BlazeAwheelSo how would you like to ski comps to be judged ?
Right now it is a score out of 100 points which basically is thrown out the window because it really is an overall impression and then a ranking system. So don't worry if jossi is in second place with a 87 and joss is leading with a 93 the point difference really doesn;t make a difference. At the end of the day they ( judges ) want to get it right with the correct ranking from 1st all the way down the list.
If the judges do enter a score and by chance they come out the with the same score : for example russ just scored a 87, well you can;t have a tie. So judges have a quick vote by a show of hands on if they like it better or worse. If three hands go up in russ's favour , the head judge will adjust the score to reflect the vote. Thus Russ would move up into 2nd say with a 90 point score.
Thoughts ....
I'm glad someone brings this up. I went to a judge clinic earlier this season. So I started to understand the judging.
Personally, I think the overall impression is a bit out-of-date. It was fine at the early stage of this game, since creativity should be rewarded to make the game advance. As the game progresses, and the technics advance, it's harder and harder to rank athletes' runs based on some overall impression. A throws a trip12 japan with a clean landing, B throws a trip14 safety with some bobble landing, given all the other features same, who is better?
Recently, in snowboard we've already seen the difficulty. Last year X games, Mark and Stale, whose run was better? And also, I believe the dew tour ski slope final this year was kind of a disaster, where after the first two run, the tone was set, 86.4 and 89.4. But the next thing the judges realized was almost every complete run lined between this two runs, but there wasn't enough room to put every run in there.
I know there are arguments within FIS, and FIS vs TTR. Also, whether to give a technical difficulty to each maneuver. Some people are afraid that this will kill the creativity.
Personally, I started to like the way TTR give scores, for each feature you get score to 0-10 from two judges based on amplitude, difficulty and execution. Each feature has different two judges. Then overall impression is scored by another two judges based on variation, style and combination.
I know people would argue that what if A performed trick a on feature 1, trick b on feature 2, while B performed trick b on feature 1 and trick a on feature 2, but judges are different. I would say we have such advanced technology and devices, it's very easy for them to communicate (or the head judge is able to guide all the judges). As long as all the judges are trained properly and guided by the same head judge, it won't be a big problem.
Also the TTR setting will put less burden on the focus of each judge, so they can focus on more details.
You see, we have a lot more judges than available comps. So we can definitely use more and train more.
We should also pay more attention on how to handle the progression/creativity. Nowadays, it's always spinning/flipping to win style. Spinning a double cork 10/12 in all four directions is the basis. If everyone throws a double, then a triple would win the gold. If everyone getting a triple 14, the one who do a triple 16 will win. Where is the 19 spin, dub 16? And currently misty/rodeo/flat seems only to add a bit of variety, it won't make a difference than a all four way dub corks run. I mean, adding a rodeo won't give you a big boost in score, judges still weight a lot on the execution. Yet a rodeo is harder than a cork. Also, the hardway(opp carving/reverse carving) takeoff won't count much. It just add some "style", yet "style" is not a criterion in judging. I still remember last year X game, sb slope final, Sage did a really creative run, love all those tricks. But the score made it just a clown run. Let's say it this way. If the overall impression is to give all the creative things a chance, why when real creative thing happens, it gets shit. Overall impression hates to commit using difficulties on each individual feature, but when scoring it's inevitably to rely on it. When coming to a dilemma, which individual trick you like better? Then why not just admit it, embrace it. Also it will help to reduce such problems, on feature 1, A did better by a margin of 2.5, on feature 2, B did better by a margin of 1. So, overall A is better.
Finally, bring the replay to the judges! They can't rely on it of course, but when they have disagreement or doubts, they can always refer to it. We are almost in 2016, not like 15 years ago.
