关于新的记分规则

从2002-2003赛季起，ISU使用了新的规则。由以前的9名裁判（也有5或7名裁判的时候）增加到14名裁判，由电脑(就是所说的Secret Computer)选取9名裁判的打分。在亮分的时候，也不是像以前那样1-9名裁判依次排列，可以知道是哪位裁判给选手的分数，而是采用了从低到高排列分数。这是Cinquanta(我恨他, 在别的论坛上我们给他起了个外号Speedy）所谓的“减少裁判作弊行为”的方法。（他为什么要提出我想在这里就不用说了吧）
但在我看来，这种方法不仅不会有一点效果，只是给如果想作弊的裁判（这里只是假设，我不是说真有裁判要作弊）一个更好的机会，因为没有人知道是谁打的分，想追查也不能了。至于坏处，那可是说不完的多。
首先，由secret computer选分数本来就很不公平，使分数差不多的选手的名次并不完全准确。拿2003年世界锦标赛来说，有几次看到选手的得分，似乎差不太多，但是A选手就排在B选手之前。可能把B排在前面的裁判比A的还多呢，但是在选分数的时候发生了偏差。选手的分数越接近，出现这种事的几率就越大。
第二，个人感觉裁判打分有了很大水分。以前世界大赛中，冰舞给6分的较多一点，但是其他3个项目就是微乎其微了。如双人滑比赛，就连G&G, M&D, B&S那么优秀的选手都没得过多少次6分。今年世界锦标赛S/Z技术分和表演分各获得2个6分，但是真的认为他们的表演是6.0分的表演吗？当然，我不是说他们表演不好，只是和G&G1988年奥运会的Classical Medley, 1989世界锦标赛的Die Fledermaus, M&D的Liebestraum和Rach, B&S的 City Lights和Meditation相比，是否有差距？而那些节目都没有获得过满分。G&G1994年经典的Moonlight Sonata也只获得了1个满分。还有今年Four Continents也有太多满分。
以前6.0是一个很“神圣”的分数，尤其是在世界锦标赛和奥运会。
第三，这种制度减少了比赛的刺激性。以前的分数与每个裁判和他所给的名次对应，而且可以看到选手与选手之间究竟相差多少。现在看到的都是从低到高的排序。
总之，这些原因，和这种新规则被采用的原因，还有Speedy, 都加起来使我非常讨厌它。

在2003-2004赛季中，还要采用更新的规则。这回和体操一样，有一个Code of Points, 每个动作都有具体的得分。艺术表现力的各个项目都有非常具体的分值，ISU网站上有。这样一个艺术表现力很差的选手可以通过高难度跳跃积很多分，从而超过那些艺术表现力更好的选手。
我个人认为这个规则被采用，将是花样滑冰的悲哀。在许多论坛上都有一个类似的说法,"We want to see Michelle Kwan's pure joy after a string of perfect 6.0s on the board, and not Timothy Goebel has scored 600 points, breaking a new World record, after landing four quads and a quintuple jumps in one program." 上一段话是我编的，没有什么理论依据。大意是，我们不想看到Timothy Goebel在完成4个四周跳和1个五周跳后积累了600分，打破了世界纪录；我们想看到Michelle Kwan在得到一连串的6.0分后的发自内心的喜悦之情。

不知道对于这个问题大家是怎样看待的。

你说的有一定道理，不过电脑选分还是有一定好处的，裁判们可以减少压力，至于他打出的分数，虽然我们不知道，但是国际滑联知道，如果他有过分的举动，即使他打的分数不是有效分，也会被处罚的。有一点我非常赞同你，排列方式的问题，不应该按照从低到高的顺序排，这样我们无法看到裁判对运动员的整体评判，最高的技术分和最高的艺术分不一定是一个人打的，应该把顺序打乱，但是应该让我们能清楚的看到每位裁判对一个选手的整体评价，就是对应的技术和艺术分应该是一个裁判打出来的。
对于更新的规则，我完全同意你的观点，花样滑冰是一个很特别的运动，它和音乐的结合太紧密了，也就是说它不是一个完全用竞技指标能够衡量的项目，也不是完全量化的评分规则可以度量的，所以采用体操那样的评分方式是不合理的，可能使运动员片面的追求难度，无疑改变了花样滑冰运动的本质，最可怕的是爆冷的机会大大增加。相信这种规则长久不了，应该会在短期内夭折，我们一块祈祷吧！！！

确实，这个新规则唯一受益者就是那些乱打分的裁判，让电脑随机抽取分数实在是太荒唐了，这是对运动员的极大不尊重。而且，6。0分泛滥，观众们看到的只是从低到高的排列的分数，根本不知道哪个分数是哪个裁判打的，也不知道哪个技术分和哪个表演分是由同一个裁判打的，也就是说，前面亮出来的分数其实一点意义也没有，什么都不能说明，最后出现的裁判排位才是决定性的。
说到设立COP，真是花样滑冰的悲哀，自从竞技体操93年强化COP以来，体操的难度日新月异，可是比赛却越来越乏味。艺术体操2001年也大规模的引进COP，结果比赛是越来越让人看不懂，也不好看了。现在没想到花样滑冰也走上了这样的一条道路。

I pretty much agree what you said except the follwong points:

1. I don't think it's appropriate to compare G/G. M/D. B/S's performances to S&Z's 2003 Worlds LP while they are not even in the same era or competition. Otherwise, why don't you compare 3-time Olympic gold medalists & 10-time World champinos Irina Rodnina/her partners to those teams? I highly suspect R/her partners would place in top 10 in any competitions today.       [em17]

2. I can't remember other teams' situations exactly. But I know B/S "did" get 6.0s for their "City Lights" program(though not in the World Championships). One 6.0 in 2001 European Championships(with Elena fell on her 2axel!!!). One in the 2001 Cup of Russia(my favorite B/S's performance of all time).     

3. I guess everybody has different taste. Many prefer artistic skaters and some like athletic skaters. S/Z may not have great artistry as G/G or B/S. But it doesn't mean they don't deserve high 2nd marks. Remember that the 2nd mark is called "presentation marks", not "artistry marks". And according to ISU's definition of "presentation", it's not strange for S/Z getting such high marks with their performance in Washington D.C. Should I mention again that I was there that night? They moved the audience and brought many people in tears. If I were a judge, I wouldn't give them 6.0/6.0, but I would give them 5.9/6.0 for sure.      

为什么总是用英语？

DSC是外国网友，可以看简体中文，但是不能打，^_^

我也不喜欢现在实行的14位裁判打分的情况，因为很多裁判的分数之间相差太大了，因为不知道自己分数是否有效，就会有裁判，完全按个人喜好打分，给自己喜欢的选手拼命打高分，而对有的选手故意打低分。
而且6.0泛滥也使这一个神圣的分数失去价值。凭心而论，我个人对S/Z获得那么多6.0虽然很高兴，但不觉得他们的表演真的值那么多6.0，就那次自由滑来说他们是整体最好的，但至少我觉得在技术分上没有什么人真能做到完美。
就艺术上来说，S/Z在世锦赛上表演确实很好，但毕竟是表演了2个赛季的节目，很多历史上6.0都是一个赛季的节目，所以总和我心目中的6.0还是有差距的，当然这是我个人看法，不是针对S/Z的。
对于未来要实行的规则，我也不喜欢，我可不希望Goebel那种乏味的表演是今后花样滑冰的主流，这会毁了花样滑冰的。

[此贴子已经被作者于2003-4-27 13:07:03编辑过]

DSC,
That's true. But legends are always legends. G&G and B&S are legends, and will always be, no matter how time passes or many new skaters come up. A lot of their programs, like Moonlight Sonata, Romeo&Juliet, City Lights, Meditation, or M&D's Liebestraum are classic programs. Even though they're from a different era, and different competitions, those programs, in some ways, are better than a lot of programs we see now, even without the difficult technical elements. Those programs are special because of the choreography, and that's what the second mark is about. I know S&Z's program had many people in tears, and I was also in tears, and I also know their technical elements were more difficult, but IMHO, their choreography doesn't even come close, though it was better than before. Their dbasic skating and spins have a long way to go.

And B&S's City Lights at CoR was so magical, very deserving of a 6.0. Ironically, the judge who gave them the 6.0 there, the German judge, was one of the two(the other was the Canadian judge) that put B&S in 2nd after the short program at the 2002 Olympics.
They had also got a 6.0 at the 1998 European Championships for their short program Swan Lake.

In the presentation mark, here are a few of the qualities that are taken into account:
choreography, the flow of the program, speed, edges, grace, moves in the field, the balance of the whole program(which I guess should be part of the choreography), the basic skating skills, the skaters' presence on the ice, and of course how the skaters present the program. And also some other aspects that a lot of people don't think should be a criteria: the choice of music, costumes, and sometimes the crowd reaction, and also some very unfair aspects, such as how famous the skaters are, what a skater or skaters' resume is like, and a lot of times, a skater's nationality and coach. Sometimes skaters are "held up" through the presentation mark, because it is very difficult to judge a skater presentation-wise. A lot of scandals have been created, a lot of results screwed up, and it's all because people and judges have different tastes. For example, judges from a former USSR nation, or the so-called "Eastern bloc" judges, would prefer the balletic grace, the classical style, while the North American judges would like the more playful style, and the audience too. That's probably because of cultural differences, or just because the skaters and judges were trained differently.

采用像体操那样的起评分？天啊～那花样滑冰岂不是变成技术型选手的天下了？太可怕了～我要睡不好觉了。这样做虽然对花样滑冰的技术动作进行了量化，使裁判的技术打分不至于差得太多，可是这样的话花样滑冰不是变得很乏味了吗？我可不想在以后的日子里总在讨论这个选手的SV是多少多少，这个动作值多少分那个动作值多少分这种问题～

有起评分的话，那表演分怎么算？

                                               [em28]

我反对新规定，根本看不到所有裁判打的分数，而且打出来的分数差距很大
凡事都有利有弊，希望花样滑冰的评分标准能越来越公正。
技术分比较好规范，可艺术分就有问题了……

figuresk8er

     I pretty appreciate your responding, but I am not sure I would agree what you mentioned about "G/G. M/D. B/S vs. S/Z" or something like that. B/S and S/Z are both my favorite teams. If I were a judge and they competed against each other in the same competition, I would give the edge to B/S with no doubt because B/S do have better overall basic skating skills. The problem is, they didn't go to the Worlds this year. Even if they went there with well-choreographed "City Lights" or "Meditation", how can you assure B/S would perform the program well and make it worthy of 6.0? How do you know they wouldn't repeat the disater like they did in 2000 GPF? The fact is, the gold contest of 2003 Worlds was between S/Z and T/M. S/Z won by a magnificent LP, that's it. If you don't want to give S/Z 6.0s, then I guess you have to take away T/M's 5.9s first. I agree S/Z still have long way to go to improve themselves. But I disagree they shouldn't get high marks just because those legendary teams didn't get as many 6.0s as they got. That's irrelevant.  

     And, according to the ISU rules, here are the judging elements for presentation mark for pairs:
1. harmonious composition/conformity with the music chosen
2. variation of speed
3. use of the ice surface
4. ease of movement/sureness
5. carriage and style
6. originality
7. expression of the character of the music
8. unsion

     I am going to say only item #1. 3. 6 are related to the choreography. Most of them depend on how the skaters perform themselves. I would say S/Z are doing great in #2. 3. 5. 8(except the SBS spin), has improved a lot in #1 and 7,  and need to work on #4. 6. B/S have them all, but, as much as I like them, I want to know when was the last time B/S skated BOTH clean programs in ONE competition?

     As for the new judging system, I totally dislike it. And I think the scandal happens only because of the judges, not because of the system. But figure skating is a very subjective sport and it's hard to avoid the argument.

     Sorry again if my words annoy you.     [em19]

DSC

Not at all, I love hearing your opinions.
B&S do have some problem with consistency, and I think that's what has hurt them a lot. I didn't mean to start a B&S vs S&Z thread or anything like that. And I really admire both teams, and respect them. Remember back in 1999 Worlds, when Elena&Anton won with Lena's fall on the double axel, and S&Z skated a relatively "perfect" technical program, but were still placed in 2nd? Then CTV captured Russian and Ukranian judges toe-tapping to each other on tape? Then a minor-scandal broke out. The reason I say minor scandal is because S&Z were such a class act, and they didn't break out with all the cries of, "Oh, we were robbed!" blah, blah. They people that really started the scandal were more B&S bashers than S&Z supporters. 2002 Olympics were such a contrast. NBC and S&P are losers. Sorry if that sounds bad. I have a bad feeling for S&P, NBC(especially Sandra, Scott, Tom Hammond), and Speedy. I also think S&Z and the Chinese Fed made the right decision to not attend the second double gold ceremony. I really gained respect for S&Z after that scandal. I thought of how the "scandal" in 99 could've turned out if they were whiners like S&P. If they had whined about not getting gold after 99 Worlds, and had gotten, let's say, a second gold, I would think the gold was a tainted one, and probably would've lost respect for S&Z. But they didn't, and were a true class act. Seeing them at 2003 Worlds was sooo great, I was in tears, and sincerely happy for them.
Please, don't feel I have any hard feelings towards them. I love them as well. And this time not just because they're our Chinese skaters, but more because of their strength and courage, and perseverence, and of course, they're skating has become very beautiful. IMHO, competing all those years against B&S and S&P(as much as I hate S&P) really helped their presentation. I think it really brought the coaches and skaters to focus on the presentation and choreography as well as the technical elements.