ASP judging: To the nines
At the end of Day 1 at the Quiksilver Pro Snapper Rocks, the first event under the ZoSea banner, only one 9 point ride was registered. At the end of Day 2 just six 9+ rides had been scored leading a few people to think that a new webcast isn't all that had changed within pro surfing.
It appeared a new judging scale was in place, one that was harsher and made it harder to reach the ceiling. A good thing for those who complain about judges going too big too early and leaving little room to move when competitors peak toward the end of a heat.
The stats seemed to bear it out. The first six events of the year had remarkably few 9+ rides and only a sprinkle of perfect 10s. Only three 9+ rides were registered at the whole Margaret River event. Out of the first six events J'Bay had the most 9+ rides with 17 of them dished out.
Meanwhile, the just-finished Billabong Pro Tahiti had four times the number of 9+ rides with 68 in total. On the last day the judges were going so high so early that some competitors were scoring five 9+ rides in a heat. John John Florence got knocked out after scoring 19.77 points!
Here is the breakdown of 9+ rides for the year.
It was a great event, of that there is no doubt. Maybe even the best event ever, as Kelly and every punter on the panel said, and that may answer why there was so many waves in the excellent range. But with 100 points to spread the scores (10 points broken into tenths of a point) and an adjustable scale you've gotta wonder why the judges were jamming so many scores up into the ceiling.
Post-Teahupoo it's safe to say the judging scale is the same as it ever was, and the boys in the booth are as prone to emotional overreaction as the rest of us.
Comments
All in all, I reckon it was well judged - but they really do need to spread out the scores a bit more as it seems to get a bit emotional.
Don't see why at the start of each round they can't push the reset button a bit - maybe even provide some commentary explaining it for the commentators to read out. i.e. "After the recent run of high scores and with conditions expected to stay this good we are lifting the bar for an 'excellent' score"
I reckon Ace was unlucky not to get a 10 for the first wave of his heat against Bede this morning, if it had come later in the heat it would have been a 10 for sure. If they acknowledged a reset in between rounds they could have scored it lower and not put noses out of joint. But the criteria should be kept consistent within each round.
The ASP backed itself into a corner when they said that 5 point to 7 point were poor, 7 to 9 average, and 9 plus waves were excellent. On days like today they need to remove that scale and bring it down, that way they can retain the same spread. There's no use having a 100 point spread if the judges are only going to use the final 10. Awesome contest.
Personally i thought JJ won his heat against Kelly with his last wave,should have been a 10 imo but boy did they score big time ,best contest ever!!!!!!!
Was interesting reading the Facebook comments to this article. The vast majority of people were of the opinion that "great waves = high scores" thereby showing that very few punters have any idea how ASP judging works.
Firstly, wave quality and size isn't mentioned anywhere within the criteria. And second, the judging scale moves depending upon the conditions. How was a 10-point ride registered at Rio in easily the worst conditions the tour has seen this year? Because the scale was set to reflect the conditions.
And so the scale should also be set to reflect triple overhead perfection, brought down so the judges can create an equal spread. In the last day alone there were four heats decided by less than 3/100ths. And that's with a possible 200 point spread (2 waves x 10 points x 10ths of a point).
If the scale was adjusted downward there'd be more room to spread the scores. There'd also be room to move for when the next-to-impossible gets made. What would the judges have given Kelly if he made that final barrel?
That would have been a 12!
Good point Stu,what would they have given Kelly,probably a 10 but we will never know.I suppose at the end of the day as long as the best surfer in the heat wins it o.k but they do need to address the scoring system.
It's a judging sport - it will always be flawed - no doubt they try to maintain credibility for the sport and give the surfers a fair go.
That said, the judges are, in my opinion, always swayed by the context. For example, John John's 9.9 in the semis would have been a 10 if Kelly hadn't got a slightly better bomb on the same set. I find it hard to believe the judges didn't, whether consciously or subconsciously, look at JJ's and say wow but....oh Kelly had an edge to his (with that amazing highline foam ball dodge) therefore Kelly gets 10 and JJ gets marked down to 9.9.
Does anyone know how the submission of scores works? Are the judges "blind-folded" from knowing the other judges' scores? Are the judges "blind-folded" from seeing the actual scores (i.e. the average score minus the best and worst score).
I'd have thought if you (as a judge) were in the dark about the actual scores, and were only comparing waves based on your own scores, you'd be more likely to just judge each ride for what it is, without being distracted by knowing that if a 9.x is given Joe Blogs will win the heat etc.
I' sure this debate fires up after every event! Thoughts anyone?
It seemed to me that every single wave that was made on the last day scored in excess of nine points. I'm sure it wasn't that way but it sure felt like it. The difference between for example Kelly's 10s and Gabriel Medina's QF and SF high line barrels was far more than a point. I'm not trying to hate on Gabs, he deserved the win, but yesterday was a day for once in a lifetime rides but the judges rewarded anyone who made it to the channel.
Yeah had a bit of a rant straight after the heat but if any one wants to have a look at the Bede and CJ heat in round three.
Less than perfect conditions but the skill involved on the last wave of CJs, yeah smaller wave but couldn't have been ridden any better, and scored enough to TIE the heat which meant Bede went through with the higher score for his early bomb. Tell me the judges didn't know what he needed to win!!!
Definitely some strange calls in the mix, even the event commentators were surprised at some of the scores.
Thought the same Stickyson. That was one of the longer barrels of the day, had two distinct sections and was ridiculously tricky. I don't buy the conspiracy but I reckon CJ should feel hard done by after that result.
Missed it. Was it better viewing than J Bay final day ?
Chalk and cheese, blowin..... Both were great for different reasons....
In regards to Margs, I'd like to see the event go mobile.... The "W.A Pro"..... A hectic stretch of coast, that one..... I'd like to see that....
There are indeed some quality waves in WA Sheepy.
I kinda have the opposite view of CJ's barrel. No doubt it was a great long barrel and well ridden. But it was a 4 footer when there were 8ft bombs in the mix . Lucky to get a 6 for it of you ask me.