How does "politicking" work? | Golden Skate

How does "politicking" work?

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
We all know federations politick for their skaters in different ways. Skaters have made comments about it (i.e. Johnny Weir saying his Olympic scores could have been better if he was politicked for), judges have been busted for trading votes (i.e. SLC pairs) and also attacking skaters from other countries (i.e. Inman's e-mail "pointing out" Plushenko having no transitions). In what other subtle, behind the scenes ways to federations use these tactics to promote their skaters?
 

plushyfan

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Country
Hungary
Akiko's and Mao's marks in last year, if I right remember at NHK Trophy or at GPF...Akiko sould have won that competition.
 

b-man

Final Flight
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
I am certainly not an expert on this, and it differs between national competitions and international events. But the judges usually stay at the same hotels, often will eat in the same restaurants. Before and after the competition, there is a judges lounge at the skating venue where the judges congregate. If there is a friendly judge or official nearby from another Federation that a judge has known over the years, I am sure they don't sit in silence. They may compliment a skater from the opposing Fed., and casually mention some positive aspects of their own skaters that may have been overlooked in past judging. If your skater has made recent improvments in technique, you may point that out. The other judge may subconsciously look for that improvement, and judge accordingly.
 

gmyers

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
The clearest example is Inman against plushenko and getting plushenko two 5.00 transition scores in the sp to help lysacek win.

Another example may be Russian ice Dance chair declaring domshabs ropes for lifting legal.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Ironically, Plushenko deserved a 5.0 for Interpretation in the SP. His transitions were fine. The power pull out of the 3Axel was amazing.
 

b-man

Final Flight
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
I should mention I read a book by Jon Jackson titled "ON EDGE" a few years ago. It gives his story how he started up the judging ranks, from low level comps through national and eventually received international judging certificates. He was an observer, not a participant, of the Salt Lake City scandal in 2002 and explains a lot how politicing works. This was all under 6.0
 

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
Love him, or hate him, but Scott Hamilton talked about politicking with examples from his own career of officials and judges going for or against him in his autobiography "Landing It".
 

brightphoton

Medalist
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
John Curry (1976 Olympic gold medalist) talked about politicking in his documentary. He was very derisive of 6.0, saying that cheating was laughably transparent. Although he knew he wasn't a "favored" skater during most of his career, he also knew that changed during the Olympic year. For whatever reason, the judges deemed him the top skater, and he said that played a large role in his eventual win.
 

LiamForeman

William/Uilyam
Medalist
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Didn't Moskvina say a vodka bottle to the former soviet judges would go a LONG way to favoritism?

As much as I liked Weir's skating, well, he let his skating get away from him his last four years. He joined the cult of personality instead of working his butt off to be a legitimate threat to international medals. I'm not even sure it was the cross-dressing, the alrheaded interviews. He wouldn't do a program with all jumping passes, didn't add a silly 2toe to make a 3 jump combo. He was a terrible competitor. Evan at least learned the rulebook, and maximized his potential with hard work and less flim-flam to the media. Mostly when Weir made the papers it was about something airheaded he'd say. I remember something about him skating like a Carebear on Acid or Icicles on Cocaine? Huh? I'm not sure it was lack of politicking that ruined Weir's career. If you were the USFS, and frankly any employer, would you choose the flighty inconsistent and not paying attention Weir to the maybe dull, but reliable, conscientious, and incredibly focused with a work ethic Evan? It seems obvious to me. Weir was not THAT talented to get away with it.
 

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
^^^^^

That's your opinion but what's Johnny gonna blame?

Anyway, he seems to act professionally in his new job now. I hope he will stick with the mature style and help set a new standard for the US figure skating commentaries.

BTW, I feel that often "Politicking" is the scapegoat for people not liking the results. Like it or not, COP does offer more transparency and points for arguments for or against the results.
 

elif

Medalist
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
This is why we can't talk about Mao's underrotated triples. I can't write ''She is underotating her jumps''. Because some poster will say this is South Korea sabotage or some other angry posts. Just wait and see. If nobody talk about underotation, there is no underrotation.:laugh::laugh: Good idea. :laugh: This year's favorite "politicking":laugh:
 

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
What is really incredulous is the fans' politicking, as if it would make a difference, if not with the judges and skaters, then other fans, again as if that would make a difference. And then there are the projections and accusations of other fans politicking if their comments are not flattering enough to the accusors' favorites, as if that would make any difference. It only makes me go :confused:.
 

RABID

Final Flight
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
I know this might sound naive but shouldn't it stand to reason that some politicking might also be dedicated to shaping a direction a judge feels the skating world should encourage? Perhaps SOME of the reasons YuNa's scores are so high is that, the judges want to not only reward her skating but reward her TYPE of skating? And maybe the same with lighter degrees of interests, lesser skaters as well. What is "politicking" after all? Perhaps Patrick Chan is the face the International skating world wants to represent them and it is THEM that is forgiving of his lapses rather than any particular cabal of Canadian judges and big wigs.
I wouldn't be surprised if that sort of politicking isn't even encouraged.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Didn't Moskvina say a vodka bottle to the former soviet judges would go a LONG way to favoritism?

I think it was Tatiana Tarasova, commenting on the 1998 Olympics, Tara versus Michelle. "Why didn't Frank Carroll slip us a bottle of vodka. What did we care which American girl won?"

There was also a famous quote from two-time Olympic bronze medalist Philippe Candeloro. "If course there is politics. Without it, no French skater would ever win anything."

CanadianSkaterGuy said:
Anyway, he (Weir) seems to act professionally in his new job now. I hope he will stick with the mature style and help set a new standard for the US figure skating commentaries.

I just saw his work from NHK, ladies and men, on NBC television. He knocked it out of the park. :rock:
 

Krislite

Medalist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
I am certainly not an expert on this, and it differs between national competitions and international events. But the judges usually stay at the same hotels, often will eat in the same restaurants. Before and after the competition, there is a judges lounge at the skating venue where the judges congregate. If there is a friendly judge or official nearby from another Federation that a judge has known over the years, I am sure they don't sit in silence. They may compliment a skater from the opposing Fed., and casually mention some positive aspects of their own skaters that may have been overlooked in past judging. If your skater has made recent improvments in technique, you may point that out. The other judge may subconsciously look for that improvement, and judge accordingly.

I imagine this is how it works most of the time. No round-table conspiracy, bribes or anything overt, but more a matter of chatter and reputation. Judges talk to each other and keep track of competition results/protocols and watch videos of competitions. Expectations play a lot into scoring. When they consider you top dog, they give you high marks. When you're a relative unknown, they score conservatively unless you have a skate-of-your-life moment. Your most recent competitive results tend to determine your current potential/range of scores. Improvements/consistency increase that range. Poor results will lower it. This is because judges stay within a narrow "corridor" of scores for each skater, a corridor that is largely set by expectations even before the competition begins. Interestingly, by using a trimmed mean instead of majority votes by ordinal ranking, the IJS has likely decreased the variance in competition results.
 

hurrah

Medalist
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
What is "politicking" after all? Perhaps Patrick Chan is the face the International skating world wants to represent them and it is THEM that is forgiving of his lapses rather than any particular cabal of Canadian judges and big wigs.
I wouldn't be surprised if that sort of politicking isn't even encouraged.

You may have something there. I was talking to my sister about how Mao's PCS had gone up another knotch this season and that the judges were giving her alot of love, and my sister made the remark that maybe besides the fact that Mao has actually improved, the judges want to send the message to other skaters that if you put in the hard work to improve your skating skills and re-learn the right technique, it does make a difference. They want all skaters to know that if you improve your basics no matter when it occurs in your career, the judges do notice it, and they do reward it, and therefore, taking the risk of changing everything can be worth the effort.

Besides Patrick, Carolina has gotten an enormous amount of love from the judges over the years, more so than Yuna has probably. It may be that the judges were willing to forgive Carolina's many lapses because they really love her skating skills.

Of course, Yuna has gotten alot of love from the judges as well, but I think it was not so much about her skating skills as much as the fact that she is so very clean. Judges really love clean performances and suddenly the GOEs go a bit higher than they ought to.

Judges also love Dai as well, but again, I think, for another reason. With Dai, I don't think it's his skating skills or him being clean that they love but his magnetic charisma. If you are as magnetic as Dai, then your PCS goes up just that little bit more.

So, if you have Patrick's/Carolina's skating skills, can do your performance clean like Yuna does with Dai's magnetic charisma, that probably for ISU would be the perfect skater.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I imagine this is how it works most of the time. No round-table conspiracy, bribes or anything overt, but more a matter of chatter and reputation. Judges talk to each other

I am sure that does happen.

The biggest effect will be that if a skater does something especially well, or especially poorly, in program construction or unique technique on certain elements, etc., judges who notice may chat about it in the judges room and then more judges will notice and mark accordingly the next time.

Also, when it comes to actual politicking, if a skater does something especially well that might not be obvious at first glance, judges from that skater's country will be sure to mention it, to make sure other judges notice and reward it.

and keep track of competition results/protocols and watch videos of competitions.

Some more than others, and they may follow different competitions. E.g., US or Canadian or Russian or Japanese judges will know how last year's 8th place US or Canadian or Russian or Japanese lady did at their nationals, and maybe at whatever senior B or JGP they were assigned to. Judges who were at Europeans will know which skater from an obscure country cracked the top 10 at Europeans, and Four Continents judges will know which cracked the top 10 at 4Cs. But unless they made a huge splash and actually won something significant or landed a rare jump element or had a totally new program concept (or costume, perhaps), judges who weren't there might not have heard much about them before encountering them at a bigger international.

If someone did make a big splash one way or another, then there will be chatter and buzz about them.

For the skaters who have already made it to the top, or at least to the GP/top 10 level, judges already have expectations and opinions, but I doubt they go out of their way to keep track of how all these skaters do in every competition. A big comeback will be news.

Expectations play a lot into scoring. When they consider you top dog, they give you high marks. When you're a relative unknown, they score conservatively unless you have a skate-of-your-life moment.

Yes, but I think this happens mostly unconsciously -- people see what they expect to see. And I think the seeded draws in short programs magnify this effect.

Improvements/consistency increase that range. Poor results will lower it.

Most of this will come from judging what's actually put on the ice: if you skate well today, you'll score well today. Or the opposite.

There is some unconscious effect of "If you skated well yesterday you will score well today." But there's only so much that effect can do if you skate badly today.

Interestingly, by using a trimmed mean instead of majority votes by ordinal ranking, the IJS has likely decreased the variance in competition results.

Can you justify this statistically?

I'm sure we can show statistically that there is more movement in placements within and between ice dance competitions under IJS than under 6.0. Seems pretty much the same to me in freestyle, but I haven't crunched numbers either.

The main reason has to do with the base marks called by the tech panel rather than the judges, though.

In theory, under IJS skaters will get credit in the base marks for exactly what they do. And the system itself has built-in penalties for some kinds of errors (e.g., 0 credit for an extra repeated jump) are harsher than the penalties for other kinds of errors (e.g., fall on a rotated quad).

Of course tech panel members are also human and what they see may be colored by expectations of what they expect to see from known skaters, which is not politics. Some skaters may get unconscious benefit of the doubt in ambiguous cases, and others may get extra scrutiny.

There may also be chatter among tech specialists about which skaters are prone to certain errors or which skaters have original features in their elements, that the panel should make a point to look out for. And some of this chatter might be politically motivated.

But ambiguous areas can only affect a minority of the technical panel calls. Most of the variance will be due to what the skaters clearly actually do or don't do.

Similarly, judges can be generous with GOEs for some skaters and stingy with others, but if the skater makes an obvious mistake, the GOE will be negative, and the skater does something especially well and not just acceptably, it will be positive.

If a skater makes many, disruptive mistakes (in the minds of the judges), the PCS may take a dive. But mistakes, or successes, that may have a large effect on the technical score may make little difference to the PCS. And therefore judges could score the same skater fairly similar in PCS for a clean skate and a mistake-filled skate, and the results could end up being very different purely as a result of the technical content. So even if judges end up getting stuck in a corridor based on expectations, there will be more variation in Technical Elements scores than there would have been in the single Technical Merit score under 6.0.

the judges want to send the message to other skaters that if you put in the hard work to improve your skating skills and re-learn the right technique, it does make a difference. They want all skaters to know that if you improve your basics no matter when it occurs in your career, the judges do notice it, and they do reward it, and therefore, taking the risk of changing everything can be worth the effort.

If judges notice that you skated better today than last year (in subtle, pervasive ways, not necessarily success of the elements -- but that too of course), all they have to do is score to send the message that you skated well today. Other skaters or observers can take the message "if you improve you'll be rewarded," but the rewards are for the actual better skating, not so much the idea of improvement.

Besides Patrick, Carolina has gotten an enormous amount of love from the judges over the years, more so than Yuna has probably. It may be that the judges were willing to forgive Carolina's many lapses because they really love her skating skills.

I'm sure that is true. Most judges love good skating skills, which are the heart of what this sport is about. When they see great skating, they want to reward it, even if the jumping is not so great that day.

Of course, Yuna has gotten alot of love from the judges as well, but I think it was not so much about her skating skills as much as the fact that she is so very clean. Judges really love clean performances and suddenly the GOEs go a bit higher than they ought to.

Judges also love Dai as well, but again, I think, for another reason. With Dai, I don't think it's his skating skills or him being clean that they love but his magnetic charisma. If you are as magnetic as Dai, then your PCS goes up just that little bit more.

Yes, judges can get excited by these things and end up scoring a bit more generously when a skater wows with technical mastery or touches them emotionally, or both. That's human, not politics.

So, if you have Patrick's/Carolina's skating skills, can do your performance clean like Yuna does with Dai's magnetic charisma, that probably for ISU would be the perfect skater.

Isn't that the ideal for everyone? Well, great skating skills, clean performance, great performance quality -- choose your own examples of who best embodies each of those qualities.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
The clearest example is Inman against plushenko and getting plushenko two 5.00 transition scores in the sp to help lysacek win.

To be fair, Plushenko himself declared that he doesn't have any transitions. But Inman certainly facilitated those remarks to Plushenko's detriment. It's true though, his transitions were very much lacking compared to the rest of the field... just because you landed quads/3A and are who you are, doesn't make a program good.
 

ciocio

On the Ice
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
To be fair, Plushenko himself declared that he doesn't have any transitions. But Inman certainly facilitated those remarks to Plushenko's detriment. It's true though, his transitions were very much lacking compared to the rest of the field... just because you landed quads/3A and are who you are, doesn't make a program good.

No, Plushenko did not declare that he had no transitions, but Mishin did not wanted to investigate the case or to tell Plushenko about Inman's letter. When Plushenko found out, it was too late to ask the journalist explanations about the article (it was an article in Absolute Skating). He did say in some interviews (videos) that he does not have as many transitions as other skaters, which is different.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
I want to be a bit more systematic.

I'd say the following can all go into the scoring:

1. Honest assessment

Tech panels call what they see the skaters do, according to the rules and written guidelines.

Judges evaluate GOEs according to the written guidelines and PCS according to their assessments of each performance against the written criteria, according to their own mental images of what constitutes poor, average, good, outstanding, etc., developed through watching thousands of skaters and comparing notes (about general principles) with other judges

There is some room for different mental definitions of "good," etc., and of which criteria are more important than others.

2. Psychological effects
People see what they expect to see.

Tech panels may give more scrutiny to skaters who have had known problems in the past and give more benefit of doubt to skaters who are known for executing clean elements and successful features.

Judges' perceptions of quality may be influenced by their knowledge of what they've seen from specific skaters in the past, or what they know about skaters' past results, past scoring range, and other buzz. Skate order can also affect the judges' mindset.

3. Politics
Officials may intentionally manipulate the buzz about certain skaters in hopes to influence others to appreciate and reward their favored skaters' strong points or to scrutinize the rivals' weaknesses more closely

4. Cheating
Officials intentionally decide to inflate scores or tech calls for their favored skaters above what they objectively deserve and to lowball the scores of the rivals -- either on their own initiative or more likely in response to pressure or explicit instructions from their federations or other outside influences.

They may make deals with officials of other federations to help each others' skaters in a quid pro quo arrangement.


While all of the above can occur in any judging system, I think that the way IJS is set up shifts the emphasis more toward 1 than 2 compared with the ordinal system.

But this thread is supposed to focus on #3, right? Intentionally manipulating buzz?
 
Top