The Judging Controversy Thread
- Thread starter Andre Smith
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2012
tell me about it! my brain is ready to explode from all of these insights!
Just my two cents on the issue (might as well say it and get it over with): After mulling over the whole controversy, reading through these posts and what not, I think it wasn't a case of a judging conspiracy but the judges getting caught in the moment (i hate using this phrase), and getting affected by the audience's reactions and giving Adelina (and even Julia) higher scores than most would've expected. Such things have happened before and will probably continue to happen. We've seen many skaters, including Yuna, Mao and Caro, get higher scores than we expected b/c they were either skating on home ice or skated clean etc...What bothered me most though was the consistent PCS being given throughout the season, not just at Sochi. In one competition Julia gets a 32+ for a SP, in another she gets a 29+, which is a pretty significant gap for a SP. Murakami got PCS in the mid 50s in a grand prix and then moved up to 60s at 4CC, all of these down from her PCS from last world championships. My point is judges have been inconsistent the whole season but in general were willing to hold the veterans' scores down to push the newbies up (see Carolina Kostner during grand prix).
What I do have an issue with are the tech calls made at Sochi. Based on the gifs floating around, Adelina's triple toe looks under-rotated and she seems to be flutzing. but as someone else also pointed out, the tech controller might not have seen her skate from the same camera angles as we did or they decided to give her the benefit of the doubt. even then, i think ISU should have the ability to record a skate from more than one camera angle so consistent tech calls can be made because some skaters definitely benefited while others were hammered. Also anonymous judging should be done away with. it serves no purpose.
If people find the judging/tech calls at Sochi questionable by all means question it, argue against it, petition etc. If people felt it was fine, go ahead and defend it. However, everyone can get their point across without name calling, insulting skaters and/or their nations, being rude to other forum members and excessive eye rolls. it devalues the whole point of your post!
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2012
there's no need to cross post from forums or call people names. it serves no purpose.
Yes I agree - the discussions have been quite construtive. For example, I didn't know about the new ISU rules - didn't know "!" was phased out.
As for PCS, I reckon it's predominantly subjective. If only there was a definite mechanism to measure it...
Edit: What about separating TEC and PCS judges? I don't really understand how a judge can evaluate how the skater is interpreting the music and checking to see if the jumps were correctly executed. At the same time.
As for PCS, I reckon it's predominantly subjective. If only there was a definite mechanism to measure it...
Edit: What about separating TEC and PCS judges? I don't really understand how a judge can evaluate how the skater is interpreting the music and checking to see if the jumps were correctly executed. At the same time.
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
A very detailed analysis on the scoring inflation for the Russian skaters, especially on GOEs: http://www.thewire.com/culture/2014/02/whole-new-set-questions-about-adelina-sotnikovas-allegedly-rigged-gold-medal-win/358425/#disqus_thread
My heart still bleeds at this injustice and corruption...
My heart still bleeds at this injustice and corruption...
And as seen repeatedly here, those in denial will not accept non slo-mo videos anyway. They are saying the slo-mo video is "doctored." Well, then "what stops someone from doctoring the whole thing?" will be their next line of defense. 
Yuna fans, my a**. Yuna is history. Retired. A legend.
The group think, tribalism, trading favors, etc., however, are still here. If these are not addressed, you can bet the history repeating in 2018. And I myself will probably not be here. (I know that no one will miss me, but I speak my mind wherever I go so I am afraid that you will have to deal with it while I am here)
Yuna fans, my a**. Yuna is history. Retired. A legend.
The group think, tribalism, trading favors, etc., however, are still here. If these are not addressed, you can bet the history repeating in 2018. And I myself will probably not be here. (I know that no one will miss me, but I speak my mind wherever I go so I am afraid that you will have to deal with it while I am here)
Judges getting caught in the moment? They're professionals, they've judged before, they've gone through training. They should be used to not letting the crowd get to them. If they really were influenced by the Russian crowd to inflate the Russian skaters' scores (which seems like too many coincidences lining up), then they're inept/incompetent instead of corrupt. I'm not sure which is worse.
Yes, PCS is subjective. Selective aberration is, however, relatively easy to spot.
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
Judges are humans, not robots. Have you ever watched a figure skating competition live in an arena? It's really, really difficult to not get caught up in the moment sometimes. Besides, even the official PCS criteria takes into account audience reaction. Under the Performance/Execution component of PCS, judges are supposed to mark skaters based on "Projection: the skater radiates energy resulting in an invisible connection with the audience" as part of the P/E criteria.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
Yes of course.
Yes but from another perspective, that is the loop hole that the ISU has made for the judges. Genuinely impressed by the performance vs. intentional score-inflating. I'm not arguing that there was any actual intentional inflating - no one including the judges themselves can prove the scores with reasoning that everyone agrees to. As for Projection, Adelina was surrounded by a Russian audience. If Yuna was surrounded by a Korean audience, you would've argued likewise.
Maybe they should write up a short summary to justify their thoughts? LOL I'm sick of writing my 10-page law essays on why I decided on the outcome.
Totally agree. And yet I think it was awarded with a +3 GOE.
That's good way to tell; thanks.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
Four is the minimum suspected. Yours is also all unsubstantiated opinion sprinkled with figure skating 101 basics.
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
Were the +3 GOEs automatic?
What's interesting about all the GOE talk is that I have not yet seen from any article any analysis of whether the skaters deserved +3 GOEs or not, only pointless statements that basically say, "Skater X had so many +3 GOEs, so it must be wrong!" For example, this previously-posted article (http://www.thewire.com/culture/2014...y-rigged-gold-medal-win/358425/#disqus_thread) complains about how Lipnitskaya received too many +3 GOEs without analyzing why her elements did/did not deserve the +GOEs or not.
As others have pointed out, the majority of Julia Lipnitskaya's (who had the most +3 GOEs) +3 GOEs came from her spins. Julia is one of the best spinners in the field right now--her combination spins are just amazing and I can't think of anyone who does better. I currently don't have any access to videos of her ladies event skates, but if she was spinning like she usually does, she totally deserves +3 GOE for spins like the final spin in her LP. From what I remember of Julia's LP, her closing spin was quite good, with no egregious traveling in her spin like the way she did in the team event.
Anyway, let's look at the spin GOE criteria:
1) good speed or acceleration during spin
2) ability to center a spin quickly
3) balanced rotations in all positions
4) clearly more than required number of revolutions
5) good position(s) (including height and air position in flying spins)[/B]
6) creativity and originality
7) good control throughout all phases
8) element matched to the musical structure
From watching Julia spin all season, I'd argue that Julia's closing spin in her LP usually fits at least 7 of the criteria (I personally won't give her 8: element matched to the musical structure but that one's the most subjective criterion). Judges are recommended to give +3 GOE if the skater matches 6 or more of the GOE criteria. What's so unfair about this?
I thought this should be read by everyone in this thread. Just for the poster's effort. lol. I felt bad that it's being buried without being noticed.
But seriously I do agree with it 100% and it's worth reading.
@evangeline: I am not sure why you quote me when you talk about Yulia's spins. I did not say anything about her spins in this thread. (Her spins certainly have a "wow" factor)
But seriously I do agree with it 100% and it's worth reading.
{Btw: I'm new here and got banned in my first attempt because of spam or something (?) I can't find the rules where it says not to link but just to make sure, I modified the link but you should be able to find them fairly quickly with the magic of google)
So... I'm a skating fan, but I've always avoided forums because of how ludicrous things can get in here. However, after the serious breach of ethics and embarrassment of the Olympics, I became so incense I searched on the internet to see if other people also saw what I saw: blatant misjudging, disregarding of figure skating rules, or just plain incompetence. And here I am.
To be honest, I was never a Yuna fan. I acknowledged how good she was, and what a complete skater she was, but I could never root for her fully because I'm a sucker for underdogs, and Mao and Carolina were the underdogs under Yuna's reign. (And yes, Yuna had a lot of setbacks, but she was so good they couldn't hold her down, while Mao and Carolina struggled...). Like even during these Olympics, I was rooting for Adelina more than for Yulia, because she was the underdog coming in compared to Yulia, and especially Yuna. I wanted her (and Mao, and Carolina, and Zijun, and Akiko and even Wagner among other underdogs to prove to everyone they could bring it). And when Adelina delivered her FP so well, I couldn't help but fistpump at my screen in victory... I was so proud of her!!! But then, the scores came, and all I could do was stare in absolute shock. My pride for her turned to absolute confusion at the judges. I was already confused at the SP... the gap should have been much higher (I'd say 3-4 point minimum), but I didn't care much because I was rooting for my underdogs, but the FP was just too much to ignore, even for me.
I already knew Mao's programmes almost by heart by the end of the season, and I knew Carolina's fairly well, but I didn't get to see much of Yuna's. So I started studying Yuna's SP/LP while looking at scoresheets... and maybe it's because I've rewatched each sections of the two programmes and dissected them grade by grade... but I've finally paid close attention to Yuna's artistry and absolute mastery of all aspects of her movements and skating and understanding of the music, and I'm a convert. lol. Honestly, her skill is MINDBLOWING. I don't get how she does it, she's super human. Or maybe it's because she became the underdog. Haha. Just kidding. Seriously, my love for Mao and Carolina must have blinded me to how improved Yuna became as a skater since 2010. Granted, she's less flexible (but flexibility is a rather small part of skating ability), but she's definitely significantly better than in 2010 as a skater (which shouldn't be possible, it's SO unfair and infuriating for us who work so hard and never get there), and definitely as an artist.
One thing I've noticed, is that there is very little actual discussion about the level of step sequences. I've looked at both adelina and yuna... counting the features and turns and there's absolutely no reason why if Adelina should be granted a level 4 step sequence and Yuna shouldn't. And worse, why Mao and Carolina shouldn't get a stsq4 in the sp.
IF adelina is granted a stsp4, all the other "main" ladies should as well. And to be honest, adelina stsq could very easily be downgraded to level 3 if you pay attention to her turns and edges and count them and discount the invalid ones. But if we're generous with her, then we should be generous with the other as well.
Let's say I'm an idiot, and that the levels on the stsq was called right... this doesn't explain why adelina has higher GOE +1.7 on her stsq than Yuna +1.1 (even including how much the difference in levels will impact on the GOE), and even Mao +1.6 (!!! seriously WHAT?? Mao is known for her killer stsq). Let's say adelina had harder step sequences. How she execute them (GOE) should be independent of how hard they are (levels). I realise most of you don't know much about how to judge stsq.
But here's video I found showing side by side cuts of the stepssq, with slowmo, as well as no music, and with music:
tvpot(dot)daum(dot)net/v/v87a2CxPLCLTHxxCQQJLXGL
Let me give you a few suggestions when looking at it that should be easy for anyone with even almost zero expertise on the subject to get. Each step is an increase in level of mastery (order in which you learn to perfect your sequence).
1. First, just look at their footwork (just the feet/legs/knees). With no music. There's a few points that should be easy enough to spot, even for a beginner. I'll try to make everything as simple in layman terms as possible so that all of you non-skaters can understand.
How to judge quality is by how much the feet seem to glide with flow on the ice (my coach always told me that you should make as little noise as possible.). Look at the ice dancers, they have the best steps and show how it should be done. Furthermore, notice how each movement propulse you and how much ice coverage they make instead of the lower level skaters when the steps don't get you anywhere much around the rink.
In order to to give it a feeling of gliding and power, one thing is to position to blades on the edges neatly instead of on the blunt side of the blades (think friction). In addition to the benefit of having clear edges for gliding (and no noise, and flow, etc.), how neat your edge work is helps clarify your step sequence, and turns can be invalidated if not clear and your level downgraded (a bit like how underotations, flow, etc for jumps).
Also, how you make your "turns" (there's different "figures" you need to make on ice with your blade to achieve certain levels, like drawing on ice with your blade) determine the level (say if you need to "draw" a man, but ended up drawing a stick figure with no distinct gender, that might get you low GOEs, or even make your "drawing" invalidated). And the neater your writing (aka. how clear your edge is), the easier it is to see your drawing (vs blunt side of blade). To make your edge clear, you need to lean on the side of the edge (and the more you lean, the harder to balance and control your movement).
Because you need to make all those "twist and turns," it gets even harder because you need to lean in different directions to achieve change of edge very quickly (there's inside edge and outside edge), while at the SAME TIME making the changes flow and glide. Trust me, it takes skill to achieve the correct edge, even more skill to make the edges neat, and crazy master level and power muscle to make it glide. Also, the more/longer you do your "steps" one just one foot, the harder, because it takes serious muscle power. Beginners tend to cheat and swing around their free foot to give the steps ice coverage while true masters (virtue/moir, also davis/white and other ice top ice dancers) flex the leg (rise and fall of the knee.. the "bounce") with the foot on the ice (not the free foot), to move around... which is much harder to do. But it creates an effect of flow if you have enough power to make it move. And it takes crazy hip power to keep just the lower body moving, but the upper torso straight and still. The arms should be used to balance your upper body and change in direction, NOT to cheat and propulse yourself around (at least, not obviously). Same with your free foot. It should be used to help you balance, and change movement (and choreography), NOT as a significant force to make you move across the ice. It should be more like a wheel stirring the direction than a mallet you swing around. True it gives you force, but it takes away your flow and makes your steps jagged. Everything should feel as if a wind is pushing you around, not that a kid is pulling you left and right demanding for candy (my coach's words. lol.).
Now, keeping that in mind, look at both Yuna's and Adelina's footwork without the music. And it should be obvious to you the difference in how neat the edges are for each movement (you can tell distinctly with each change in lean that the foot has changed edges, rather than a quick sloppy change in lean where the edge didn't have time to be clearly on before you change it again). Then, look at how during the sequence, it should feel as if your gliding smoothing across the ice, how your "drawing" and writing should flow from one word to another, making it hard to see a pause in movement between one stroke to another (edgework is how neat and distinct each stroke is. the more deep your edge (your lean), the finer the trace on ice, the more distinct and refined your "stroke" is)... rather than the opposite where you can easily see a jagged paused between each stroke.
My coach tends to use the musical equivalent portato (loure) vs. staccato. Both portato and staccato are the opposite of legato in that you can distinct one note from the next and detached them, but staccato is much more jagged instead of linked.
Look at how much ice coverage the movement on a single leg makes. Also look to see if each movement and edge lean, and figure is allowed to be finished instead of hurrying to the next one.
If you see what I'm seeing, then I truly don't get why adelina is said to be more athletic. Lots of her "edges" are so blunt I have to cringe. Honestly, this whole debacle is making me furious. I was so happy watching adelina FP the first time, but this conflict made me analyse the scores and look at it and it stole away the enjoyement I had. I can't unsee it and now, instead of watching her program and enjoying it like I would have, whenever I look at it, all I can see is that blunt footwork when she turns and switches edges. Ruins it. Makes me so mad.
Now, also look at the free leg. The movement of the free leg should also be portanto, rather than staccato, and it's movement, subtle and choreographic (as opposed to something you swing around as force). Overall, everything should glide and flow, and nothing should look like one's making an effort.
2. Look at the upper body without music. As I said previously, the arms as used as balance, choreography, and subtle help in steering when changing direction. Just like the feet below, it should move with the same flow. In addition, the flow and rhythm should match/complement the flow/rhythm below in the legs. Notice that having flow should not prevent you from being rythmic. Like I said before, the flow means finishing your movement, and avoid hurrying into your next, it means linking between each stroke, the stroke itself can and should be neat and clear while still flowing and follow the music (Yeah, I know... it's a nightmare. Tell me about it). Furthermore, your upper body should be kept "still" with a straight posture (axis) (the axis itself can move, but you can't change the axis from a straight line to say, a squiggly or hunched line just because the axis itself is not vertical. Just because your changing your upper body angle doesn't mean you should lose the posture you have when you're straight up standing. LOL. The horror. I'm starting to sound like my coach. ). And same with the arms, the torso movement should flow, and should correspond or complement with the flow and movement of the feet. And same with the head and neck. Basically, the legs/torso/neck/head(and arms) should feel like extensions of each other, your body should feel like snake undulating, with each part linked with each other, rather than seeing jagged parts like rising steps of stairs. Your body should feel like a whole, and your body and music should also feel complement to each other. Also, there's limit number to how much your arms can move above your shoulders during the sequence (~20), AND regardless of your arms, your shoulders SHOULD not be high up during most of the sequence. They should be kept down for posture.
3. Now, watch the lower body (legs) with the music, and notice whether or not it utilizes the main rhythmic point of the music, or even better, whether it utilizes the nuances and phrases in the music rather than just the obvious strong beat. (Also, note whether or not there is an obvious rhythm to the music or not, whether the rhythm is regular and repetitive or changes with each beat and if the beat is distinct. The more subtle, the harder it is to find a proper beat, the harder it is to mold your step to the music.)
4. Then, watch the upper body for the same thing.
5. Finally, watch it as a whole, including face expression, and evaluate for interpretation of the musical as a whole, and whether you are aware of the music at all time and your movement becomes part of the music accordingly (rather than vice versa.) Basically, whether you're just performing the steps, or you're performing more than just the steps, but act and express to the music and acting accordingly. This is PC by the way.
So that's a basic basic basic way to look at quality of step sequences without all the knowledge of pros. But even then, it should be a good indication for laymen about the quality of execution of the steps regardless of how easy/hard they are and their levels (it'll take me much longer to elaborate on THAT.. I might get to it some time later perhaps). I don't think you need to know about the exact terms of the figures and step in order to be able to tell whether the edge work is neat, or flow, etc.
=====================
It has been discussed ad nauseum about whether the results were fair, and discrepancies have been found on GOEs, PCs, edge calls, UR, choreo, interpretation, Skating skills (all in PCs but it seriously need to be said separately).
If you can't see the difference between skating skills, it's a lost cause to argue, honestly. If you want, just watch the gala exhibition of Yuna and Adelina from the Olympics, just fresh from the competition, where there are no difficult jumps/spins or other elements involved... just plain skating, and the difference in skill level (not to mention interpretation) is OBVIOUS).
While Yuna lives her program (she's basically acting, and so into her role you forget she's acting and think she's actually living it), Adelina is still at the stage where she's trying to perform the expected face expression/gestures/movements without living it. I would say that even Yuna circa 2008-2010, while musical, and good at interpretating, and acting, was still not living the music as much as she's doing it now. Maybe that's why it took me so long to get to appreciate her fully.Being musical and understanding the nuances is one thing, but it takes it to another level of technical mastery of your program in order to be able lose yourself into the music, fusing with the music rather than just follow it.
for example, while Yuna glides textbook on ice, with no movement that lacks flow and finish in her lines (fingers, arms, head, etc.), adelina... well, is not there yet. She's still doing choreography, well Yuna is not only interpreting it, but living it. Not to mention, Yuna's element feels part of the story telling (and by story, I don't mean an actual plot. It could be a plot, a feeling, a moment, a picture, etc.). While analysing her programs, you tend to forget to observe each elements as distinct elements so much they feel part of the whole story she tells during the four minutes. What's funny is that at first, it didn't feel to much that way, but the more I watched it, the more often I had to rewind after I was too busy watching her storytelling and forgot to check for the element features I was evaluating. lol. She transforms choreography into a story, something real rather than choreographed. Adelina is actually a rather good interpreter... But she still tends to become more of herself many times during the program and forget the interpretating (or acting if you want to go further). There's nothing wrong with just being yourself while skating, but acting your program brings it to another level of interpretation (and when you're yourself, it becomes a risk to get carried away and lose polish, especially if you don't have the technique to back your personality up.)
And for people that say that Adelina is better technically because her program includes technically more difficult elements, it takes a whole lot more training and master skills to make your skate look effortless and "artistic" rather than laboured. The more in control you are of your body, and thus, of your interpretation, the more it requires athleticism to control. Otherwise, if you're not strong enough, you lose control. (think about how much stronger you need to lift a heavy bag with flow and make it look easy, vs just lifting it). It's only when you have complete mastery of your skating skills that there are room for living your program.
The best analogy I can think of is you can't play a music piece on the piano (or any other instruments) and give it justice if your technical skill is well above the basic ability to just get the note right. When your technical skill is so high that the piece becomes easy for you, THEN you can play the piece with musicality. It's like comparing a kid at music school who can get all the notes right for a really hard piece, and an internationally awarded piano master who plays a simpler piece with beauty that the kid cannot reproduce no matter how "easy" the piece is.) For all of you who have played an instrument or sing. You know that it takes a certain level of technique to get the note right, but it takes a whole other level of skill and technique to be able to control how you make the note sound.
Yuna is a perfectionist (just like Mao... but honestly, I think yuna is even more hardcore perfectionist. You can tell from how textbook all her jumps are, especially the lutz which the majority tend to flutz). She wants everything she does, every note she makes to "sound" right, even with her jumps. Which is why even though she can do the triple loop rather beautifully, and tried to train with brian orser at first for the triple axel, she doesn't want to do anything less than perfect and dropped them. That doesn't mean she's less technically brilliant. Technicality is more than just performing the jumps in figure skating. That's why TES includes GOE rather than just the BV.
Let's say you have a certain technical level. You can choose to use your technical skill at full to perform something that is barely within your reach in terms of skill, and risk it not being perfect (hence the splatfest of the men's events because of challenging content), or you can choose to use your technical skill EQUALLY at full to perform something you're able to perfect, which involves challenging polish of the content. The risk should not be evaluated at how much content you have only, but rather on how much you choose to push your full technical level. Adelina chose to push her full technical level by upping her content at the risk of quality (aka. focus on BV). Yuna, throughout her career, being a perfectionist, chose to push her full technical level towards making all her content perfect (aka. focus on GOE). Both are part of TES, and it's a fallacy to assume than higher BV means higher technical skill. Its both BV and GOE = TES. When people say Yuna doesn't take risk because she's not pushing her BV... that's false. While some skaters choose to put most of their eggs into the BV basket (ala Mao), Yuna chose to put many of her eggs into the GOE basket. Different baskets doesn't suddenly mean that the eggs are less fragile. Mao works really hard to get the triple axel and risks her effort if she doesn't manage to get to perform it and get it ratified. Yuna also performs her maximum (or according to her, she put 120% of efforts for the olympics) into making her jumps perfect, and risks her effort if she doesn't perform it to perfection. Different focus doesn't mean less risk. As long as there's a risk you don't perform what you trained so hard for, it's a risk. It's a risk for Mao not being able to land the axel and lose points for it. It's a risk for Yuna not being able to have the best form in her jumps for Goe and also lose points for it in this game of Cop. And it certainly doesn't mean she's less athletic. It takes a whole lot of athleticism to be able to control your movement, and even use them for artistry.
Again, with the music analogy. Let's say you're a really really good piano player or singer or whatever. With the set of ability you have, when you go for competition, you can choose to either play a piece that's super challenging in level for you that you're unable to perform to perfection, or you can choose with the same set of skill, to perform a song a little less challenging and under your skill limit, and use the "extra" skill to the fullest in order to perfect every aspect of it. At the end of the day, you also used your full ability. Doesn't mean you're less athletic. You just used your extra athleticism for control. Without athleticism, being able to control, perfect, polish your element cannot be done. While playing piano for your family with a harder piece or singing high notes that might sound slightly unpolish might impress them, but honestly, in a proper competition, playing a harder piece and just getting the notes on time without the nuances, and interpretation, and polish will get you nowhere with the trained judges.
fortunately, the Cop system is different than music competitions in that the system awards both options. You can play a really hard piece with less polish and get awarded for the level by the tech panel, but not the polish by the judges. Or you can polish a slightly easier piece, and get awarded for the polish. Unfortunately, in this competition, it seems as if the judges are not trained, because while the tech panel awarded the levels (albeit not really correctly), the judges failed to evaluate the polish correctly. So while Sotnikova BV is slightly higher (1-2 points), the difference in GOE should more than make up for the difference considering the polish and textbook perfect technique of Yuna, had this actually followed the Cop system as it should. Unformtunately, it didn't follow the system, hence the innacurate score in TES: the GOEs are seriously messed up for the jumps (and less on the spins... but seriously. for most of her jumps, everything about it is so textbook i almost used to hate her as a mao fan out of jealousy before i converted a few days ago. lol. the clean cut accurate edge, the perfect air position, distance, smooth ledge and straight back flowing edge out and delayed), not to mention the level/edge/UR calls... and the PCs even more. But that's a whole different story.
Anyway, I just came here for the step sequences mainly and started rambling. lol. I'll stop now. Plenty have talked about the jumps and other stuff previously already:
( Insideskating: Something is rotten in the state of Sochi analyzing ladies short program
Feverskating: 64960133
TheWire : Why people think adelina sotnikova figure skating gold medal was rigged
MyDearKorea : Sochi figure skating scandal
The Wire: whole new set questiions about adelina sotnikova
Feverskating: 65081423)
You know what's sad? Is that Adelina is an excellent skater in her own right. But now, that excellence is overshadowed by how overrated it is instead of being appreciated for its actual value, which is mighty fine in its own right without the need for the boost in evaluation, which not only overshadows the actual talent, but undermines potential improvement of it into something even greater by stating that it's already almost the greatest with little room for improvement. (9.75... really??? even when you're carried away... 9.75???)
This whole thing is so messed up, and the skaters have to pay for it. And if you don't think it's corrupt, think again.
Although none of the skaters actually speak outright about it in public, the way the speak after the scores tells us they know something is not right. In an interview on NBC with gracie, ashley and polina, ashley mentioned about how the judging didn't seem right, then, in another interview, gracie obliquely acknowledged a judging problem by saying she needs to work harder to fight the system, then denis ten in a message for Yuna says that regardless of the medal, she still is in everyone's heart as a champion, and then joannie rochette says she's not a judge but she would have given yuna higher scores, and all the commentators who implied yuna would win (like kurt browning, robin cousins, carol lane, Aust commentators, witt, gwendal peizerat, before changing their tune or not), or subtly acknowledging yuna like how elvis stoyko said on yahoo that mao, denis, and yuna are the top 3 for him this olympics, or how michelle kwan saying the problem is not the system but the people in the system here Youtube :watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NWjEQJwKlK4 , etc.
I can't say for sure the competition was rigged, but it sure as hell was inaccurately scored. Honestly, the scoring is already confusing enough for skaters without the need to muddle it furthermore.
Phew... now that I vented this all out, I can breathe in peace. lol.
@evangeline: I am not sure why you quote me when you talk about Yulia's spins. I did not say anything about her spins in this thread. (Her spins certainly have a "wow" factor)
