South Korean federation's complaint to the ISU about judging

qwertyskates said:

I lead a normal life, I don't post every 2 minutes or so. There are some 10-20 of you at any one time. I dislike hogging threads or making lots and lots of replies, especially when it's about the same things over and over ad nauseum, so I like to combine my rebuttals, especially when there are several posters addressing any one of my posts at any time.

I still haven't seen this "DISCUSSION" on GS that you insist took place about the Feature Levels 2,3,4, blow by blow, on which Level 4 stsq is judged, I only saw Feature Level 1, i.e.,Complexity, discussed on BoP thread. I am waiting for your link, since you said it exists. So far, you posted a statement/opinion of BoP, not a link to a discussion.

I don't take anyone's statement for a fact. I tend to believe the Tech Panel, especially when my eyes saw the same skate.

Found a Yuna fan upload of Sochi:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8NIHBJBAqU&ntz=1

Yuna's torso remained upright for most of her stsq, she had *some* arm movements, but they were not enough to affect balance in a significant way. I didn't see 1/3 of stsq with major torso, head and arm movements maintained. Yuna's steps and turns were smaller, slower, more pauses in between. I don't think Yuna is famed for her stsq, unlike Caro, she received Level 3 at many other competitions. They really weren't memorable at Sochi either, there wasn't an outstanding choreography. I don't find awarding Level 3 to her ss a controversial decision.

If you propose that the Tech Panel was wrong, or judging was fraudulent then you should post the evidence that you have.

The onus is on those who alleged wrongdoing, Tech Panel is innocent until proven guilty, and so you must provide proof. Stating for a fact your opinion that Yuna's skate *is* Level 4 isn't proof.

I am now watching World's, I'm more interested in that than to debate a non-issue with you all. Like I said, rather than carrying this to your grave why not do a second by second, blow by blow? I promise I'll visit! Adios!

Click to expand...

cooper said:

in short i don't know anything so i walk away..

Click to expand...

qwertyskates said:

No, in short, I have a LIFE, I have some consideration for others not to hog threads, to insult, to wish ill on Russia and Adelina,...etc. and I SUPPORT GOLD FOR ADELINA. Deal with it.

I am also here only because I have my drink with me, I'm waiting for my favorite skaters to appear right now, with Worlds. Otherwise, I won't even bother. This is because I'm actually interested in skating, not politicking for my favorites.

I'm waiting for your few more threads to discuss Feature Levels 2,3,4, to educate us lesser peoples.

Have to say at least JayLee tried to hold a discourse with some opinions, can't say the same for the rest of you!

Seems you have shown ZERO interest in the REAL SKATING happening right now at Worlds...strange!

Click to expand...

Mathman said:

I still have one question. Has the Korean Skating Federation actually submitted a protest to the ISU, or is this just an urban myth that we have fallen for?

Click to expand...

cooper said:

oh please. at least i admit that i'm not the greatest expert.. unlike you who pretend to know it all...

Click to expand...

cooper said:

they had 60 days... do some research..

Click to expand...

Rubirosa said:

"Complaints must be filed with the DC by any Skater, Official, Office Holder or other participants in the ISU activities, within 60 days of learning of the facts or events, which constitute a disciplinary or ethical offence."

When did they find out that Russian judge is the wife of director? 60 days haven't passed yet?

They are going to complain of hugging?

Because if you mean 60 days starting from Ladies LP, it means they are complaining about the results. That deadline is over.

I think Koreans won't file anything. Otherwise they would do that by now. They know they don't have a case. To humiliate Yuna and her country one more time is embarrasing. They dropped the information to fish. Now they read the opinions, read GS and decided to stay "send in clowns" rather than "sent in clowns".

Click to expand...

cooper said:

yeah.. it's funny you say that.. the russian fed filed a protest in 2002 for irina.. i guess they were trying to humiliate irina too..

Click to expand...

Rubirosa said:

Okay, you made me google. Look what I found- you misrepresented facts. Russians didn't file a protest in 2002 like Koreans presumably are filing now. They filed it on different basis- over the results. On the same day of LP seeking for second gold medal, like Canadians got second gold in pairs. Got rejected. Koreans actually protested to ISU too over short track guy. But they all protested over results. Here over Yuna Koreans are filing the protest not over the result, but with DC on the basis "within 60 days of learning of the facts or events, which constitute a disciplinary or ethical offence." Answer me if you know what facts or events exactly Koreans learned within 60 days? Results? It's different type of protest. That deadline is over. What facts they learned or what events happened within 60 days? Can you name one? You can't. They can't. Nobody can. Creating a comedy show is humiliating Yuna.

Click to expand...

qwertyskates said:

*snip*

If you propose that the Tech Panel was wrong, or judging was fraudulent then you should post the evidence that you have.

The onus is on those who alleged wrongdoing, Tech Panel is innocent until proven guilty, and so you must provide proof. Stating for a fact your opinion that Yuna's skate *is* Level 4 isn't proof.

Click to expand...

Vanshilar said:

I was reading up on past figure skating controversies and found something interesting in the wikipedia article about the 2010 quad controversy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple_jump_controversy

The basic gist of it is that Lysacek won gold without doing a quad, and Plushenko who did a quad triple combination got silver. Afterwards Plushenko wanted to protest it but the Russian Olympic Committee refused to give legal support stating "Under the new ISU rules a complaint maybe lodged only if a calculation (mathematical) error occurs. If the judges err in interpreting an element or its level of difficulty, it is considered a “human error” which can not be challenged...No lawyer would take on representing Plushenko's interests as no provision for challenging the judging under these circumstances exists."

So basically as far as the ISU is concerned, other than math errors (or as mentioned previously, errors such as where the step sequence was, or the type of jump performed, etc.), any deviations from the judging rules that are the result of human judgment or interpretation cannot be changed. This obviously severely limits the recourse for when these deviations do occur. It also makes it more difficult to hold the judges accountable, especially since the scores are given anonymously -- making it easier for judges to judge not according to the skater's performance but on other, political criteria.

Perhaps that's why the Koreans are protesting the composition of the judging panel. If the ROC is right, then the ISU simply does not accept any protest regarding whether or not the judging was accurate, i.e. in accordance with the skating rules.

It's not necessarily that not being able to protest or asking for a recount is a bad thing. A competition would take much longer if each skater protested some minutiae of the judging to gain a few more points. However, the reputation of the sport relies on the credibility of the judges (or their equivalent) in applying the rules evenly, and being held accountable for them. For example, in baseball, usually the umpire's call is final, even if it is wrong. However, the umpires are publicly known and thus held accountable, with their individual reputations at stake. An example of this is Armando Galarraga's near-perfect game, which was ruined by an umpire giving a wrong call on what would have been the final out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armando_Galarraga's_near-perfect_game

Also, the umpires can be fined if they don't apply the rules correctly:

http://mlb.si.com/2013/05/10/mlb-admits-umpiring-mistake-angels-astros/

The point is that even though their ruling is final, incentive mechanisms exist for umpires in baseball to "follow the rules". That's what keeps the sport relatively clean, in terms of the officiating. In contrast, in ISU's judging system, not only are the scores more or less final (short of math errors), but the judging is anonymous, and there are no known repercussions for deviating from the publicly stated scoring rules -- the judges don't have to provide how they arrived at the scores nor even identify which judge made which marks.

Click to expand...

qwertyskates said:

I lead a normal life, I don't post every 2 minutes or so. There are some 10-20 of you at any one time. I dislike hogging threads or making lots and lots of replies, especially when it's about the same things over and over ad nauseum, so I like to combine my rebuttals, especially when there are several posters addressing any one of my posts at any time. I am also a stickler for grammar, so I frequently corrected any erroneous grammar/spelling. Didn't see that as a violation of forum rules?:scratch:

Click to expand...

I still haven't seen this "DISCUSSION" on GS that you insist took place about the Feature Levels 2,3,4, blow by blow, on which Level 4 stsq is judged, I only saw Feature Level 1, i.e.,Complexity, discussed on BoP thread. I am waiting for your link, since you said it exists. So far, you posted a statement/opinion of BoP, not a link to a discussion.

Click to expand...

I don't take anyone's statement for a fact. I tend to believe the Tech Panel, especially when my eyes saw the same skate.

Click to expand...

Found a Yuna fan upload of Sochi:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8NIHBJBAqU&ntz=1

Yuna's torso remained upright for most of her stsq, she had *some* torso and arm movements, but they were not enough to affect balance in a significant way. I didn't see 1/3 of stsq with major torso, head and arm movements maintained. Yuna's steps and turns were smaller, slower, more pauses in between.

Click to expand...

I don't think Yuna is famed for her stsq, unlike Caro, she received Level 3 at many other competitions. They really weren't memorable at Sochi either, there wasn't an outstanding choreography. I don't find awarding Level 3 to her ss a controversial decision.

Click to expand...

cooper said:

what the.............???!! what's the difference???????????!!!

Click to expand...

jaylee said:

Yuna not being "famed" for her step sequences like Carolina is completely irrelevant. Actually she has received at least one level 4 step sequence at every competition she's competed at since 2012 NRW, with two level 4 step sequences at 2013 Worlds. As for not being "memorable" or it being "outstanding" choreography, whatever.

Click to expand...

Vanshilar said:

I was reading up on past figure skating controversies and found something interesting in the wikipedia article about the 2010 quad controversy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadruple_jump_controversy

The basic gist of it is that Lysacek won gold without doing a quad, and Plushenko who did a quad triple combination got silver. Afterwards Plushenko wanted to protest it but the Russian Olympic Committee refused to give legal support stating "Under the new ISU rules a complaint maybe lodged only if a calculation (mathematical) error occurs. If the judges err in interpreting an element or its level of difficulty, it is considered a “human error” which can not be challenged...No lawyer would take on representing Plushenko's interests as no provision for challenging the judging under these circumstances exists."

So basically as far as the ISU is concerned, other than math errors (or as mentioned previously, errors such as where the step sequence was, or the type of jump performed, etc.), any deviations from the judging rules that are the result of human judgment or interpretation cannot be changed. This obviously severely limits the recourse for when these deviations do occur. It also makes it more difficult to hold the judges accountable, especially since the scores are given anonymously -- making it easier for judges to judge not according to the skater's performance but on other, political criteria.

Perhaps that's why the Koreans are protesting the composition of the judging panel. If the ROC is right, then the ISU simply does not accept any protest regarding whether or not the judging was accurate, i.e. in accordance with the skating rules.

It's not necessarily that not being able to protest or asking for a recount is a bad thing. A competition would take much longer if each skater protested some minutiae of the judging to gain a few more points. However, the reputation of the sport relies on the credibility of the judges (or their equivalent) in applying the rules evenly, and being held accountable for them. For example, in baseball, usually the umpire's call is final, even if it is wrong. However, the umpires are publicly known and thus held accountable, with their individual reputations at stake. An example of this is Armando Galarraga's near-perfect game, which was ruined by an umpire giving a wrong call on what would have been the final out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armando_Galarraga's_near-perfect_game

Also, the umpires can be fined if they don't apply the rules correctly:

http://mlb.si.com/2013/05/10/mlb-admits-umpiring-mistake-angels-astros/

The point is that even though their ruling is final, incentive mechanisms exist for umpires in baseball to "follow the rules". That's what keeps the sport relatively clean, in terms of the officiating. In contrast, in ISU's judging system, not only are the scores more or less final (short of math errors), but the judging is anonymous, and there are no known repercussions for deviating from the publicly stated scoring rules -- the judges don't have to provide how they arrived at the scores nor even identify which judge made which marks.

Click to expand...