Politics does not just mean nationalism and lobbying, but also skaters being scored on reputation/momentum. Do you honestly believe Joubert would have been 3rd in the SP at 2010 Worlds with that performance if he had instead gone into the competition as Olympic Champion? No, of course he wouldn't have been. He would have been 1st. Skaters will almost always be scored higher/lower based upon factors outside of the performance and the GOE and PCS scores can fluctuate significantly in this manner.
I think you are mixing up concepts. In sports where judging is involved, reputation/momentum is a factor but it almost always is a
subconscious reaction on the part of the person judging, whereas political influence is a deliberate and
conscious decision. Forget about Figure Skating for a second, let's use baseball as an example. X Home Umpire has a certain strike zone. But when a rookie shows up, he seems to call strikes more often than when Derek Jeter shows up, for pitches that are more or less at the same spot. Skating is in a way similar to strike zone, it is quite possible that judges will be more lenient on GOE and PCS when famous skaters show up or make mistakes. There is nothing we can do about this, judges are human and as humans, we can be influenced by emotions and preconceptions. But that's not politics. Politics would involve quid pro quo or undue pressure, as it did at the SLC 2002 Olympic Games.
Regarding Joubert finishing 3rd in the SP at the 2010 Worlds, I think that title is a little bit of red herring. He technically finished 3rd, yes, but the difference was
merely 0.10 separating him and Chan.
2010 Worlds Men SP Results How do you construe such difference as the result of deliberate political manipulation is beyond me. You have to understand that since the adoption of IJS, individual judges have lost the ability to directly rank skaters and in the competition itself, vast majority of them don't know how their scoring will contribute or affect the outcome especially when a competition is very tight as it was there. Considering there was no Canadian judge on the panel, we really have to stretch your conspiracy theory with a lot of IF, even then it's a big stretch. No reasonable person would have bought those arguments because they are akin to witch hunts.
If you want to provide a valid argument against what I am saying, then breakdown the 4 performances I talked about and give your analysis of how Joubert's 2009 SP performance deserved higher PCS than Chan's 2009 performance and how one year later their performances of the same programs had altered such that the reverse was correct. Meanwhile, I'll be sure not to hold my breath.
First of all, I disagreed with the Men SP results at the 2009 Worlds. Secondly, I was there too. But I will address your point regarding differing results between the two years. At the LA Worlds, post-event, there were some concerns about the level of exposure (experience) that some of the judges on the Men's event had. Many of them happened to come from small member federations (due to the random draw process) where their judges had considerably less experience than say a Canadian, French, Russian or Japanese judge. The ISU actually made a point of better train certain aspects regarding PCS such as transitions after that event. If you dig up some of the older ISU communications from that time, you'll recall the Technical Committee for Singles & Pairs continued to express concerns about the way some judges marked transitions, among other aspects of PCS. Then of course, there was the 2010 debacle after what Plushenko said.
Chan at 2009 Worlds, was a relatively unknown to a lot of the lesser experienced judges. Some of the judges have never seen him before - yes they know he just won 4CC but it was vague and abstract to them. On the other hand, Joubert and Lysacek were veterans, both won medals at World before and were at the previous Olympics. You could also ask how come Chan beat Lysacek comfortably at the 4CC SP but a month later, lose to him? Is that proof too of political influence on the part of USFS? No, absolutely not. You'd want to think all the rankings can be fixed with certainty but the reality is there are always unpredictable factors and things you can't control. The point difference between the two were so small that Lysacek could have easily lose it in the FS. Trying to fix the Men's result is about as futile as trying to grow tomatoes in the snow because Men's skating is just too unpredictable, more than any of the other 3 disciplines.
By 2010 Worlds, like it or not, judges were a little more sensitive regarding how to reward Transitions, thanks the events that happened after the 2009 Worlds and before the 2010 Olympics. Remember, Joubert was one of those dragged into the TR debate thanks to Plushenko. Not to mention, the panel was handled by different judges from the 2009 Worlds, so they all have their own "strike zone", preferences and being different persons, they will likely a different verdict as well. Although Chan didn't skate well at the 2010 Olympics, he was no longer an unknown and that means he was no longer a rookie but a vice-World Champion. He may not yet be a Derek Jeter but he was considered like a Robinson Cano, certainly not someone from the farm anymore. Your attempt to compare marks from two different panels across a year, after so much has happened is not a wise decision. I think you really pick the wrong discipline to attempt your conspiracy theory. Better luck next time though.
Wow, I didn't realize Skate Canada has such clout considering there was not even a Canadian judge on that panel.
