I made a sheet to make COP really easy

[Roma]

I made a cheat sheet to understanding the second set of marks for pairs and women. Men are much easier because they don't use the multiplier in the short, and in the long, their score gets reported on a scale of 1 to 100, which is very easy to understand. I didn't do dance yet:

(On the original post my columns got all messed up.Please refer to my next post where I redid the scale to make it easier to read.)

[Roma]

darn! the post deleted the spaces between my columns! I'll use an example to explain:

There are 5 marks, each graded on a 10-point scale. In each phase the maximum is 50.
In the short, the skater's total is multiplied by a factor of .8. Thus the maximum for any skater is a 40.0. This is the "perfect 10" of figure skating.
In the long, the skater's total is multiplied by a factor of 1.6. So in the long, the "perfect 10" is an 80.

So in the short, a skater who scores a 36 is the equivalent of an average of 9.0. Here's the scale
40 = 10.0
36 = 9.0
32 = 8.0
28 = 7.0
24 = 6.0
20 = 5.0
16 = 4.0
12 = 3.0
8 = 2.0
4 = 1.0

In the long,
80 = 10.0
72 = 9.0
64 = 8.0
56 = 7.0
48 = 6.0
40 = 5.0
32 = 4.0
24 = 3.0
16 = 2.0
8 = 1.0

[Roma]

For the first mark, there is no 'set in stone' cheat sheet, because the scores are not on a 10-point scale, they depend on the difficulty of the planned elements. But the pairs short is a good example.
When I was at Skate America, they told us the planned score, and for the pairs, almost all were a 27.0 or 27.5 due to the similarity of the elements: 9 out of 10 pairs did the triple toe as their SBS jump, most pairs did the loop or salchow as their throw, etc. Very similar elements. Those who scored above 27 were those who had great quality. But we started to catch on that a tech score of 33 was really good, 24 was toward the bottom, etc.

The men had a wider range of scores on the planned elements, because for example, the combination attempts ranged from quad to 3 axel to 3 lutz to 3 toe). Despite the wider range, we could catch onto what was a good and not-so-good score.

In sum, my advice:
To judge the technical portion, write down the score of the 1st skater and use this as a basis of comparison.

To judge the 2nd mark, use the scale that I calculated above.
I actually think my post sounds more confusing than it is;); I really think this will help. I checked my scale from some women's and pairs results, and I matched exactly - to both decimals.

[Roma]

In response to someone's question to me on a different thread, the cheat sheet on this thread is just to help someone watching TV to understand the scores as presented, not to determine how the points were calculated. So, in the short, if someone has a second mark of 28.11 and you have no idea whether this is good, you can check my cheat sheet and see that because it is just over 28.0, it represents an average score just slightly over a 7.0.

[Calgary88]

So basically, I could "judge" programs the way I have been on a 6.0 scale and then convert it to the new scale using your cheat sheet?

[Roma]

I was extraordinarily fuzzy in my wording above!! Rather than calculate the score from the ground up, I came up with a way to quickly make sense of the score you see on TV by taking it and working backwards. So, if you saw a long program (women or pairs)second mark of 72.0 and thought 'I have no idea what this means' it's the equivalent of an average score of 9.0. And a mark of 64.0 is the equivalent of an average of 8.0, etc. It's a way of converting the second set of scores to a quickly understandable average, which is the actual 10.0 scale that is used.

The nice thing about the men's LP is by using the factor of 2.0 (essentially doubling the 50-point scale) it's a nice even 100: so if a man has a score of 80, that's the equivalent of an average of 8.0., a 72.80 would be an average of 7.28, etc.....

I hope this helps.