Patrick Chan has a new quad, ready to defend title

Backhand, I am still trying to understand what the Affiliation Rule has to do with Lori Nichol. Lori Nichol does not serve on any judging panel. She cannot be in violation of any rule that pertains to judges.

Following Seniorita's advice, I will ask a third time. Does anyone know whether Nichol was invited to conduct any seminars for ISU international judges after she took on coaching responsibilities for Patrick Chan?

In case of violation of rules, or code of ethics, I assume there are protocols for complaints and demands for reviews and investigations. I am sure someone cheated of a medal should and will launch such a procedure.

While there has not been any such formal allegation made against Patrick Chan by any of his competitors or any official (or against any medalist in any international event since 2002), enough people have nonetheless charged all kinds of improprieties without evidence, so much so that these allegations are taken as facts. With calling for his WC title to be stripped and at least cheapened and questioned, and all kinds of crazy racist rants made earlier today on this board, my little snark somehow is the most inane statement ever in this forum. OK dokey.

Isn't it sad? Someone must be very proud of himself!

Unless Hernando or anyone else could bring any new evidence, I think I could safely say that this multi-page accusation on Lori Nichol and ISU is false.

Hello Mathman,

This is a very good question.
.
" Backhand, I am still trying to understand what the Affiliation Rule has to do with Lori Nichol. Lori Nichol does not serve on any judging panel. She cannot be in violation of any rule that pertains to judges ? "

IMO only. Here's Lori's problem. The judging seminars I've attended are usually broken into segments. Some segments are open to the public and focus on things like : How to run a successful show, or How to get more students into your program, How to find a good coach in your area. These are usually attended by Sponsors, Athletic Directors, or Band Directors. If Lori were to speak at one these sessions, there is no violation. Why, because she is offering her " opinion " based on her experience. Those in attendance can take her advice or not, without worry.

Other segments are for judges and coaches and are not open to the public. These often focus on Education and cover things like : How to design a successful program, Which elements will help improve scores if done successfully, In what order should these elements be placed, Designing a winning costume, Explanation of new rules, How to speak with a judge after a show.

Because this segment is based on facts, not opinion. And its purpose is to " Inform " those in attendance. It would be a violation for Lori to speak......on behalf of the Association. this is why it's so important to know what Lori did at a seminar before we give an opinion.

I can tell you this much. I would love to attend a seminar given by Lori as I have loved her work for years. Along with Sandra B. they are by far the best IMO of course. All she has to do is call it the Lori Nichol Choreography Seminar and she can invite anyone she wants and say anything she likes because it's not an ISU Sponsored event.

Backhand

backhand45 said:

Because this segment is based on facts, not opinion. And its purpose is to " Inform " those in attendance.[/B] It would be a violation for Lori to speak......on behalf of the Association. this is why it's so important to know what Lori did at a seminar before we give an opinion.

Click to expand...

I think the question being asked is: Has Lori spoken to international judges in such a segment on behalf of the Association since she became a registered coach of Patrick Chan?

SkateFiguring said:

Really, no experts in any areas of skating should be consulted and associated with ISU in any way. No actual skating of actual skaters should be used as illustrations. They should only lurk on forums to educate themselves about all aspects of skating.

Click to expand...

I realize you were being sarcastic, but I do think active skaters should not be used as an example. I have heard of people like Plushenko and Carolina Kostner featured in training videos for judges; that's inappropriate, whether they were included as positive examples or negative ones. This came up during the Inman e-mail debate (let's not rehash that one, please) and I thought then, as I do now, that the solution is simple: use programs from retired skaters to illustrate what should score well and what shouldn't. By now there are enough retired skaters from the IJS era to choose from, but even if there weren't, as was the case in the early years of the system - there are skaters who skated under 6.0 whose programs would have scored very well under the IJS.

What's interesting about this Lori debate is that both sides are avoiding the acronym CoP.

Given the restrictive input of the CoP, I would say Nichol, and a few other choreographers do a good job in combining points and movements It isn't exactly creativity but what can one expect from the nature of the CoP.

As to her suspected collusion with the Canadian Fed, it's hard to believe she has the time to create a better program for Patrick and not others. The creative process of choreography comes as a thought and then it works itself out in its application for the skater's program. What I do is accept whatever any choreographer can manage and look for what a performer can do with it. It's the feeling of the music that brings out the nuances of body movements and that's the talent of the competitor, and not the choreographer.

I once watched a skater use Pop Goes the Weasel for his music. It worked because he made it into a serious comedy program using all the body movments the music stated. That tall French skater had that kind of talent. Boys, in general are much more versatile with music than girls who tend to suffer with balletitus.

Patrick is doing very well by the way, and Lori does her best with the restrictive CoP.

Bluebonnet said:

Unless Hernando or anyone else could bring any new evidence, I think I could safely say that this multi-page accusation on Lori Nichol and ISU is false.

Click to expand...

Here is an article going back to the 2002 scandal that clearly states Lori runs training seminars for ISU judges.

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2002/04/01/Assignment_America_Remember_Ice_Skating/UPI-48021017677406/

"The official ISU seminars on how to judge "presentation" - the key mark in judging - are led by Anne Schelter, a Canadian choreographer, and Lori Nichol, who works with Sale and Pelletier, the Canadian team.


This is really not news in any way and many GS members have known Lori is part of the strong Canadian presence within ISU.


My point is not to accuse Lori of anything and for all I know she could be the most honest and fair-minded person in all of skating.

But it looks bad and most other sports would never put up with such a conflict of interest.

We saw where it lead back in SLC and skating does not need more of this.

I have no idea if Lori is presently working in an official capacity training judges for ISU but see nothing wrong with her doing seminars for the Canadian federation.

Joesitz said:

What's interesting about this Lori debate is that both sides are avoiding the acronym CoP.

Given the restrictive input of the CoP, I would say Nichol, and a few other choreographers do a good job in combining points and movements It isn't exactly creativity but what can one expect from the nature of the CoP...

Patrick is doing very well by the way, and Lori does her best with the restrictive CoP.

Click to expand...

Here is what Lori Nichol has to say about the CoP.

I’d say that from the middle level and on up it’s much more stagnating. As a choreographer I sometimes really feel like I’m wearing a straight jacket, every time I seem to come up with a really great idea it’s illegal.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree. The CoP is a good system for children learning the ekements of competitive skating. But not so good at the elite level.

The irony is that most contests for beginners still use 6.0 (it is too expensive to arrange for technical callers, etc., at that level), whereas all higher level contests now use the CoP.

Backhand, thank you for the clarification. It is the sponsoring organization, either the national association or the ISU, that could be in violation of its own principles in these conflict of interest cases.

Backhand, thanks for your insights as an expert in a related field. This is the sort of thing that I generally don't have a chance to hear.

Math, it's interesting to hear Lori's complaint about CoP's effect on choreographers, because she's one of the most successful in figuring out how to use it (two OGM winners in 2010!), and if it's tough for her, imagine what it's like for a less gifted choreographer. Can you imagine the mathematical planning that has to take place while devising a program! Hey, maybe you should hire yourself out to help choreographers. Or to help Oda.

I like your point that CoP is probably great for teaching newer skaters but less so for expressing skating at the highest level. I fear you're right. I don't know how things can be improved, though.

COP is challenging, for skaters, choreographers, and coaches, no doubt about it. Is this good or bad? It shows up weaknesses, prompting complaints, but it eventually raises the skating standard starting from the best in the field, with the next generation all elevated. I believe this is good for the sport, at least in the long run. Competitions should be challenging and sports should break new grounds.

Unlike most other sports, figure skating is also a performing athletic art. There is even a gala with exhibition programs after each competition. Skaters have the opportunities and all the freedom to express themselves in such show events without the competition constraints.

It is no news skaters and choreographers, including the current WC team of Chan and Nichol, have said the competition regulations restrict creativity. I am all for tweaking the rules, which is not really all about COP, to allow and even promote innovations and creativities while still emphasizing athletic and basic skills with fairness for all competitors. The regulations and the relatively new scoring system are evolving necessarily with the sport, and I enjoy the ride.

Thank you for all agreeing that the CoP is more restrictive than challenging.

To alleviate the restrictiveness, Bring Back the Free Skate

Hernando said:

She does too many for me to keep track of.
Here is info about a seminar wth Lori and Joe Inman. Remember his name

http://www.skate-eos.on.ca/Documents/2010-11/10-11_Coaching-RptCoachJudgeSeminar Jul.pdf

Click to expand...

The document you have linked to was a summary, written by a coach from the Eastern Ontario Section of Skate Canada, of a three day coaches and judges seminar run by the Central Ontario Section of Skate Canada. Attendees were Skate Canada coaches and judges. The focus was on the changes to the rules in terms of spins etc that applied for the 2010/11 season and helping coaches and judges both to understand what the PCS components are and how they are to be interpreted. Yes, there are certainly ISU / international level judges in Canada ... but the content of this seminar was very much the basics.

Can absolutely guarantee you that my DD, who is a judge in Canada, will not be judging at the ISU level in this lifetime - and she was the target market for this particular seminar.

CdnSkateWatcher said:

The document you have linked to was a summary, written by a coach from the Eastern Ontario Section of Skate Canada, of a three day coaches and judges seminar run by the Central Ontario Section of Skate Canada. Attendees were Skate Canada coaches and judges. The focus was on the changes to the rules in terms of spins etc that applied for the 2010/11 season and helping coaches and judges both to understand what the PCS components are and how they are to be interpreted. Yes, there are certainly ISU / international level judges in Canada ... but the content of this seminar was very much the basics.

Can absolutely guarantee you that my DD, who is a judge in Canada, will not be judging at the ISU level in this lifetime - and she was the target market for this particular seminar.

Click to expand...

I linked another article which stated Lori has served as an official trainer of ISU judges. She was very close to Jamie and David while serving in this capacity during the SLC scandal.

This article mentions it, how upsetting it was to her and also many other interesting thoughts from Lori about choreography, music, the CoP, her thoughts on judges and how much she enjoys training them.

http://www.absoluteskating.com/index.php?cat=interviews&id=2007lorinichol

"I do think there are several good judges that do understand the program components. It’ll be a while before we get the majority of them on the panel, but that’s life. But I feel that some skaters are getting what they deserve and that’s very important. I still teach the judges every year which I love to do. It’s very important to me to further their education and motivating them to educate themselves as well. And I am noticing more and more are getting much higher in quality and more serious about spreading the marks. "



Any problems or doubts I have about this concern ISU and not Lori. She has done more good things for skating than I could ever hope to list.