I totally agree.. The judges didn't think Caro, Mao, or Yuna to skate that well and clean.. especially Yuna going last, after seeing the score they gave Adelina. Adelina was given such a high score on purpose. It secured her win by trying to intimidate Yuna so she would feel the pressure and crumble or even if she skated clean, there was no way Yuna would have beaten that score.
The Judging Controversy Thread
- Thread starter Andre Smith
- Start date
that's exactly what I thought!
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
Here's the thing about what Boitano said about Ashley--Ashley's scores were fair. I agree. But Lipnitskaia's scores were not. And that may have been Ashley's point.
And I find it interesting that many here are saying the athletes need to speak out, but when one did, it is viewed as nothing but sour grapes. These athletes cannot win when it comes to that.
Anonymous judging needs to end. The power of the tech caller needs changed--I don't know how you do that. But the stat someone collected about Adelina's edge calls proves there is a problem when that decision is in one person's hands. Perhaps there should be two or three assigned at major events like Worlds/Olympics/GPF and when a Russian skater is performing, a Russian tech caller takes a break. I realize that may not be practical at every event, but surely the ISU could manage it at the big events.
Also, could the coaches have a review session at the end of each group? I coached competitive forensics and drama. At major events, the coaches had a review session with the event coordinator and one judge where we got to look at scores before awards were announced. We had that opportunity primarily to make sure everyone understood any tiebreakers, etc... We were also able to see our students' score sheets before results were announced at most events. In just one example, I was able to appeal an incorrect disqualification before it became effective and kept my students out of finals.
I also think scoring needs some serious adjustments. Why have we come to see full rotations landed with a butt on the ice as a lesser mistake than a minor under rotation or a two footed landing? Sorry, it is a bigger mistake to fall.
Thanks again, gkelly. I'm glad you find this interesting.
True, but do they really have a value today? Thus far, it looks like this part only fuels the controversy rather than helps development of figure skating.
Sensors can detect timing, i.e., if the movement goes synchronically with the music. They only can’t tell if the picture is pleasant to human eye and if it gives us emotions. The first mainly depends on choreography. The second can’t be judged objectively no matter. That’s why I thought about judging routines in general and giving them “yes” or “no” and not points. Choreography either is nice or is not.
Unless they’re judged severely before even admitted to international competition! Today, there is the rule of minimal technical points. Why not a rule of artistic quality instead?
I think my subconscious got it right and it would be rather exciting to watch the points getting collected. That’s what sports are about. However, would it be the same audience that adores figure skating today? That’s a good question.
Why not feasible? There are probably millions of students but they all pass exams in their schools according their level. I don’t see any problem if the skaters do their artistic exams according their level with the judges they have locally and then for the next level with international judges. How many world class skaters we have, really?
There, I rather meant emotional and aesthetic integrity with the plan than technical changes. Machine can to the later. However, if often happens that skaters lose their spirit after a mistake and skate the less of program uninspired. That might be given deductions by aesthetic judge; also deductions might be given for other other things, like, wardrobe malfunctions.
They should work on the artistic level in general not giving particular pluses for actual day performance.
I totally agree. Likewise, Yu-Na and Carolina were not unfairly judged. However, Adelina was unfairly held up, therefore changing the order. The judges were overly generous with their scores for only selected some. That was Ashley's points.
Now, I'm really concerned about Ashely's future. I admire her being so open and honest, but at the same time, I wish she kept quiet and let the retired skaters or coaches do talking. I'm afraid that she may get penalty points from the judges in the future for being openly critical of the mighty judges.
Oh, I think some is nicer than others -- it's a matter of degree, not just yes or no.
And that's what makes it subjective. But also what makes it fascinating to me.
I'll address some other points later when I'm not at work.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2011
Gracie Gold says she needs to become a better skater so she can beat other skaters who get "help" by crooked judges:
http://www.usatoday.com/media/cinematic/video/5738659/
http://www.usatoday.com/media/cinematic/video/5738659/
Yes, this thought was at my backmind. But Yuna didn't crumble and delivered a beautiful program. So the judges just shamelessly robbed Yuna.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I am sure that the technology already exists for sensors in the boots that can measure such things as under-rotations, which I think is the main thing that needs to be made more uniform and precise. (I also think that if actual rotations in the air were measured with scientific precision then fans would be surprised to learn how short of rotation virtually all jumps are, counting pre-rotation on the ice and under-rotation on the landing.) Why this isn't done now is because there isn't any money in it for some engineering firm to undertake the task.
For the "second mark," though, I think it is a question of quantity versus quality. Quantity is measured; quality is judged. I would not want to see human judges replaced by machines, nor human skaters replaced by robots. For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
For the "second mark," though, I think it is a question of quantity versus quality. Quantity is measured; quality is judged. I would not want to see human judges replaced by machines, nor human skaters replaced by robots. For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
Very diplomatic. But I'm glad that she said it.
Good for her! But also sad for that some skaters have to work extra.
Me too. I hope Gracie will light out at 2014 Worlds and be a World Champion.
but I will be glad too if Mao will be World Champion in her last Worlds.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2011
I think Gracie is just trying to make the best of a situation where she knows she is swimming upstream. She knows there is lack of ethics in judging, but what can you do? Nothing. It is up to the rest of us, who aren't forced to be diplomatic, to speak up for the skaters, push back and make our voices heard on behalf of the athletes.
What about yes or no for the degree?
For the "second mark," though, I think it is a question of quantity versus quality. Quantity is measured; quality is judged. I would not want to see human judges replaced by machines, nor human skaters replaced by robots. For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
Uhm, all right; but there's also practical side. Let's take two Olympic longs, Carolina's and Yuna's. How would you judge? Whose is of better quality?
Another reason why figure skating judging needs to be revamped. In other sports, players criticize the refs all the time without repercussions. Lots of times, complaining about a bad call will even result in a close call in the player's favor the next time. The judges should represent the ISU not their federations. They should be paid for their services by the ISU. They should not be anonymous. And they should be banned for life if they are caught cheating or trying to cheat.
it must be so frustrating where the thing you love and work and compete in is so subjective. thank god in the racing world there's only the stopwatch... well, unless you count the politics in Formula 1. Any of this remind u of Senna 1989? Alain Prost (French) crashed into Senna (Brazilian) on purpose, which Senna still went on to win the race (!). Prost, upon seeing Senna continue, went straight to the tower to protest to the (French) FIA president, who disqualified Senna for "not completing" the lap, as they crashed into one of the escape chicanes. Of note, F1 drivers use the escape chicanes all the time for incidents, without penalty.
/end side rant
FTA:"Mathematically it would take an outrageous overscoring/underscoring for two or three judges to sway the mean of a nine-judge panel that significantly. "
Isn't that exactly what happened?
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2011
This article contains exhaustive explanations which even the media has not done. Maybe they should take a lesson from this blogger instead of telling people to "deal with it."
Who else is done?
I am a former skater and have been a serious fan of competitive FS since 1970.
I am FINISHED being a serious fan of FS competitions due to the cheating that is prevalent over the past 44 years. I will watch skating and hope to find great performances, but I am completely finished being a serious fan of competitive FS.
Who cares how many spots? Who cares who the judges put first? WHO CARES, AS IT IS ALL A STAGED CHEAT?
Who else feels similarly? I. Am. Done.
I am a former skater and have been a serious fan of competitive FS since 1970.
I am FINISHED being a serious fan of FS competitions due to the cheating that is prevalent over the past 44 years. I will watch skating and hope to find great performances, but I am completely finished being a serious fan of competitive FS.
Who cares how many spots? Who cares who the judges put first? WHO CARES, AS IT IS ALL A STAGED CHEAT?
Who else feels similarly? I. Am. Done.
