2026 Olympics: Free Dance

[withwings]

Kaori Sakamoto have to give lessons/classes to the skaters how not to feel entitled to win when one have not won.

 

[Alfa]

The thing however is that the IJS is not about ordinals. So bringing up that 5 judges placed CB in first and they still lost isn't really the right way to look at it. The current scoring system is not made to look at ordinals but at total points. So, to me, that argument is quite flawed.

Let's take tennis : One could assume that to win a match, the player must win more points than the other player. In most cases, that's what happens. However, it does happen that a player will win more points but still lose the match. Why ? Because, in the end, some points are more important than others. Easy example... With a score of 2-6, 7-6. 7-6, the player winning the two sets wins the game but most likely, the player who won a clear first set may have obtained more points.

In this free dance, some mention ordinals but it just doesn't tell the whole story. The judges who had Chock and Bates first, were less convinced about the victory of the Americans over the French and the gap in their scores was smaller than the judges who thought the French were better, and by a larger margin. The only judge who favoured the French by a small margin was the Canadian judge. The other 3 judges who favoured the French all did with a bigger lead. 3 judges who had the Americans in first had them in first by a very small margin. The other two judges, the American and Chinese judges had a higher gap with their scores... In the end, it wasn't enough.



However, it does raise a question : the upset fans are blaming the French judge. What about the simple fact that there is even a judge out there, the Spanish judge, who didn't even put Chock and Bates in 1st, let alone 2nd place, but put them in 3rd place.

Do you think the Spanish judge cheated then ?

No, the Spanish judge simply thought that Piper and Paul were better and so did I

No, the issue is that Cizeron had a botched twizzle and hiccup on a lift, which was not appropriately deducted, and still won. This is where I don't think there was justice.

 

[Alfa]

Kaori Sakamoto have to give lessons/classes to the skaters how not to feel entitled to win when one have not won.

Can we please stop with this pity? How about you go compete at the Olympics and see what Chock/Bates went through and let's see what a great sportsman you'd be. Enough! People have the right to be disappointed and upset, get over it. It's not a fairy-tale.

 

[4everchan]

No, the issue is that Cizeron had a botched twizzle and hiccup on a lift, which was not appropriately deducted, and still won. This is where I don't think there was justice.

Did you read the score card ?

French twizzles earned : 8.44 points versus 9.54 points for the Americans. So there was a significant deduction here, over 1 point for one element in the free dance. It's a huge gap. Some of you make it sound like Guillaume had the same kind of mistake as Lilah on her twizzles. It's not the case. He lost a feature. They lost some GOE. The reason why they didn't lose more points is because they had great flow and ice coverage on their twizzles until he had to put is foot down at the very very end. It's not as costly as a mistake as one may think it is.

The rotational lift is an interesting case. Here, there are no deductions. It was wonky at the start but got straightened up very quickly. Did the judges have the same camera angle as we did ? They didn't review it... This happens all the time. It's not what I would call cheating because here, all the judges, even the American judge gave the lift huge scores (+4/+5 GOE). So to all the judges, this lift looked fine. The commentator I was listening to didn't mention anything about it and she did mention the twizzles mistake.


I read two things on this thread

1) The French judge cheated

2) A majority of judges had CB in first.

If the French judge cheated, her scores would always be the outliers... On the twizzles, she gave them 3. Only 4 judges had a lower score. She was right in the middle. Some judges even gave the twizzles a 4.

Then, if a majority of judges had CB first... why didn't they all mark that lift down ? It doesn't add up. One cannot have it both ways, accusing judges of cheating so that they overcome the majority of judges and then call elements flawed that all judges marked positively. (the lift)

If that lift were to be marked lower, don't you think that the majority of judges who had Chock and Bates first would have marked it lower ?

3 of the judges who have Chock and Bates first marked that lift a level 5. 2 marked it a level 4. So clearly, there is no logic in the arguments presented when looking at the score card.

 

[MargueriteGaultier]

The thing however is that the IJS is not about ordinals. So bringing up that 5 judges placed CB in first and they still lost isn't really the right way to look at it. The current scoring system is not made to look at ordinals but at total points. So, to me, that argument is quite flawed.

Let's take tennis : One could assume that to win a match, the player must win more points than the other player. In most cases, that's what happens. However, it does happen that a player will win more points but still lose the match. Why ? Because, in the end, some points are more important than others. Easy example... With a score of 2-6, 7-6. 7-6, the player winning the two sets wins the game but most likely, the player who won a clear first set may have obtained more points.

In this free dance, some mention ordinals but it just doesn't tell the whole story. The judges who had Chock and Bates first, were less convinced about the victory of the Americans over the French and the gap in their scores was smaller than the judges who thought the French were better, and by a larger margin. The only judge who favoured the French by a small margin was the Canadian judge. The other 3 judges who favoured the French all did with a bigger lead. 3 judges who had the Americans in first had them in first by a very small margin. The other two judges, the American and Chinese judges had a higher gap with their scores... In the end, it wasn't enough.



However, it does raise a question : the upset fans are blaming the French judge. What about the simple fact that there is even a judge out there, the Spanish judge, who didn't even put Chock and Bates in 1st, let alone 2nd place, but put them in 3rd place.

Do you think the Spanish judge cheated then ?

No, the Spanish judge simply thought that Piper and Paul were better and so did I

That Spanish judge is not being funded by IAM!

 

[MargueriteGaultier]

Did you read the score card ?

French twizzles earned : 8.44 points versus 9.54 points for the Americans. So there was a significant deduction here, over 1 point for one element in the free dance. It's a huge gap. Some of you make it sound like Guillaume had the same kind of mistake as Lilah on her twizzles. It's not the case. He lost a feature. They lost some GOE. The reason why they didn't lose more points is because they had great flow and ice coverage on their twizzles until he had to put is foot down at the very very end. It's not as costly as a mistake as one may think it is.

The rotational lift is an interesting case. Here, there are no deductions. It was wonky at the start but got straightened up very quickly. Did the judges have the same camera angle as we did ? They didn't review it... This happens all the time. It's not what I would call cheating because here, all the judges, even the American judge gave the lift huge scores (+4/+5 GOE). So to all the judges, this lift looked fine. The commentator I was listening to didn't mention anything about it and she did mention the twizzles mistake.


I read two things on this thread

1) The French judge cheated

2) A majority of judges had CB in first.

If the French judge cheated, her scores would always be the outliers... On the twizzles, she gave them 3. Only 4 judges had a lower score. She was right in the middle. Some judges even gave the twizzles a 4.

Then, if a majority of judges had CB first... why didn't they all mark that lift down ? It doesn't add up. One cannot have it both ways, accusing judges of cheating so that they overcome the majority of judges and then call elements flawed that all judges marked positively. (the lift)

If that lift were to be marked lower, don't you think that the majority of judges who had Chock and Bates first would have marked it lower ?

3 of the judges who have Chock and Bates first marked that lift a level 5. 2 marked it a level 4. So clearly, there is no logic in the arguments presented when looking at the score card.

This is a great analysis. Also, the highest and lowest scores for a programme are discounted, so the French judge didn't even have any say!

 

[DancingCactus]

To me the biggest issue this quad has not been dodgy scoring based on nationalism, but based on IAM skaters being pushed up at the expensene of non IAM skaters.

In the case of this performance it's weird to me that on aggregate the judges didn't punish the various mistakes in FBC's program as hard as they usually would some others. Just my personal conspiracy theory, but there seems to have even a certain willingness to score them very well despite their mistakes.

And yes, I do think C/B did not skate that well, but they were clean.

 

[flakyy]

https://x.com/LevAkabas/status/2022002377449234554/photo/1 (13.2.26; 11:38)
This is not the whole story as you have to examine every component and every element, but it's telling. The difference between FB/C and C/B constructed by the US judge was far more accurate than that by the the French judge - given whgat was put on the ice on that very evening; and it would be really interesting to ask J9 (Czech) why so very stellar marks were handed out ... because of that some of the French marks stood, and French judge was the only one to give out a mark below 130. Every other judge had both couples above 130. So there happened two outlier things at once to the disadvantage of C/B ... and that feels weird. Cizeron's approach to skating is not my taste but there was never a doubt that he was outstanding with his former partner. I rarely watched him because of the sameness of his programs, his reluctance to at least show that he can do spectacular lifts and his tendency to ignore RD themes and do what he pleases even there. It's also showing in his new partnership. FB is not Papadakis, brings in new aspects - but he just carries on and makes her adapt to his style; as a result they look more like two skaters than as a couple and that might well stay to a certain degree even with more time and is not just a thing of being together for a short period of time. Wednesday eveing he was not at his best while C/B did a very good skate. Not a stellar skate, but they were better.

 

[chepe]

Did you read the score card ?

French twizzles earned : 8.44 points versus 9.54 points for the Americans. So there was a significant deduction here, over 1 point for one element in the free dance. It's a huge gap. Some of you make it sound like Guillaume had the same kind of mistake as Lilah on her twizzles. It's not the case. He lost a feature. They lost some GOE. The reason why they didn't lose more points is because they had great flow and ice coverage on their twizzles until he had to put is foot down at the very very end. It's not as costly as a mistake as one may think it is.

Yeah, they lost effectively 1 point, pretty large penalty in a race where they were less than half a point lead after RD, and top pairs had same level of technical content. The mistake was not anywhere same level as Lilah's error, I barely noticed that something was off, whereas Lilah nearly fell.

Whether they were overscored in other respects, IDK.

The rotational lift is an interesting case. Here, there are no deductions. It was wonky at the start but got straightened up very quickly. Did the judges have the same camera angle as we did ? They didn't review it... This happens all the time. It's not what I would call cheating because here, all the judges, even the American judge gave the lift huge scores (+4/+5 GOE). So to all the judges, this lift looked fine. The commentator I was listening to didn't mention anything about it and she did mention the twizzles mistake.

I think this is complete red herring, none of the judges saw anything out of ordinary. On repeated watches I kinda see something, but not some huge errors some folks are claiming.

 

[NewLook]

You've confused the team event, where it's the placements that count, with the individual events where it's the total scores that decide the outcome.

No, I haven't. I know very well the difference between team and individual events. It's you failed to get the point I am making here- CoP is wrong. It allows the minority to beat majority by manipulating the score. In what other sport it happens? None. It never happened in FS either, that skaters with 5 first places didn't win. Now it happened and it will happen again.

 

[icetug]

No, I haven't. I know very well the difference between team and individual events. It's you failed to get the point I am making here- CoP is wrong. It allows the minority to beat majority by manipulating the score. In what other sport it happens? None. It never happened in FS either, that skaters with 5 first places didn't win. Now it happened and it will happen again.

Actually at last GPF C/B won RD having 4 first places and 5 second. At Kinoshita Cup 2025 Z/K were 2nd, with 4 first places and 3 second (there were 7 judges) while L/leG won, placed by judges 3 times first, 3 times second and once third. I don't have time to check more competitions, but "it never happened in FS" is just our wishful thinking...

 

[Demandred]

No, I haven't. I know very well the difference between team and individual events. It's you failed to get the point I am making here- CoP is wrong. It allows the minority to beat majority by manipulating the score. In what other sport it happens? None.

There are other sports this can happen. Artistic gymnastics, for example.

 

[xabia]

Wasn't there a petition to overturn the results of Sochi 2014 when Yuna Kim wuzrobbed ?

Yes, and what became of that? You can’t change the result unless there’s irrefutable evidence of corruption as at the 2002 pairs.

 

[museksk8r]

I believe the results of this event bring to light the flaws that are evident in the current iteration of the IJS. There’s a huge problem when not just experts and longtime fans of the sport don’t understand the scores and outcome, but also the Everyman/woman watching in the audience and from home clearly see errors from the winning performance and question why that beat clean performances. It’s not like an Ilia Malinin issue either where he has such an enormous technical advantage in base value, that it makes sense in the points and math why he wins with an error. In ice dance, the top basically all have the same base value and perform the same elements, so one would believe a mistake(s) should be much more costly. I think the ISU has over complicated their criteria on how to award GOE and PCS. So much of the language in the rules is repetitive and/or asinine. I think they need to eliminate the wide variance from -5 to +5 and go back to a -3 to +3. So many of the teams/skaters receive +5 when they should receive +3 instead as it is. A simplification of the GOE and PCS criteria is needed. As it is currently written, it gives too much freedom for judges who want to cheat to pile on meaningless excess points to boost their favorites and alternatively lowball their favorites’ biggest competitors. The choreo sequences as technical elements also need to be eliminated because programs should have choreography in them as part of the PCS criteria and as a technical element, it’s never judged consistently and due to its subjectivity, it just opens more room for cheaters to cheat.

 

[freedomlover]

I believe the results of this event bring to light the flaws that are evident in the current iteration of the IJS. There’s a huge problem when not just experts and longtime fans of the sport don’t understand the scores and outcome, but also the Everyman/woman watching in the audience and from home clearly see errors from the winning performance and question why that beat clean performances. It’s not like an Ilia Malinin issue either where he has such a technical advantage in base value, that it makes sense in the points and math why he wins with an error. In ice dance, the top basically all have the same base value and perform the same elements, so one would believe a mistake(s) should be much more costly. I think the ISU has over complicated their criteria on how to award GOE and PCS. So much of the language in the rules is repetitive and/or asinine. I think they need to eliminate the wide variance from -5 to +5 and go back to a -3 to +3. So many of the teams/skaters receive +5 when they should receive +3 instead as it is. A simplification of the GOE and PCS criteria is needed. As it is currently written, it gives too much freedom for judges who want to cheat to pile on meaningless excess points to boost their favorites and alternatively lowball their favorites’ biggest competitors. The choreo sequences as technical elements also need to be eliminated because programs should have choreography in them as part of the PCS criteria and as a technical element, it’s never judged consistently and due to its subjectivity, it just opens more room for cheaters to cheat.

Ding ding ding! Apart from mutiple standouts of wrong judging in the -3 +3 era, it wasn't as egregious as this.

What was the ISU's reasoning for going to -5 to +5 back then? I heard some things, but I effectively started looking at scoring closely in 2021. Anyone know what was up during the congress it was decided on?

 

[Demandred]

The +5 and -5 GOE range is fine in theory, the problem is that judges often apply it quite arbitrarily, especially in ice dance and especially on choreo elements. If you are not a Top 5 team in the world ranking, you almost never get +5 on choreo elements while the top two or three teams get +5s as a matter of course.

 

[Magill]

The +5 and -5 GOE range is fine in theory, the problem is that judges often apply it quite arbitrarily, especially in ice dance and especially on choreo elements. If you are not a Top 5 team in the world ranking, you almost never get +5 on choreo elements while the top two or three teams get +5s as a matter of course.

No, it is not fine even in theory. It gives much more power to subjectivity and/or manipulating the scores. -3/+3 scale is much more intuitive as such than -5/+5, and the latter leaves much more space for random or completely subjective assignment oof points.

 

[chepe]

No, I haven't. I know very well the difference between team and individual events. It's you failed to get the point I am making here- CoP is wrong. It allows the minority to beat majority by manipulating the score. In what other sport it happens? None.

From just winter sports? Lets see, ski jumping, snowboarding, freestyle skiing...

Now having reacquinted myself with snowboarding and freestyle, the problems in scoring in those sports are far more acute. There are only few tricks which are worth doing points-wise, and judging is completely opaque, athletes don't get any kind of feedback why they get the scores they get. Finnish freestyle who missed the finals was extremely bitter post-race, he did all the same tricks as the leaders but inexplicaply got much lower scores. He was crying through it.

But he was not an American star who missed a gold medal, so nobody cares...

 

[Paulipau]

I watched the skating session and got educated a bit about how the scoring works, i recommend it to everyone who is still WUZROBBING and being emotional about it

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

 

[museksk8r]

I watched the skating session and got educated a bit about how the scoring works, i recommend it to everyone who is still WUZROBBING and being emotional about it

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

I love the Skating Session’s channel and they provide a wonderful service for everyone who is drawn to the figure skating world. I think they are fair in their critical assessments. When judging the FD at this Olympics, they explained how they usually believe FB/C at their best are the better team over C/B; however, they believe that as the performances were skated on Wednesday that C/B should have beat FB/C. When they reviewed all the judging criteria as it is currently written and assessed their own scoring accordingly, even their judging resulted in FB/C beating C/B and they really did not like that result. They both believe the cleaner performance of C/B should have won, but explained the problems with the current IJS. This is also where I stand; I fully believe had FB/C recreated their Europeans FD here at the Olympics, their victory would/should not be questioned. As it stands, it’s a really hard pill to swallow that a gold medal skate with 4 noticeable errors (his twizzle fall out, his error on the rotational lift, both of their twizzle errors in the serpentine step) came out on top, even given what beautiful basic skating FB/C have. I would be curious to hear their assessment of G/P too and how they would have stacked up against FB/C and C/B in their scoring.