Eating Muffins

Posted by Sari

I am feeling really good about these olympics, which is a nice change from SLC, where there was a huge judging controversy involving pairs and dance where I really liked the winners, and the gold in other two disciplines went to skaters whose skating I actively disliked. There is some dramatic irony in that I don’t think either Sarah Hughes or Sale/Pelletier would have been gold medallists if the 6.0 system had wanted the same things from the skaters than Code of Points…

Anyhow, this time around: much better from the emotional point of view. Some general observations.

1. For all the three skating disciplines COP is working better than the old system. There are problems aplenty, but nothing that could not be fixed by tweaking and honing the system.
a) forest from the trees -problem. As COP’s technical portion marks individual movements and the level of difficulty in spirals and spins is achieved by having as many positions as possible, there have been lots of "disjointed" and hurried programs where the elements have been crammed in without really giving room of the choreography to grow. It is however possible to create a beautiful, organic performance while complying with the new rules, just ask Matt Savoie.
b) Component mark problem. There are five component marks, all of equal value. Skating Skills, Transitions, Performance/Execution, Interpretation/Timing and Choreography. Judges very rarely if ever give marks that are more than .75 apart in any of these categories. If a skater has gorgeous skating skills, zero transitions, great lines and pedestrian coreography that should be reflected on the scores. This is a problem which will not go away without constant re-education of judges: it is wrong, wrong, wrong to use component marks for protocol judging and you should be slapped on the fingers for doing it.
c) The splat or not problem. COP is a system which really dings underrotated jumps. This has meand that men are less likely to try quads. An underrotated and fallen quad is just a risk not worth taking when the amount of jumping passes is limited. Similarily, women are less likely to try triple-triple combinations. They are riskier and if your second triple in the combo is more often than not downgraded to double anyway, why even try for the riskier element when – again – the number of your jumping passes is limited. This is a problem which either stays or goes away. The next generation of skaters may be better at doing these tricks cleanly and thus have no problem including them. Or they may think that the risk/reward ratio will continue to be iffy and keep it safe. In that case, the rewards for doing riskier elements should be upped.
d) The Technical Specialist problem and the secrecy problem COP is asystem where there sometimes is ten points separating first and second, sometimes 0.01 points. Thus the person(s) who are punching in the sekrit komputer the levels and rotations are in key positions. It is theoretically quite possible for two people in cahoots give a little extra or chip a way from the elements scores of any given skater. Also even if block judging is pretty much impossible, biased judging is easier than ever. There are two answers to this problem. Either change the system, or make it transparent. Now fans are left with the rulebook in one hand and the protocols in other and in many cases really not making sense.

I do think COP can and should evolve all the time, making a rule, seeing what effects it has, modifying it… There should be a hefty bonus for completing all triple jumps in a program, there should be other positions considered difficult than Bielmann, Skating skills and transitions should be worth more than choreography (which, after all, is actually not something the skater has done)… But even with all this, singles and pairs are so much more interesting to watch than under 6.0 system. I see steps, and spins, and difficult entries to the jumps… you know skating.

Unfortunately, quite the opposite is true in Dance. The trend was there before COP, but the new system  has given the final blow to my favourite discipline.  Spins, lifts, twizzles, side-by-side steps with break neck speed – why not just call it adagio pairs and have done with it. I am past caring.

As for the results the fangirl in me says:
Petrova and Tikhonov did it for them selves.
If only Zhao had nailed that toeloop…
Zagorska/Siudek were a joy.
Jay for Plushenko and Buttle.
Savoie rules.
Arakawa was phenomenal.
Awww for Slutskaja.
I am not so sekritly elated that Sasha splatted (her skating personifies everything I dislike in women’s skating).
Pocket and Beanie were shafted, I tell you, shafted.
Love Ben Agosto’s skating but boy, that flamenco? Ew.
Feeling begins with white pasties? What were Grushina and Goncharov thinking? And that won bronze?

Posted by Sari

I’ll say this for the new judging system – it gives a lot to analyse! Olympics opened with pairs short, and a very high standard one at that. Tatiana and Max were just the class of the field today, no question. Elements were crisp, clean and gorgeous, the program was a skating clinic in pair skating – someting I thought I would never say about them.

The rest of the field is really close. There is about the same difference between 1 and 2 (3.92 points) as there is between 2 and 8 (4.47 points). Thus the placements are really not that important. Still, I do think that judges use the component marks for protocol judging. As far as the judging is concerned we could still have just one “presentation” mark,  all the five components are usually within one point of each other, and I don’t think they necessarily reflect what was going on on the ice.

Props for Inoue and Baldwin landing a throw-triple-axel, a first in international competition (they did one in US nats this year). It is difficult to see how the throw could have been cleaner and even so one judge gave it -1 GOE. They had the second highest element mark but were (unfairly, IMO) dinged in the components which kept them down.

Props for Shen and Zhao for showing up and skating as well as they did as Hongbo is just coming back from a serious achilles tendon injury. They do have the “it” –factor, but they were given a some world champions extra in the components.

Props for Petrova and Tihonov for the best coreographed and performed program of their careers. The souped up Händel’s Sarabande Smalun first introduced to skating works like a charm and they were fast, crisp and had the lift of the competition. I know I am biased but even so, I think it is a crying shame that the sloppy chinese are ahead of them.

And finally props to Savchenko and Szolkowy for overcoming the media storm around Ingo and skating their perfectly COP-designed programme with flair. They should have been rewarde better in the skating skills and transition mark.