Is it easier to cheat in 6.0 or CoP?

Mathman · Nov 25, 2009

janetfan said:
What if one was to consider Occam's razor?

"The simplest explanation is usually the best."

Would it apply to 6.0 vs CoP ?...

Yes or no?

It is not at all clear that 6.0 is easier to understand that CoP. Many skaters and coaches complained that they didn't really understand all the complications of ordinal judging. For instance B could be in second place and C in third place with only Z left to skate.

Z skates last and beats Y. This might cause B and C to change places, with C now winning the silver medal!

Here is a good expalnation of the OBO ("One by One") version of the 6.0 ordinal system.

http://www.frogsonice.com/skateweb/obo/score-obo.shtml

The point of this article, by Sandra Loosemore, is to show how complicated and convoluted 6.0 judging is.

The other 6.0 ordinal system that was simultaneously used is the "majority of ordinals" system. This has some advantages with resperct to OBO, and some disadvantages. In the 6.0 era the ISU used OBO for international competitions, but the USFSA used majority of ordinals at U.S. nationals and other national events.

So I wouldn't blame a skater who says, 6.0 was impossibly complicated. CoP is much simpler. You get 5.5 for a triple flip, -2 GOE if you go off the wrong edge, 3.2 for a level four combination spin, and a a nice score on PCSs if you hit all the bullets. Add up the points, most points wins. What could be simpler than that?

janetfan · Nov 25, 2009

prettykeys said:
Occam's Razor has to do with numbers of assumptions, not variables.

I think.

You might be right. It can be applied to different disciplines and was proven to be wrong in the study of DNA and genetic coding.

I was following the thread and enjoying it and wanted to insert a more philosophical look at this problem.

Of course if the razor would apply and be correct then the variables, although fascinating would become secondary, unless they could conclusivley reach an outcome that would prove the razor is wrong.

shallwedansu · Nov 25, 2009

prettykeys said:
He comes into this conversation I was happily engaged in, saying "What's up with you? You're strange."

.....................................................................

There are a ton of goldenskaters which English is not their first language. I think it's poor form to make jabs like that against them.

prettykeys · Nov 25, 2009

CoP, as it is right now, has a lot more places to "hide" favouritist boosting in. Would it be better if the number of Program Components were decreased to 3 as I suggested earlier?

janetfan · Nov 25, 2009

Mathman said:
It is not at all clear that 6.0 is easier to understand that CoP. Many skaters and coaches complained that they didn't really understand all the complications of ordinal judging. For instance B could be in second place and C in third place with only Z left to skate.

Z skates last and beats Y. This might cause B and C to change places, with C now winning the silver medal!

Here is a good expalnation of the OBO ("One by One") version of the 6.0 ordinal system.

http://www.frogsonice.com/skateweb/obo/score-obo.shtml

The point of this article, by Sandra Loosemore, is to show how complicated and convoluted 6.0 judging is.

The other 6.0 ordinal system that was simultaneously used is the "majority of ordinals" system. This has some advantages with resperct to OBO, and some disadvantages. In the 6.0 era the ISU used OBO for international competitions, but the USFSA used majority of ordinals at U.S. nationals and other national events.

So I wouldn't blasme a skater who says, 6.0 was impossibly complicated. CoP is much simpler. You get 5.5 for a triple flip, -2 GOE if you go off the wrong edgem 3.2 for a level four combination spin, and a a nice score on PCSs if you hit all the bu;llets. Add up the points, most points wins. What could be simpler than that?

Thanks and I wasn't necessarily saying 6.0 was a simpler system. Truth be told I think the simplicity argument doesn't depend on a skater's abilty to understand it since he is not the one doing the judging or "cheating."

I wondered which system would be considered simpler, the one with the least amount of marking options and therefore the least chances for cheating.

I don't think I know the answer but it appears that CoP offers more ways to distort a score than 6.0

Daniel5555 · Nov 25, 2009

prettykeys

He comes into this conversation I was happily engaged in, saying "What's up with you? You're strange."

That was after:

Oh yeah? Quote yourself, because I don't see the answer.

Well, his lack of English facility makes his questions like "You seem ruder than usual", "You're stranger than normal lately" sound errr...provoking.

Yeah, look who's talking now.

By the way, do you know that double posting is considered to be rude on forums?

shallwedansu

There are a ton of goldenskaters which English is not their first language. I think it's poor form to make jabs like that against them.

Don't worry, and besides I have perfect English

prettykeys · Nov 25, 2009

For the purposes of this discussion (since it's more centred on dishonest judging rather than the respective flaws of 6.0 and CoP), I think we should--for the sake of the deabte--ignore the order of skating in 6.0 that further complicates the matter.

Mathman · Nov 25, 2009

prettykeys said:
It would be interesting (and mathematically possible), to quantify how large the degree of cheating has to be to overcome modest variations in honest judging that can happen in two skaters considered reasonably close in ability.

Something like the probability that three cheating judges can establish their favourite as the winner if they cheat by X amount when the honest judges ideally give the better skater a higher score by Y.

That is exactly the intent of this thread. :agree:

prettykeys said:
But why does "close competition" convert to a mere difference of 0.25 by the honest judges, and a whole 1.0 by the crooked ones?

Well, it might go this way. There is an opportunity for judges to try to cheat in this fashion. Sometimes they will be successful in changing the outcome, sometimes not.

But in CoP, the close ones have to give Miki only a 0.25 advantage by points, and the cheaters are by 1.0 point? That's 4x the difference.

Well, yes, that's the underlying assumption. That the contest is close in the opinions of honest judges, but the cheaters will cheat by as much as they think they can get away with.

That's not objective, mathematical "proof". You're saying that that's how it would go (or assuming that's how it would go.)

That is proof that it could go that way. Would it? Under some circumstances yes, under others, no.

Daniel5555 · Nov 25, 2009

prettykeys

Tell me what was rude or strange about me saying "Oh yeah? You already answered my point? Because I didn't see it."

I thought it sounded a bit rude and then I said:

What's going on with you? No offence, but lately you are strange.

I didn't say anywhere that directly "You seem ruder than usual", "You're stranger than normal lately".

prettykeys · Nov 25, 2009

Hmm, OK. I am convinced that it is easier to cheat under CoP, as it stands.

I still wouldn't like to go back to 6.0, though.

Mathman · Nov 25, 2009

prettykeys said:
Maybe your English is worse than normal. :think:

Gosh, I wish you hadn't said that. :no: Tell Daniel he's funny-looking and his mama dresses him weird, if you must. No, wait, tell me that I'm funny-looking and my mama dresses me weird.

But it is a huge no-no to make derogatory comments on people's English skills.

Here is why (besides common courtesy). Golden Skate is mostly a North American board. In fact, the great majority of posters here are from the United States. We would like more than anything to become an international board. We WARMLY welcome and encourage posts from around the globe, especially from countries that are not well-represented here.

Daniel5555 · Nov 25, 2009

Mathman
It would be very interesting to simulate the situation and look what happens. I really think that with less than 3 judges it wouldn't have much effect.

prettykeys

No I don't, and I don't expect you to speak for all forums.

Well, every day you have a discovery.

Besides, do you know making personal comments in the middle of a discussion is rude? Since you're so concerned about me being rude. Check the speck in your eye.

Personal? I just asked if you are alright, or this is already sooooo personal to you

Mathman

Gosh, I wish you hadn't said that. Tell Daniel he's funny-looking and his mama dresses him weird, if you must. No, wait, tell me that I'm funny-looking and my mama dresses me weird.

But it is a huge no-no to make derogatory comments on people's English skills.

It's ok, maybe she's right after all. I can't see my skills from a side.

Daniel5555 · Nov 25, 2009

prettykeys

It's either a) he's trying to annoy me but making the classic "opposite disclaimer" that I've been seeing everywhere, or

b) he honestly didn't mean bad, but his lack of familiarity with English caused him to recoil at my own "Like, I don't get where you answered me, quote yourself" and then resulted in him communicating in such a manner that (unless I'm crazy!) most people wouldn't respond warmly to.

It's c) he's a rude Spanish boy who likes to communicate in a less formal manner

But yes, you're crazy!

Anyway... Calm down, I didn't want to offend you, you didn't offend me, because it's impossible. If you want to make clear something, write me a PM, ok? Let's talk about CoP here.

Mathman · Nov 25, 2009

One more moderator's remark, and then to bed.

Do you see the five stars that adorn this thread? That means that this thread has been marked as being of particular interest to a wider audience, and it will probably be referenced in the next Golden Skate newsletter.

I hope you all have signed up for the newsletter -- it has a lot of cool articles and stuff.

Anyway, many people read this that we would like favorably to impress, like USFSA officers, potential sponsors and the like. When Paula sees this mess, I am going to be in trouble. (And when Mathman gets in trouble, e-e-veryone gets in trouble. :rofl:

)

prettykeys · Nov 25, 2009

Mathman said:
Anyway, many people read this that we would like favorably to impress, like USFSA officers, potential sponsors and the like.

I didn't know you guys were trying to get sponsored. I really apologize for my general behaviour, whether I feel it was justified or not. I'll stop treating the forum like my personal playground and sniping at people! This place has some of the best-informed skating fans and a lot of diversity.

Mathman · Nov 25, 2009

^ Nah, be yourself.

You are the little umbrella that pokes the complacent vacationers in the eye every time they take a sip of their pina colada. :rock:

Post often, post long!

Ladskater · Nov 26, 2009

It was never really "cheating" under the 6.0 system - it was more like "let's make a deal." One judge would try to influence another judge before the skaters stepped on to the ice. Often the skaters were the pawns in the game. You should read some of Toller Cranstons books, he really talked about this problem (and complained) during his competitive years.

I don't know if this still goes on with the new marking system. That kind of was the idea - to eliminate any deal making or underhandedness.

janetfan · Nov 26, 2009

Ladskater said:
It was never really "cheating" under the 6.0 system - it was more like "let's make a deal." One judge would try to influence another judge before the skaters stepped on to the ice. Often the skaters were the pawns in the game. You should read some of Toller Cranstons books, he really talked about this problem (and complained) during his competitive years.

I don't know if this still goes on with the new marking system. That kind of was the idea - to eliminate any deal making or underhandedness.

That is an interesting take on it and it is something that occured too often.
It is interesting that part of Tat's arrangement with Mao and the JSF is to be with Mao at all international events. Apparently somebody thinks Tat's presence at international competitions, from the schmoozing with the judges to sitting with Mao in the K&C area while awaitng her marks does have some value.

I would think Mao might need Tat more at training sessions - but of course they have a different idea..

An interesting statement from Linda Fratiane after the SLC scandal involved a call made by Carlo Fassi to her parents back in 1979.

The story goes that Fassi told Linda's parents if she left Carroll and trained with him he could guarantee Linda the OGM. It was also said that Fassi guaranteed Linda would not win the OGM if she stayed with Carroll because he didn't have the same influnece with the international judges.

This is just something that Linda said 20 years later and I have no idea how true it is. On the other hand it certainly fits into the theme of Ladskater's post.

Happy Thanksgiving to all GS members and to all of wonderful skaters.

evangeline · Nov 26, 2009

janetfan said:
That is an interesting take on it and it is something that occured too often.
It is interesting that part of Tat's arrangement with Mao and the JSF is to be with Mao at all international events. Apparently somebody thinks Tat's presence at international competitions, from the schmoozing with the judges to sitting with Mao in the K&C area while awaitng her marks does have some value.

I would think Mao might need Tat more at training sessions - but of course they have a different idea..

An interesting statement from Linda Fratiane after the SLC scandal involved a call made by Carlo Fassi to her parents back in 1979.

The story goes that Fassi told Linda's parents if she left Carroll and trained with him he could guarantee Linda the OGM. It was also said that Fassi guaranteed Linda would not win the OGM if she stayed with Carroll because he didn't have the same influnece with the international judges.

This is just something that Linda said 20 years later and I have no idea how true it is. On the other hand it certainly fits into the theme of Ladskater's post.

Happy Thanksgiving to all GS members and to all of wonderful skaters.

I think Tarasova's presence at international events with Mao is perhaps for other reasons--you know, like morale support. Which I think has LOTS of value at a competition. But I do agree with your statement that Mao probably needs Tarasova more at training sessions--are they still doing that part-time coaching arrangement (in an Olympic year!?)?

As for the whole Poetzsch-Fratianne affair, Sonia Bianchetti has an interesting analysis of the ladies' and men's event at Lake Placid, which also features examples of dodgy marks under 6.0...though she argues that the actual results were correct.

janetfan · Nov 26, 2009

evangeline said:
I think Tarasova's presence at international events with Mao is perhaps for other reasons--you know, like morale support. Which I think has LOTS of value at a competition. But I do agree with your statement that Mao probably needs Tarasova more at training sessions--are they still doing that part-time coaching arrangement (in an Olympic year!?)?

As for the whole Poetzsch-Fratianne affair, Sonia Bianchetti has an interesting analysis of the ladies' and men's event at Lake Placid, which also features examples of dodgy marks under 6.0...though she argues that the actual results were correct.

Thanks Evangeline, I have read that several times.
I also think Carroll has said "they just buried Linda in the compulsories."

Something that is not talked about often is that there was a lot of hanky-panky over the years when it came to marking the figures. It wasn't just restricted to the SP or LP.

When Fassi was coaching Peggy and Dorothy they always got very high marks coming out of the compulsaries. Maybe a "coincidence" that Linda, who had done OK in '79 while winning the WC suddenly forgot her figures?

Maybe Bielman should have been gifted the Gold as her spin is still seen and Annette and Linda are remembered today more for the controversy than their skating.

There are also a few stories involving Fassi's meddling with Janet Lynn.

It was a long time ago and there are enough stories about it that the doubts may never go away completely.

Is it easier to cheat in 6.0 or CoP?

Mathman

janetfan

Match Penalty

shallwedansu

prettykeys

janetfan

Match Penalty

Daniel5555

prettykeys

Mathman

Daniel5555

prettykeys

Mathman

Daniel5555

Daniel5555

Mathman

prettykeys

Mathman

Ladskater

~ Figure Skating Is My Passion ~

janetfan

Match Penalty

evangeline

janetfan

Match Penalty

Similar threads

Connect with us