Judging System for Figure Skaters:CoP or the Old System

[rf3ray]

Hey guys just wondering what you guys think about the new CoP system for when you do competitions, do you see any advantages or disadvantages of that from the old scoring system??

[Mrs Redboots]

Oh, the New Judging System is infinitely better. I've only seen one competition at non-elite level judged using it so far, the ISU Adult competition at Oberstdorf last summer, but it seems excellent. Far less subjectivity in the system, and you can see exactly where you are going wrong. One skater, for instance, entered that she was going to do a loop jump, a flip and a lutz - but what the judges saw, and marked, was three loops. So she now knows what she needs to work on for next time.

Plus, if you score (say) 3.5 in one competition, and 6.4 in the next, you'll know that you've really improved, and it's not just the judges starting the base-mark in a different place. And you will be able to compare the protocols and see that, where you got -0.3 on your jump last time, you got a 0 on it this time! Or whatever.

There were one or two places where, when it was very close, the result wasn't quite what was expected, but the skaters were able to see why this had happened when they saw their protocols. But overall the system seems much fairer. I can't wait for it to be rolled out across the board!

[NickiT]

The new system certainly sounds so much better than the old one. It's just a shame that it will probably be years, if ever, that we implement it in Opens competitions here in the UK.

Nicki

[sk8pics]

With all due respect, there is still a great deal of subjectivity in the new scoring system, even though there are (perhaps) clearer guidelines as to how to mark. Just because marks are calculated to 3 decimal places does not make it more objective. But yes, there is the opportunity for more specific feedback for the skaters, and that's a good thing, as long as even the small club competitions provide that information. And yes, you can see from the grade of execution on a particular element if you are improving at your execution of it. Comparing component scores can also give you an idea of your own relative strengths and weaknesses, but not necessarily whether you are improving in that area since they are actually supposed to be graded "on a curve" rather than on an absolute scale. I do like a lot of the principles of the new judging system, but it still needs some work, especially for the lower level skaters.

The downsides are the increased number of officials needed (judges + callers), increased costs if computers are needed (even the paper and pencil version seems to require at least one computer, but it worked quite well in Oberstdorf). In the US, well balanced program rules will have to be adjusted to be in harmony with the ISU rules even for adults. IMO the anonymous judging aspect and the use of trimmed means are also weaknesses in the system, but of course individual federations can choose to implement the system using all judges and without anonymity.

[SkateFan123]

Plus, if you score (say) 3.5 in one competition, and 6.4 in the next, you'll know that you've really improved, and it's not just the judges starting the base-mark in a different place. And you will be able to compare the protocols and see that, where you got -0.3 on your jump last time, you got a 0 on it this time! Or whatever.



I disagree. The level of the event and other skaters at the event seem to be dictating the scores.

[skaternum]

I think the way the new judging system is being implemented for non-elite skaters (i.e., adults) raises some questions. Example: single jumps aren't even mentioned in the ISU system, so basically the competitions that implement it for adults have to make up what they want the points to be. In understand there was some grumbling about what how they awarded points at Oberstdorf. And what do you do with a bunch of bronze ladies who don't manage to get 3 revs on any given spin? Those don't "count" under the new system.

[NoVa Sk8r]

What I like about the NJS for adults is that spins count so much. For the elite skaters, a spin might be worth 2.5 points, compared to ~10 points or more for a jump combo. Single jumps range from 0.4-0.8, but a spin combo is roughly 2.0-2.5 points. I like this--A LOT!!!

[Debbie S]

It's just a shame that it will probably be years, if ever, that we implement it in Opens competitions here in the UK.

I suspect that it will take just as long, if ever, to implement the new system at club comps here in the U.S. The increased expenses that sk8pics mentioned make it likely that only the larger club events, like Liberty or Indy Pairs, will use it, and then probably only for juvenile level and up (for the immediate horizon, it's just novice, junior, senior). To me, this creates a problem b/c skaters will begin their competitive careers under the old system and then will have to readjust to a new system when they reach qualifying levels. And as skaternum pointed out, the system is not designed to judge low-level skaters doing less than double jumps, which pretty much includes all Adult competitors (excluding Masters).

Maybe it's just the way I've been conditioned to think about skating, but I don't think a points-based scoring system like this one is well-suited to the sport. I agree that the old system had the potential for unfair judging (like using the second mark to "prop up" skaters), but this new system, with its anonymous judging, has just as much potential for scandal. And what about changes after the fact if the caller makes a mistake? At Liberty, I lost track of how many times I heard the caller recite an element or level and then say "review". In fact, at Worlds this year, Johnny Weir dropped a spot after the SP (or was it the QR?) because his scores (or someone's) were adjusted after the comp was over b/c of a caller mistake.

Skaters move fast, and it's hard to see every last detail and think fast enough to catergorize elements, which is why I thought instant replay to help the judges identify jump mistakes was a great idea. But another important aspect of skating is that programs are often greater, or less than, the sum of their parts, and I fear that the new judging system will reduce the sport to counting and checking-off. And I think with so many categories in the component scores, and with judges needing to make decisions so quickly, there is just as much potential for "propping up" or cheating as there was under the old system.

[NoVa Sk8r]

The new system also does not reward skaters who do harder triple-triple combinations:
Comparing these two elements:
-3toe-3-toe
-3lutz

If a skater does a 3lutz and then follows with a 3toe/3toe combo, the number of base points is the same as if the skater had done a 3toe and then 3lutz/3toe. (The only way it's worth more is if the skater does the triple-triple past the 2minute mark, thus getting that 10% bonus.)

Also, is it fair that sequence get multiplied by 0.8 as if they were that much easier to do ... eg., is a 2axel/3toe that much harder than a 2axel/half loop/3sal? (In CoP the first gets 7.3, while the latter gets 6.24 base points).

And let's not even discuss the transition scores. Ugh. :roll:

[MQSeries]

I was reading an interview with MK in one of the skating mag currently on the newstand, and she said something to the effect that it feels strange to have to count the number of revolutions in a spin during a free program instead of letting the music and your feeling of the music at that moment dictate when you should exit the spin. I agree with this. The skaters have enough to worry about during their performance and now they have to actually think out everything, it seems like. I don't see how you can really let yourself go during a free program when you have to mentally tally everything that you do on the ice.

[slusher]

Skaters always had to count the number of rotations in their spins to make sure that they got the minimum required.

I like the balanced program requirements. It always bugged me in some of the kid competitions that someone would do 12-14 jumps, because they could do loops well so put in a lot of them of so-so quality, and get points on quantity. Someone who could do a tremendous loop and showcased it in their program somehow felt underjudged. Now, if you're going to do jumps, they better all be good.

I'm not liking the planned program content sheets. So if you write in that you're going to do 3axel/toe combo and decide to to 3 axel and combo something instead later, it takes away that opportunity to go with what you're feeling at the moment.

[sk8pics]

I suspect that it will take just as long, if ever, to implement the new system at club comps here in the U.S. The increased expenses that sk8pics mentioned make it likely that only the larger club events, like Liberty or Indy Pairs, will use it, and then probably only for juvenile level and up (for the immediate horizon, it's just novice, junior, senior). ...snip... At Liberty, I lost track of how many times I heard the caller recite an element or level and then say "review". In fact, at Worlds this year, Johnny Weir dropped a spot after the SP (or was it the QR?) because his scores (or someone's) were adjusted after the comp was over b/c of a caller mistake.


Actually, there are plans to implement the new system at all levels, I believe, and discussions are going on right now about the adult events. It actually didn't bother me that there were a lot of "review" comments at Liberty; the assistant callers are there to help with any questions, and I think it's good to make use of them. Although it did get funny after a while! And on the elite level, my opinion is that they need to be consistent. Some scores (such as Johnny's) were changed after the fact, but in other cases scores were not changed (Kimmie Meissner at Jr. Worlds) even though there was an obvious mistake.

Example: single jumps aren't even mentioned in the ISU system, so basically the competitions that implement it for adults have to make up what they want the points to be. In understand there was some grumbling about what how they awarded points at Oberstdorf. And what do you do with a bunch of bronze ladies who don't manage to get 3 revs on any given spin? Those don't "count" under the new system.
Actually, single jumps do count, just not very much! It's half revolution jumps such as waltz or half flip, that many pre-bronze skaters may want to do, that don't count as anything except "steps." I thought some of the judging was harsh in Oberstdorf; they were very strict about jumps being fully rotated. So if you do a single toe loop that is at all cheated, it is downgraded to no jump at all. I have no idea if the judges at a club competition here would do the same thing. And yes, if you don't get 3 revolutions in position, the spin does not count, but I wonder if the judges under the 6.0 system here at a club competition would give credit for that either? Anyway, yes, there need to be some adjustments to element values for the lowest levels.

NoVa Skr: You're right in your comment on jump combinations. The only sort of restriction on jumps and combinations is the number of jumping passes permitted, and of course the Zayak rule. It would be nice to see some sort of extra multiplication factor for harder jump combinations. And I also did not understand why they essentially downgraded the value of a sequence, although I had thought they had done away with that 0.8 factor.

Slusher: You can always make changes to your planned technical content, you just have to make sure you still stay within the rules for your particular event. Yes, it may take away some of your spontaneity, but the old judging system had well-balanced program rules, too, which could be restrictive.

Thanks for everyone's comments. I would suggest that if you are in the U.S. and have strong feelings about the implementation of the new judging system in adult skating here, send your comments to your respective section committee chairs, or you can PM me with more comments and I'll be happy to forward them.

Pat

[NCSkater02]

It's half revolution jumps such as waltz or half flip, that many pre-bronze skaters may want to do, that don't count as anything except "steps."

So the pre-bronze level scores really low, then, since the test standard is for half or full single revolution jumps. Does that mean I shouldn't even try to complete until I have all my full jumps?

It won't stop me from competing since all I got last year was ordinals anyway. We didn't get any other numbers.

All my jumps are half right now, and likely will be for a while. I'll just keep plugging along, and maybe one day I'll get to singles. (My coach, who I think is on drugs, sees me doing doubles down the road.)

[NoVa Sk8r]

So the pre-bronze level scores really low, then, since the test standard is for half or full single revolution jumps. Does that mean I shouldn't even try to complete until I have all my full jumps?

It won't stop me from competing since all I got last year was ordinals anyway. We didn't get any other numbers.I think that (for now?), it's a moot point because there are no CoP competitions that have pre-bronze events. Oberstdorf had bronze and up and adult nationals has never had (and I think I can say this), will never have pre-bronze events.

But I guess the way things are going, all the adult competitions (Peach Classic, Halloween Open, New Year's Invitational, etc.) will someday use CoP???

And there's nothing wrong with "scoring low." As the 6.0 system is applied to adults, most of us have really low marks anyway. The base total mark for bronze level, for example, is 5.0 (2.5 each for technical and presentation). Pre-bronze level has no base mark, since the test is pass/fail.

[icedancer2]

Actually, single jumps do count, just not very much! It's half revolution jumps such as waltz or half flip, that many pre-bronze skaters may want to do, that don't count as anything except "steps." I thought some of the judging was harsh in Oberstdorf; they were very strict about jumps being fully rotated. So if you do a single toe loop that is at all cheated, it is downgraded to no jump at all. I have no idea if the judges at a club competition here would do the same thing. And yes, if you don't get 3 revolutions in position, the spin does not count, but I wonder if the judges under the 6.0 system here at a club competition would give credit for that either? Anyway, yes, there need to be some adjustments to element values for the lowest levels.



I recently judged my first "club-type" competitions (I am a new Bronze test judge, so this is all new for me) and our judging sheets definitely had revolution requirements for spins, even for pre-pre and no-test levels. So if a spin didn't have even the 3 required revolutions, it didn't really count as meeting the requirement for spins. There are deductions for omitting an element and if an element doesn't have the # of revolutions, then I chose to treat it as omitted.

I think the new judging system will make it easier for the judges (I can't wait) because trying to rank a group of skaters is really hard!! You have to make sure you don't tie anyone, the numbers get all mixed up in your head and you just pray to god (or whoever) that you don't screw up too badly!

[Debbie S]

Actually, single jumps do count, just not very much! It's half revolution jumps such as waltz or half flip, that many pre-bronze skaters may want to do, that don't count as anything except "steps." I thought some of the judging was harsh in Oberstdorf; they were very strict about jumps being fully rotated. So if you do a single toe loop that is at all cheated, it is downgraded to no jump at all.

Good point - that's another issue when CoP is applied to lower levels, both kids and adults. If every Pre-Bronze adult or No-Test/Tots kid gets no credit for their jumps (or spins), b/c they are either half a rev or cheated, then how do you pick a winner? Obviously, the component scores would decide things, but that seems like such a weird way to figure out placements. And half-rev jumps are also an issue in Bronze, b/c you do see skaters doing a waltz-toe (test requirement) or waltz-half loop-sal, since axels are not allowed.

I think CoP needs a bit of fine-tuning before it's applied to all levels, but as I understand it, the system is going to be phased in over a 3-year period or so, so hopefully, that will give the powers that be time to modify the system so that it makes sense. Personally, I think for non-qual levels (Pre-Juv and below, and Adult comps outside of AN), it makes more sense to just use an ordinal system for the final results and then maybe give skaters and their coaches a handout (like in Oberstdorf) that tells them how their elements were scored.

[stardust skies]

I was reading an interview with MK in one of the skating mag currently on the newstand, and she said something to the effect that it feels strange to have to count the number of revolutions in a spin during a free program instead of letting the music and your feeling of the music at that moment dictate when you should exit the spin. I agree with this. The skaters have enough to worry about during their performance and now they have to actually think out everything, it seems like. I don't see how you can really let yourself go during a free program when you have to mentally tally everything that you do on the ice.


Well, I like Kwan and all...but that is just sour grapes because the new system isn't good for her (very solid and consistent skater, but no extras a la Cohen that can rake up points). It sunk her this year, and she's openly said she didn't like the idea of learning about a new system at the end of her career, and that the 6.0 system "made" her. I personally think she would have been successful under any system because she's an amazing competitor and skater, but her resistance to learning about the new system is what screwed her over this year. Skaters ALWAYS have to count the revolutions on their spins, to make sure they have enough revolutions. The COP doesn't reward the number of revolutions, it rewards changes in positions. For example, for a layback to be a level 3, you need 3 changes of positions including a sideways position, and I THINK a biellman position, too. But even under the 6.0 system, you need 10 revolutions on combo spins, and 6-8 on solo spins. So if she didn't count her spin revolutions before, there's no reason she should count them now, because the rules on that haven't changed.

Meanwhile, I took part in a non qualifying competition earlier this summer that had the COP implemented for the higher levels (as well as the standard 6.0), and I personally really liked it. It gave you extra points for things that would be overlooked before- I noticed everyone had more intricate programs, and it was great. I also loved the detailed description of everything I was graded on, how I was graded, and why. Sure, the judges can still cheat, but that's going to be ANY system, whether you make them accountable or not. Usually any corruption that goes on with the judging starts way higher up the food chain than a judge, anyways, so who is going to bust said judge if he was "suggested" holding up a certain skater? Nobody.

I don't like how triple/triples don't get extra points (although I don't do them yet anyways so really it doesn't matter :P) but I DO like how jumps in the second half of the program get more credit. All in all, it still have problems, but it's a major improvement, and I think it's good that it was finally done.

[sk8pics]

Meanwhile, I took part in a non qualifying competition earlier this summer that had the COP implemented for the higher levels (as well as the standard 6.0), and I personally really liked it. It gave you extra points for things that would be overlooked before- I noticed everyone had more intricate programs, and it was great. I also loved the detailed description of everything I was graded on, how I was graded, and why. Sure, the judges can still cheat, but that's going to be ANY system, whether you make them accountable or not. Usually any corruption that goes on with the judging starts way higher up the food chain than a judge, anyways, so who is going to bust said judge if he was "suggested" holding up a certain skater? Nobody.

I don't like how triple/triples don't get extra points (although I don't do them yet anyways so really it doesn't matter :P) but I DO like how jumps in the second half of the program get more credit. All in all, it still have problems, but it's a major improvement, and I think it's good that it was finally done.

Yeah, I agree there are a lot of positives. But how do you know that if you had had a more intricate program under 6.0 that you wouldn't have been given credit for such things? I would think the major benefit to skaters is the concrete feedback that maybe wasn't so available before, rather so much that new things count that didn't count before. I also really have a hard time believing there is much cheating among judges at the club competition level. Perhaps some bias, but outright cheating?

I also like skaters getting bonus points if they do jumps late in the program. One negative I see, though, is that while people are doing more complex programs, they're mostly all doing the same moves. So we see lots of edge-changing on spins, lots of bielman positions, but not as much variety in the programs. I hope people will become more creative as they get used to the new scoring system.

If every Pre-Bronze adult or No-Test/Tots kid gets no credit for their jumps (or spins), b/c they are either half a rev or cheated, then how do you pick a winner? Obviously, the component scores would decide things, but that seems like such a weird way to figure out placements. And half-rev jumps are also an issue in Bronze, b/c you do see skaters doing a waltz-toe (test requirement) or waltz-half loop-sal, since axels are not allowed
Yes, you're right that it could come down to component scores deciding the outcome, which is right back to being more subjective. There will have to be changes made for the lower levels.

But I guess the way things are going, all the adult competitions (Peach Classic, Halloween Open, New Year's Invitational, etc.) will someday use CoP???
I think that's a fair assumption. Eventually it would get too difficult to have two different judging systems in place. I think for now, if you are planning to compete under CoP and 6.0 you have to look at the well balanced program requirements for each and see how best to fit your program in. And btw, even though Oberstdorf had no pre-bronze category, you could skate up, which I did. And yeah, my score was very, very low! :roll:

icedancer2-Thanks for your perspective as a judge!

NCskater02-- You can only do what you can do! Even if you only have half jumps, there are still spins and spirals, for example, which will give you points under the new system. And like others have said (including me!) it makes sense that there will have to be some adjustments made for the lowest levels. I also don't think you will have to worry about this at club competitions for a while, and maybe by the time you do, you'll have some singles!
Pat

[NoVa Sk8r]

I think that's a fair assumption. Eventually it would get too difficult to have two different judging systems in place. I think for now, if you are planning to compete under CoP and 6.0 you have to look at the well balanced program requirements for each and see how best to fit your program in.What about interp programs ... are those gonna be CoP'ed as well? That doesn't make sense to me at all.

[blue111moon]

So far, from my experience, I like COP. As a competitor, I liked seeing that the caller at least recognized that I did what I said I was going to do.

As an accountant (the person who calculates the results), I'm a little less thrilled, simply because the system is pretty cumbersome at this time and it churns out a lot more paper as compared to the 6.0 system. But almost all competitions have gone to using at least one computer to do results (even Basic Skills) so that's not an issue. The last I heard, USFSA was estimating three years to make the switch to COP (they call it IJS, ISU Judging System) at all levels.

[jenlyon60]

For standard track Novice and above, the well-balanced program requirements are the same under both the IJS and the 6.0 system, at least for this season. That's one reason why USFS put out clarifications of the well-balanced program requirements... they had published the US 2005-2006 well-balanced program requirements before the ISU set everything in stone in ISU Communication #1318 (dance) and #1319 (singles/pairs).

[sk8pics]

What about interp programs ... are those gonna be CoP'ed as well? That doesn't make sense to me at all.
Yeah, that's a problem. There will likely be some sort of CoP-type of system, but whether it will be just the components or some other modification, I don't know. Like I said, if you have comments, ideas, suggestions, send them to your section chair or PM me and I will be happy to forward them.

Pat

[jenlyon60]

I would expect that the emphasis would be put on the Program Component Scores. Perhaps they would weight the relative value of the PCS vs. the elements/GOEs differently for interp events.

What about interp programs ... are those gonna be CoP'ed as well? That doesn't make sense to me at all.

[Mrs Redboots]

The downsides are the increased number of officials needed (judges + callers), increased costs if computers are needed (even the paper and pencil version seems to require at least one computer, but it worked quite well in Oberstdorf). In the US, well balanced program rules will have to be adjusted to be in harmony with the ISU rules even for adults. IMO the anonymous judging aspect and the use of trimmed means are also weaknesses in the system, but of course individual federations can choose to implement the system using all judges and without anonymity.I would have thought that most clubs now have, or have the use of, at least one computer to issue the scores from the old relative system. Okay, so they will need new software for the new system, but that need not be expensive. My husband reckons it could be done with a simple spreadsheet.

As for adjusting the well-balanced programme rules - well, now that we are a recognised ISU discipline (Yaaay!), we were going to have to do that anyway.

Another thing I like is that "simple steps, beautifully done" will be rewarded more than a poorly-executed attempt. So with any luck we'll see more really good double axels, and rather fewer poor triples - and fewer skaters needing hip replacements at 17 because they've tried to do elements they weren't able for.

An elite dancer was saying this morning that sometimes she & her partner find it better to go for a level 2 or 3 element and get a good mark than to try for a level 4 and just miss.

And what I like is that the 2nd and 3rd sequences of a compulsory dance carry a higher tariff than the first - I'm always so shaky on the first sequence, then settle down!!! Suits me!

[sk8pics]

I would have thought that most clubs now have, or have the use of, at least one computer to issue the scores from the old relative system. Okay, so they will need new software for the new system, but that need not be expensive. My husband reckons it could be done with a simple spreadsheet.
...snip...
Another thing I like is that "simple steps, beautifully done" will be rewarded more than a poorly-executed attempt. So with any luck we'll see more really good double axels, and rather fewer poor triples - and fewer skaters needing hip replacements at 17 because they've tried to do elements they weren't able for.


Actually, while many clubs probably do have a computer to be used, you still need a few more people than currently, since you have not only judges but callers as well. And while I agree you should be able to do the calculations with a spreadsheet, I know the ISU has software specially designed for this. Admittedly theirs is more complicated due to the random picking of judges on each element. I don't know if it will be required to use their software or not.

And I agree with you on picking things that you can do well, so you're not trying to do things that are just too hard for you. But still, if you do the harder thing just well enough that it counts, you can often get more points than doing a simpler thing well. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

[skatersmama]

Thought that some of you may be interested to see how Skate Canada is going about implementing this new system to the StarSkate kids (non-competitive test stream).

Here are some samples from the scale of Values table:
Cheated Singles
<Toeloop Base Value 0.20 worse deduction is -0.10
<Flip Base Value 0.20 worse (---) is -0.10, best(+++) is =0.20

<Toeloop and <Salchow are same as are the flip, lutz and loop

Waltz Base is 0.30, ded (---) is 0.20 and best (+++) is 0.60, so you can get 0.90 for a fabulous waltz jump.

Singles are: Toeloop and Salchow Base 0.40 (---)0.30 and (+++)1.00
loop and flip Base 0.50 (---)0.30 and (+++)1.00
lutz Base 0.60 (---)0.30 and (+++)1.00
axel Base 0.80 (---)0.50 and (+++)1.50

So, although the numbers wil be small, there is a value assigned to all elements. There is also a catagory added to Spins, which is Called "A", which I am assuming is a very entry level type spin.

This will be implemented couple of years, however coaches are designing programs now that are cop friendly, even for the Introductory catagory (before pre-preliminary). :)

[SkateFan123]

6.0 or CoP??? Umm, let's see, CoP adds for things done, 6.0 ranks skaters. In a large field, this is extremely difficult to do. Both systems have flaws.

I could totally support CoP if there were two changes: the secrecy has to go which would enhance judges accountability and the technical specialist has to go which would allow judges to judge instead of punch buttons based upon what the technical specialist calls.

Without these changes, I cannot support figure skating any longer. I'm just using up my tickets bought years ago and becoming cynical while just watching the skaters move to the beat of the lovely music.

And for the record, the first Nationals I attended was in 1968! I've been a fan for a very long time.