Saturday, December 11

When You're Already Marked So High...

Is a 9.00 for interpretation really that needed or deserved? Chan and Takahashi both had 'off' performances in my opinion, and while the latter might have made more severe mistakes, he should have topped the interpretation score easily. What did he earn? 8.25.

I commented on the live review that Chan's interpretation was the weakest component that he has, yet these judges gave him the highest score there.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm in complete agreement. Takahashi was a bit off, but he deserved a higher mark for interpretation because he really does become the music. Chan... not so much. And Kozuka deserved higher PCS marks, as always - his skating is so gorgeous to watch.

Anonymous said...

I agree. Chan almost always deserves high scores in SS, for example, but for interpretation? It's like the judges decided they might as well give him high PCS across the board as long as they were giving some. He definitely deserved the win (and I say this as someone who's generally a hater XD), but I feel like it sullies his victory when they do this... not to mention makes PCS look like a joke.

Anonymous said...

I think Chan is routinely overscored on interpretation. I don't even care that he gets high scores for his other components marks, but interpretation? I don't think he even hears the music.

Anonymous said...

Totally agree. I can live with Chan getting high marks for SS and TR, but IN? Seriously? He doesn't interpret the music at all.

But what I'd really like to know is what was going on with the scoring of Chan's SP quad attempt. As the solo jump jump, there should have been steps into it, and there weren't; and it was underrotated as well. Yet two judges didn't even see fit to give it a negative GOE, and the overall GOE was just -1.14.

Are the judges watching the same skater we are? What incentive is there for Chan to improve his weak areas when he's scored like this? It's bad for him and bad for skating.

Tony said...

I commented about the lack of steps into the quad. He obviously planned it to be his combination, but when he couldn't get the second jump off, the lack of steps should have hurt. He did have a few turns into the jump, so a -1 GOE for the otherwise decent attempt (I guess I didn't watch close enough for the under-rotation) is alright by me. Since he got the < call, a -2 is probably better off there.

The third judge on the protocol should have to explain themselves. +2 for the quad toe and +3 for the flying sit? LOL

Anonymous said...

Wow, I didn't even notice the +2, it must have registered as a -2. How on earth?

I hope you're planning on scoring the GPF yourself, Tony - I'm curious to see the results.

Anonymous said...

9.00 interpretation for Chan?


Lambiel and Takahashi flatten Chan when it comes to interpretation, and I can't even remember the last time they've ever received a 9 for IN.

What a farce.

Anonymous said...

9.00 interpretation for Chan... It's a sin, and it does make PCS look like a joke. Although I feel that Chan did deserve the win, but this mess in PCS needs to be adressed. I'm a huge fan of figure skating in general, but I'm starting to not want to watch competitions anymore. It's just not good for the sport.

cameralaw said...

Have to disagree here. Chan interpreted the last part of the music quite expressively. This is what made the final impression on the judges. Of course, we know how imprecise the program component scores are and how they tend to be a mirror (or a rubber stamp) of the technical scores. Nonetheless, giving high scores to Chan is quite defensible. He is a smooth, pleasing skater with continuous flow and almost no scratching of edges. He listens well to his music (though some of the music in the middle of the program was too amorphous for a couple of the combination jumps he had to perform). He skated away with this competition. So, my hat's off to Patrick! Job well done.

Anonymous said...

Many ISU judges are still continuing relative judgment. Now i doubt they have tried to give inflated PCS on Chan and to keep his attention to figure skate competitions and go on to Sochi? Well, at least Chan himself knows and admitted he has been overscored at interview with Sport Express in Cup of Russia.
Source : http://winter.sport-express.ru/figureskating/reviews/9889/
English translated http://community.livejournal.com/ontd_skating/935126.html

Anonymous said...

Having just re-watched his LP... yeah, there's really not enough going on there to merit scores even near Takahashi's. During the first half of the program, the only time he really emotes TO the music rather than THROUGH it (or... vaguely around it sometimes) is during the step sequences, and honestly I felt the same way for much of the rest of the program. It's good, and he's very good at interpreting the music during the steps, but when you put it up against Takahashi... :/ Did someone forget to tell the judges what interpretation means? Were they trained? What's going on here?

David said...

Yeah, I think 9 for Chan's interpretation is too much; I think he deserved to win, overall, but his PCS marks are very weird,I mean I agree his skating is one of the best, but then Kozuka's as good as his, and in my opinion as far as interpretation is concerned, no one can beat Takahashi. But I'm not arguing with Patrick winning here, he deserved it.
...PCS marks have been weird in the ladies' competition too; I personally feel Akiko's should have been higher and Kostner's and Ando's much lower.

Anonymous said...

A 9 in interpretation is fine with me. Interpretation has nothing to do with execution. You can have great interpretation and have a few execution errors. My problem is when one judge gives a 10.00 for exection when there was obvious errors, ala Savchenko and Szolkowy, Skate Canda 2009 FS.