Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 63

Thread: What are the most glaring examples of cheating using the CoP within the last 5 years?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    62

    What are the most glaring examples of cheating using the CoP within the last 5 years?

    So we all know the CoP is a total mess and that it doesn't really do anything to address judges playing favorites and cheating. So what are the most glaring examples of the judges totally abusing the CoP system in recent memory? Obviously Patrick Chan didn't deserve to win at Worlds this year and probably not at Worlds last year either. Ashley Wagner should probably have been 3rd at US Nationals this past year and DEFINITELY not the winner. I'm sorry, but when you land on your behind twice in the middle of your long program, you should automatically be out of the running for a gold medal. Any other atrocious examples?

  2. #2
    Medalist
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    79
    Really?

    This thread is going to be the usual nightmare.

  3. #3
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    233
    Ashley Wagner deserved to be the US Champion. Yes she fell, but Gracie Gold made mistakes in the short, and the short program counts. Just because Gracie Gold skated a clean long it doesn't mean she's the overall winner, and Ashley Wagner skates with a lot more character and maturity than Gracie Gold which really helps.

    I think Caroline Zhang was scored very harshly at US Nationals, I think it was her 3L-3L that was downgraded, when it really shouldn't have been. Her performances were great and she didn't get the credit for them. Same in terms of Mirai Nagasu's long in my opinion.

  4. #4
    At the rink. Again. mskater93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,193
    Quote Originally Posted by ffionhanathomas View Post
    I think Caroline Zhang was scored very harshly at US Nationals, I think it was her 3L-3L that was downgraded, when it really shouldn't have been. Her performances were great and she didn't get the credit for them. Same in terms of Mirai Nagasu's long in my opinion.
    Oh, no, Caroline was fairly scored at Nationals technically. The 3Lo+3Lo was definitely < and </<< (borderline between UR and DG) in replay. Caroline DID get credit for her PERFORMANCES - she got fairly high PCS. The thing she needs to work on is her skating skills to improve EVERYTHING (which I have been saying since she was in Juniors and which she REALLY hasn't done which is because she has a lot of lovely qualities but her basic skating is atrocious for a Senior lady).

    Nagasu's long the jumps weren't even borderline - so obvious in real time and worse in replay. I had her ~ 5th overall without even doing the math just watching the LP because it was very clear this was going to be a low-scoring program technically.

    If it was about cleanliness only, Hicks would have been National Champion over the two programs and that's something else I can't get behind.

  5. #5
    Medalist
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by ffionhanathomas View Post
    Ashley Wagner deserved to be the US Champion. Yes she fell, but Gracie Gold made mistakes in the short, and the short program counts. Just because Gracie Gold skated a clean long it doesn't mean she's the overall winner, and Ashley Wagner skates with a lot more character and maturity than Gracie Gold which really helps.
    So it is okay for Ashley to fall in a long and win because of her PC, but when it is Patrick that wins because of PC everyone has a fissy fit?

  6. #6
    At the rink. Again. mskater93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,193
    Different situation, snsd - Gold had a fall and a pop in her SP and was the only one to REALLY hit it out of the park in the LP of the ladies with big scoring potential. D10 was clean in both phases at Worlds and it wasn't like he didn't do 4T.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,147
    Quote Originally Posted by snsd View Post
    So it is okay for Ashley to fall in a long and win because of her PC, but when it is Patrick that wins because of PC everyone has a fissy fit?
    Gold made the same # of errors as Wagner at Nationals when one considers her short program. Dumb comparision. Anyway one need not worry since I am pretty sure if that scenario repeats Gold will come out the winner next time. After Worlds I am pretty sure Gold is the new USFSA IT girl despite that Wagner technically finished slightly above again.

  8. #8
    Custom Title FSGMT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    2,795
    I'm sorry but I'm not going to give my opinion about this, because of one simple reason:
    Quote Originally Posted by bump View Post
    So we all know the CoP is a total mess and that it doesn't really do anything to address judges playing favorites and cheating.
    Quote Originally Posted by bump View Post
    I'm sorry, but when you land on your behind twice in the middle of your long program, you should automatically be out of the running for a gold medal
    I disagree with these two statements that are practically this thread's starting point...

  9. #9
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    409
    The major problem with this judging system is that mistakes visible to the naked eye are or seem to be less important than those that cannot be seen easily, like flutzes and ur's. Mirai Nagasu has often skated a clean-looking program only to fall several places in the standings due to these "invisible" errors, and Carolina Kostner and Patrick Chan rarely skate clean but do so well with things like edging and knee bends that they rack up more points than clean-skaters. I don't know if anybody is cheating, but what the judges are focusing on is not what can be seen on television and certainly not from up in the stands.

    There is another reason why the point system seems to be failing that nobody wants to talk about: None of our current skaters are very good compared to those in the past. Yes, I know the tricks are harder, but think about it. Can you see ANY of them, (save for YuNa) getting a row of 6.0's? Ever?

    It's like they made this tremendously detailed grading system to determine which person who messed up in the long program should be put ahead of who messed up in the short program, or will they both be behind the person who skated clean but too slow?

    I actually think you'd have the same problems with this current crop of skaters under any system, only we'd be like why did Carolina get a 5.8 when she fell, and why did Patrick still get a 5.7 with all his errors?
    If/when someone who skated really well and usually clean emerges on the scene, that person will win fair and square and everyone will agree. I hope, LOL!

  10. #10
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by Poodlepal View Post
    The major problem with this judging system is that mistakes visible to the naked eye are or seem to be less important than those that cannot be seen easily, like flutzes and ur's. Mirai Nagasu has often skated a clean-looking program only to fall several places in the standings due to these "invisible" errors, and Carolina Kostner and Patrick Chan rarely skate clean but do so well with things like edging and knee bends that they rack up more points than clean-skaters. I don't know if anybody is cheating, but what the judges are focusing on is not what can be seen on television and certainly not from up in the stands.
    I agree. Those "invisible" errors shouldn't that harshly penalized. They don't ruin the program nearly as much as the falls. I personally don't even care if somebody flutzes of lips, as long as the jump is landed.

  11. #11
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,853
    All the examples given are "Decisions I disagree with" -- in most examples, because the poster disagrees with the rules, not that the judges weren't following the rules.

    That's not cheating.

    Blatant examples of judges, or technical panel members, cheating would be blatantly not following the rules, in some systematic manner to produce a desired results.

    Of course, with the way the ISU scrambles the scores in the protocols at the senior international events, there's no way to identify a systematic pattern of incorrect scores, only individual mistakes.

    But since some posts in this thread mention US Nationals, those scores are not anonymous; they're listed in order by judge number. If you think someone is cheating, you could study their marks for all the skaters and see whether you see a consistent pattern or not. Make sure to consider whether the scores you think are "bad" are really incorrect according to the rules, or just not in agreement with your personal opinion.


    In colloquial use within the skating community, the word "cheating" is often used to refer to underrotated jumps. It's not really considered a moral failing on the part of the skater, but it does mean that the skater didn't really complete the jump as intended. To casual viewers who haven't trained their eyes to notice degrees of rotation, this error might appear "invisible" -- but even under 6.0 scoring, judges noticed. And skaters who did rotate their jumps noticed and resented it when they lost to skaters who didn't.

    So along those lines "glaring examples of cheating" would be jumps that were so badly underrotated that even a casual viewer would see there was something wrong, without even waiting for slow motion replay.

  12. #12
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,583
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    All the examples given are "Decisions I disagree with" -- in most examples, because the poster disagrees with the rules, not that the judges weren't following the rules.

    That's not cheating.
    THIS. I really dislike the current judging system sometimes because the winners sometimes are not the ones who I believe have skated the best programs. However, I generally feel the judges are scoring the programs based on the requirements of the scoring system. When Chan wins, there is at most one Canadian on the judging panel so it's really hard for him to "cheat".

    At the National level, I do think favorites are held up a bit and the politiking that the coaches do is perhaps more effective. For me, the result of the season that bothered me the most was Agnes almost winning the SP at Nationals. She fell and she isn't very artistic, yet somehow she gets marked above several decent programs.

  13. #13
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,675
    Quote Originally Posted by glam View Post
    I agree. Those "invisible" errors shouldn't that harshly penalized. They don't ruin the program nearly as much as the falls. I personally don't even care if somebody flutzes of lips, as long as the jump is landed.

    I think we have to look at edges otherwie someone can say hey I will just do a flutz because it is worth more than a toe loop or whatever.

  14. #14
    At the rink. Again. mskater93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,193
    No one conciously decides to do a flutz (lip). Sometimes skaters learn borderline technique or are pushed through the ranks a little quickly by coaches without as strong a foundation as they need to have. Once the team (coach/choreo/skater) realize there is a problem (and sometimes they do before they get to that international level) they work on correcting it. Sometimes it becomes an issue after a growth spurt or injury where to hurry the jump back into the arsenal, the skater doesn't take the time to re-learn. Or sometimes (as is the case with Gold's 3F) it develops as an issue over time (she had no problems with the flip last season, but now it's gone from flat to outside edge)

  15. #15
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    273
    Quote Originally Posted by Poodlepal View Post
    The major problem with this judging system is that mistakes visible to the naked eye are or seem to be less important than those that cannot be seen easily, like flutzes and ur's. Mirai Nagasu has often skated a clean-looking program only to fall several places in the standings due to these "invisible" errors, and Carolina Kostner and Patrick Chan rarely skate clean but do so well with things like edging and knee bends that they rack up more points than clean-skaters. I don't know if anybody is cheating, but what the judges are focusing on is not what can be seen on television and certainly not from up in the stands.

    There is another reason why the point system seems to be failing that nobody wants to talk about: None of our current skaters are very good compared to those in the past. Yes, I know the tricks are harder, but think about it. Can you see ANY of them, (save for YuNa) getting a row of 6.0's? Ever?

    It's like they made this tremendously detailed grading system to determine which person who messed up in the long program should be put ahead of who messed up in the short program, or will they both be behind the person who skated clean but too slow?

    I actually think you'd have the same problems with this current crop of skaters under any system, only we'd be like why did Carolina get a 5.8 when she fell, and why did Patrick still get a 5.7 with all his errors?
    If/when someone who skated really well and usually clean emerges on the scene, that person will win fair and square and everyone will agree. I hope, LOL!
    Well stated.

    Query, however, whether there would have been as much disagreement, or any disagreement at all, if Denis Ten had won the gold.

    Perhaps a problem with the sport is that it is too closed and it is becoming ever more so. Where most people cannot agree or understand the results, and those results are vigorously defended, what is really being said is that the sport reflects the values of the few but not the many. It really does not bode well for the popularity of the sport or for the popular respect of its integrity. People can defend the results, believing them to be correct, but eventually other people are just going to stop watching. That is the danger ever becoming more real. No one wants that, do they?

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •