only have one event even if a spot isn't open one will be made
Senior Grand Prix
a) 8 Grand Prix(s) based on medal table at worlds for the 2019-2020 season (Russsia, USA, China, France, Japan, Kazakhstan, Canada, Italy SUBS Czechia, S. Korea, Austria)
b) Having 16 Slots at each grand prix for Ladies and Men, 12 for Ice dance, and 10 for pairs(max 4 spots for a country), points will work like JGP
c) Top 30 from seasons best and WS get 2 spots each
d) JGPF and JWC medalists get 2 (if age eligible)
e) Top 12 at worlds get 2 spots (Top 13-16 get 1 spot)
f) Each event nominates a couple of local wildcards for each category to be on standby in case there are last minute withdrawals.
g) eac warm up group 1st is 4 2nd and 3rd have 6
h) ice resurfacing happens after the 2nd group
Junior Grand Prix
a) max for each country 3 spots
b) host get to have up to 5 entries per discipline (which will incentivize bidding for JGP events)
c) 8 Junior Grand Prix's
Junior Grand Prix Final
a) Top 10 qualify
Tiebrakers
b) consistency is key 3rd and 3rd will beat 2nd and 4th
c) higher cumulative score
d) higher combined PCS score
e) all skaters will qualify
exceptions
f) if you win you will qualify automatically (unless you finish below 6th)
g) if you medal and only have one event even if a spot isn't open one will be made
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2017
I think having 3+3 always beat 2+4 is also wrong, tbh. Maybe the first tie-breaker for skaters with the same amount of points should be "higher total score" instead of "highest placement".
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2014
- Country
-
That reminds me of the time Plushy got into the GPF in 2005 because Johnny Weir withdrew even though he only did 1 event.
Then he won and I find that hilarious for some reason...
The other 5 must have been like "What the Heck?!"Yes, I think this is the simplest solution, and simple is beauty.
I feel like I'm in the minority of thinking 2+4 > 3+3 is fine. I would love to see the other side - I'm open to discourse!
I think we should look more so at the blanket underlying rule and not just one sub-result. The tie breaking rule is that highest single placement wins. This exact rule would also apply to when there's a 1+3 vs 2+2. With the podium argument no longer relevant, would everyone still think that the 2+2 deserves a higher placement? And again when it's 1+4 vs 2+3? Sure 2+3 had two podium placements, but 1+4 also had an outright win.
I think my main hesitation with the "two podium" argument is that podium itself is arbitrary, whereas using the numbers is a little more objective. When trying to set tiebreakers, ordinals and terms like "highest" make more objective sense, compared to a more sentimental approach of "podiums" that's less quantifiable. 2nd and 3rd are both podiums, so how are we quantifying them to make a distinction?
I totally get that it feels weird for someone with two podium placements to be placed below someone with one podium placement, but that fails to acknowledge the weight of a silver/2nd over a bronze/3rd. If both skaters received the same amount of GP points, they are already equal under the system. To further distinguish them, it makes sense to me that we would then go and award the skater who had placed higher as they theoretically have more potential.
As a more subjective opinion, 3+3 seems more "mid-tier" to me. A "safer" less variable bet than 2+4 sure, but 2+4 has much more competitive upside. In a final where 3+3 is not outright qualifying, I'd rather see someone who was able to achieve a silver/2nd because they'd be more competitive in the final where competitors should go for broke. A skater always taking bronzes at individual GP's doesn't sound very competitive in a GPF of other champions.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2019
- Country
-
I like it that GP is so watchable with it’s 6x12 in each discipline skaters nearly without the national caps.
And I like that the final puts highlight on the juniors who are otherwise summarily ignored! I truly enjoyed watching JGP this year.
And, sure, some of the skaters I rooted for didn’t advance into the final, both in junior and senior.
But no matter the rules, the cut off will always come down. There is no point of tweaking it because someone was out of luck this year like Mariah, while, on the inverse, Boyang got incredibly lucky.
Winning a medal at one event already makes skaters memorable, and it makes sense that the champion title outweighs the medal placements.
It is also run at the start of the season to allow for the time to prep for nationals before the very limited selections are firmed up for 4CC/Eu/Wo.
And I like that the final puts highlight on the juniors who are otherwise summarily ignored! I truly enjoyed watching JGP this year.
And, sure, some of the skaters I rooted for didn’t advance into the final, both in junior and senior.
But no matter the rules, the cut off will always come down. There is no point of tweaking it because someone was out of luck this year like Mariah, while, on the inverse, Boyang got incredibly lucky.
Winning a medal at one event already makes skaters memorable, and it makes sense that the champion title outweighs the medal placements.
It is also run at the start of the season to allow for the time to prep for nationals before the very limited selections are firmed up for 4CC/Eu/Wo.
