Two Olympic Judges suspended by ISU

[gkelly]

Another way of looking at it:

The idea has sometimes been floated to have a separate panel of judges evaluating program components only. Some fans have even suggested bringing in arts experts who may have no more technical skating knowledge than the casual fan, but more performing arts knowledge than the average judge, to score PE, CO, and IN. Their expertise is musical phrasing, visual composition, body line, etc., but they may not be able to tell a double from a triple axel, let alone a toe loop from a flip or a three turn from a rocker.

Suppose such a PCS-only judging panel existed. And suppose that all of these experts score Jim higher on components than Chuck. But Chuck wins anyway because of better technical content.

Does it make sense to say that these artistic/component judges ranked Chuck ahead of Jim, even if every single one of them thought Jim was more artistic and gave higher scores to Jim?

Wouldn't it make more sense to say that "the panel" or "the panels" (meaning tech panel plus tech judges if there's a separate group scoring GOEs and SS/TR, plus referee) ranked Chuck higher? But if asked how the artistic panel specifically ranked these two skaters, you'd have to say they scored Jim higher.

Of course real judges in the current officials setup know a lot more about what they're seeing in terms of technical content and are also responsible for scoring the technical quality. But they're still only responsible for a piece of the total score. So if we must talk about how individual judges "rank" skaters, we can really only talk about the scores they actually award.

 

[narcissa]

She had no effect on the base value. The base value isn't even known until the skater has skated and the technical panel has ruled. It is stretching to say a judge "placed" a skater higher if the base value is included.

The score she gave places Skater A above Skater B.

Does it make sense to say that these artistic/component judges ranked Chuck ahead of Jim, even if every single one of them thought Jim was more artistic and gave higher scores to Jim?

It makes sense to say that the artistic/components judge ranked Jim ahead of Chuck in components.

However, in the real world, judges judge both TES and components.

Yes, they don't have a say in the tech calls (i.e. URs, levels, etc.) so if there were uncalled technical errors, that is not their fault. Assuming the tech panel did its job, though, the judges have control over everything else. Exorbitantly high GOE and PCS leading to an inflated final score is on them.

 

[gkelly]

According to this thread, ISU seems to disagree with you. Judges were suspended because their scores deviated too much compared to other judges.

Yes, based on the GOEs and program component scores they gave, compared to the rest of the panel. NOT based on how their scores combined with base values to rank the skaters.

I'm not saying anything about who should or shouldn't have been singled out for investigation. Just that any such singling out should be based on what the judges actually did, not on some artifact based on what they actually did plus what someone else did that they had no control over.

Using language that ascribes intention and control over those parts of the scoring they had nothing to do with obscures where the real problems might be rather than clarifying.

 

[narcissa]

Using language that ascribes intention and control over those parts of the scoring they had nothing to do with obscures where the real problems might be rather than clarifying.

And arguing that fault cannot be assigned because no one has executive control over anything is an easy way to deflect any judgment.

 

[gkelly]

However, in the real world, judges judge both TES and components.

Yes, and in the real world a judge can score skater A ahead of skater B on both TES and components and still have that scoring advantage add up to less than B's advantage on everything else.

And arguing that fault cannot be assigned because no one has executive control over anything is an easy way to deflect any judgment.

That's not what I'm arguing.

I'm saying focus on what the judge actually did. If there is fault because the judges' GOEs and PCS were too high or too low compared to the rest of the panel and compared to what the OAC officials believe could be justified, then flag and investigate, and punish if the investigation yields no good explanation, based on those too-high or too-low scores that the judge actually awarded.

 

[Eclair]

Yes, based on the GOEs and program component scores they gave, compared to the rest of the panel. NOT based on how their scores combined with base values to rank the skaters.

I'm not saying anything about who should or shouldn't have been singled out for investigation. Just that any such singling out should be based on what the judges actually did, not on some artifact based on what they actually did plus what someone else did that they had no control over.

Using language that ascribes intention and control over those parts of the scoring they had nothing to do with obscures where the real problems might be rather than clarifying.

no, Huang stayed within the corridor on GOE and PCS. His end scores deviated too much if there is any reason at all. So with that logic, Parker should have gotten investigated, too.

 

[jenaj]

The score she gave places Skater A above Skater B.



It makes sense to say that the artistic/components judge ranked Jim ahead of Chuck in components.

However, in the real world, judges judge both TES and components.

Yes, they don't have a say in the tech calls (i.e. URs, levels, etc.) so if there were uncalled technical errors, that is not their fault. Assuming the tech panel did its job, though, the judges have control over everything else. Exorbitantly high GOE and PCS leading to an inflated final score is on them.

To "place" is an intentional act. If the base value is out of a judge's control, she cannot place a skater based on her scores plus the base value.

 

[Eclair]

To "place" is an intentional act. If the base value is out of a judge's control, she cannot place a skater based on her scores plus the base value.

no 'place' is not an intentional act. Or otherwise nobody could place 23rd in a competition, as no-one can foresee that they will place 23rd.

it's totally legitimate to say, that Parker placed Vincent above Hanyu.

it may not have been intentional to place Hanyu behind Vincent, but it was definitely intentional to underscore Hanyu and over score Vincent (as posters have said before, the probability of her score being a coincidence is veeerry low). The result - Vincent above Hanyu is just the consequence.

And last time I checked, over scoring und underscoring based on nationality is officially still not allowed.

 

[ribbit]

To "place" is an intentional act. If the base value is out of a judge's control, she cannot place a skater based on her scores plus the base value.

no 'place' is not an intentional act. Or otherwise nobody could place 23rd in a competition, as no-one can foresee that they will place 23rd.

It depends on whether "place" is being used as a transitive verb (one that takes an object) or an intransitive verb (one that doesn't take an object). "One judge placed the skater 23rd" describes an agent's action: someone (the judge) is putting or locating something somewhere. On the other hand, "The skater placed 23rd" tells you about a state or an outcome, not the action of an agent who determined the placement. The first case generally implies intention, while the second doesn't.

When we talk about judges placing a skater in first, or third, or 23rd, we're talking about their actions, about the results of their choices. To me, it makes sense to use that verb to describe the part of the scoring that is in their control, and to find other language to describe the (possibly unintentional) outcome of combining the GOE and PCS they do control with the BV they don't. And then we can stop arguing about grammar and go back to arguing about judging.

 

[Andrea82]

Huang on February 24th:

So honored in the Pyeongchang OWG , Really Amazing Experience ! Thanks everyone for everything , See you in 2022 Beijing OWG !

https://www.facebook.com/feng.huang...haa7helbnvczQvWGHWJnS38uAlxAXveHPnVkU&fref=nf

That was around one week after the Pairs event and one week before the suspension

Interesting going through the list of "likes" for that post. I see some familiar names: the referee of the Pairs event, the Technical Controller, one of the Technical Specialists, one member of the Assessement Commission, two judges from the Pairs panel, some other judges.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

no 'place' is not an intentional act. Or otherwise nobody could place 23rd in a competition, as no-one can foresee that they will place 23rd.

it's totally legitimate to say, that Parker placed Vincent above Hanyu.

it may not have been intentional to place Hanyu behind Vincent, but it was definitely intentional to underscore Hanyu and over score Vincent (as posters have said before, the probability of her score being a coincidence is veeerry low). The result - Vincent above Hanyu is just the consequence.

And last time I checked, over scoring und underscoring based on nationality is officially still not allowed.

Judges arent (nor can) placing skaters. That is the fundamental difference beetween this and 6.0. system. Judges judging skaters in accordance to scales defined through GOE and PCS (by comparing skaters with numbers on those scales). ISU's mathematical system is the one who make the final placement based on those judges marks... However, judges can overscore and underscore skaters in GOE and PCS, but just in relation to the other judges.

 

[Eclair]

Judges arent (nor can) placing skaters. That is the fundamental difference beetween this and 6.0. system. Judges judging skaters in accordance to scales defined through GOE and PCS (by comparing skaters with numbers on those scales). ISU's mathematical system is the one who make the final placement based on those judges marks... However, judges can overscore and underscore skaters in GOE and PCS, but just in relation to the other judges.

once you give scores, you are placing skaters. But if you all insists, then let's use another word for it:

Parkers score added up in a way that Vincent placed above Yuzuru. This occurred, because Parker overscored Vincent and underscored Hanyu about 10 points compared to the other judges.

Parker still displayed national bias.

 

[Andrea82]

Last week at ISU seminar in Frankfurt, Feng passed the exam to be promoted from International to ISU Technical Controller

More from Hersh on the situation
http://www.globetrottingbyphilipher...aying-unacceptable-game-of-ethical-relativism

 

[cruzceleste]

Last week at ISU seminar in Frankfurt, Feng passed the exam to be promoted from International to ISU Technical Controller

More from Hersh on the situation
http://www.globetrottingbyphilipher...aying-unacceptable-game-of-ethical-relativism

In a new episode of ISU has no logic in it´s bones...

 

[xeyra]

 

[chopinskate]

Ah, why not. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ It's not like Parker was suspended.

 

[kenboy123]

I haven't read through all 21 pages, but what defines "bad judging" in people's eyes...i'm honestly not sure, is it because the opinions are unpopular????...your favorites don't get the scores they "deserve"???...or what???...i'm actually not sure...these judges were obvious, so they got caught...but what actually defines "bad judging"?...could it be simply that people from certain countries prefer their own skaters less on preference of the skater/s itself (or nationality) and more because people from certain countries like their own style of skating????....i don't know...just a thought...

 

[BillNeal]

I haven't read through all 21 pages, but what defines "bad judging" in people's eyes...i'm honestly not sure, is it because the opinions are unpopular????...your favorites don't get the scores they "deserve"???...or what???...i'm actually not sure...these judges were obvious, so they got caught...but what actually defines "bad judging"?...could it be simply that people from certain countries prefer their own skaters less on preference of the skater/s itself (or nationality) and more because people from certain countries like their own style of skating????....i don't know...just a thought...

For your reading pleasure: https://www.goldenskate.com/forum/showthread.php?73898-The-Good-Judging-Judging-Theory-Thread