USFSA officially supporting CoP

[Debbie S]

They issued a new statement sometime today. Apparently, there was a meeting of the Exec Committee during Nats and they have decided to support CoP for use in the Senior GP and Worlds next year on a "probationary" status. They would support using it for the 2006 Olys.

http://www.usfigureskating.org/Story.asp?id=21244

You know, if anyone from the Exec Committee was paying attention to the audience during the ladies final, they would be able to see the both the excitement generated by the 6.0 system (and the possibility of "perfect" marks), along with the enjoyment among fans of being able to understand the marks rather than seeing a bunch of holistic numbers thrown up on the Jumbotron. Would a Michelle/Sasha duel really be as interesting if we wondered if MK's 5 component marks (each with decimals to the hundreth place) would add up to more than Sasha's 5-decimal-point totals?:roll: Not to mention having no clue which judges gave which marks and how the totals are even determined. And I thought the USFSA didn't like secret judging.

[sk8er1964]

Although I don't like the secret judging under CoP, I fully support the concept. Under CoP, programs were more difficult, and more interesting to watch. Excellent spins and choreography were rewarded just as much as excellent jumps. This is not always the case under 6.O. IMO, it's a step in the right direction for our sport, and our fans are savvy enough to be able to figure out the points system.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by sk8er1964
Although I don't like the secret judging under CoP, I fully support the concept. Under CoP, programs were more difficult, and more interesting to watch. Excellent spins and choreography were rewarded just as much as excellent jumps. This is not always the case under 6.O. IMO, it's a step in the right direction for our sport, and our fans are savvy enough to be able to figure out the points system.

I can deal with code of points conceptually. I don't like the concept of a caller. Why can't judges judge themselves? Why do they need to be told what the element was? This system leaves no room for skaters who make an early mistake and revamp their program on the fly to compensate for it. That's rediculous. I will never support secret judging....ever! Judges must be accountable, period!

[Rachel]

Originally posted by Debbie S
You know, if anyone from the Exec Committee was paying attention to the audience during the ladies final, they would be able to see the both the excitement generated by the 6.0 system (and the possibility of "perfect" marks), along with the enjoyment among fans of being able to understand the marks rather than seeing a bunch of holistic numbers thrown up on the Jumbotron. Would a Michelle/Sasha duel really be as interesting if we wondered if MK's 5 component marks (each with decimals to the hundreth place) would add up to more than Sasha's 5-decimal-point totals?:roll:

I honestly don't understand what is so magical about the 6.0 system. Yes, it's exciting to see a 6.0, but it's also exciting to see a high score in CoP. If all people are interested in is the total, then the total is there for them to see and they can ignore the rest. What has been interesting for me is seeing where the differences between two skaters lie. I would find it very interesting to see Michelle v. Sasha under CoP. I think it would be exciting, even without a perfect 6.0, which isn't really perfect, anyway.

There are some wrinkles that need to be worked out of the CoP yet; the callers need to be more consistent with one another from competition to competition, and the judges tend to be overgenerous in the way they mark some things, but overall, I think it's a good thing.

[sachelle]

For those of you who have studied this, could this system work as well if the judges were known? If not, Why?

[icyboid]

I think CoP is a step in the right direction to making this sport more objective, but unless the criteria are enforced more, I predict the Program Components scores are where skaters will be screwed/held up and cause many future upsets and controversies. I also think that GOE is also where we'll see a lot of competitions won/lost.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by icyboid
I think CoP is a step in the right direction to making this sport more objective, but unless the criteria are enforced more, I predict the Program Components scores are where skaters will be screwed/held up and cause many future upsets and controversies. I also think that GOE is also where we'll see a lot of competitions won/lost.

The concepts are fine but the methods employed are not. First, why a caller? And why can't callers adjust when a skater changes their program? The system as is does not allow flexibility. The caller has made mistakes this year and the program doesn't pick it up. For example, he called a step sequence a level 4 sequence and the computer scored it as a zero because there are only level 1, 2 and 3 sequeces. Why can't judges call their own elements? Isn't that what judges are supposed to do?

There were several obvious typos on the part of judges entry. No way to correct that either.

But my main objection is that COP was developed as a result of corrupt judging. Sorry, it doesn't solve the problem but promotes judging that hides behind the scoring system. This system allows more secrecy not less. It just doesn't solve the problem.

COP needs judging that is open and accountable and flexibility for skaters.

[icyboid]

Originally posted by SkateFan123
But my main objection is that COP was developed as a result of corrupt judging. Sorry, it doesn't solve the problem but promotes judging that hides behind the scoring system. This system allows more secrecy not less. It just doesn't solve the problem.

COP needs judging that is open and accountable and flexibility for skaters.

As opposed to 6.0 doing a better job of solving it?

I think the ISU should hire a statistician to have access to which judges gave what scores in certain competitions, and determine once and for all if judges really do give higher, lower, or about the same scores under anonymity as they do with accountable scoring.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by icyboid
As opposed to 6.0 doing a better job of solving it?

I think the ISU should hire a statistician to have access to which judges gave what scores in certain competitions, and determine once and for all if judges really do give higher, lower, or about the same scores under anonymity as they do with accountable scoring.

There are a few statisticain fans who have analysed scores. The results are interesting. Check the web. Sandra at frogsonice has good articles and points on her site.

The Russians are upset because they don't believe their skaters are being properly rewarded so they say. Or is it that they can't manipulate the scoring so easily as before?

USFSA and others are cowards. They will not risk the punishment the ISU has promised.......either support it or be banished from ISU events which means no Olympics. If I was still skating, I'd be bannished too for saying that.

[sachelle]

:idea: I have no idea if this has been discussed but has any show done an investigative peice on figureskating? GMA, 20/20, 60 minutes, Dateline, Geraldo, even?? I like Diane Sawyer the best.

If many fans wrote and asked for an independent statistician's review (I doubt the ISU or any of its federations would hire one to investigate themselves, somehow), on the CoP to see if any judges are nationalistically biased or cheating subtely, we would have our answer. At least for the set of data/time submitted.

Problem is, I don't think any invesigative news peices would be interested in one GP season. Attention could be gotten maybe by an internet effort to do just this before the next Olympics. Or maybe the entire Olympic year, everywhere the Cop has been used. Or since CoP inception. It's nice we all want fair judging as it's make or break a skater's life. Only we have enough numbers to demand it for our skaters.

Around the Olympics I could see John Stossle of 20/20 doing this peice, as half the fluff will be the SLC pairs and Dance events ad nauseum.

I think they would appreciate the tips from our great writiers all over the forums. Someone with credentials like Mathman's, perhaps with many signatures and additional individual stories of comp.'s which over/underscored x y and z skater. Just a thought.

[contrary]

Thats exactly what the caller is there for, to call what eliment the skater does, regardless of what he planned. If they only went with the plan, then the eliments would already be in the computer. The caller is so there is consistency on what is being judged. Like someone above said, was it a level 1 or 2?

AS for secrecy, this system is NO MORE secret than the last years of the 6.0 system. It's exactly the same. I aint sayin that's good, but its no worse. I'm still undecided about secrecy.

Fans as statisticians? yeah, right... fans would NEVER be swayed by what outcome they'd like. Hey, I do reporting to upper management for a living. My management can make the data read whatever they want.

CoP is a good thing. It forces judges to quantify each and every part of how they score a skater. No arbitrary single number for a whole routine. AS for the componant mark, it needs work, but it will get better. And what's wrong with going two decimal places? wouldnt want a mark to be too accurate, would we?

C'mon... so what if the crowd wants to chant "Six! Six!". That's not what the scoring system should be about. It aint rocket surgury.

[Schmeck]

"And what's wrong with going two decimal places? wouldnt want a mark to be too accurate, would we?"

It's been 12 years since my last class in measurement and accuracy, but I believe decimal places mark precision, not accuracy. Accuracy is based more on how a number relates to the actual value of an entity (sp?).

You've all brought interesting points to light about CoP, but since I haven't had my full load of caffeine yet, I'm going to ponder a bit before I post!

Schmeck

[loveskating]

Originally posted by sk8er1964
Although I don't like the secret judging under CoP, I fully support the concept. Under CoP, programs were more difficult, and more interesting to watch. Excellent spins and choreography were rewarded just as much as excellent jumps. This is not always the case under 6.O. IMO, it's a step in the right direction for our sport, and our fans are savvy enough to be able to figure out the points system.

Its not "secret"...obviously, ABC has named all the judges on national television, so who they are is hardly a secret. What is a secret to the public, not to those in charge of the judges, is who gave what marks to who...and none of them knows which marks were deleted by the computer.


I'm glad...COP gives much more for the quality and difficulty.

[Rapt2Go]

I must admit I don't understand the CoP, so I apologize if this is a stupid question.

What happens if the caller is wrong? Also, do they call if something is two footed or not centered, or just what was attempted? Do they know what the skater is planning? I ask because if they don't realize the skater is planning a lutz, and the skater flutzes, what happens if the caller calls it a flip?

[sk8er1964]

Originally posted by loveskating
Its not "secret"...obviously, ABC has named all the judges on national television, so who they are is hardly a secret. What is a secret to the public, not to those in charge of the judges, is who gave what marks to who...and none of them knows which marks were deleted by the computer.


I'm glad...COP gives much more for the quality and difficulty.

Umm - that was my point. Knowing Judge "A"'s name doesn't tell me a darn thing. I want to know how Judge "A" scored the event. I want to know if Judge "A"'s marks were one of the ones thrown out. That's what I mean by secret.

In our government they have sunshine laws to ensure people know what their decision makers are doing at all times, except in very few limited circumstances. This is because secrecy in government is a bad thing - it can lead to all sorts of abuses. I don't think it is a stretch to apply the same logic to figure skating judging.

[sk8er1964]

Originally posted by Rapt2Go
I must admit I don't understand the CoP, so I apologize if this is a stupid question.

What happens if the caller is wrong? Also, do they call if something is two footed or not centered, or just what was attempted? Do they know what the skater is planning? I ask because if they don't realize the skater is planning a lutz, and the skater flutzes, what happens if the caller calls it a flip?

Rapt - they are discussing the CoP here http://www.skatingforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12418 and it might help a bit. I'm not knowledgeable enough on the technical aspects of the caller to answer your question.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by sk8er1964
Umm - that was my point. Knowing Judge "A"'s name doesn't tell me a darn thing. I want to know how Judge "A" scored the event. I want to know if Judge "A"'s marks were one of the ones thrown out. That's what I mean by secret.

In our government they have sunshine laws to ensure people know what their decision makers are doing at all times, except in very few limited circumstances. This is because secrecy in government is a bad thing - it can lead to all sorts of abuses. I don't think it is a stretch to apply the same logic to figure skating judging.

We know who the judges are but we don't have a clue which judges scores count or what those scores were. I agree with sk8er here! If scoring is not totally forthcoming, it's a farce.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by sk8er1964
Rapt - they are discussing the CoP here http://www.skatingforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12418 and it might help a bit. I'm not knowledgeable enough on the technical aspects of the caller to answer your question.

If the caller is wrong, it remains wrong. There is no room for corrections. Also if a judge has a typo, it stays that way too. This system does not allow for changes. And who is going to pay for all these computers and judges for local events???? And what happens to the scoring when the hard drives fail???? Too many undetermined things for comfort.

Perception is reality. While CoP has some good features, there are too many unknowns and issues for it to be perceived as reliable. Remember, skaters, coaches, judges, and federations who come out against it are banned from ISU events.

Reminds me of elections in Iraq. Saddam got 100% turnout and he got 100% of the vote. Why? Because if you didn't go vote for Saddam, you were killed. Sounds like the ISU approach.

[contrary]

Originally posted by SkateFan123
... Remember, skaters, coaches, judges, and federations who come out against it are banned from ISU events....

This is totally not true. I have heard skaters say they dont like it. I've also heard a lot of skaters say they really do like it. That it's providing feedback. The thing is, they are ISU events, so they will be judged by ISU methods. Or should, perhaps, each skater get to choose how they're judged?

I also dont understand why fans think that the only system that will be right is one that THEY know who did what. Honestly, sometimes I think the only thing served by the fans knowing what judge gave what mark is so they can complain about it.

[LTM]

As far as I'm concerned the old 6.0 system can go the way of dinosaur
and garter belts.
How nice not to see marks "saved" because of who was skating later in the competition.
How nice to see balanced programs showcasing all the skating skills not just the jumps. I seem to recall not all that long ago numbers of
skating fans complaining about how competitions were nothing but jumping contest with no attention to artistry. That change would never have come about without some kind of defininte system that rewards doing all those skills. 6.0 simply did not do it.
How nice to see that when the world champion messes up and forgets the rules (like how many combos you can do) he gets penalized for it.
Regardless of the country he comes from.
If the Russians are complaining about their skaters not being judged fairly it could also be said they have been the slowest to adapt their skaters to the new system
To be honest the Russians more than anyone else still look like they are skating programs from 10 years ago and even though they may be technically perfect they're dull. (Plushenko excepted but even his stuff remains front loaded dispite the additional marks given difficult jumps done later in the programs)
Well that's not CoP problem or the problem of skaters and coaches who have made CoP work for them.
The system needs fine tuning and nothing is going to be perfect but
I think it's going in the right direction

[sachelle]

I did not suggest that just any old FS fan attempt to investigate how consistent and fair the CoP is.

One would simply be cabable to draft a letter asking an investigative news journalist to do a peice. They (20/20) get the expert statisticians. We as fans could all drop emails to show there is great interest and need for investigative jounalism.

Yes, it's better than 6.0. But 1 gp season had some whacky results.
After next season there will be much more raw data. Keep the CoP but identify the judges with the marks they gave. Why cannot this be done? If results continue to be at times very questionable, then why not ask for a news peice before Olympics 2006?

Idetifying the judge with his page of marks is the only way to turn the corruption of FS around.:D There is not good enough reason, IMO to let them be anonymous. Secrecy in FS judging is bad, ITA.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by contrary
This is totally not true. I have heard skaters say they dont like it. I've also heard a lot of skaters say they really do like it. That it's providing feedback. The thing is, they are ISU events, so they will be judged by ISU methods. Or should, perhaps, each skater get to choose how they're judged?

I also dont understand why fans think that the only system that will be right is one that THEY know who did what. Honestly, sometimes I think the only thing served by the fans knowing what judge gave what mark is so they can complain about it.

No one who is eligible is giving real feedback that is negative. They can't. Many proskaters who have nothing to lose are providing many comments that eligible skaters just cannot provide.

Basically, the concept of adding points for what is done is good. I have no problem with that concept at all. In the long run, it will be easier to understand the scoring.

Secrecy leaves one to doubt. That's what fans are upset about. How would you like to get a grade and not know what teacher gave it to you or why you got that particular grade? What if the teacher made a typo and had no way to fix it? Sorry, I think fan support means more than most people think.

Skating has big tv contracts only because ratings were high beginning in 1994. If ratings are poor, no big tv contracts. Those contracts provide a tremendous amount of support for skaters. The problem with them is that the money that figures skating generates from tv contracts is dispursed by the ISU to two sports....figure skating and speed skating. The ISU has more top level people on the speed skating side of the house than the figure skating side. So you have speed skating people making figure skating decisions that are affecting tv contracts.

ABCs contract with the ISU is up after Worlds and with the USFSAs up after Nationals next year. If they are not renewed with the same or at a higher dollar value than before because ratings are poor, will the money be there to support all the computers, training, backup support, judges, etc needed for this system? ABC has already announced it does not want to show all the Grand Prix events in the future. Canadian tv contracts are in the same boat with not many Grand Prix coverage being shown. Sure other networks can pick it up but with all the controversay in the sport and declining ratings, will they want to pay big bucks to cover a sport that is losing fan support at a rapid pace?

So that makes me ask why figure skating is run by speed skaters? Why aren't the two groups separate? Hockey is not part of the ISU so the logic that tells me "it's all skating" is just not true.

So although it is not about the fans, the fans have more leverage than most people are willing to admit. Fans bring the tv dollars to sports, all sports! Without those advertising dollars, no sport will be successful. TV will only show sports that generate ratings because they can sell the advertising at a high rate. One only needs to look at the advertising circus surrounding the upcoming Super Bowl.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by sachelle
I did not suggest that just any old FS fan attempt to investigate how consistent and fair the CoP is.

One would simply be cabable to draft a letter asking an investigative news journalist to do a peice. They (20/20) get the expert statisticians. We as fans could all drop emails to show there is great interest and need for investigative jounalism.

Yes, it's better than 6.0. But 1 gp season had some whacky results.
After next season there will be much more raw data. Keep the CoP but identify the judges with the marks they gave. Why cannot this be done? If results continue to be at times very questionable, then why not ask for a news peice before Olympics 2006?

Idetifying the judge with his page of marks is the only way to turn the corruption of FS around.:D There is not good enough reason, IMO to let them be anonymous. Secrecy in FS judging is bad, ITA.

Agreed! And judges need to be accountable. The penalty for cheating should be "life" If you cheat, you are banned for life from judging. Cheating should not be tolerated.

Federations should also face penalties if their judges cheat. I'm all for Federations not being able to send a judge for 5 years for the first time a judge representing that Federation cheats, 10 years the second time and life the third. Federations cannot tolerate cheating and should be penalized for it too.

Open accounting and severe penalties for cheating are the only things that will establish credibility in the sport. Without those, skating will be just like wrestling, a show for your viewing pleasure.

[SkateFan123]

Originally posted by Bondo
Hmm, I don't think the secrecy and the lack of ability to correct typos are part of the same problem. They can easily make it so changes can be made without making it an open system. But they do throw out high and low ratings so a typo will just get chucked out anyway so the system does make up for those mistakes, just not those of the caller.

And in your analogy, under the present system we do know why we got a specific grade. After the competition a very detailed report on the scores is released.

Bondo, you are free to support secrecy if you want. That's the beauty of being an American. But I am free to not support it. I am currently not attending ISU sponsored events. Nor will I until this changes. And that is my right.

I did not attend the Atlanta event due to the risk of identity theft with the FBI criminal background check requirement. That was my right too. The background check was not the problem, releasing sensitive information to an all volunteer group who would not gaurantee it would not be released was the problem.

You are correct that a typo will get tossed if there was only one typo, that is. But the concept of secrecy leads to the believe of deception. The details released are not relative to the judge, therefore, you can't check to see mathmatically if a judge is cheating.

I've been attending top level events for nearly 40 now. I've never seen such upset in the sport as I am seeing lately.

I respect your right to your opinion, however.

[contrary]

I'm not sure I'm getting the school grades analogy. I wouldn't necessarily want the entire student body to know every mark I've gotten and why. Based on that analogy, the only person entitled to know who gave what is the individual skater (and only about their own marks).

I agree with most of what you said regarding cheating judges and punishment. I'm all for getting rid of the cheats. I'm also not saying that I am FOR secrecy. I am just saying that the judges don’t have to be accountable to FANS in order to be honest. The judges are accountable, to the ISU and their federations. So, what needs to be fixed is how the governing body and the federations deal with that accountability.

As for the security, um, what does that have to do with this argument? I think that was a local organization committee thing, and it only has to do with riding there transportation (and probably volunteering). You could go to the event without giving that info. Besides, we're talking about a very secretive organization. I'm sure your info would have been safe. :P

[Rachel]

Originally posted by contrary
I'm not sure I'm getting the school grades analogy. I wouldn't necessarily want the entire student body to know every mark I've gotten and why.

Which is why it's usually illegal for anyone to reveal your grade to anyone other than you.

I've also done blind grading, where I've graded papers for another instructor and that instructor for me. The students do not know who gives them their grades. And why was this done? It was done because students were perpetually *****ing about bias in grading, so the university in question said fine, all your work will be graded by someone who doesn't have any personal contact with you at all and we won't put your names on the papers, just your student numbers, so they won't know if you are male or female or have anything to go by other than your work. After that, the students all complained that they were being judged by someone they didn't know and so couldn't write for, because it's all about psyching out the instructor and figuring out what the instructor wants, not about writing well. They still don't like their grades and they still aren't happy.

You will never had a system in which a judgment is rendered that will make everyone happy. Can CoP be improved? Sure. Is there anything inherently better about the 6.0 system? Not really, only that people are more familiar with it.

[Tessie]

Originally posted by sachelle

Yes, it's better than 6.0. But 1 gp season had some whacky results.
After next season there will be much more raw data. Keep the CoP but identify the judges with the marks they gave. Why cannot this be done? If results continue to be at times very questionable, then why not ask for a news peice before Olympics 2006?

Idetifying the judge with his page of marks is the only way to turn the corruption of FS around.:D There is not good enough reason, IMO to let them be anonymous. Secrecy in FS judging is bad, ITA.

Although 1 GP season created some wacky results, it may be proving that the 6.0 system really holds people up. As Peggy Flemming Said in the '01 or '00 GP final, "I think Irina just got her Christmas present."

I haven't watched enough of the GPs this past season to render an opinion. But I do like the concept of earning your points versus a placement system. However, judges should have enough character to stand behind their marks, and should not hide in a veil of secrecy.

I am a licensed professional in my line of work, my name goes on my work. Why can't a figure skating judge stand up and be counted?

[sachelle]

I wonder if many fans realize that these contracts will be up. I did not. Will we go back to just seeing Nationals, Worlds and the Olympics? Look at the numbers who read these forums. Will they write the networks when its gone? All the millionaire skaters esp. Michelle should be sending roses I guess to Tonya every day.

Thanks for an informative post, 123!

[LTM]

I'm not crazy about the secrecy. I think in the long run it should be done away with.
But think back to Salt Lake. The charge was that the french judge was being pressured to vote a certain way BY ELEMENTS OF HER OWN FEDERATION.
Any suggestions as to how to police that? By using a point system
that problem has been addressed to some degree but there's still a subjective part to the marking process that, in theory could be manipulated.
We vote by secret ballot in elections to remove the chance that we could be pressured to vote a certain way by say, some guy standing there with a very big club.
I think the federations still can hold clubs over their judges and the only way to really remove those clubs is to detach the judges from the feds and make them a separate entity under the auspices of the ISU.
That and lifetime bans for anyone caught attempting to sway the results by pressuring officials.

[ariel]

I'm glad the 6.0 will be gone soon. The very idea of holding people up and saving room for skaters that were skating later in the program just made me sick. Talk about corruption!

[icyboid]

Although it doesn't tell us exactly whether judges are marking higher/lower than they would under accountable judging, the interim anonymous system is much more wi(l)der with the marking range as we can see from the recent 4CCs.

Some skaters had ranges larger than a whole point. 8O

[loveskating]

I don't think the judges are secret to the skaters...or within the ISU...their work is reviewed, it is said.

I also read where TT and Sasha got feedback...and changed the program accordingly, and specificlaly, i.e., the COE on the spiral in the SP.

Originally, the judges marks were to be secret so that no one could bribe a specfiic judge...they would have to bribe the entire panel. Also, the dropping of two marks was insurance against cheating.

It was said at that time, that nothing could be done about the nationalism of judges...that the best that could be done was to fix the system so that nationalism would be less effective and trickery would be less possible.

WHo gave what marks is the secret...and only to the public, plus which marks were dropped is determined by random computer program, so no one knows except on review.

In any case, I like the COP better...it clearly rewards more than just the jumps, and IMHO that is good for skating. Also, from what I've seen so far, it forces the presentation to rest solidly on the technical, and ensures far less cheap theatricality.

The key to "cheaters" is a due process within the ISU...so far, the accusations of cheating have never been proved...so its a matter of who you believe, and even the one instance, at SLC, where there was an affidavit, it was claimed that it was made under great duressand that it was false. Naturally, fans of one nation believe the charges by skaters or others of THEIR nation, but that is not justice, that is not impartial, is not based on real, hard evidence.

I wish the COP was in opera...then Domingo could not get away with transposing an opera down so he could hit a so-called "B"...he'd have to sing a B and a C just like everyone else, or get off the stage!

[IgglesII]

Originally posted by ariel
I'm glad the 6.0 will be gone soon. The very idea of holding people up and saving room for skaters that were skating later in the program just made me sick. Talk about corruption!

It shouldn't be gone soon - it should be gone immediately. It's ridiculous to bother using 6.0 at Nationals if all of the ISU's GP and championship events are going to use CoP. If we're trying to determine our National team to send to 4CC and Worlds, they should be judged using the system they'll be facing at 4CC and Worlds.

Of course, then they wouldn't be able to whip the fans into a frenzy with the magic "6.0" appearing on the scoreboard, and wouldn't that be just a cryin' shame.

[sk8pics]

Originally posted by loveskating
I don't think the judges are secret to the skaters...
Nope, the skaters also don't know who gave what marks.
Originally posted by loveskating

Originally, the judges marks were to be secret so that no one could bribe a specfiic judge...they would have to bribe the entire panel. Also, the dropping of two marks was insurance against cheating.

Yes, I remember this line of thinking, too, but I don't buy it. You don't have to bribe the whole panel, but just some (like before). Yes, you don't know if your "bought" judges will count, but if they do, they have a bigger impact since fewer marks actually count. And even if their marks are thrown out, they do have an impact on the total score since other marks are therefore not thrown out.
Originally posted by loveskating

WHo gave what marks is the secret...and only to the public, plus which marks were dropped is determined by random computer program, so no one knows except on review.

It's not a secret only to the public... it's a secret to the skaters and coaches as well.

For myself, I like certain aspects of CoP, but I hate the anonymous judging and the random selection and using a trimmed mean. To minimize the impact of cheating, more scores would be better than fewer. And of course the system can still be manipulated. The component scores changed during the grand prix events inexplicably. It looked like some skaters forgot how to skate during their trip from one event to the next, as shown by component scores more than 1 point different in 2 consecutive events. What this due to a lack of training of judges? Perhaps. Cheating? Perhaps. Who knows? :roll:

Pat

[Callystarr]

I am personally happy that the USFSA has supported this new scoring system. Especially after the awful mens results from 4CC a change is definately needed!

[Schmeck]

It's going to be interesting to see how the USFSA implements CoP in the future in regards to nationl competitions. I don't think they're planning on using CoP at Nationals next year, just at International events.

If they want to use CoP at Nationals, then it has to be used at Sectionals and Regionals too, wouldn't it? I don't know if that's possible right now, not enough trained judges, equipment, technicials, etc, to go around!

Schmeck