General Skating Chat

[Murieleirum]

21 minutes ago, Valkyria said:

Raising the bar would give a boost to skaters that lean more towards the "artistic" side so they have a chance not to be left behind by underdeveloped jumpsters (ergo ~saving~ the artistry and leveling the two parts of a score), while also rewarding those who take the time and effort to go for the complete package.

 

Of course, this is all an ideal situation. Nothing pertaining to PCS can ever truly work as long as politicking is rampant, but that's not a problem inherent to the system but to the people.

 

If the PCS bar is raised, politicking with those scores will be more difficult, although it will still happen. But during this last year, everytime a judges gave Chen and Chan, or Chen and Hanyu, the same PCS in Skating Skills or Transitions, people noticed it and complained. Sure, complaining doesn't change things, but if the roof is raised, the difference between good skating skills and excellent skating skills will have a chance to be highlighted more. To me, that's actually the greatest priority there is right now, because it just can't happen that years and years of Skating Skills study get completely ignored. 

After that, an accelerated course of "what are transitions?" for all ISU judges, right? 

[SSS]

3 minutes ago, Murieleirum said:

Sure, complaining doesn't change things, but if the roof is raised, the difference between good skating skills and excellent skating skills will have a chance to be highlighted more.

If they don't fix judging, it takes probably two competitions for Chen to get same SS or TR scores as Yuzu...

[EisElle]

8 hours ago, xeyra said:

Comparative Scale of Values for triple and quadruple jumps, comparing current season with 2018-2019 season proposed changes, taking into account the interpretation we've all had with the 10% increment on GOE based on BV as described in the article:

 

 

I find the range of GOEs way too high. It's unsettling how much more power the judges would have like this.They can eat half of the BV of a jump, or award half BV more, which is huge, even with all the PCS question out of the picture.

 

Now, assuming that a fall gets mandatory -5 GOE in analogy with current rules, which I think is quite possible, we would have a 4T with fall  barely worth more than a merely average 3T with 0 GOE (only BV). Which to me is quite odd. would be And it doesn't feel right that a 4T or 4S with fall would be worth less than a the BV of a 3Lo, or 4Lo with fall less than the BV of a 3F, and a 4Lz with fall less than an unremarkable 3Lz with 0 GOE, too. And it's ridiculous that a 4A attempt with fall would be worth 1.75 points less than a 3A with 0 GOE and even slightly less than a perfect +5 GOE 3T.

Just.what.the.heck!

And if falls mean mandatory -5, I hope the further 1 point deduction will be removed, because that would mean a 4T with fall would get  a ridiculous 3.75 against an unremarkable but landed 3T with BV 4.20, which would be entirely laughable.

 

I myself am in for some overlapping between a very bad quad and a very good triple, but this is too much! A bad quad shouldn't be comparable to a landed but unremarkable triple. This isn't "rewarding quality" at all.

IMHO this new system is much more focused on punishing mistakes than really encouraging quality, and wouldn't encourage skaters to challenge themselves (unless they do that just for the sake of glory). Which is a loss, because pushing the athletes to go further and further is what a sport shoud do, what sport is. But of course, for all of those people who want FS competitions to turn into endless squabbles about "artistry", I guess it's fine.

 

 

I definitely don't see anymore 4-5 quads programs (at least until judges won't start throwing away +5 on quads, which I think would take some time). The risk of messing something big time would be very very high, so most skaters would go back to more affordable triples (if judges would be willing to award max positive GOE on triples is another question mark though) because they can dream consitency on quads. Till now it was a worhty risk to go for a quad and fall, as long as they got the rotations. But if the quad BV is so brutally chopped, then I expect Men's skating to go back to pre-Sochi, if not pre-Vancouver. TBH I don't think the audience ISU wants to bring in so badly with the supposed "high quality" thing would be that much thrilled about that. And just when finally it looked something more exciting could happen to ladies'event, ISU quashes everything, damn

Also, if ISU's concern is protecting the skaters' health, maybe it should make sure current rules are applied tbw. Just start promoting proper jumping technique, which usually results in good take-offs and nice landings that stress less the body. And maybe don't reward bad jumps in spite of your own rules. And don't throw away pcs just because.

 

4 hours ago, Murieleirum said:

then e have the RAI commentators, whom don't even know what a counter is, and only make empty compliments when they think the performance was great/clean, and heavily favour some skaters instead of others. I remember, I'm not sure if it was GPF 2010 or another comp, but they went ahead and talked about how they preferred Takahashi 100 times over Patrick Chan, and didn't think Chan should have won, for 10 minutes straight, without talking tech, or PCS, in a professional manner. 

Rai sport commentaries often make me wince because when there are the two ladies together they sometimes let out high pitched screams that make my ears hurt, and they aren't really as knowledgeble as they should be (Bianconi in particular, she shuld knew a lot of about tech, SS and TR but never gives any detail). Their comments are usually so very generic.

 

1 hour ago, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

Which seemed true for awhile, which was why the system worked, for the most part anyway, until Hanyu hurricaned over everything (absolutely no offense meant to those affected by Harvey and Irma, I'm just using the term as a figure of speech because it seems well-suited for the subject matter--my apologies if anyone here finds it inappropriate) with his perfect tech technique and ideal physique and pioneering perfectionist mentality which allowed room for artistry to shine even while the tech is sky-high still. Heck, the guy turned his tech into art.

 

Yes, Yuzuru being good at doing everything is what first "broke" the system. But the real break (that now ISU so desperately wants to fix messing things up) happened when in the attempt to keep other skaters in the race suddenly judges started being a tad too generous with everyone else to even out things...or maybe judges just got a taste of how good it feels giving +3 GOE and high PCS and became addicted.

 

1 hour ago, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

*I seem to recall that he (Hanyu)  was allowed to pass the 90 threshold back when his artistry was still too unrefined to really deserve it, too--though it was still a lot better than what Chen is putting out now still, given his (Hanyu's) tech back then was less challenging--when the judges first started to show signs of dropping Chan for Hanyu...which seemed to push him towards refining it enough to finally truly deserve it (proof that ego can be good, when applied correctly)...though a few might argue that he's sometimes a tad over-rewarded still. Subjective, like I said, even for the great Hanyu--though only to a limited extent. I guess that's the best any skater can hope for. Limiting subjectivity to a narrow extent, I mean. Speaking of working to deserve scores they're getting, I was kind of hoping Chen would do the same but perhaps not this cycle seeing there's so much at stake...

I could argue that even if now Yuzuru is way better than before, he had already very good ss back then, when he started getting 9s, and his programs had a lot of transitions, and choreo was good too (Buttle and Wilson had make sure it was good, after all. IN and PE are a different question, if we talk about the FS). PCS are somehow comparative, so if judges were already giving e.g more than 8.5 to skaters that did less TR and were way slower on the ice, then it was about right that in comparison Yuzu got 9.

I could also argue that even in Sochi judges hadn't still dropped Patrick at all, as for his flawless short Yuzuru still got less PCS than Patrick's not so flawed one (step out on 3A). Mind you, it was that legendary WR Parisienne Walkways, after a string of clean shorts and yes I might be slightly salty for that.

And I might also point out it took Yuzu that perfect Chopin 2.0 in Barcelona to finally break past Patrick's PCS. Overall I don't think Yuzuru has ever been that much over-rewarded if we compare his scores to those of others. tbh I find he's more often than not under-rewarded in TR, at least.

19 minutes ago, Valkyria said:

Of course, this is all an ideal situation. Nothing pertaining to PCS can ever truly work as long as politicking is rampant, but that's not a problem inherent to the system but to the people. As it is, I don't think there's a way to get rid of that, unfortunately 

I agree, the system may have some flaws, but they could be worked out. The problem is how the system is used or rather misused, but that's sadly an old problem that ISU doesn't want or lacks the resources to address.

[Murieleirum]

1 minute ago, SSS said:

If they don't fix judging, it takes probably two competitions for Chen to get same SS or TR scores as Yuzu...

 

Remember though, Yuzuru chose to bring Chopin and Seimei back to raise the bar himself. Chopin and Seimei are 'warhorses' of their own rank. Anyone competing against THAT already has the bar raised, nevermind how Yuzuru will skate them (which will surely be outstanding). 

 

I'm not sure, but we will see in Cup of Russia, right? It will be Yuzuru's and Nathan's second competition. They will try to do their best, but their programs are already disleveled. Plus, it's Europe, so it shouldn't favour Nathan nor Yuzu too much... But.... you never know. 

[Valkyria]

4 minutes ago, LadyLou said:

 

I find the range of GOEs way too high. It's unsettling how much more power the judges would have like this.They can eat half of the BV of a jump, or award half BV more, which is huge, even with all the PCS question out of the picture.

 

Now, assuming that a fall gets mandatory -5 GOE in analogy with current rules, which I think is quite possible, we would have a 4T with fall  barely worth more than a merely average 3T with 0 GOE (only BV). Which to me is quite odd. would be And it doesn't feel right that a 4T or 4S with fall would be worth less than a the BV of a 3Lo, or 4Lo with fall less than the BV of a 3F, and a 4Lz with fall less than an unremarkable 3Lz with 0 GOE, too. And it's ridiculous that a 4A attempt with fall would be worth 1.75 points less than a 3A with 0 GOE and even slightly less than a perfect +5 GOE 3T.

Just.what.the.heck!

And if falls mean mandatory -5, I hope the further 1 point deduction will be removed, because that would mean a 4T with fall would get  a ridiculous 3.75 against an unremarkable but landed 3T with BV 4.20, which would be entirely laughable.

 

I myself am in for some overlapping between a very bad quad and a very good triple, but this is too much! A bad quad shouldn't be comparable to a landed but unremarkable triple. This isn't "rewarding quality" at all.

IMHO this new system is much more focused on punishing mistakes than really encouraging quality, and wouldn't encourage skaters to challenge themselves (unless they do that just for the sake of glory). Which is a loss, because pushing the athletes to go further and further is what a sport shoud do, what sport is. But of course, for all of those people who want FS competitions to turn into endless squabbles about "artistry", I guess it's fine.

 

I pretty much agree with all these. The +-5 GOE thing could be good in theory to reward outstanding quality, but then again it leaves such a big grey area that it could end up being, as you say, punishing. It feels reactive to the quad race, a power-grab (as has been mentioned here before) to get things back into their hands and out of the skater's, instead of proactive to help the system work better and promote the complete package.

 

As we still don't have information about how GOE should be awarded under the new rules, we can't predict much more either besides that politicking will happen; we'll see to how much extent 

[xeyra]

4 minutes ago, Valkyria said:

 

I pretty much agree with all these. The +-5 GOE thing could be good in theory to reward outstanding quality, but then again it leaves such a big grey area that it could end up being, as you say, punishing. It feels reactive to the quad race, a power-grab (as has been mentioned here before) to get things back into their hands and out of the skater's, instead of proactive to help the system work better and promote the complete package.

 

As we still don't have information about how GOE should be awarded under the new rules, we can't predict much more either besides that politicking will happen; we'll see to how much extent 

 

We have to remember, though, that these tables are speculative only. We don't yet know exactly how much each GOE interval will give or take away from a jump. We know they talked about increments of 10% of BV but maybe it'll be less for negative GOE or they'll have a different formula in the end than what we speculate. And I both doubt there'll be many over rewarding of +5 on jumps as well as that they'll take 50% off the BV of a jump in GOE if you fall on it. A -2 GOE on a fall in the new system, if at 10% of BV, would already make a jump worth less than the same jump with -4 GOE in the current system, due to the BV reduction too. 

[golden]

whats the point in having a -5 at all if it wont be utilised on a fall though? what else can it be used on? i completely understand how unwarranted the amount of points you would lose is, but the -5/50% deduction is absolutely redundant if it wont be used on falls. at the end of the day, that is the biggest mistake you can make on a jump. stumbles, step outs, underrotations, wrong edges are all jump imperfections, but in no way as severe as a fall and not as jarring to the flow of the program.  falls are penalised enough under the current system with -4 goe on quads and a mandatory -1 deduction, in my opinion. the whole system is fine, lol, the judging isnt, but i think ive mentioned that enough in my previous posts lmao.

 

why is the isu an edgy teenager, hating anything popular and trying to do the exact opposite of what people want them to do???

[Sombreuil]

@golden

Or a cranky elderly person cutting off their nose to spite their face

Symmetry?  Makes as much sense as any other explanation for this mess.

[xeyra]

15 minutes ago, golden said:

whats the point in having a -5 at all if it wont be utilised on a fall though? what else can it be used on? i completely understand how unwarranted the amount of points you would lose is, but the -5/50% deduction is absolutely redundant if it wont be used on falls. at the end of the day, that is the biggest mistake you can make on a jump. stumbles, step outs, underrotations, wrong edges are all jump imperfections, but in no way as severe as a fall and not as jarring to the flow of the program.  falls are penalised enough under the current system with -4 goe on quads and a mandatory -1 deduction, in my opinion. the whole system is fine, lol, the judging isnt, but i think ive mentioned that enough in my previous posts lmao.

 

why is the isu an edgy teenager, hating anything popular and trying to do the exact opposite of what people want them to do???

 

Yes, I questioned the same thing. -4/-5 GOE will have to be applied to something but I cannot think that they'll do the same 10% increments off BV for negative GOE as it's speculated for positive GOE (heck, I don't even think +5 GOE will be worth 50% of a jump's BV, which is... a lot), so whatever tables fans are doing and speculating about is likely to be wrong anyway. That or ISU really wants a fall on a quad to be worth as much as a so so triple, in which case say goodbye to quads. 

[Valkyria]

32 minutes ago, xeyra said:

 

We have to remember, though, that these tables are speculative only. We don't yet know exactly how much each GOE interval will give or take away from a jump. We know they talked about increments of 10% of BV but maybe it'll be less for negative GOE or they'll have a different formula in the end than what we speculate. And I both doubt there'll be many over rewarding of +5 on jumps as well as that they'll take 50% off the BV of a jump in GOE if you fall on it. A -2 GOE on a fall in the new system, if at 10% of BV, would already make a jump worth less than the same jump with -4 GOE in the current system, due to the BV reduction too. 

 

I was thinking about a simple +-5 spread, no percentages, since we don't know how (or if) they're going to be applied. It's still a sizeable chunk to give or take from a jump's BV.

 

The percentages are crazy, imo. If they use them like in these examples, they would be too extreme (but yes, falls on quads that costly would stop the race in its tracks for sure :__D)

 

 

[¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

2 時間前, Xenさんが言いました:

No I don't think that was the point either =D but I did think a bit more about why I didn't find the PCS scores of Javi, Yuzu and even Patrick having perfects that surprising. That's because they kind of are the more balanced tech and artistry skaters of the current gen. Well Yuzu especially, but Patrick and Javi do get classified as more artistic skaters, so I'm not shocked by their higher PCS. And relative to some of the new guys, they are. Actually Boyang's PCS scores are closer to what I'd expect as the norm. And the real norm we'd have to dig past the large feds and the top 6...then we'd have to check how PCS scores evolved since 2010 and pre-Sochi.

 

But if I look at say Shoma, Nate and Boyang, and think of them along the athletic and artistic scale, I can see where they would most likely fall. And if you look at the Junior men coming up, even with Vincent Zhou etc you can still kind of see it. The closest I would put to balanced, might be Shoma actually, but he's not exactly quite Yuzu or Pchan level in skating skills or technical mastery. If Boyang works on his artistry, sure he could possibly achieve more than even Shoma. Among the younger guys, the only one I'd kind of see is possibly Cha Junhwa,  possibly Deniss (but he's a small fed skater), maybe Shimada if he recovers? But overall, slim pickings for skaters who could combine both art and sport and do extremely well on both. So it's more probable and efficient that skaters pick one side and gun for that?

 

Ah. This was more or less the point I was trying to make in my very first post about this subject, a few pages back. So I'd be a hypocrite if I said I don't feel the same way.

 

In terms of Chan and Fernandez, I didn't mention them in my previous long post because in terms of "hurricaneness" (sorry!), theirs are not as epic as Hanyu's. I don't actually get a 'force of nature" sense from them at all, tbqh. Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing them at all. If anything, they are perfect the way they are. They're leagues above everyone else other than Hanyu when it comes to complete packaging. Hanyu's just an anomaly. Which is probably why I got into him, and subsequently fs itself. I tried to find someone else to like after he pulled me into the sport (I wasn't even at casual viewer level, my interest in the sport, and especially the men's discipline, was 0), and couldn't find anyone else. I wasn't even necessarily looking for the same thing, knowing that he is a unique creature. Just...watching everyone else simply reminds me why I never got into the sport in the first place. They're just not my cup of tea.

 

Anyway, back to Chan and Fernandez. While complete, their level of completion, I feel, still pales in comparison to Hanyu's. Objectively speaking, their biggest jumps, when executed perfectly, are things of beauty in their own right but the style of their jumping has a heavier/sturdier feel to it that while nice, doesn't lend the jumps themselves to blend in with the performance seamlessly. Their jumps give off a longer feeling of pause at the end...or something. I'm not quite sure how to put my finger on it. The accent effect is nice, though. The way I see it, these jumps that they do, with lovely transitions, just show the viewer that they can nail the performance aspect as well as the jump aspects beautifully even with increased difficulty. I don't feel a sense of cohesiveness coming from their programs the way I feel it does with Hanyu's. I think for the programs to be cohesive, the only kind of jumping style that would work is the light and airy kind, no matter the nature and style of the performance. Because that's the only way the jumps themselves don't stand out too much from the rest of the performance.

 

But whether people prefer Hanyu's style, which is full-on cohesiveness, or Fernandez's/Chan's, is a matter of personal preference, as I think these skaters all have different ideals. So while different kinds of complete, they're all complete still, I feel. And it's great that they're all different (Fernandez and Chan have different ways of expressing themselves in their performances) cos then there's something for everyone. ^^

 

2 時間前, Valkyriaさんが言いました:

 

The thing with the PCS ceiling being fixed is that it encourages skaters to go for the jumps as a surefire point grab in the TES, since the PCS take a much longer time to develop for a lesser reward, in detriment of more "artistic" and/or intricate programs. Raising the bar would give a boost to skaters that lean more towards the "artistic" side so they have a chance not to be left behind by underdeveloped jumpsters (ergo ~saving~ the artistry and leveling the two parts of a score), while also rewarding those who take the time and effort to go for the complete package.

 

 

Of course, this is all an ideal situation. Nothing pertaining to PCS can ever truly work as long as politicking is rampant, but that's not a problem inherent to the system but to the people. As it is, I don't think there's a way to get rid of that, unfortunately 

 

I...don't quite get it? Maybe I'm missing your point but how would increasing PCS limit give more artistically-inclined (nee less technically-savvy) skaters a boost when less deserving skaters with better tech will just get the same boost? I mean, as it is, these skaters who deserve to be in the 90s threshold are held back in the low to mid-80s, who can consider themselves lucky and are supposed to feel themselves well-rewarded if they get high 80s for having average tech, while high-flying tech specialists who are very obviously sacrificing the finer details of their performances to present their tech are getting high 80s and 90s? Like your second paragraph and disgruntled emoji imply, this kind of scoring isn't likely going to change anytime soon so if the PCS ceiling is raised, it'd be exactly the same situation now, only with bigger numbers...?

 

1 時間前, LadyLouさんが言いました:

Yes, Yuzuru being good at doing everything is what first "broke" the system. But the real break (that now ISU so desperately wants to fix messing things up) happened when in the attempt to keep other skaters in the race suddenly judges started being a tad too generous with everyone else to even out things...or maybe judges just got a taste of how good it feels giving +3 GOE and high PCS and became addicted.

 

Yeap. Which was why I said everyone and their grandmas with impressive enough tech are all up there with him now. Or will get there next season. The fact that we're even talking about it now as a fixed thing shows how the system truly works. That is to say, not the way it's supposed to. More impressive considering the fact Hanyu at least had to old school work his way towards them over the course of more than one season while one of them is already hitting the high 80s in their first season, without the level of artistry required to justify it, and another hitting the 90s only in their 2nd season despite more senior skaters having better performance skills but earning a lot less points in the same department. I've seen lots of complaints about this issue, that all ultimately amounted to nothing* because--you guessed it--it's all subjective, anyway. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

*Or maybe it did, hence the pushing of technical programs and artistic programs as separate events >_<

 

1 時間前, LadyLouさんが言いました:

I could argue that even if now Yuzuru is way better than before, he had already very good ss back then, when he started getting 9s, and his programs had a lot of transitions, and choreo was good too (Buttle and Wilson had make sure it was good, after all. IN and PE are a different question, if we talk about the FS). PCS are somehow comparative, so if judges were already giving e.g more than 8.5 to skaters that did less TR and were way slower on the ice, then it was about right that in comparison Yuzu got 9.

I could also argue that even in Sochi judges hadn't still dropped Patrick at all, as for his flawless short Yuzuru still got less PCS than Patrick's not so flawed one (step out on 3A). Mind you, it was that legendary WR Parisienne Walkways, after a string of clean shorts and yes I might be slightly salty for that.

And I might also point out it took Yuzu that perfect Chopin 2.0 in Barcelona to finally break past Patrick's PCS. Overall I don't think Yuzuru has ever been that much over-rewarded if we compare his scores to those of others. tbh I find he's more often than not under-rewarded in TR, at least.

 

Yeah, I acknowledged that he had at least somewhat justified his pcs scoring better than some of his younger rivals with high pcs are doing now. Well, Uno's I get somewhat. While Hanyu has things in his artistry back then that Uno still lacks now, Uno likewise has things within his artistry now that Hanyu was lacking still back then. So even if his scores are strange in relation to scores people like Chan are only getting now, there's still the argument of his higher tech content (albeit questionably executed but the judges don't seem to mind and that's all that matters, really) and cleaner skates. And in relation to Chen's scores, by the logic you cited, his seem fair enough. But Chen's remain elusive to justification...

 

As for the Chan vs. Hanyu argument , Sochi is a tad different, though. The guy was the heavy favorite and if they reeeaaaaallly wanted to, they could let Chan win still, even if it's only by a hair's breadth. Same way if they reaaaallly wanted to, they could put someone with higher BV who skated clean enough above a phenomenal Hanyu but with slightly lower BV in PC, though they might be a tad less inclined to do so if the lower BV included both a well-executed 4Lz  and a lovely 4A...

 

And well, if he'a under-rewarded in some aspects and over-rewarded in others, the total works out to about the same so those scores are his to deserve at the end of the day. I mean, people might want to split hairs still and if they do, it's their prerogative, is all I'm saying.

[xeyra]

18 minutes ago, Valkyria said:

 

I was thinking about a simple +-5 spread, no percentages, since we don't know how (or if) they're going to be applied. It's still a sizeable chunk to give or take from a jump's BV.

 

The percentages are crazy, imo. If they use them like in these examples, they would be too extreme (but yes, falls on quads that costly would stop the race in its tracks for sure :__D)

 

 

 

I thought that would be like that too, actually, which would be simpler, but then they decided to lower BVs too, so a -5 on a 4T fall would make it worth 4.5, which is basically a 3T, so it's still the same issue of punishing quads a bit disproportionally. Also, the icenetwork article talked about applying a set percentage off BV for GOE, so that stopped the idea of just a basic +5/-5 . Which makes things even worse when it comes to negative GOE. So I don't know. I'm speculating using these tables for fun but I've the feeling this is not going to be what they intend. 

 

Edit: might they lower quad's factoring from the 1 they currently have while doing these changes to GOE, I wonder. 

[Valkyria]

20 minutes ago, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ said:

I...don't quite get it? Maybe I'm missing your point but how would increasing PCS limit give more artistically-inclined (nee less technically-savvy) skaters a boost when less deserving skaters with better tech will just get the same boost? I mean, as it is, these skaters who deserve to be in the 90s threshold are held back in the low to mid-80s, who can consider themselves lucky and are supposed to feel themselves well-rewarded if they get high 80s for having average tech, while high-flying tech specialists who are very obviously sacrificing the finer details of their performances to present their tech are getting high 80s and 90s? Like your second paragraph and disgruntled emoji imply, this kind of scoring isn't likely going to change anytime soon so if the PCS ceiling is raised, it'd be exactly the same situation now, only with bigger numbers...?

 

I think we're coming at the same thing from different angles and talking ourselves in circles 

 

Ideally, with minimal politiks and true separation from TES, a higher PCS ceiling would allow a bigger reward to the more artistically-inclined so it helps compensate for the lack of tech in otherwise good quality skaters. Realistically, of course it could be manipulated as you say and not work as intended. Again, as with the current CoP the fault is with the people applying it, not the system; there's no system that allows for total objectivity while still keeping the "artistic" component of FS 

 

 

18 minutes ago, xeyra said:

 

I thought that would be like that too, actually, which would be simpler, but then they decided to lower BVs too, so a -5 on a 4T fall would make it worth 4.5, which is basically a 3T, so it's still the same issue of punishing quads a bit disproportionally. Also, the icenetwork article talked about applying a set percentage off BV for GOE, so that stopped the idea of just a basic +5/-5 . Which makes things even worse when it comes to negative GOE. So I don't know. I'm speculating using these tables for fun but I've the feeling this is not going to be what they intend. 

 

...I don't even know where they're going with this. Seems so unnecesarily complicated XD

[¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

8 分ぐらい, Valkyriaさんが言いました:

 

I think we're coming at the same thing from different angles and talking ourselves in circles 

 

You and I seem to do that a lot...

 

8 分ぐらい, Valkyriaさんが言いました:

 

Ideally, with minimal politiks and true separation from TES, a higher PCS ceiling would allow a bigger reward to the more artistically-inclined so it helps compensate for the lack of tech in otherwise good quality skaters. Realistically, of course it could be manipulated as you say and not work as intended. Again, as with the current CoP the fault is with the people applying it, not the system; there's no system that allows for total objectivity while still keeping the "artistic" component of FS 

 

Uh huh. Which is why it makes no sense to me to go beyond 100. The "p" in PCS might as well stand for "political". >.<

[golden]

13 minutes ago, Valkyria said:

...I don't even know where they're going with this. Seems so unnecesarily complicated XD

 

and just driving more people away from figure skating, because its such a task to understand