Rescoring past competitions w/ new SOV+rules

I'm simply not skilled enough to do this re-scoring, but if anyone with extra time has any interest in re-scoring other past competitions like even Sochi with this new system, I'd be very excited to see the results.

4everchan

“my point i guess is more along these lines : i acknowledged your reply because you took time to write it... Simple courtesy.”

Click to expand...

Considering your other behavior, this claim of courtesy seems disingenuous at best, but if you do actually believe that, rest assured, that I have never heard of forum etiquette that requires replies to people’s posts and I never expect anyone to reply to mine. I replied because when I see someone tell everyone that the grass is purple, I feel compelled to say otherwise.


CanadianSkaterGuy

I think people forget sometimes that "hitting all the bullets" can only get you max GOE if there are no flaws with the rest of the jump that reduce said GOE.

Click to expand...

As i’ve expressed in other posts, I’m well aware that you’re supposed to deduct negative bullets from positive ones. Don't know where all these supposed negative bullets are for the jumps in that program.


CanadianSkateGuy

"I even gave +4s to some of the elements". Whoa, that's some harsh judging!

Click to expand...

That’s some convenient editing. You know perfectly well that an element that hits 5 bullets with no reductions is supposed to get +5 GOE. The full statement is that I gave 4’s for elements that “only” hit 5 bullets.

http://www.isuresults.com/results/se..._FS_Scores.pdf

Yagudin never had a 3 quad + 2 axel layout.”

Click to expand...

I’ll give you this one. I tend to be overly focused on Chan’s prime since he wasn’t a big factor in the past quad - sometimes I forget that he increased his tech.

CanadianSkateGuy

He still got a slew of 9.50/9.75s too, which, let's be honest is way too lenient judging for a performance with a major error. Every component other than TR (which are usually lower for every skater) averaged 9.50 and above.

If 2+ falls/serious errors out of 7 jumping passes having a serious error merits 9.5 max for SS/TR/CO and 9.0 max for PE/IN, then it stands to say that 1 out of 3 jumping passes with a major error should be treated similarly.

His PCS score was 47.35. Like, come on “

Click to expand...

Which is still below what he normally gets for a clean performance - His average raw PCS for clean programs in the last year 3 years is 48.5675. The majority of the judges did take a deduction, the 10’s were thrown out, and, as I’ve already complained several times - there is no definition of “serious error” in the GOE guidelines so they weren’t even required to deduct. When has a clean Hanyu ever scored lower than Fernandez - they clearly lowered the score for the error.

And your argument makes no sense. The only component reduction guideline in the old system at the time of the event was merely “no 10’s” for a serious error/fall - all the scores that actually counted followed that.

Neither guideline has any special rules that adjusts based on number of jumps.

But I’m pretty sure you already knew all of this. Anything to support your bias, right?


Shanshani

And, as someone else pointed out, what happens with skaters who typically get PCS in the 80s? Do their PCS go down less when they make major mistakes than someone whose PCS is typically in the 90s?

Click to expand...

Sorry whoever said it first as I don’t see who Shanshani is quoting, but I never even thought about this until I saw Shanshani mention it. That seems to be the worst thing about the new PCS guidelines - it affects maybe 5 active skaters - if they’re going to do this, they need a way to make the penalty guidelines go all the way down. If you really want to double up the penalty for falls, it was at least fair the way they did it in the old system, but as others have mentioned, the penalty already seems more than adequate.

BaronVladimir

Most of those new guidelines are based on rewarding 'clean programmes' more than it was the case before. We will see how it all plains out, but generally most of the judges were actually applaying a lot of things which are now litteraly written.

Click to expand...

I think it’s more the idea of rewarding high quality. So a program with more mistakes can still beat an equally difficult program. However, you can’t win with raw TES value unless the elements are also well done.

I do understand why the ISU decided to go to the changes in the PCS scoring considering the major image hit they took when skaters with multiple mistakes still won major titles against cleaner skaters, but I think it goes against the fundamental principles behind IJS scoring.


Pyeongchang2018

I'm simply not skilled enough to do this re-scoring, but if anyone with extra time has any interest in re-scoring other past competitions like even Sochi with this new system, I'd be very excited to see the results.

Click to expand...

I’ve been checking out the new system using a worksheet I made. I’m still tweaking the formatting but I can send it to you when it’s done. Obviously, the results are going to be skewed because when I score I keep the GOE guidelines in front of me, and literally pause the video, count the positive bullets, subtract the negative bullets. Judges don’t have that luxury. Not to mention, most of the programs are on video at better angles than judges get - I'm actually starting to feel some sympathy for the judges. IJS seems to expect you to have eagle vision, encyclopedic memory, the ability to do math in 1/4 of a second, and hyperfocus on each tiny segment while still being able to clearly see the whole.

Old Cat Lady said:

I’ve been checking out the new system using a worksheet I made. I’m still tweaking the formatting but I can send it to you when it’s done. Obviously, the results are going to be skewed because when I score I keep the GOE guidelines in front of me, and literally pause the video, count the positive bullets, subtract the negative bullets. Judges don’t have that luxury. Not to mention, most of the programs are on video at better angles than judges get - I'm actually starting to feel some sympathy for the judges. IJS seems to expect you to have eagle vision, encyclopedic memory, the ability to do math in 1/4 of a second, and hyperfocus on each tiny segment while still being able to clearly see the whole.

Click to expand...

Which is why I think a split judge panel might be important going forward, so I kind of hope the technical committee does make a proposal for the next Congress that expands on the Netherlands' proposal and answers the questions asked during this past Congress about it.

xeyra said:

Which is why I think a split judge panel might be important going forward, so I kind of hope the technical committee does make a proposal for the next Congress that expands on the Netherlands' proposal and answers the questions asked during this past Congress about it.

Click to expand...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_YXSHkAahE

xeyra said:

Which is why I think a split judge panel might be important going forward, so I kind of hope the technical committee does make a proposal for the next Congress that expands on the Netherlands' proposal and answers the questions asked during this past Congress about it.

Click to expand...

I was thinking the other day that it would also be nice if the judges were spread around the rink. That way skaters won't be able to position their weak elements where judges can't see them. I recommend everyone try judging a competition on just fancams while keeping in mind that you're only supposed to judge what you see and give the benefit of the doubt to the skater. Great for helping you understand how the system works as well as why a lot of things don't get deducted.

One thing that occurred to me is that with the way the GOE guidelines are currently stated, you can technically get as high as -2 with a fall. I believe that is neither the intent nor how it will be applied so I've been giving the automatic -5, but it might be that we're misunderstanding the system and the falls aren't necessarily as harsh a penalty as we're thinking.

also strange, was in the process of scoring 2014 Olympics and can't find Patrick's long program on youtube. So far, I have higher scores for both of them.

One thing I noticed is that if you go purely by GOE bullets, there can be noticeable differences in quality but get the same score. This is especially a problem for vague requirements - I interpret the phrase "good speed and/or acceleration during spin" as meaning simply "not slow" as opposed to "superior" speed so I ended up giving Chan equal or higher marks for all his spins even though they are clearly slower.

I also find myself being pretty lenient with "element matches the music" - as long as it hits some sort of beat or phrasing of the music I've been giving everyone credit though that doesn't differentiate between those who are able to express nuance in the music during the element vs those who merely place the element where it pretty much fits.

chopinskate said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_YXSHkAahE

Click to expand...

What a cynic. Believe!

Old Cat Lady said:

One thing I noticed is that if you go purely by GOE bullets, there can be noticeable differences in quality but get the same score. This is especially a problem for vague requirements - I interpret the phrase "good speed and/or acceleration during spin" as meaning simply "not slow" as opposed to "superior" speed so I ended up giving Chan equal or higher marks for all his spins even though they are clearly slower.

I also find myself being pretty lenient with "element matches the music" - as long as it hits some sort of beat or phrasing of the music I've been giving everyone credit though that doesn't differentiate between those who are able to express nuance in the music during the element vs those who merely place the element where it pretty much fits.

Click to expand...

To echo xeyra here, this is why splitting the judges between TES and PCS is more relevant in this case. What's happening in GOE scoring right now is similar to 4.0 GPA system in schools to be honest. You and the other student can get 3.75 in your subject simply because you both meet the requirements needed to get that score, even though in reality one is probably better than the other. However, if PCS is used as objectively as possible, the differences in quality could still be reflected somewhat. Superior speed (including great flow in and out of jumps) can be reflected both in Skating Skills and Transitions. Musicality in terms of overall phrasing of the music, groove and more nuanced expression can be reflected in Interpretation and Performance. Program Components, theoretically, is such a great vehicle to differentiate quality when TES no longer allow it. Yet it is the most abused part of this scoring system to the point that it becomes the most glaring flaw of COP rather than its asset.

I mean, really, if only judges are more objective in judging the PCS we wouldn't really have this hairsplitting problem.

I got bored with all the talk of the men so I decided to see how this would work with the Olympic Ladies results. I used the same methodology as Shanshani-- except that I transplanted exactly the same GOE scores as the judges gave between -3 and +3-- and got somewhat different results.

Shanshani said:

alterations to the backloading bonus rules ultimately did not have a very significant effect on competition results, at least in the competitions I examined. Alina is still Olympic Champion off the back of her high GOEs and BV and perfectly competitive PCS. The gap between Alina+Evgenia and the others did not change very much and in some cases actually widened under application of the new rules, largely because the two of them also receive very high GOE scores.

Click to expand...

I also found this to be true.

Shanshani said:

Though the gap between Alina and Evgenia narrowed, I believe this has as much to do with Zhenya's higher GOEs in the FS as it does with Alina's backloading (Alina lost a couple points on her first 3Lz because she received relatively low GOE for that element.) Therefore, all this drama about backloading may, at the end of the day, be much ado about nothing.

Click to expand...

The gap between Alina and Evgenia widened, with Alina now winning both segments. The gap between Kaetlyn and Evgenia narrowed significantly as well... in fact, had Kaetlyn managed to earn as much for her 3Lz in her FS as she had in the SP, she'd have beaten Evgenia in that segment, and come within half a point of her overall. Other gaps remained similar, except that Carolina gained on Satoko and overtook Kaori in the SP.

The drama about backloading is not entirely "much ado without nothing" because without restricting backloading, Alina's margin over the rest of the field grew significantly. But aside from that, yeah, it didn't make a huge difference between the other skaters.

Scores: Actual Scores w/Restricted Backloading & New SOV
Alina Zagitova Evgenia Medvedeva Kaetlyn Osmond Satoko Miyahara Carolina Kostner Kaori Sakamoto
Scores: Actual Scores w/New SOV
Alina Zagitova Evgenia Medvedeva Kaetlyn Osmond Satoko Miyahara Carolina Kostner Kaori Sakamoto

I also decided to see how Pairs would be affected under this system, since they're also affected by BV and GOE changes and yet no one seems to be talking about it. The results were much more interesting than the women's to me, and I think show that the Pairs scores will now be slightly more variable than the women.

I did an "actual score" test with the exact same GOE (+/-3 range) as the judges gave but transferred into the new system. Here the scores were results were basically the same.

I then did an "adjusted score" test to account for the new +/-5 scale (by multiplying by 5/3 like Shanshani) and for the new rules regarding spins (replacing the PCoSp in the SP with a CCoSp and removing the (F)CCoSp from the FS entirely). Here there were several interesting results but still no change in the overall standings for the top 6:

1. Savchenko/Massot2. Sui/Han3. Duhamel/Radford4. Tarasova/Morozov5. James/Ciprès6. Marchei/Hotarek
Notes About the Results

• Savchenko/Massot increased their margin of victory over Sui/Han by about two points
• Savchenko/Massot swap places with Duhamel/Radford in the SP, moving up to 3rd in that segment
• Sui/Han swap placements with Duhamel/Radford in the FS, moving up to 2nd in that segment
• James/Ciprès swap placements with Tarasova/Morozov in the FS, moving up to 4th in that segment
• Duhamel's/Radford's 4STh went from being the highest-scoring throw of the competition by 1.17 points to being only the 7th highest-scoring
• Savchenko/Massot's 3Tw4 outscored both Sui's/Han's and Tarasova/Morozov's 4Tw3 (previously both had earned more points)
• There was an tendency towards increased SP scores but lower FS scores

General Observations

• GOE seems to be more important here than it was for women, and base value less so.
• The SP score increases were probably due to the increase in BV for Group 3 and Group 4 lifts in addition to the higher GOE, but that's offset by the downgrade from PCoSp to CCoSp.
• The FS drops are obviously due to the loss of the solo spin combination, but also due to the BV drop of Group 5 lifts and Twist lifts (and quads). They're offset somewhat by the higher Group 3/4 lift values and increased death spiral values in addition to the higher GOE.
• Quad twists are probably still a worthwhile investment for a team with a strong Twist: without the crashy landing S/H would have outscored S/M on that element (as they came very close despite much lower GOE in the first place) and it was still a high point-getter for T/M as well.
• Quad throws OTOH are likely *not* worth investing in, which it seems was obviously the ISU's goal: aside from being only the 7th-highest scoring jump under the new SoV, D/R's 4STh only earned a pathetic 0.05 more points than their 4LzTh (which earned less than the 4FTh and 4LoTh by the other top 4 teams). J/C's attempt earned an abysmal 3.57 points.

I don't know how many other ways I can say "It sucks", but it does.

chopinskate said:

I don't know how many other ways I can say "It sucks", but it does.

Click to expand...

Yeah the results of the pairs skate does not thrill me. Having little incentive for quad twists or quad throws is a real shame. I'm all for quality of elements being the major factor but it was hardly like the pairs competition was full of quad falls just because of the points that its racked up. I think the quad nerf here was a big mistake. The pairs competition just isn't at the same place as the men's, in fact it's only just recovering back into an exciting competition.

Old Cat Lady said:

also strange, was in the process of scoring 2014 Olympics and can't find Patrick's long program on youtube.

Click to expand...

That is odd because it was on there, I know because in my first flush of fannish enthusiasm I downloaded an awful lot, hoping to at least start to learn a bit (if only who I like best). Okay, most of the vids I still have are my favourites but I checked the hard drive and do have both of Patrick's skates at Sochi (the Four Seasons, I do always notice the music). I can upload it to youtube on one of my google accounts if you like...

One thing I am getting from all this - which is a bit of a relief, at least in retrospect - is that even if the minor places silver and bronze could be argued, the 2018 olympic gold in each category would stay the same? None of the silver winners can feel "but for a few months..."

TallyT said:

That is odd because it was on there, I know because in my first flush of fannish enthusiasm I downloaded an awful lot, hoping to at least start to learn a bit (if only who I like best). Okay, most of the vids I still have are my favourites but I checked the hard drive and do have both of Patrick's skates at Sochi (the Four Seasons, I do always notice the music). I can upload it to youtube on one of my google accounts if you like..."

Click to expand...

Thanks!!! But I found it with a search of the men's free skate as opposed to just searching for Patrick. For those who are interested, after rescoring, the gap closed to less than 3 points with the new GOE system (no adjustments for a dropped jumping pass), but Hanyu still won.

Can either of you link it? I haven't watched that in a while.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf-0ct53q0w

One thing I never noticed until I re-scored, Hanyu didn't get any credit for his 3 salchow on his lutz combo.

Great, thanks.

Old Cat Lady said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf-0ct53q0w

One thing I never noticed until I re-scored, Hanyu didn't get any credit for his 3 salchow on his lutz combo.

Click to expand...

Thanks - that's probably a better version than mine, which has the NBC commentary and is - even though I'm not a fan and am happy Yuzuru won - rather sad to listen to.

And anyway, the Olympics Channel blocked it when I tried (which is probably what happened to the copy I downloaded after I did)

Old Cat Lady said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf-0ct53q0w

One thing I never noticed until I re-scored, Hanyu didn't get any credit for his 3 salchow on his lutz combo.

Click to expand...

Well, that actually benefited him because if his 3S had been scored as a separate jumping pass, and thus his 8th one, then his 2nd 3Z (which is worth about 2 points more than a 3S) wouldn't have counted at all.

But it was weird that it wasn't counted, as if he never even executed it, when he clearly did.

cohen-esque said:

I got bored with all the talk of the men so I decided to see how this would work with the Olympic Ladies results. I used the same methodology as Shanshani-- except that I transplanted exactly the same GOE scores as the judges gave between -3 and +3-- and got somewhat different results.

Click to expand...

Hm, so what's you're saying is, instead of multiplying the GOE by 5/3 (on the assumption that GOE would increase proportionally), you just gave them their original -3/+3 score on the new -5 to 5 system. Interesting. Depending on how judging goes, that may actually be a better model for the ladies than my proportional GOE increase model, because I think there's a high chance that neither Alina or Evgenia will be getting a lot of +4 to +5 GOEs, at least for their jumps. Neither of them jumps particularly big, so they may not be able to hit that (now extremely important) GOE bullet. Kaetlyn does jump big, but her axis is often a bit wonky, so she may struggle to hit 4+ GOE as well (though perhaps less than Alina or Evgenia? That would be interesting).

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

Well, that actually benefited him because if his 3S had been scored as a separate jumping pass, and thus his 8th one, then his 2nd 3Z (which is worth about 2 points more than a 3S) wouldn't have counted at all.

But it was weird that it wasn't counted, as if he never even executed it, when he clearly did.

Click to expand...

Hmmm, maybe something in the rules. Maybe someone like gkelly or BoP can answer?