General Skating Chat

[golden]

i've only watched the singles skating one so far but it's unintentionally hilarious. i genuinely could not stop laughing. i could probably make a compilation of my favourite moments, every second is more awkward than the last. its quite ridiculous  the emphasis on the word guideline, the struggles with technology, finishing with "don't worry, it's exactly the same", you just cant get more isu than this 

[Yatagarasu]

4 hours ago, robin said:

the judges can do whatever the f they want? 

 

Exactly the same as before! 

 

___

 

Seriously though, it's not just the + GOE, the -GOE are seriously influential now too we are going to have such an amazing party in the next four years with these "guidelines" 

[Eclair]

the ice dance video is so much better. no it's just a guideline nonsense. clear instructions and the two woman are funny and entertaining. if only the single and pair video had the same quality..

[rockstaryuzu]

8 hours ago, Yoa said:

Yuzuru's 3a was used as an example of bullet 1 (very good height and very good length 6:12) and bullet 4 (steps before the jump, unexpected or creative entry 7:18) for jumps in ISU's webinar

 

The main thing I take away from that is that a fall is always -5 GOE... not sure how different that is from before. And speaking as a scientist, 'very good height' and 'very good length' are not concrete descriptors by any manner or means...they need to start quantifying what 'very good' means. Does it mean the skater can jump up to half their height or fly 1/4 the width of the rink, or what?  And with modern computer analysis, they could create algorithms to come up with reasonable (ie based on empirical data of past performances) numbers for these...

[Pamigena]

9 minutes ago, rockstaryuzu said:

And with modern computer analysis

 

ehm, those "guidelines" are brought to us by people who think that CDs are high-tech and that the USB stick was invented by Satan, so......

[liv]

The USB stick WAS invented by Satan....  they drive this old bird crazy... 

[Old Cat Lady]

1 hour ago, rockstaryuzu said:

The main thing I take away from that is that a fall is always -5 GOE... not sure how different that is from before. 

 

hmm, I didn't get that at all.  Unless I missed something, all they did was show the negative features and comment that there were a lot more reductions than before.  The only automatic -5 is the SP: Jump element not according to requirement, not that they ever adhered to the auto max deduction rule before .   Judges don't want to follow the guideline... I know, we'll just get rid of the requirement for steps before the jumps rather than actually sanctioning the judges! 

 

As far as I can tell, in both the old and the new system you're supposed to deduct for falls like normal errrs, by adding positives then subtracting the negatives.  That's why Kolyada often gets -2's for falls on his quad lutz from judges.  But judges rarely give less than the maximum for a fall and don't recall them ever giving the automatic -3 for no steps before a jump in the short program.

[rockstaryuzu]

2 hours ago, Old Cat Lady said:

, I didn't get that at all.  Unless I missed something, all they did was show the negative features and comment that there were a lot more reductions than before. 

I may be mixing up my terms, but what I'm referring to is the fact that all the charts of deductions they showed had "fall: -5" at the top.

.

[Old Cat Lady]

35 minutes ago, rockstaryuzu said:

I may be mixing up my terms, but what I'm referring to is the fact that all the charts of deductions they showed had "fall: -5" at the top.

.

 

Lol, not sure if I'm misunderstanding you or if you're misunderstanding me.

 

That chart doesn't show the final GOE.  It's what's subtracted after the positive aspects are added up.  So, if a jump has very good height/distance and steps before the jump, it would start at +2. Then, if nothing else is wrong with the jump, you subtract 5 for the fall, ending in -3.  However, a skater never has a perfect jump then falls over for no reason so normally there's going to be additional deductions - that, and judges don't seem to follow the bullets strictly when it comes to falls.

 

The only deduction which is listed explicitly as "final GOE must be" -5 is the SP:not according to requirements.  In this case, even if the element is spectacular in every way, you're supposed to give it a final GOE of -5 because it didn't follow the SP requirement for that element.

 

eta: need to make this Yuzu related...  that's part of the reason it was so galling that judges never enforced the steps before jump.  He should have had an additional 3+ point advantage over most of the field since almost no one did steps directly before the solo jump but judges never gave them the automatic -3.

[Neenah]

8 hours ago, Pamigena said:

 

ehm, those "guidelines" are brought to us by people who think that CDs are high-tech and that the USB stick was invented by Satan, so......

After getting a virus from a USB stick that cost me an entire year's work (and a nearly complete project) I am inclined to believe this as well 

[Cerunias]

8 hours ago, Pamigena said:

 

ehm, those "guidelines" are brought to us by people who think that CDs are high-tech and that the USB stick was invented by Satan, so......

 

Powerpoint and video clips embedded in powerpoint are clearly not very high tech by that logic since that's what they used (rather than an overhead projector and clear slides/markers and an old movie reel + projector). But the chap controlling the computer at times made it look almost like it might be near his techno-limit... 
 

 

PS: just saw this:

 

I think we have Hanyu to blame for Virtue/Moir now roping Queen Aljona and Massot into the synchronised single axel exhibition? 

[EisElle]

On 7/7/2018 at 7:23 PM, Pamigena said:

yeah, "unironically", more like taking the rulebook and literally hitting you in the face with it.

Attention everyone, we are talking about guidelines! Guidelines! Do I need to repeat it for the people in the back? I can spell it out for you: g a i d e l a i n s. Guidelines aren't rules. Those are different. If the judges don't follow the guidelines, you're not allowed to bitch about it, because guidelines aren't made to be followed, they are just tools. Rules and tools sound similar, but they're totally different. If judges don't follow the rules, you're also not allowed to bitch about that, and if you do, we're just gonna call the dumb rules controversial and remove them and make more guidelines.

tbh, if they really wanted to have at least a little bit of objective scoring, they could have at least removed the 'guidelines' part.

If judges aren't even able to follow 'requirements' and 'must', go figure what happens when you say, again and again, 'guidelines'.

At this point what even is the sense of searching for bias or punishing judges who don't score in the corridor? They are merely not applying the guidelines, as ISU kindly reminded them it's within their rights to do. Why and how on heart can you punish them, after you told them: whatever?

 

It's the same if in basketball they said the referee: hey, the ball needs to go in the basket to count as a goal, but hey, it's a guideline. If a player misses the basket by 1 m, you can still count it as a goal if you want, eh!

This to me is ten thousand times worse than giving half BV for a fall. Some people complain that a fall is basically a failed element and should get a 0, but isn't this whole thing about guidelines much, much, much worse? And much more incomprehensible? And totally indefensible?

I really wonder how legit ISU punishment towards the two chinese judges is. Literally there is NOTHING in the darn rulebook that can really be used to say 'their scores were objectively wrong, so they must be punished'. Maybe they read the guidelines, then they thought: I'll do as it pleases me. And they were basically told to do so by the ISU. Those who scored in the corridor maybe followed the guidelines,maybe not, but what  makes their choice more legit, if there is nothing all of them must do? Just because they were the majority? what if only one judge followed the guidelines for all skaters while the majority was overly strict with a group and overly generous with another group, and that poor judge finds himself flagged for being biased against the second group when in truth he was the only non-biased judge in that panel?

All of this as if bullets themselves weren't vague enough to begin with.

 

IOC should really give a good read to the handbook and reconsider keeping FS as an olympic sport, maybe ISU would finally change that idiotic phrasing. We can't erase subjectivity but maybe finally there would be not so blatant leeway left to any crazy score.

And the worst of all of this, more than making fans angry and alienating part of those potential viewers they so sough, is that they do all of this to the skaters, who works they asses off everyday for years and would deserve as bare minimum to be judged according to fair rules. And there just can't be fair rules, if judges are allowed to do whatever they want, and even encouraged to do so, with all this stressing that 'rules' are 'only guidelines' 

 

[rockstaryuzu]

On 7/8/2018 at 2:32 AM, Old Cat Lady said:

 

Lol, not sure if I'm misunderstanding you or if you're misunderstanding me.

 

That chart doesn't show the final GOE.  It's what's subtracted after the positive aspects are added up.  So, if a jump has very good height/distance and steps before the jump, it would start at +2. Then, if nothing else is wrong with the jump, you subtract 5 for the fall, ending in -3.  However, a skater never has a perfect jump then falls over for no reason so normally there's going to be additional deductions - that, and judges don't seem to follow the bullets strictly when it comes to falls.

 

The only deduction which is listed explicitly as "final GOE must be" -5 is the SP:not according to requirements.  In this case, even if the element is spectacular in every way, you're supposed to give it a final GOE of -5 because it didn't follow the SP requirement for that element.

 

eta: need to make this Yuzu related...  that's part of the reason it was so galling that judges never enforced the steps before jump.  He should have had an additional 3+ point advantage over most of the field since almost no one did steps directly before the solo jump but judges never gave them the automatic -3.

Thanks for the explanation. I was confusing the deductions for the final GOE marks.

[rockstaryuzu]

On 7/8/2018 at 6:40 AM, Cerunias said:

 

Powerpoint and video clips embedded in powerpoint are clearly not very high tech by that logic since that's what they used (rather than an overhead projector and clear slides/markers and an old movie reel + projector). But the chap controlling the computer at times made it look almost like it might be near his techno-limit... 
 

 

PS: just saw this:

 

I think we have Hanyu to blame for Virtue/Moir now roping Queen Aljona and Massot into the synchronised single axel exhibition? 

How are V&M ever gonna be satisfied with regular ice dance after this? See what you started, Yuzu? 

[Cerunias]

1 minute ago, rockstaryuzu said:

How are V&M ever gonna be satisfied with regular ice dance after this? See what you started, Yuzu? 

 

Challenge to Yuzu: Note that perfect sync between all four skaters? Your turn now...