Scott Hamilton frustrated by figure skating's leadership

[IceDanceSk8er]

Article in the Detroit Free Press

http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews/pm17040_20031105.htm

[quarkiki2]

Contains Skate Canada spoilers.

[ceceB]

``I don't agree that you put together some outrageous scoring system that can be manipulated by man and is so convoluted that no one can determine how a result came about specifically. The scoring is kind of gray and smoky.''


I disagree with Scott on this. I think that under the old system it was harder to determine how a result came about. A judge could literally sit there, decide on the ordinal and then determine which mark would achieve that. Under the points system with each element being worth a specific number, the scoring is much more clear. Of course it isn't if you don't understand the points, but I think it's generally good for skating.

[Roma]

I have 2 thoughts re: Scott's comments. First, I find it hard to believe that he is still using archaic terms such as 'MAN-made' and 'manipulated by MAN' in the 21st century. Half the people in the world are women, so the time is long overdue to stop using 'men' as the generic for 'people.'

Second, I think that this is a good example of over-reliance on a talented and well-liked Olympic champion. Scott's comments seem too vague and unsupported -- he is talking about how terrible the system is, but gives few supporting facts, and gives the impression that he has not actually tried to fully understand it. His opinion sounds more like that of a casual spectator than that of a well-informed expert.

Being an Olympic champion does not make someone a good spokesperson regarding the scoring system. Frankly, there are many people on this board -on both sides of the debate - who provide more detail to support their opinions, and thus sound more credible on the topic, than Scott.

[duane]

Regarding the new system, I'm more in agreement with Scott--which isn't common ;) .

When it comes to a judge "cheating", I don't think this new system changes anything. Any scoring system can be manipulated, especially when subjectivity plays a role in the judging. The secrecy of the new system doesn't help either.

I think the old system had it flaws, but overall, I think it worked fine. On top of that, we skating fans understand it, which is important.

[PaulWyliefan]

Originally posted by Roma
I have 2 thoughts re: Scott's comments. First, I find it hard to believe that he is still using archaic terms such as 'MAN-made' and 'manipulated by MAN' in the 21st century. Half the people in the world are women, so the time is long overdue to stop using 'men' as the generic for 'people.'



I'm a woman myself, but I've never had a problem with people using the word "man" this way. Perhaps it's because it's easy to see that they're talking about both genders, or perhaps it's just that I'm an English major and am sick of seeing the ways people -- even professional writers and teachers who should know better -- twist and mutilate the English language just to avoid offending one gender. Besides, "human-made" just sounds so silly! :-) I know Scotty and I are in the minority, but that's okay.

[blades]

8-)

when the politically correct (which stands for the humor impared) wanted to call a manhole a personhole they lost me...

as for the judging system...the old one worked fine...the isu just never did anything about the cheaters...we'll get the same with the new system and the same "action" from the isu...

my personal observation of the new system is that if it sucked any more it'd be a hoover...

[Roma]

Originally posted by blades
8-)

when the politically correct (which stands for the humor impared) wanted to call a manhole a personhole they lost me...


Who said anything about manholes? I was referring to the use of 'man' to refer to human beings.

There is a huge difference between being 'politically correct' and being 'correct.' The latter refers to being accurate. It is not a case of being 'politically' correct if one wants someone to stop referring to human beings as men, rather it is a case of being 'correct'.

Just because something has been common usage or common practice in the past does not make something right, nor does it make those of us who suggest changing it 'politically correct' (ie. nitpickers).

[Justine_R]

Oh please quarki stop this there is no need to patronise everywhere u go because it has already actually been aired on TV so it cant really be called a spoiler now can it?

Orginally posted by Quarki22 ( Contains Skate Canada spoilers.)

[Roma]

Originally posted by Justine_R
Oh please quarki stop this there is no need to patronise everywhere u go because it has already actually been aired on TV so it cant really be called a spoiler now can it?

Actually, Skate Canada has not yet been aired in the United States, so quarkiki2 was right to warn of spoilers.

[skatepixie]

Blades-Took the words right outa my mouth...

but it should be electrolux. "Nothing sucks like electrolux."

[IceDanceSk8er]

Originally posted by Roma
Actually, Skate Canada has not yet been aired in the United States, so quarkiki2 was right to warn of spoilers.

Gee, I wonder who won

[Roma]

Originally posted by IceDanceSk8er
Gee, I wonder who won
Actually, I don't know all the medalists. And since none of it has been aired in the U.S., those people who chose not to go into the Grand Prix threads in order to have some surprises when it is aired this week do have the right not to know. Just because ABC has delayed the broadcast doesn't mean that the desire to watch it without knowing all the outcomes goes away. So again, I think quarkiki was right in warning anyone who didn't want to know that there was a spoiler.

[Justine_R]

Umm he is right in some way,skating has changed!

But i think this new CoP system works in the skaters favour.

[Peggy Flaming]

how about a system like this, using the 6.0 scoring?

Kristi Y. vs. Michelle K.

JUMPS Kristi, at her best w/her triple lutz-triple toe, but still leaves out her triple sow, lands the loop- shakily. Give her a 5.8 for jumps; Michelle, clean in all her jumps, but no triple-triple, edge to Kristi. Michelle is at 5.75.

SPINS - Kristi better variety on spins, not quite as flexible as Michelle but a better layback, Kristi 5.80, Michelle 5.70.

FOOTWORK, including EDGE WORK, SPIRALS, INAS, SPREADEAGLES, ETC. - Kristi a nice spiral, but not the difficulty of Michelle's change of edge spiral. Kristi's footwork not as sharp as Michelle's, Kristi 5.6 for footwork, Michelle 5.85.

ARTISTIC IMPRESSION, incl. MUSICAL EXPRESSION, HOW THE MOVES RELATE TO THE MUSIC AND THEME. Kristi perhaps a tad shy of Michelle's ability to express and reflect her music. Kristi 5.7, Michelle 5.85.

OVERALL, Kristi 5.725, Michelle 5.7875. Shouldn't it be something like this instead?

[Arsenette]

Personally I don't like the system but my real problem is this... The ISU did NOT clean house.. it's in the ISU's best interest to change the subject by throwing in something new and not needed to keep the real issue from being solved.

[Roma]

Originally posted by Peggy Flaming
how about a system like this, using the 6.0 scoring?

Kristi Y. vs. Michelle K.

JUMPS Kristi, at her best w/her triple lutz-triple toe, but still leaves out her triple sow, lands the loop- shakily. Give her a 5.8 for jumps; Michelle, clean in all her jumps, but no triple-triple, edge to Kristi. Michelle is at 5.75.

SPINS - Kristi better variety on spins, not quite as flexible as Michelle but a better layback, Kristi 5.80, Michelle 5.70.

FOOTWORK, including EDGE WORK, SPIRALS, INAS, SPREADEAGLES, ETC. - Kristi a nice spiral, but not the difficulty of Michelle's change of edge spiral. Kristi's footwork not as sharp as Michelle's, Kristi 5.6 for footwork, Michelle 5.85.

ARTISTIC IMPRESSION, incl. MUSICAL EXPRESSION, HOW THE MOVES RELATE TO THE MUSIC AND THEME. Kristi perhaps a tad shy of Michelle's ability to express and reflect her music. Kristi 5.7, Michelle 5.85.

OVERALL, Kristi 5.725, Michelle 5.7875. Shouldn't it be something like this instead?

Peggy Flaming (LOL), what you propose is very similar to what the judges are doing under the new code of points.


Here is an example of what is wrong with the existing system. The skater who wins the short could do so with, say, across the board 5.8's. Let's say that the person who came in 2nd had all 5.7's and 5.8's -- very close. The skater who came in 3rd had 2 errors and got all 5.0's. The skater in second was much closer in perforomance to the skater in 1st than to the skater in 3rd. But once you convert this to ordinals, these differences are wiped clean. So, for example, if the skater in third in the short (whose short was miles behind the winner of the short)is only slightly better in the long than the winner of the short, this person wins the gold medal despite having a clearly inferior overall performance to the person who won the short.

Now I agree that the fact that the new system is more accurate mathematically is an entirely separate issue from crooked judges. And this problem certainly needs to be addressed. But one good thing about the new system is that each judge has to keep rating the skater over and over and over throughout the performance. It is much easier for example, to give the skater from one's own country just two inflated marks (the old sytem: technical and artistic) than to keep inflating every single jump, every single spin, all 5 of the 2nd marks, etc. The judge would stick out like a sore thumb in no time, because even though the public doesn't see each judge's marks, there is some referee or someone who does see them.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by Roma

Now I agree that the fact that the new system is more accurate mathematically is an entirely separate issue from crooked judges. And this problem certainly needs to be addressed. But one good thing about the new system is that each judge has to keep rating the skater over and over and over throughout the performance. It is much easier for example, to give the skater from one's own country just two inflated marks (the old sytem: technical and artistic) than to keep inflating every single jump, every single spin, all 5 of the 2nd marks, etc. The judge would stick out like a sore thumb in no time, because even though the public doesn't see each judge's marks, there is some referee or someone who does see them.



Free Dance Skate Canada, marks from judge #3 for both teams:

Denkova & Stavyski

Skating Skills 8.25
Transitions 8.00
Performance 8.00
Choreography 8.00
Interpretation 0.25

Navka & Kostomarov

Skating Skills 8.75
Transitions 8.50
Performance 8.50
Choreography 8.50
Interpretation 8.75


So this is accuracy? Look at D/S, they got solid marks for 4 of the 5 items listed. But why the 0.25 for interpretation when the others were so much higher? Typo??? Or intentional??? And how exactly will
typos affect results?

It looks like the judge decided that N/K were .5 better than D/S and made a typo for the Interpretation mark for D/S. So did the judge prejudge?

The only thing mathematically accurate in this system is that the c
computer adds the marks correctly. There's still prejudging, secrecy and lack of accountability.

COP attempts to fix the wrong problem. I have no issue with the concepts of COP although it will take a long time to learn the values for everything. So did the "old" way. It just allows for too much room for error if the caller "miscalls" or if the judge "mistypes".

The problem in SLC was a crooked federation that put pressure on a judge. I fail to see how COP does little more than mask that problem by making the system so difficult that people talk about the complexity and not judges and federations that play the "you vote for my dance team and we'll vote for your pair team".

[Roma]

IIRC, the code of points was initiated before SLC. There really are 2 issues here: one is the problem of crooked judges. The second is the accuracy of the marks.

Suppose for a moment that there was no such thing as a crooked judge. The old system was still inaccurate from a mathematical standpoint. Whenever you want to be precise in measuring something, the most accurate way is to use continuous data. Ordinal data are always less precise. The problem with the old system is that it repeatedly converted continuous data to ordinal data. A typical singles performance had 4 such conversions: in the short, each judges' mark is converted to an ordinal, and then the skater's 9 ordinals are further converted to a single ordinal. This process is repeated in the long. Ice dancers had 8 such conversions in the 4 phases of competition! (This actually could have accounted for PART of the inability for skaters to move around between segments. If for example, throughout the competition, dance team 9 kept losing 5/4 splits to dance team 8, the system kept wiping this variation away, by locking one team with into place with a single 8th place ordinal, and the other with a single 9th place ordinal. So all you'd see for the 4 phases was a string of 8888 and 9999, giving the illusion of unanimous judging.)

The new system is more accurate in that there is only one conversion from continuous to ordinal data - at the very end. Crooked judges do, of course, need to be addressed. But that is entirely separate from the notion of accuracy.

Keypunch errors, of course, must be addressed, but they seem to be a minor kink.

[WeBeEducated]

I think roma has some very good points about the new system.
As for Scott, I think his lack of education is showing up whenever he tries to speak about topics in depth.
He just isnt articulate.

[quarkiki2]

Originally posted by Justine_R
Oh please quarki stop this there is no need to patronise everywhere u go because it has already actually been aired on TV so it cant really be called a spoiler now can it?

Thanks for the smile this moning! I can honestly say that I've never been called patronizing before, LOL! And I actually found this quite funny as I posted in a whole TWO threads about spoiler warnings.

Guess my status as "World's Nicest Poster" has been revoked.;)

[IceDanceSk8er]

So who won? ;)

[Roma]

Originally posted by WeBeEducated
I think roma has some very good points about the new system.

As for Scott, I think his lack of education is showing up whenever he tries to speak about topics in depth.
He just isnt articulate.

(Thanks for the vote of confidence, Webe!)

You know, I of course think Scott was a wonderful skater. And some of his commentary in the early 90's helped me to tell the jumps apart. (I had been trying to teach myself the jumps by watching tv, and he gave very clear and helpful suggestions to the audience one day on how to recognize all 6 jumps.)

But his commentary at the 2002 Olympics was the first time I had ever noticed that even an Olympic Champion can be have a relative lack of knowledge of the rules. This was particularly obvious during the men's free skate in which he repeatedly said (I think 4 times) that Yagudin had conceded the free skate to Plushenko. He seemed to be simply adding the number of quads plus triple axels to determine the placements. He also seemed to think that Yags might come in behind Goebel! He was waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off.

So I think that it is quite possible that he is not as knowledgeable as he should be and maybe should do a little more homework before being a spokesperson on behalf of the 6.0 system.

[Roma]

Originally posted by IceDanceSk8er
So who won? ;)

I know the 4 winners and some of the other medalists. But I am steadfastly keeping my head buried in the sand for another week and a half so that I will have the pleasure of at least SOME surprises from Skate Canada, LOL! There is a bronze or 2 out there that is gonna surprise me, and I'm gonna enjoy it when I see it, doggone it! ;)

[SkateFan123]

For the person wanted in know the Skate Canada results, here ya go.

This is a url to the Skate Canada results pages. It lists links to all phases of the event, including event details.

http://www.isufs.org/results/sc2003/

Here's the url to the Cup of China event too:
http://www.isufs.org/results/coc2003/

If you don't want to know the results from Skate Canada or Cup of China until it is aired just don't go to the site.

Other than that, I won't say more!

[duane]

Skate Canada's SPs tonight at 8pm on ESPN 2.

[sonora]

Thank goodness for people like Scott who are willing to speak out to try and save our sport.

Here's an open secret for you all to gnaw on. Many Eastern bloc judges have never strapped on a pair of skates. Their appointments are due to political favoritism not merit. By dumbing down judging with the new system, it makes basic judging errors less likely.

Many of these "judges" can't tell a mohawk from a rocker, let alone a flip from a lutz.

Still, anonymous judging is nothing more or less than cowardice, and it cheapens our sport in the eyes of the casual fan. And from what I'm hearing around the rink, elite skaters and coaches are already figuring out how to "game" the new system.

[bleu]

Originally posted by sonora
Thank goodness for people like Scott who are willing to speak out to try and save our sport.

Here's an open secret for you all to gnaw on. Many Eastern bloc judges have never strapped on a pair of skates. Their appointments are due to political favoritism not merit. By dumbing down judging with the new system, it makes basic judging errors less likely.

Many of these "judges" can't tell a mohawk from a rocker, let alone a flip from a lutz.

Still, anonymous judging is nothing more or less than cowardice, and it cheapens our sport in the eyes of the casual fan. And from what I'm hearing around the rink, elite skaters and coaches are already figuring out how to "game" the new system.

you know I was gonna say na but when I saw a judge saying some of his peers can't tell the difference between a level 1 and level 3 pair lift..thus always mark them as equal, I think you are onto something