Monday, February 12, 2018

Olympic Team Skate Scoring Redux, Part 3

Shocking no one who had seen the earlier competitions, Canada won the gold medal in the team skate competition. Russia won the silver and the USA had a very good last night to close out the bronze. Unfortunately, the same problems of last time plagued the night tonight.

Going in with a six-point lead, Canada was almost impossible to catch. A three-point lead was not insurmountable for the US to get past Russia, but it was pretty tall. The only real drama was with the US and Italy and whether the Italians could eclipse the Americans.


Because of a scoring system that doesn't penalize falls enough, Canada and Russia finished 1-2 while the US finished 3rd. This effectively put the gold medal away for Canada as they would have had to have finished in dead last in both the following competitions and have the Russians finish in first for them to catch them. Similarly, the Americans would have needed to have Russia finish dead last in at least one event for them to have a chance at getting the silver. So once again, the only drama was for the bronze and even then, a two-point lead is pretty significant when you can typically only make up one or two points at best in a round.

In the alternate scoring system, the US would have retaken the third place position from Italy, though at only a one-point differential, it would have been very close. Canada, sitting with a ten-point lead on Russia, would have been in good position to absorb a bad finish by one of their performers, but not with an insurmountable lead. Similarly, a strong performance by the US could have allowed them to overtake Russia.


With the ladies results, the competition effectively ended. A five-point lead is impossible to overcome in the current scoring system so going into the dance, Canada had secured the gold with a five-point lead over Russia. Similarly, Russia had secured the silver with a five-point lead over the US. Only the bronze was in mathematical doubt as the US had only a four-point lead over Italy but that would have required the Italians to finish in first and the Americans in last in the dance and that would have only been for co-bronze. So the dance became an exhibition for teams to work out kinks and make statements before going into their individual competitions.

In the alternate scoring system, Canada would have had a six-point lead on Russia, meaning that it was possible for the Russians to catch the Canadians if they had a bad night. Canada would have been assured at least the silver as the gap over the Americans was too big to make up, but there was a chance for drama in gold. It would have been unlikely for the US to catch the Russians for the silver, but not mathematically impossible for a co-silver should the Russians have faltered badly. It was also still possible for the Italians to vault the Americans for bronze if they had a bad night. So while the placements were still similar, there is meaning in the ice dancing round in this system as opposed to the other where everything was essentially settled.


What little drama there was with the dance competition died in the first routine when the Japanese male dancer slipped and fell. This essentially guaranteed that Japan would finish last in the category and that whisper of hope the Italians had was gone. Everything progressed as expected and the medals were awarded in exactly what was expected.

The same results would have come about in the alternate scoring system, although the American's solid second place routine would have been much more of a door slam on the Italians. Some additional tweaks might be needed but for the second time, I think this alternate scoring system would go a long way towards giving a more dramatic edge to the competition. In both 2014 and 2018, the appropriate teams won their various medals so the lesson is more about consistency and having a well rounded team. But if you're going to have a competition like this, I think a greater risk/reward system needs to be put into place so that the audience doesn't get bored with competitions that just don't matter.

One last side note, I did a quick check to see what the results would have been if falls were penalized more. Ultimately, the answer is none. I think the Canadian man's score was high enough (he actually landed one of his quad jumps before falling) that the American wouldn't have caught him anyway, but even if the American somehow finished first, the Russians still would have finished one-point ahead of the US in the standings. But that would have been a heck of a lot more drama. Interestingly, in the alternate scoring system, the Americans and Russians would have tied for the silver if the American man had finished first and the Russian third. I doubt the Olympics would have liked that but imagine the reaction from all the teams had that happened.

Drama is available to be had but only if a greater punishment is made available to counterbalance these great rewards.

Sunday, February 11, 2018

Olympic Team Skate Scoring Redux, Part 2

We are now down to the qualifying five: Canada, Russia, USA, Japan and Italy. Canada entered with a clean edge and a four point lead over Russia (35-31) but Italy and Japan were within striking distance at 26 points apiece. The pairs long program was the only qualified event that also took place that day as the other three events will take place later today.

The standings after the pairs are:



Already we have our first discrepancy as Italy would be in third place in the alternate scoring system rather than still in fourth. But countering that, Canada's lead over Russia is smaller in the regular system than in the alternate system. But, with an ability to swing the pendulum in wider arcs, that larger gap may not be as big a deal as it would be in the regular system.

We shall just have to see what tonight brings.

Friday, February 09, 2018

Olympic Team Skate Scoring Redux, Part 1

Last night, the figure skating team competition kicked off at the Olympics. Four years ago I wrote a post about changing the scoring system in the second half of the competition to make it more interesting.

To recap, the scoring now is that ten teams compete in Men's, Pairs, Women's and Ice Dancing short program and the scores in each competition producing a ranking which gives them points (10 for first, 9 for second, etc.). At the end of the short program, the bottom five teams are eliminated and the remaining five do the long programs. I have no beef with this part. However, the scoring in the long program is where things fall apart.

In the long program, the five teams complete, receive scores and then get a point value based on their finish. The problem is that they get 10 thru 6 points for the finish and it's added to their existing total from the first half. This means that teams in front have little to fear from teams at the bottom as they usually can't make up ground enough. My wife and I's proposed solution was to change the points awarded from 10 thru 6 to an even award (10, 8, 6, 4, 2) based on place. This would make a mistake in the long competition much more devastating and could pull a team with a high score back to the pack or pull a team in last place up to the front.

To test this, I'm going to keep track of the scoring as done now and compare them to what they would be if the scoring was done in the alternate way.

For the first phase, it would be kept as is so the scores will show no deviation at the moment: