From its onset, the ISU Judging System has been confusing most people who watch it because the GOE grading system is a lot less intuitive than it should be. Here’s a how-to primer on what base values and Grades of Execution actually mean and what it’s done for to incentivize difficulty programs.

Base values estimate relative difficulty

Each element is given a base value. For each type of elements (e.g., jumps, spins), the base values provide a way of determining the relative difficulty of the jumps. For example, a double axel has a base value of 3.30 and the triple axel has a relative base value of 8.00, implying that the triple axel is about 1.5x more difficult than the double axel. Although there is no actual science to these numbers, it allows the different jumps to have relative differences based on how skaters experience them.

GOEs reflect how well or poorly an element is done

Judges give each element a Grade of Execution (GOE) based on how well or poorly it’s done from a range of -5 to +5. A “perfect” element gets a +5; a fall gets a -5, plus a -1 mandatory deduction. GOEs are meant to reward impeccable execution and penalize errors. A couple things to note:

The most confusing thing about GOEs is that a +5 GOE does not mean the element gets base value + 5 points - it is relatively to the base value on a percentage basis
- For example, +5 GOE means the element gets the base value PLUS 50% of the base value; -3 GOE means the element gets the base value MINUS 30% of the base value
GOEs are cumulative, meaning a really well done jump (e.g., great speed, great height, good air position) with a minor error (e.g., hand down) could still get a positive GOE
Historically, judges have been kinder to quads and triple axels than to triples, mostly because some of the inherent features of a good jump, like speed going in and jump trajectory, have to be part of more difficult jumps - but it is not uncommon for a scratchy landing on a difficult jump to get a better GOE marking than a scratchy landing on a less difficult jump

Difficulty is incentivized

All of this adds up to how difficulty is incentivized. Looking at the graphic above, you see that a poorly done quad jump gets around the same score as a mediocrely done triple jump of the same kind. So that is to say, if you can fully rotate a quad jump and stay on your feet, it’s worth at least the same as doing a triple relatively well.

The key phrase there is “fully rotate” - because if a jump is underrotated (between 1/4 and 1/2 short of full rotation), its base value is dropped by 20%; if a jump is downgraded (1/2 or more short of full rotation), its base value gets bumped down to the next rotation down (e.g., a downgraded triple axel gets a base value of 3.30, not 8.00)

The ISU has already changed the system a few times to penalize errors more, but it hasn’t been enough. Don’t be surprised if a program with multiple messy quads still scores higher than a program with clean triple jumps. It’s all just a matter of base values.