The Judging Controversy Thread

[drivingmissdaisy]

Again back to a discussion for the discussion's sake. Unless you have "compelling counter-evidence," your refutation on the number of judges goes just as weak and brittle.

Statistically it is likely 7 and extremely unlikely to be less than 6. I do not think you could arrange the marks so that 4 favored Yuna but I haven't tried.

Edit: Here's the scores in ascending order from someone who posted early in the thread. Column 1 is Yuna, 2 is Adelina:

134.09 141.83
140.39 143.13
143.09 145.33
144.09 145.63
144.69 151.13
144.79 151.53
145.79 153.93
149.49 154.03
151.79 155.73

Adelina has 7 scores over 145, Yuna has 3.

 

[tetana]

No, but again, do you honestly believe only TWO judges marked the programs for who they believe deserved to win?

Please, don't cloud the issues. THOSE TWO JUDGES(or three) are the symbols of corruption in Russia. Number doesn't mean anything. Even if there was less number of judges relating this happening, it is still corruption.

 

[bek41]

Yuna was crying after the competition...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxPp5n4irkA

 

[kslr0816]

Statistically it is likely 7 and extremely unlikely to be less than 6. I do not think you could arrange the marks so that 4 favored Yuna but I haven't tried.

Edit: Here's the scores in ascending order from someone who posted early in the thread. Column 1 is Yuna, 2 is Adelina:

134.09 141.83
140.39 143.13
143.09 145.33
144.09 145.63
144.69 151.13
144.79 151.53
145.79 153.93
149.49 154.03
151.79 155.73

again, you are trying to use the weakness in* the conspiracy theory to undermine the biased scoring/attempt to legitimize adelina's - isn't there a word for what you're doing, mr. attorney? lol

 

[kslr0816]

Statistically it is likely 7 and extremely unlikely to be less than 6. I do not think you could arrange the marks so that 4 favored Yuna but I haven't tried.

Edit: Here's the scores in ascending order from someone who posted early in the thread. Column 1 is Yuna, 2 is Adelina:

134.09 141.83
140.39 143.13
143.09 145.33
144.09 145.63
144.69 151.13
144.79 151.53
145.79 153.93
149.49 154.03
151.79 155.73

Adelina has 7 scores over 145, Yuna has 3.

right. clearly the scores were biased. you have no way of legitimizing these scores. that's why you choose not to respond to detailed analyses from certain posts on here, and instead choose to prey on the weaker arguments. your attorney background shows, but it's a laugh. what proof do you have that these scores are justified, other than "they are what were given"

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

again, you are trying to use the weakness in* the conspiracy theory to undermine the biased scoring/attempt to legitimize adelina's - isn't there a word for what you're doing, mr. attorney? lol

I'm only addressing the conspiracy here. The general consensus doesn't agree with you that there wasn't a conspiracy just bad judging. Most think there was cheating. The topic of this thread is judging conspiracy.

 

[kslr0816]

I'm only addressing the conspiracy here.

ah - then i agree with you. the possibility of several judges being bought off seems small - and there is no evidence suggesting that more than 2 judges + 1 tech guy had any "conspiracy" type of agreement relationship in question or conflict of interest, more like.

 

[sk8in]

No, but again, do you honestly believe only TWO judges marked the programs for who they believe deserved to win?

The conflicts of interest in the judging panel were unacceptable whether or not there was a conscious/deliberate conspiracy.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

The conflicts of interest in the judging panel were unacceptable whether or not there was a conscious/deliberate conspiracy.

As long as countries have skaters in the event there will always be such conflicts. Many here believe USA and RUS traded votes. Should we ban USA too?

 

[starrynight]

Statistically it is likely 7 and extremely unlikely to be less than 6. I do not think you could arrange the marks so that 4 favored Yuna but I haven't tried.

Edit: Here's the scores in ascending order from someone who posted early in the thread. Column 1 is Yuna, 2 is Adelina:

134.09 141.83
140.39 143.13
143.09 145.33
144.09 145.63
144.69 151.13
144.79 151.53
145.79 153.93
149.49 154.03
151.79 155.73

Adelina has 7 scores over 145, Yuna has 3.

I remember this chart and your comment on it. It is you who said it did not prove anything.

 

[kslr0816]

I'm only addressing the conspiracy here. The general consensus doesn't agree with you that there wasn't a conspiracy just bad judging. Most think there was cheating. The topic of this thread is judging conspiracy.

well i'd like to make a 'were adelina's scores justified' thread but obviously it would just get merged into here, and here is where the good data breakdowns are as far as quality of the performances etc.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

I remember this chart and your comment on it. It is you who said it did not prove anything.

The person who posted it did not understand the judges were in random order. However, those are the judges' scores in random order. I don't know how you allege cheating without considering how the judges actually scored the programs.

 

[sk8in]

As long as countries have skaters in the event there will always be such conflicts. Many here believe USA and RUS traded votes. Should we ban USA too?

Judges should not be allowed to have relationships with skaters. They shouldn't even speak to one another. Any instance of this should instantly disqualify a judge. The hug between Adelina and the judge was not out of national pride. They obviously knew each other. Also, every panel should be balanced with representatives from different countries. I would also say that Russian satellite nations should not get to judge on the same panel as the Russian judges.

 

[usethis2]

Yuna was crying after the competition...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxPp5n4irkA

As atrocious as the judging was, I wish the reporters had left her alone. Freaking Korean papparazzis. That clip reminds me of Mao in 2010.

 

[kslr0816]

Judges should not be allowed to have relationships with skaters. They shouldn't even speak to one another. Any instance of this should instantly disqualify a judge. Also, every panel should be balanced with representatives from different countries. I would also say that Russian satellite nations should not get to judge on the same panel as the Russian judges.

isn't it the tech caller who was adelina's previous coach?

 

[sk8in]

My understanding is that the tech caller or specialist is actually the Vice President of the Russian Skating Federation---which is complete ********. It means the same organisation that was training Adelina to do a flutz without correction, was also in charge of upholding these technical standards in competition.

 

[starrynight]

The person who posted it did not understand the judges were in random order. However, those are the judges' scores in random order.

The chart shows there are always four judges consistently favoring Adelina by a great margin under all combinations.

 

[usethis2]

My understanding is that the tech caller or specialist is actually the Vice President of the Russian Skating Federation---which is complete ********. It means the same organisation that was training Adelina to do a flutz without correction, was also in charge of upholding these technical standards in competition.

You know, among the deniers in this board, there seem to be educators who teach young children how to skate. (flutz, fine! UR, fine!) It's a sickening and scary thought. I would watch out if I had a kid learning figure skating.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

The chart shows there are always four judges consistently favoring Adelina by a great margin under all combinations.

I'd say it's likely all the 151+ Adelina scores she won, as I doubt a judge would score both Yuna and Adelina within a point at 151. Adelina's two 145 scores are higher than 6 of Yuna's scores, so she probably won at least one of those. The two judges that absolutely hated Adelina, 141 and 143, probably preferred Yuna.

 

[port79]

No, but again, do you honestly believe only TWO judges marked the programs for who they believe deserved to win?

What do you think about this theory that the user (Andy) from ISU forum came up with--under COP, unlike 6.0 system, 2 judges are enough to severely impact the outcomes of any event?

http://forums.isu.org/viewtopic.php?t=2084&start=200&sid=12e78a6ef9cd39efab7a1e33f703b26a

Thanks.. here the copy of my post, meant as a reply/addendum to what had been said about the COP analysis of the Ladies free, post is the same, bar some minor spelling corrections.

Thanks for the interesting analysis. I can add some more points of discusson to it. According to rule 1631, the performance of the judges is evaluated as follows:

1) for the TES, the average scoring is calculated per element, as graded by each of the nine judges as follows.
Let's say that element A is scored for its GOE +3, +2, +2, +1, 0, 0, -2, 0, +2. The average is then (3+2+2+1+0+0-2+0+2)/9=0.89

Subsequently the score of each judge is compared to this average, so the first judge would be +2.11 above average for element A.

For each judge each element is evaluated as above, then the positive differences and the negative differences are subtracted. Let's say that judge number one scored the seven elements of a short program with the following biases from the averages: +2.11, -0.11, -1.50, +0.20, +0.00, -1.20, +1.00.
The positive differences are +2.11+0.20+0.00+1.00=+3.31
The negative differences are -0.11-1.20=-1.31

So the total bias for judge nr 1 is 3.31-(-1.31)=4.62

The acceptable limit for the TES is one point per element, meaning that in a short program any score within 7.0 GOE point from average will not be scrutinized. Note at this point that I jotted down random numbers, including a royal 2.11 difference. Note also that in a singles FP the number of elements goes up to 12 for ladies and more for men. Allowed difference is then 12. We can fit and elephant in this difference, and no further action would be taken towards the judge marking this way.

2) The story is even better for PCS. For every PCS a cumulative corridor of 7.5 points is allowed (1.5 point per PCS, but only considering the TOTAL bias). Averages are calculated as above of course, with a small variation.
In this case the positive and negative differences are added to each other, so our judge number one marking the 5 PCS with the following differences: +1.5, +2.0, -2.5, -0.25, -0.10, would score a total bias of +1.5+2.0-2.5-0.25-0.10=0.65

Again in this case no question would be asked...
Too bad though that a difference of 7.5 points from average translate in a fat 15 points allowed more or less in a men's FS - and that is just for the PCS.

3) Let's see now how two judges can start influencing the review process. Let's take an absurd example. Skater A receives for SS the following marks: 7,7,7,7,7,7,7,7,9

Anybody would question the 9... well, the average mark is 7.22, so the bias is +1.78. Just out of the 1.5 limit.

Now let's say that two judges have a similar idea on how to score the same skater A. SS is now: 7,7,7,7,7,7,7,9,9. Again, I think anybody would jump on the two 9's. The average is 7.44, the bias for each judge is 1.56.
Now it is enough the following: 7.25,7,7.25,7,7.25,7,7.25,9,9 and we are set: average is 7.55, bias for the two judges is... 1.45. Perfectly acceptable. This translates into a 2.9 point more (men's FS), more that enough to accomodate one gold medal.

I think now it is easy to combine points 1-2-3 to draw some conclusions on how it would take 2 judges to severely impact the outcomes of any event, without any consequences.

As a final remark, maybe it is worth noticing that in the 6.0 system a minimum of 5 judges were needed for the placement of a skater in a certain position. Under CoP, 2 judges are enough.
_________________
Andy

This doesn't even factor into all the calls made by the possibly biased tech panel.