Well, just like the hugs and the presence of corrupt officials don't necessarily prove there WAS a conspiracy, all judges scoring Sotnikova near or over Kim doesn't prove that there WASN'T one.
Oh and another point to make. How did you arrive with #9 in terms of difficulty of Yuna's programs? Not even taking into account Yuna's level 3 awarded step sequence in the FS here's what I have calculated:
BV of SP and LP of -
Mao: 90.22 (surprisingly higher than Yuna's!)
Caro: 88.98 (you were right to say Caro's progs were tougher than Yuna's, but to a negligible extent)
Gracie: 92.68 (higher than Adelina's!)
Yuna's ranked #5 actually. But this argument of using BV is totally inadequate. Why did Gracie lose to Adelina? Gracie completed her 3F in the FS but she fell on it. You could say Yuna came to Sochi with a #5 ranked difficulty program and she was ready to execute them.
I'd replace #1 with the lack of accountability for how judges score skaters. Removing anonymity would go a long way toward that, but I don't think it'd be enough if judges still didn't have to defend their marks, i.e. listing out why they gave +1 vs +2 GOE for a particular jump, or level 3 vs level 4 spin, etc. when asked to do so. Simply seeing some numbers is not a good feedback system for telling skaters what areas of their skating need improvement, nor verifying if the judging was done correctly.
I agree Julia did a great job in executing the 3F in the FS when she made a terrible fall on it in the short - she's strong for sure.
Julia's triple flip was just fine. Was it a better jump than Kim and Kostner though? Obvious no. That is the only point at hand. Adelina's was not better either. Lets say the judges were given glasses to see Kim and Kostner instead of Julia and Adelina and Julia and Adelina instead of Kim and Kostner when they were skating. We all know who would now get the higher GOE for the triple flip, and by a much larger margin than the original way around.
Denis Ten, who won the FS in 2013 Worlds had the 10th highest BV out of all the men.
And I guess Jason Brown is arrogant too since he had the audacity to win the FS at U.S. Nationals with the fourth highest base value! Or that he managed to get into the final group at the Olympics in 6th despite an 11th place BV.
Johnny and Tara have their own self-delusions that we all are aware of. Plus they don't yet have their own voices and can be replaced by someone else. (I hope Tara finds something else to do)
I can't stop watching Adios Nonino. Yuna is truly amazing. The. Queen.
Tara is jealous of someone like Yu Na Kim since she is considered a much greater champion than she ever was. She was probably thrilled to see her lose, and feel even more vastly inferior than she already did (although in reality Yu Na is an even bigger legend and considered even greater with her bogus false loss than if she had won her 2nd OGM so her feelings are misguided). She knows someone like Sotnikova will never be considered half the skater Tara was, so she doesnt give a darn about her victory (never mind credability of skating judging and skating, self obsessed Tara would never care about those trivial things now that she is retired ). Tara always had an inferiority complex and was jealous of people seen as better than her. That is why she and her crazy mother were always so jealous and obsessed with Kwan. Just beating Kwan in a few competitions was not enough, she could never accept that to the public and to the Dick Button's of the world Kwan was still a much greater, more impactful, and far more popular skater than she was. It persisted for years with her own mom moaning endlessly about Michelle being given the honor of awarding the Team USA jacket to the president at the 2002 Games saying "what an awful thing to do to my poor Tara" and bemoaning to the press how Tara cried her eyes out over hearing that.
They are. I'm working on a post for the improvement thread, so I've been looking it over quite a bit. Imo, the definitions are at times irrational, and the criteria are simply not concrete enough, and not objective enough. Too much room both for error and cheating.At least for the technical elements and GOE's anyway. I think the PCS guidelines are likely very fuzzy though, or at least, very opaque.
It's definitely a part of the problem, but to me, it's not the root of it..I'd replace #1 with the lack of accountability for how judges score skaters.
I promise, if you correct the ambiguous language of the pcs, and make it mandatory for judges to defend their marks, you will start to see pcs scores that make sense. Asking the judges to defend their marks (pcs in particular) under the current text will not work, because the language is giving them too much room to allow their biases to dictate the scores. The criteria need to be so concise, so concrete, so starkly devoid of subjectivity, that judges who overinflate will not have a leg to stand on when it comes time to defend their marks. Unless this is done, the pcs score will always be the fudge factor they can use to cheat, and will always be skewed towards the veterans, even when the judges are trying to be fair.Removing anonymity would go a long way toward that, but I don't think it'd be enough if judges still didn't have to defend their marks, i.e. listing out why they gave +1 vs +2 GOE for a particular jump, or level 3 vs level 4 spin, etc. when asked to do so.
I agree.Simply seeing some numbers is not a good feedback system for telling skaters what areas of their skating need improvement, nor verifying if the judging was done correctly.