The ISU Judging System (also called Code of Points (CoP) or the New Judging System (NJS)), is the scoring system currently used to judge the Figure skating disciplines of men's and ladies' singles, Pair skating, Ice dancing, and Synchronized skating. It was designed and implemented by the International Skating Union (ISU), the ruling body of the sport. This system of scoring is used in all international competitions sanctioned by the ISU, including the Winter Olympic Games.
The ISU Judging System replaced the previous 6.0 system in 2004. This new system was created in response to the 2002 Olympic Winter Games figure skating scandal, in an attempt to make the scoring system more objective and less vulnerable to abuse.
Previous judging systemEdit
Figure skating was formerly judged on a 6.0 scale. This scale is sometimes called "the old scale", or "old system". Skaters were judged on "technical merit" (in the free skate), "required elements" (in the short program), and "presentation" (in both programs). The marks for each program ran from 0.0 to 6.0 and were used to determine a preference ranking, or "ordinal", separately for each judge; the judges' preferences were then combined to determine placements for each skater in each program. The placements for the two programs were then combined, with the free skate placement weighted more heavily than the short program. The lowest scoring individual (based on the sum of the weighted placements) was declared the winner.
Scandal and responseEdit
In 2004, after the 2002 Olympic Winter Games figure skating scandal during the 2002 Winter Olympics, the ISU adopted the New Judging System (NJS), or Code of Points, which became mandatory at all international competitions in 2006, including the 2006 Winter Olympics.
The technical panelEdit
Under the new system, technical marks are awarded individually for each skating element. Competitive programs are constrained to have a set number of elements. Each element is judged first by a technical specialist who identifies the specific element. The technical specialist uses instant replay video to verify things that distinguish different elements; e.g. the exact foot position at take-off and landing of a jump. The decision of the technical specialist determines the base value of the element. A panel of twelve judges then award a mark for grade of execution (GOE) that is an integer from -3 to +3. The GOE mark is then translated into a value by using the table of values in ISU rule 322. The GOE value from the twelve judges is then averaged by randomly selecting nine judges, discarding the high and low value, and averaging the remaining seven. This average value is then added (or subtracted) from the base value to get the value for the element. Skaters can receive deductions for things like falls and for lifts that go on for too long.
The number and type of elements in a skating program depends on the event and on the level of competition. At the senior international level, single and pairs short programs contain eight technical elements. The actual eight elements are detailed for single skaters in ISU rule 310. Each skater must attempt one combination jump, two solo jumps, three Figure skating, and two skating sequences. The eight elements required for a senior pairs short program include two lifts, one side-by-side jump, one throw jump, one side-by-side spin, one pair spin, one step sequence, and one death spiral (ISU rule 313).
Senior level free programs have 14 elements for pairs, 13 elemetns for men, and 12 elements for ladies. The details of the elements are given by ISU rules 520 and 521 (2008 version). Pairs do 4 lifts, 4 jumps, 3 spins(including 1 death spiral), 1 step sequence, and 1 spiral sequence. Men do 8 jumps, 3 spins, and 2 step sequences. Ladies do 7 jumps, 3 spins, 1 step sequence and 1 spiral sequence.
Following an event, the complete judges scores are published in a document referred to as a protocol. There are specific notations used on the protocols.
If a skater attempts more than the allowed number of a certain type of element in a program, then the element is still described and called as such by the technical controller, but receives a base value of 0 as well as a GOE of 0, regardless of how judges may have marked it. On ISU protocol sheets, elements that have been nullified by this are denoted by an asterisk(*) next to the element name. Jump elements performed after the halfway point of a program are marked with an x. If a jump has been called as having an incorrect take-off edge (for example, an inside edge on a Lutz jump take-off), that jump is marked with an e, for incorrect edge and the GOE of the jump must be negative. If the take-off edge is not obviously an incorrect edge, that jump is marked with a ! sign and the GOE decision is at the discretion of the judges.
Jumps done in combination are marked as a single element, with a base mark equal to the sum of the base marks for the individual jumps. However, a combination can be downgraded to a "sequence", in which case the base value is 0.8 times the sum of the individual jumps. The jumps normally executed at the senior level, and their base values, are quad Toe loop (9), triple Axel (7.5), triple Lutz jump (6), triple flip (5.5), triple loop (5), triple Salchow (4.5), triple toe loop (4) and double Axel (3.5).
All elements on a protocol sheet are abbreviated. The following is a list of the common ones.
|TTh||Throw toe loop|
|FUSp||Flying upright spin|
|FLSp||Flying layback spin|
|FCSp||Flying camel spin|
|FSSp||Flying sit spin|
|CUSp||Change foot upright spin|
|CLSp||Change foot layback spin|
|CCSp||Change foot camel spin|
|CSSp||Change foot sit spin|
|CCoSp||Combination spin with change of foot|
|PCoSp||Pair combination spin|
|SlSt||Straight line step sequence|
|CiSt||Circular step sequence|
|SeSt||Serpentine step sequence|
|MiSt||Midline in hold step sequence|
|DiSt||Diagonal in hold step sequence|
|NtMiSt||Not Touching Midline Steps|
|NtMiTw||Not Touching Midline Sequential Twizzles|
|SpSq||Spiral sequence of any pattern|
|1Li||Group one lift|
|2Li||Group two lift|
|3Li||Group three lift|
|4Li||Group four lift|
|5TLi||Group five toe lasso lift|
|5SLi||Group five step in lasso lift|
|5RLi||Group five reverse lasso lift|
|5ALi||Group five axel lasso lift|
|TTw||Toeloop twist lift|
|LzTw||Lutz/Flip twist lift|
|ATw||Axel twist lift|
|SlLi||Straight line lift|
|RRoLi||Reverse rotational lift|
|FiDs||Forward inside death spiral|
|BiDs||Backward inside death spiral|
|FoDs||Forward outside death spiral|
|BoDs||Backward outside death spiral|
The level of a spin or footwork sequence is denoted by the number following the element abbreviation. The number of rotations on a jump is denoted by the number preceding the element abbreviation. For example 3A denotes a triple axel, while SlSt4 denotes a level four straight line step sequence.
The former presentation mark has been replaced by five categories, called program components. The components are (1) skating skills (SS), (2) transitions (TR), (3) performance/execution (PE), (4) Choreography (CH), and (5) interpretation (IN). A detailed description of each component is given in ISU rule 322.2. Each component is awarded a raw mark from 0 to 10 in increments of 0.25, with a mark of 5 being defined as "average". The five raw marks are then translated into a program mark by multiplying by a factor that depends on the program and the level.
For senior ladies and pairs, the factor is 0.8 for the short program and 1.6 for the long program. For senior men, the factor is 1 for the short program and 2 for the long program. The factors are set so that the total score from the artistic marks will be about equal to the total score from technical marks. Senior men tend to have higher element scores than ladies because they have more jumping passes and attempt higher valued jumps, so their program components are factored higher to reflect the difference.
In ice dancingEdit
Ice dancing judging is similar to pairs and singles, but uses a separate set of rules and table of values. In the compulsory dance, steps are specified and "elements" are defined for each dance as subsets of the prescribed steps. For compulsory dance only, there is no program component score given for transitions and choreography. Instead there is a timing (TI) program component that is exclusive to the compulsory dance, leaving only four program components in the compulsory dance. In the original dance there are 5 marked technical elements. In the free dance, there are 9 marked technical elements. Unlike singles and pair skating, the different program components are weighted differently in each segment of the competition. The highest factored component(s) in each segment are skating skills and timing in the compulsory dance, interpretation in the original dance, and transitions in the free dance. The exact values of these factors are listed in ISU Rule 543.1k.
Current World RecordsEdit
These are the highest scores that have been posted under COP since its inception. It does not differentiate for changes made to the system.
|Short Program (figure skating)||Evgeni Plushenko||90.66||2006 Olympic Winter Games|
|free skate||Daisuke Takahashi||175.84||2008 Four Continents Championships|
|Combined Total||Daisuke Takahashi||264.41||2008 Four Continents Championships|
|Short Program (figure skating)||Kim Yu-Na||71.95||2007 World Championships|
|free skate||Kim Yu-Na||133.70||2007 Cup of Russia|
|Combined Total||Mao Asada||199.52||2006 NHK Trophy|
|Short Program (figure skating)||Zhang Dan / Zhang Hao||74.36||2008 World Championships|
|free skate||Shen Xue / Zhao Hongbo||136.02||2004–2005 Grand Prix Final|
|Combined Total||Shen Xue / Zhao Hongbo||206.54||2004–2005 Grand Prix Final|
|Compulsory Dance||Tatiana Navka / Roman Kostomarov||45.97||2005 World Championships|
|Original Dance||Tatiana Navka / Roman Kostomarov||68.67||2005 World Championships|
|Free dance (figure skating)||Tatiana Navka / Roman Kostomarov||117.14||2003 Cup of Russia|
|Combined Total||Tatiana Navka / Roman Kostomarov||227.81||2005 World Championships|
|Short Program (figure skating)||Team Surprise||77.54||2007 World Synchronized Skating Championships|
|free skate||Team Surprise||144.70||2007 World Synchronized Skating Championships|
|Combined Total||Team Surprise||222.24||2007 World Synchronized Skating Championships|
Judging in figure skating is inherently subjective. Although there may be general consensus that one skater "looks better" than another, it is difficult to get agreement on what it is that causes one skater to be marked as 5.5 and another to be 5.75 for a particular program component. As judges, coaches, and skaters get more experience with the new system, there may emerge more consensuses. However, for the 2006 Olympics there were cases of 1 to 1.5 points differences in component marks from different judges. This range of difference implies that "observer bias" determines about 20% of the mark given by a judge. Averaging over many judges reduces the effect of this bias in the final score, but there will remain about a 2% spread in the average artistic marks from the randomly selected subsets of judges.
The ISU judging system moves figure skating closer to judging systems used in sports like Diving and Gymnastics. It also has some features intended to make judging more resistant to pressure by special interests. However, there is debate whether the new system is an improvement over the old 6.0 system.
Under the ISU rules, the judges' marks are anonymous, which removes any public accountability of the judges for their marks. The random panel selection procedure can change a skater's mark by several points and alter the outcome of competitions depending on which subset of judges are chosen. The United States Figure Skating Association has split with the ISU on these two issues. In the U.S., the judges names remain associated with the marks. Also the U.S. uses only nine judges and counts all nine of their scores.
While COP has minimized the number of ties and the need for multiple tiebreaks like there was under 6.0, ties still do occur. At the 2007 World Championships, Yukari Nakano and Carolina Kostner tied for 5th place with 168.92 points overall. Nakano won 5th place on the tiebreak, which was the free skate placement, and Kostner dropped to 6th. Ties for single segments of the competition also occur. At the 2004 Skate America, Alissa Czisny and Cynthia Phenuef tied in the short program at 50.20, with both earning a TES score of 25.40 and a PCS score of 24.80.
At the 2008 U.S. Figure Skating Championships, Johnny Weir and Evan Lysacek tied in the overall score. The tie was broken by the free skate placement and Lysacek won the event. At the 2009 U.S. Figure Skating Championships, Katrina Hacker and Mirai Nagasu tied in the short program, with Hacker winning the tiebreak on the technical elements score. At the same competition, Laney Diggs and Kristine Musademba tied in the overall score, with Diggs winning the tiebreak on the free skate placement.
|This page uses content from Wikipedia. The original material was at ISU Judging System. The list of authors can be seen in the page history. As with Figure Skating Wiki, the text of Wikipedia is available under the CC-by-SA License.|