Should PCS scores reflect Technical Errors?

[chopinskate]

I don't think technical mistakes should be deducted from PCS.

There is the performance/execution component anyway. If the overall impression in terms of performance is being spoiled, then that's one place it should go from.

Also, there's a lot of things that can affect the artistic components. If a competitor is falling twice at the beginning of the program, but towards the end when there's a swell of the music, uses the emotion generated to create an uplifting feeling extremely well, in a "come-back" kind of way, would we still mark them low on PE and IN? Maybe it's not 10 worthy, but there was emotion there that was conveyed well.

I think the best solution would be to actually evaluate everything for what they are worth. No influence from past performances, no reputation judging etc. But it won't ever happen.

 

[gkelly]

How about this? Tell the judges to reflect any errors in the relevant PCS as they see fit, and then let them judge as they see fit.

You may find a given error more disruptive to more components than most of the judges. When you're on the panel, you can penalize it as you see fit.

And if some other error doesn't disrupt the performance for you (e.g., a wrong edge on a flip or frequent wrong edges etc. in a step sequence) you don't have to mark down the PCS at all, even if you do give -GOE for that element.

You use your judgment, and let the other judges use theirs. That's why there's a whole panel.

 

[moriel]

BTW- if there could be a possibility to have a different judges group judging PCS only- those judges should come from Dance field. They we all shall see who deserves what PCS for real. It's been a long story since PCS got connected to TES and is judged according to rating, federation weight and jumps performance. Who would try and change that? I think no one can. That is why people strongly believe in numbers saying that this particular young skater is a skating god(dess) and the older and more refined one is somehow not. Which is ridiculous.

please no, dance judges seem to be the most vicious reputation scorers ever.

 

[moriel]

How about this hypothetical?

1) Get rid of the mandatory deduction as it stands.

2) If any element is scored with an overall negative GOE of -1 to -4, lower the PCS that skater receives by .25 in every category; if the GOE is between -4 and -5, lower it by .5 instead.

3) A fall on a non-element also incurs a .5 penalty.

So for example, if a skater falls once (-.5 PCS) and falters two times on jump landings to a lesser degree (-.25 x 2 PCS), the skater will get a penalty of -1 in every PCS category. Effectively, the most that skater can receive in each component is a 9.

Most PCs categories have nothing to do with a fall / bad landing

 

[draqq]

Most PCs categories have nothing to do with a fall / bad landing

I wonder if that's the problem with IJS. True enough as you note, it's not really required for judges to lower their PCS marks for any category due to falls apart from maybe performance/execution. And so people scratch their head and roll their eyes when a skater gets high 8s and 9s in PCS even with many errors. And because of corridor judging, any judge that decides to mark without taking reputation and popularity into consideration might be considered "out of line" by both fans and the ISU.

 

[draqq]

How about this? Tell the judges to reflect any errors in the relevant PCS as they see fit, and then let them judge as they see fit.

You may find a given error more disruptive to more components than most of the judges. When you're on the panel, you can penalize it as you see fit.

And if some other error doesn't disrupt the performance for you (e.g., a wrong edge on a flip or frequent wrong edges etc. in a step sequence) you don't have to mark down the PCS at all, even if you do give -GOE for that element.

You use your judgment, and let the other judges use theirs. That's why there's a whole panel.

I wish I could trust the judges wholeheartedly, but we've seen problems all throughout the year with judging whether it's Alexandre Gorojdanov being forced to resign or the apparent investigation into the Chinese judges at the Olympics which has led to the cancellation of Cup of China. And the proposal that would have nipped the bud in conflict-of-interest judging was struck down at the latest ISU Congress. There's a problem with both national bias and, on the flip side, corridor judging, and I don't believe the ISU has addressed these issues enough so that judges can truly judge as they see fit.

 

[draqq]

^I just can’t get behind a -2.50 point deduction for a single scratchy landing, which is what this proposal basically amounts to for the men. Especially not when they’re also getting the same -2.50 deduction for a stepout, and even more especially when the deduction isn’t even being taken out of the TES or total score, but the PCS, and yet is punishing a technical mistake.

And I feel bad for the lower-ranked skaters under this system who wouldn’t get cushy GOEs or baseline PCS, though it’s useless to use bad judging as an excuse not to tweak the system.

Would it be more palatable if the penalty was just for the performance/execution PCS score?

 

[Neenah16]

You cannot have a fixed deduction from PC because it is a scale and not a fixed value. The PC as they are in the rules now mandate that the judges give a number between 0.25 to 10 for each component based on their overall impression of the program and guided by the criteria provided. This is really is the best way to judge the components (even though the fans hate it) and the fact that is is abused by some doesn't make it inherently bad.

To put it simply, when a judge gives a 9 or an 8 for a component it means they though the performance was worth 9 or 8 with the mistakes and all. If we add a deduction over that then we are either penalizing the skater twice for the same mistakes (the judges score +the deduction) or pushing the judges into increasing their PC scores to make sure that when the deduction happens, the score they thought the skaters deserved is the one they end up getting, and neither option is a good thing.

So, what gkelly said was correct. The best way is to have the judges evaluate the performance as they see fit according to the criteria and guidelines (though the ISU do need to make the guidelines clearer) .The only problem would be bias and that can never be eliminated but may be minimized with more accountability.

 

[cohen-esque]

Would it be more palatable if the penalty was just for the performance/execution PCS score?

Well, no, not on the whole. For things like falls or stepouts, then sure— they pretty much always interfere with projection and commitment in a glaring way, even it’s just a brief interruption. But all falls and stepouts aren’t created equally: is a cat-reflexes Javi stepout more or less distracting than a normal fall, or a Pogo fall?

And I just don’t see why something like an “!” or “e” or “<” call should even carry a mandatory PCS deduction at all, despite usually incurring negative GOE (certainly in the case of “e” calls.) A lot of people rave about Ashley Wagner’s or Satoko Miyahara’s PE and IN skills, for instance, even if they UR and/or flutz/lip all over the place, because they simply don’t affect her performance from the standpoint of looking at what the PCS criteria are supposed to measure.

We need to be able to trust the judges to appropriately deduct from PCS if an error does have negative effects on the PCS, and to reflect the extent of those effects... I don’t really trust them, sadly, but forcing heavy-handed, one size fits all penalties like this into the judging system isn’t the answer. It just means that if we were ever to get consistently excellent judging it wouldn’t matter because they would just be handicapped by a bad system, instead. And in the meantime we’d have to suffer through bad judges abusing a bad system.

I think tweaks to the system should focus on making the system better and more versatile, and not more restrictive.

 

[chopinskate]

So in conclusion:

http://georgiapoliticalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Picture2-1-230x300.png

 

[moriel]

I wonder if that's the problem with IJS. True enough as you note, it's not really required for judges to lower their PCS marks for any category due to falls apart from maybe performance/execution. And so people scratch their head and roll their eyes when a skater gets high 8s and 9s in PCS even with many errors. And because of corridor judging, any judge that decides to mark without taking reputation and popularity into consideration might be considered "out of line" by both fans and the ISU.

I think people scratch their heads because PCs are awarded in an overall messed up manner, corridor judging, reputation, big fed bonus and so on. Falls are minor compared to all this.
Imho corridor judging is the main issue with falls. For example, if i've seen a skater with a fall getting 9+ for lets say Transitions or Skating Skills, it wouldnt bother me.
But then it would make sense if Performance and Interpretation score drop by more than 0.25 as they usually do.
I would actually love to see scores like 9+ in TR and 7/8 in PE/IN, for example.

But i dont think there should be mandatory deductions. There should be just actual correct judging.

 

[gkelly]

Let me suggest an exercise:

Watch and award PCS for a competition with a wide range of skill levels that you don't know the results of.

Best: A large live competition you can watch in person, or if it's a club competition watch several different levels and try to keep your scoring scale consistent.

Next best: A large competition you can watch live on video as it is happening.

Next: A whole JGP short program (random skate order) on video

Next: A whole Junior Worlds or Europeans or Four Continents short program

Shortcut if you don't want to invest more than an hour or so: A videoed freeskate of one of the above international events, choosing one randomly selected performance from each warmup group.

Just score the program components. If you're watching on video and haven't watched a lot of live skating in the past, maybe skip the Skating Skills and focus on the more artistic components.

Do your best to score each component. If you know a lot about off-ice performing arts, that knowledge will surely inform your assessment of the skating. But use the the official ISU component guidelines as best you can.

No need to worry about grades of execution, but errors or overall quality of elements make an impression on you in ways that affect the Performance or other program components, reflect that in your component scores.

What kind of score ranges do you end up with for individual skaters and for the field as a whole?

 

[Leonardo]

So if they are revising the technical side of scoring, they should also mark more penalties against the PCS scores if elements are not completed, falls, etc.
s

They tried

Additional Remarks
Program Components
In a program containing a Fall or a Serious error the score ten (10) shall not be awarded for any of the
Components.
In a program containing Falls or Serious errors the score nine-fifty (9.5) or higher should not be awarded for
Skating Skills, Transitions and Composition and the score nine (9.0) or higher should not be awarded for
Performance and Interpretation