A History of Cheating in Judging

[jenaj]

Then I can only envy in what fairyland you live. The calling this whole season was atrocious. Let's take the latest event for example. In 4CC ladies SP we have HUGE, huge, huge URs everywhere shamelessly ignored. Kaori Sakamoto's 3Lo, Young You's 3A, Rika Kihira's 3A, Wakaba Higuchi's 3T - all of them were so clearly URed that TP just can't not notice that. Moreover, some of these jumps were landed badly - and such landings are ALWAYS should be checked by TP, especially in SP. What we have though? Clear protocols. Don't you think it's just unfair to Tennell, for example - who rotated all her jumps fully? Why she should bother to train her jumps to such extent then? Only because ISU judges wants to save face of international top ladies and tries to uphold their reputation as "clean rotators" before Russians ladies in WC to make an illusion of equal competition there - they are willing to distort calling that much? Or what? Still they dinged Chen's 3Lo with UR as she isn't considered top skater. I know what it is. It is "reputational calling", pure and simple. Disgusting.



We know nothing about what makes them do their decisions. Unfortunately. But that's the point! We need to introduce this TP observing system - exactly to know that. What it will change? Well, at least it can help to avoid the usual "incompetence" we can see in calling. See the above.

What--have a video of the technical panel making their decisions? I don't know what that could possibly show that would help anything, unless they are deciding by flipping a coin (which I assume they are not). And we do know what causes them to make their decisions--what they see on the ice and on the replay. These decisions have to be made in a very short time. The panel doesn't have the time that obsessive fans do to go back and review each jump multiple times in slow-motion/backwards and forwards. Is the judging always right? Probably not. But that is not uncommon in other sports. For example, in baseball, balls and strikes are not subject to review, even when computerized strike zones show the umpire got it wrong. And challenges to the calls on the field are not unlimited--3, I think. So some mistakes no doubt go uncorrected. By and large, I think the technical panels get it right. I do think the rule generally should be, when in doubt, advantage to the skater.

 

[Elucidus]

These decisions have to be made in a very short time. The panel doesn't have the time that obsessive fans do to go back and review each jump multiple times in slow-motion/backwards and forwards.

Actually - they have enough time to do just that. In a short program with only 3 jumping elements they have plenty of time. Especially considering that they usually omit reviewing visually clean jumps and watch only those with bad landings - and among missed URs there were mostly such jumps.
If you watched the video of Moscow novice competition -they did exactly that - "go back and review not EACH jump but each SUSPICIOUS jump multiple times in slow-motion/backwards and forwards" - many times throughout all competition. And the competition went pretty fast considering the big number of participants. That, and if most of 4CC URs I mentioned above were obvious for me even in real time from first glance - how can they be unclear for experienced judges? Moreover, watching many novice and junior local competitions in Russia there were cases when I noticed that sometimes some jumps were called URed even during the skate, in real time ("<" sign appeared there during translation against an element in the top part of screen). Are the Russian judges that good or international ones are that bad, I wonder?

 

[lzxnl]

You have to be kidding me if you're trying to call Russian judges better. How many of Scherbakova's lutz edges did they call at nationals? Or Kostornaia's? For quite a while they didn't call Medvedva's too either.

As for URs, I'll take a look a little later.

 

[jenaj]

Actually - they have enough time to do just that. In a short program with only 3 jumping elements they have plenty of time. Especially considering that they usually omit reviewing visually clean jumps and watch only those with bad landings - and among missed URs there were mostly such jumps.
If you watched the video of Moscow novice competition -they did exactly that - "go back and review not EACH jump but each SUSPICIOUS jump multiple times in slow-motion/backwards and forwards" - many times throughout all competition. And the competition went pretty fast considering the big number of participants. That, and if most of 4CC URs I mentioned above were obvious for me even in real time from first glance - how can they be unclear for experienced judges? Moreover, watching many novice and junior local competitions in Russia there were cases when I noticed that sometimes some jumps were called URed even during the skate, in real time ("<" sign appeared there during translation against an element in the top part of screen). Are the Russian judges that good or international ones are that bad, I wonder?

And how many people watch the Moscow novice competition? I don't want figure skating to get any longer and more inscrutable to viewers than it already is. In fact, I would like to see fewer under-rotation calls, not more. Here's my proposal--limit reviews to three jumps in the long problem and one combo or two singles in the short. That would give the technical panels enough time to review the jumps backwards and forwards and upside down like the obsessive fans do.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Actually - they have enough time to do just that. In a short program with only 3 jumping elements they have plenty of time.

They aren't only looking at jumps. Many times they have to review spins and/or steps if there are questions about whether level features were achieved.

 

[Andrea82]

I don't think showing the whole TP deliberations would work during live TV coverages. Especially in no English speaking countries, it is not so appealing for viewers to try to listen to 3 people talking about technicalities in English. TV commentators are not simultaneous professional translators to cover it well.

However, in light of transparency, given that TP is recorded anyway, ISU can put the audio file online after the competition like they do with protocols.