Originally Posted by tabithakitten:
“I understand why Weir wasn't on the podium and why he didn't move up. However, I still don't understand how he was passed by Patrick Chan. I'm not an expert and I guess I should trust those that are when it comes to transitions, skating skills etc but it's rather difficult when you watch the two programmes almost back to back.”
There are so many things they're marked on ...
That's why I'm looking at news articles -- hoping that someone will have looked at the detailed marks and analysed them.
Here's something I quoted earlier but didn't highlight:
Quote:
“Fans and casual observers watching the event, and even days later, often do not understand or trust how the Olympics' most visible event is scored. We watch, we are awed, and we are left with an empty feeling.”
There's a strong tendency for people to think the placings should go with the things that are relatively easy for non-experts to spot when watching on tv: the jumps and the obvious mistakes (plus something rather vague and subjective about artistry) but the marking system does not work that way.
Re Chan vs Weir, there's
this
Quote:
“Wuz He Robbed?
I can't say how awesome I find it that Johnny Weir brought his two strongest performances of the year to the Olympic games. Not many competitors can do that. He did have a slight stumble but his jumps were all clean and looked strong. I know that Weir's program is not as intricate or difficult as Lysacek's and Plushenko's are...I can see that. He doesn't have the footwork and artistry of Patrick Chan, although he is a lovely skater in his own right - so smooth and simple. I looked at the scores, and to be honest, as much as he seemed underscored, it's hard to see where he would have scooped up some more points. However, Weir got a bad edge call on the triple flip and as usual, they had some fun with that deduction. I think he should have risked two-footing a fully-rotated quad toe loop rather than doing that flip again, which earned him only 4.30 points. Additionally, I think that Weir could have done a bit better in components. When I see what Chan got...I just don't feel like he gave the performance that matched those scores, particularly in executon. And Weir did not get the benefit of the grade of execution doubt on many other jumps, either. The complaints about Weir's difficulty and transitions have been around forever...and honestly, I don't think he would have ended up on the medal stand here, no matter what. So I'm going to try not to be too annoyed at what seemed like low scores. And say what you will about Johnny Weir, but he was incredibly gracious about his scores here, more so than some other top (and much less criticized) skaters have been in the past. I'm glad that for him, for a couple of nights, it finally was all about the skating. And the skating was great.”
And -- though this isn't so directly relevant to Chan vs Weir --
here's an interesting article on the judging system and on jumps and setting up for jumps vs transitions:
Quote:
““It’s an interesting story that Brian and Plushenko have said, ‘Gee, we’ve given up a little bit on that (transition) area because we’re setting up for our elements, which are the big points,” said Barton. “Chan has said, ‘Don’t have the quad yet so I’m going for more transition.’
“That’s what the system was all built around. It was all built around strategy. It was built so the athlete has a choice. I don’t have a quad so I need to make up points in other areas. Or I do have the quad but it’s hard to do it when I’m doing all those difficult steps in there so I will back off those steps and make sure I get the quad done because it guarantees me 9.2, whatever the case may be.”
It also mentions some of the steps that are taken to limit what a biased judge can accomplish:
Quote:
“But when Plushenko suggests judges can “arrange” a high placement, Barton begs to differ. He said the system cannot change a judge’s intent, but it can certainly minimize the impact one judge has on any program. Nine judges place marks in the system, two scores are randomly eliminated, then the highest and lowest of the remaining seven marks are eliminated. Technical specialists are also involved in assessing the levels of program elements and contribute to the final mark.”
Now if we are talking about overmarking, Patrick Chan would be a prime example and Johnny Weir was undermarked.imho.”
.
I really did not understand his high marks but all those mistakes must have meant deductions from his performance marks as well as his technical marks?
