I absolutely hate this Overall Impression shit. It’s impossible for the riders to know what they need to do to step it up. I thought it was just going to be for Qualifiers but even the Snowboard Superpipe Final is overall impression. I’m all for the Jam format but you have to let the competitors know what you’re looking for. It takes all the excitement out of the runs. Do you try the hardest run possible and stomp one or do four mediocre runs and stay consistent? I understand the Knuckle Huck event when it’s just for a gold but this is fucking stupid if Big Air, Slopestyle, and Superpipe finals are all going to be judged this way. At least let every rider finish their first run and then assign scores between runs when the judges have seen everyone.
X Games Judging
- Thread starter KingW3
- Start date
ViolentSkiBlade
Member
agreed, it's quite disappointing
Broadandmarket
New member
Honestly the only thing that really makes sense is that they can't stand getting shit on for being out of touch and this gives them another shield to hide behind.
#JoshBerman4SkiingSupremeCourt
#JoshBerman4SkiingSupremeCourt
J_Christoph
Active member
I think the overall impression format is something people have been lowkey asking for, I feel like, most years after their favorite rider who was consistent and showed some variety throughout a whole jam session doesn’t see the podium. That being said, there are definitely some bugs. I definitely think it would be hard, and frustrating, to gauge what needs to be done as a competitor! Pros and cons to both formats.
-eREKTion-
Active member
14100811:eheath said:
I agree but I just don't understand how we can trust the accuracy of this "overall impression" method. Slope right now has 15 skiers each doing at least 3 runs, that's 45 runs minimum to try and determine the overall impression of who the 5 best were. I think the jam format worked well enough in the Knucklehuck and well in smaller rail jams but for something like XGames slope where there's literally hundreds of features being hit within an hour, how can the judges possibly come up with a legitimate ranking with this format?
FIRETHECANNONS
Member
I agree I am Not a fan of this judging system. I don’t understand how multiple judges can determine an accurate and balanced score based on a 10 second period following the run for “overall impression?”
I am confused how so many great skiers/runs didn’t at least end up top 10, Jesper Tjäder, Teal Harle, Mark Hendrickson, and others all had at least two insane runs. Jesper and Teal both doing such unique tricks (underflip on & Dub cork 9) not getting rewarded at all.
It was defiantly a stacked contest everyone skied at such a high level but the “overall impression” just did not seem accurate or fair to me in multiple ways.
**This post was edited on Jan 24th 2020 at 3:19:47pm
I am confused how so many great skiers/runs didn’t at least end up top 10, Jesper Tjäder, Teal Harle, Mark Hendrickson, and others all had at least two insane runs. Jesper and Teal both doing such unique tricks (underflip on & Dub cork 9) not getting rewarded at all.
It was defiantly a stacked contest everyone skied at such a high level but the “overall impression” just did not seem accurate or fair to me in multiple ways.
**This post was edited on Jan 24th 2020 at 3:19:47pm
wasatch_rat
Active member
I like it
corona
Active member
It fucking sucks.
The whole "overall" impression is based on your first run, otherwise you would see people dropping in rank when they fuck up. Fabien crashed hard and missed 3 features on his third run and was still sitting in 2nd, meanwhile others with all solid runs were behind him.
If you put down a banger first run and crash on your last you'll be ranked far higher than if you crash on your first run and put down a banger last. Total shit way to judge people.
Also there's literally no transparency on how they're judging.
The whole "overall" impression is based on your first run, otherwise you would see people dropping in rank when they fuck up. Fabien crashed hard and missed 3 features on his third run and was still sitting in 2nd, meanwhile others with all solid runs were behind him.
If you put down a banger first run and crash on your last you'll be ranked far higher than if you crash on your first run and put down a banger last. Total shit way to judge people.
Also there's literally no transparency on how they're judging.
srekem
Member
Like others have said, I think it's ok for some events (knuckle huck, maybe even big air qualis) but if slope finals have the same format that's whack. It really discourages riders from trying to land their best tricks if they know they have to put 3/4 runs down. I'd much rather see a guy crash twice and lay down one sick run than watch him do 3 mediocre runs.
SofaKingSick
Active member
I think it’s fine. “Overall impression” is basically all we judge by in real life in this sport
henrik just won one of the most ridiculous big airs ever and it’s cause he did like 4 or 5 bonkers tricks instead of JUST 2 or 3
for big air so far at least I think it’s served its purpose
henrik just won one of the most ridiculous big airs ever and it’s cause he did like 4 or 5 bonkers tricks instead of JUST 2 or 3
for big air so far at least I think it’s served its purpose
14101089:SofaKingSick said:
True. Just posted another thread on that topic. I want to hear people’s opinions on what the podium would have been if it was solely based on two trick scores. Henrik has always wanted big air events events to have less restrictions (i.e. no mandatory spin directions). I thought it was great for Knuckle Huck when it’s winner take all and adequate for Big Air but I can’t get behind it for slopestyle at all with no transparency in judging.
jose=kids
New member
I don't mind it for knuckle huck and big air, but for slope I find it pretty dumb. I feel like slope should be competitive and not "an overall vibe". I watch plenty of edits for the vibe, I watch X Games slope for the heavy competition. Its kinda whack when I can't tell what's impressing the judges and I like watching dudes go for broke landing one run of solid, crazy shit because its X Games, its supposed to be balls out.
Chunderface
Active member
14100768:Broadandmarket said:
dollo knuckle huck
big_bank_hank
Member
Colby won eliminations with three different variations for all three runs. Might suck for competitors, but so fuckin dope for viewers, honestly made watching slope a different experience. Loved it.
14101100:jose=kids said:
14101094:eheath said:
I completely agree with the pipe elim’s tonight. That was more exciting than any other pipe contest in a while. Always nice seeing something creative and different but there still needs to be a baseline and more transparency on what judges are looking for. I know in 2014 before Sochi the X Games were huge in determining the discretionary picks for Olympics and if the same overall impression criteria was used things could have turned out completely different. I feel like X Games is the one time a year that gets casual viewers and people get to make a name for themselves by progressing the sport. Pipe for sure needed a shake up and it worked but for slopestyle I’m not a fan at all. Just feel like it could have been explained better to both viewers and athletes what the judges really wanted to see
I don't think they should've went for such a big change over the year. I can understand that you would want to reward more the riders who are consistent and have a varied bag of tricks instead of having to reward the one trick wonder guys, but it's too confusing right now. I think they should keep this format for qualis, where there are just so many guys to judge in a short amount of time, and since the riders don't throw their hardest tricks anyway. But for the sake of progression, I think they should return to the point system for the finals. Or at least have something easier to understand for the viewers, so we do know what the judges are actually looking for.
DomRichard
Member
“You did a triple cork? Here’s a gold medal!”
Two things:
1. Has the scoring system really changed all that much? Or is this a way of avoiding controversy over numeric scores? I will say this has potential when it comes to setting a baseline for scoring.
2.I like that skiers don't have to cram all of their best tricks into a single run. I didn't pay enough attention to say this with absolute certainty but it definitely seemed like the runs had more variety and consistency because all of them counted.
Skiers have the ability to throw in different tricks each run because they aren't just going for a single score that counts. So each run can be mixed up quite a bit. Whereas before, you would see some upgrades in runs but the basis of each one was very similar... if that makes sense?
1. Has the scoring system really changed all that much? Or is this a way of avoiding controversy over numeric scores? I will say this has potential when it comes to setting a baseline for scoring.
2.I like that skiers don't have to cram all of their best tricks into a single run. I didn't pay enough attention to say this with absolute certainty but it definitely seemed like the runs had more variety and consistency because all of them counted.
Skiers have the ability to throw in different tricks each run because they aren't just going for a single score that counts. So each run can be mixed up quite a bit. Whereas before, you would see some upgrades in runs but the basis of each one was very similar... if that makes sense?
J_Christoph
Active member
14100886:VinnieF said:
The timer is useless.
