What are the most glaring examples of cheating using the CoP within the last 5 years? | Golden Skate

What are the most glaring examples of cheating using the CoP within the last 5 years?

bump

Match Penalty
Joined
Mar 15, 2013
What are the most glaring examples of cheating using the CoP within the last 5 years?

So we all know the CoP is a total mess and that it doesn't really do anything to address judges playing favorites and cheating. So what are the most glaring examples of the judges totally abusing the CoP system in recent memory? Obviously Patrick Chan didn't deserve to win at Worlds this year and probably not at Worlds last year either. Ashley Wagner should probably have been 3rd at US Nationals this past year and DEFINITELY not the winner. I'm sorry, but when you land on your behind twice in the middle of your long program, you should automatically be out of the running for a gold medal. Any other atrocious examples?
 

ffionhanathomas

On the Ice
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Ashley Wagner deserved to be the US Champion. Yes she fell, but Gracie Gold made mistakes in the short, and the short program counts. Just because Gracie Gold skated a clean long it doesn't mean she's the overall winner, and Ashley Wagner skates with a lot more character and maturity than Gracie Gold which really helps.

I think Caroline Zhang was scored very harshly at US Nationals, I think it was her 3L-3L that was downgraded, when it really shouldn't have been. Her performances were great and she didn't get the credit for them. Same in terms of Mirai Nagasu's long in my opinion.
 

FSGMT

Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
I'm sorry but I'm not going to give my opinion about this, because of one simple reason:
So we all know the CoP is a total mess and that it doesn't really do anything to address judges playing favorites and cheating.
I'm sorry, but when you land on your behind twice in the middle of your long program, you should automatically be out of the running for a gold medal
I disagree with these two statements that are practically this thread's starting point...
 

Poodlepal

On the Ice
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
The major problem with this judging system is that mistakes visible to the naked eye are or seem to be less important than those that cannot be seen easily, like flutzes and ur's. Mirai Nagasu has often skated a clean-looking program only to fall several places in the standings due to these "invisible" errors, and Carolina Kostner and Patrick Chan rarely skate clean but do so well with things like edging and knee bends that they rack up more points than clean-skaters. I don't know if anybody is cheating, but what the judges are focusing on is not what can be seen on television and certainly not from up in the stands.

There is another reason why the point system seems to be failing that nobody wants to talk about: None of our current skaters are very good compared to those in the past. Yes, I know the tricks are harder, but think about it. Can you see ANY of them, (save for YuNa) getting a row of 6.0's? Ever?

It's like they made this tremendously detailed grading system to determine which person who messed up in the long program should be put ahead of who messed up in the short program, or will they both be behind the person who skated clean but too slow?

I actually think you'd have the same problems with this current crop of skaters under any system, only we'd be like why did Carolina get a 5.8 when she fell, and why did Patrick still get a 5.7 with all his errors?
If/when someone who skated really well and usually clean emerges on the scene, that person will win fair and square and everyone will agree. I hope, LOL!
 

mskater93

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
I think Caroline Zhang was scored very harshly at US Nationals, I think it was her 3L-3L that was downgraded, when it really shouldn't have been. Her performances were great and she didn't get the credit for them. Same in terms of Mirai Nagasu's long in my opinion.

Oh, no, Caroline was fairly scored at Nationals technically. The 3Lo+3Lo was definitely < and </<< (borderline between UR and DG) in replay. Caroline DID get credit for her PERFORMANCES - she got fairly high PCS. The thing she needs to work on is her skating skills to improve EVERYTHING (which I have been saying since she was in Juniors and which she REALLY hasn't done which is :confused: because she has a lot of lovely qualities but her basic skating is atrocious for a Senior lady).

Nagasu's long the jumps weren't even borderline - so obvious in real time and worse in replay. I had her ~ 5th overall without even doing the math just watching the LP because it was very clear this was going to be a low-scoring program technically.

If it was about cleanliness only, Hicks would have been National Champion over the two programs and that's something else I can't get behind.
 

glam

On the Ice
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
The major problem with this judging system is that mistakes visible to the naked eye are or seem to be less important than those that cannot be seen easily, like flutzes and ur's. Mirai Nagasu has often skated a clean-looking program only to fall several places in the standings due to these "invisible" errors, and Carolina Kostner and Patrick Chan rarely skate clean but do so well with things like edging and knee bends that they rack up more points than clean-skaters. I don't know if anybody is cheating, but what the judges are focusing on is not what can be seen on television and certainly not from up in the stands.

I agree. Those "invisible" errors shouldn't that harshly penalized. They don't ruin the program nearly as much as the falls. I personally don't even care if somebody flutzes of lips, as long as the jump is landed.
 

Moment

Final Flight
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Flutzing is actually easy to recognize when you're used to seeing a correct Lutz and it bothers me a whole lot. And of course cheating (yes, CHEATING) should always be penalized. What's the use of having detailed scoring system when you don't even encourage to jump with correct technique? When you look at the protocols It's not very "harshly" penalized anymore, resulting in GOEs of about -0.3 to -0.7. When you do a poor cheated 3Lz and receive the score the same as or more than that of a fine 3F, it's just not right. I guess this is where I and 6.0 supporters disagree.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
All the examples given are "Decisions I disagree with" -- in most examples, because the poster disagrees with the rules, not that the judges weren't following the rules.

That's not cheating.

Blatant examples of judges, or technical panel members, cheating would be blatantly not following the rules, in some systematic manner to produce a desired results.

Of course, with the way the ISU scrambles the scores in the protocols at the senior international events, there's no way to identify a systematic pattern of incorrect scores, only individual mistakes.

But since some posts in this thread mention US Nationals, those scores are not anonymous; they're listed in order by judge number. If you think someone is cheating, you could study their marks for all the skaters and see whether you see a consistent pattern or not. Make sure to consider whether the scores you think are "bad" are really incorrect according to the rules, or just not in agreement with your personal opinion.


In colloquial use within the skating community, the word "cheating" is often used to refer to underrotated jumps. It's not really considered a moral failing on the part of the skater, but it does mean that the skater didn't really complete the jump as intended. To casual viewers who haven't trained their eyes to notice degrees of rotation, this error might appear "invisible" -- but even under 6.0 scoring, judges noticed. And skaters who did rotate their jumps noticed and resented it when they lost to skaters who didn't.

So along those lines "glaring examples of cheating" would be jumps that were so badly underrotated that even a casual viewer would see there was something wrong, without even waiting for slow motion replay. ;)
 

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
So we all know the CoP is a total mess and that it doesn't really do anything to address judges playing favorites and cheating. So what are the most glaring examples of the judges totally abusing the CoP system in recent memory? Obviously Patrick Chan didn't deserve to win at Worlds this year and probably not at Worlds last year either. Ashley Wagner should probably have been 3rd at US Nationals this past year and DEFINITELY not the winner. I'm sorry, but when you land on your behind twice in the middle of your long program, you should automatically be out of the running for a gold medal. Any other atrocious examples?

You have no proof at all on any of your claims.

If you say that the system is gravely flawed, it might nail something. But if you say the judges are cheating, where?! I'm sorry but just because you don't like some skaters the way the judges like, it doesn't mean they are cheating. It only means that you are totally biased and playing favorites yourself!
 

bump

Match Penalty
Joined
Mar 15, 2013
Uh oh...CoP apologists all over the place. Sigh...well, if anyone that has two eyes and can see what is obviously going on wants to pipe up, please do. Let's face it...judges still play favorites and, yes, cheat deserving skaters out of winning. Let's get some folks commenting on this thread that aren't in love with the current scoring system. Come on, guys!!
 

phaeljones

On the Ice
Joined
Apr 18, 2012
The major problem with this judging system is that mistakes visible to the naked eye are or seem to be less important than those that cannot be seen easily, like flutzes and ur's. Mirai Nagasu has often skated a clean-looking program only to fall several places in the standings due to these "invisible" errors, and Carolina Kostner and Patrick Chan rarely skate clean but do so well with things like edging and knee bends that they rack up more points than clean-skaters. I don't know if anybody is cheating, but what the judges are focusing on is not what can be seen on television and certainly not from up in the stands.

There is another reason why the point system seems to be failing that nobody wants to talk about: None of our current skaters are very good compared to those in the past. Yes, I know the tricks are harder, but think about it. Can you see ANY of them, (save for YuNa) getting a row of 6.0's? Ever?

It's like they made this tremendously detailed grading system to determine which person who messed up in the long program should be put ahead of who messed up in the short program, or will they both be behind the person who skated clean but too slow?

I actually think you'd have the same problems with this current crop of skaters under any system, only we'd be like why did Carolina get a 5.8 when she fell, and why did Patrick still get a 5.7 with all his errors?
If/when someone who skated really well and usually clean emerges on the scene, that person will win fair and square and everyone will agree. I hope, LOL!

Well stated.

Query, however, whether there would have been as much disagreement, or any disagreement at all, if Denis Ten had won the gold.

Perhaps a problem with the sport is that it is too closed and it is becoming ever more so. Where most people cannot agree or understand the results, and those results are vigorously defended, what is really being said is that the sport reflects the values of the few but not the many. It really does not bode well for the popularity of the sport or for the popular respect of its integrity. People can defend the results, believing them to be correct, but eventually other people are just going to stop watching. That is the danger ever becoming more real. No one wants that, do they?
 

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Let's get some folks commenting on this thread that aren't in love with the current scoring system. Come on, guys!!

Well, you don't want opinions from both sides?!:biggrin:

By the way, this thread title is totally baseless... Carry on... ;)
 

hohoho

On the Ice
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
During Skate Canada International Debbie Wilkes and Liz Manley commentated in the arena after the skater was completed. They did little bio info stuff and they also commented on the program itself. While I disagree with the timing of the commentary (during judges scoring), I did enjoy the analysis of the elements of the program. This allowed me to see what the judges were seeing and justified the TES mark for me. As for the PCS, I find there has to be a better system for that as I do believe that reputation scoring is very evident. Someone placed this on Youtube as a comparison of Transistion marks of Yuna Kim and Kaetlyn Osmond.

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULEhRi0-LGc)

Should Kim have outscored Osmond in TR by 1.5 points? Or did Kim benefit from Reputation judging?
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
All the examples given are "Decisions I disagree with" -- in most examples, because the poster disagrees with the rules, not that the judges weren't following the rules.

That's not cheating.

THIS. I really dislike the current judging system sometimes because the winners sometimes are not the ones who I believe have skated the best programs. However, I generally feel the judges are scoring the programs based on the requirements of the scoring system. When Chan wins, there is at most one Canadian on the judging panel so it's really hard for him to "cheat".

At the National level, I do think favorites are held up a bit and the politiking that the coaches do is perhaps more effective. For me, the result of the season that bothered me the most was Agnes almost winning the SP at Nationals. She fell and she isn't very artistic, yet somehow she gets marked above several decent programs.
 

Matilda

Medalist
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Long time lurker (though I only recently made an account) here. I'm not a huge fan of the CoP, but I was at the Nationals, and I'm ok with Ashley's win. Gracie's SP was a mess, and while her LP was technically good, Ashley beat her by a mile in performance and SS. The choreography of Ashley's programs is also superior to Gracie's. Mirai's underrotations were obvious from where I was sitting, and her LP was generally flat and lifeless (she had a cold, so no surprise really).

I do agree, however, that falls should generally be punished more--they are definitely way more distracting than a mild underrotation (<< is another story). Moreover, I find that if a difficult transition is followed by a flawed jump--a fall, a pop, hand down, etc.--that should affect not just the jump score, but the transition score as well. After all, the transition was in such case clearly not successful.

As far as the popularity of skating is concerned, it was clear to me that the average audience was very confused about the scoring. For example, the people behind me had not seen the SP, and were upset about Gracie not winning. After I explained to them that Gracie had had a fall and a popped jump in the SP, they were ok with the result. Same with Mirai's underrotations. I'm not sure how this kind of problem could be fixed though. Maybe a brief analysis of the skater's SP just before their LP? (This would work for the TV, I think, but I doubt the skater would want to hear that while preparing to take the ice...) Something definitely needs to be done, because if the audience doesn't understand why skater A beats skater B, they are not likely to be drawn to the sport.
 

Bluebonnet

Record Breaker
Joined
Aug 18, 2010
THIS. I really dislike the current judging system sometimes because the winners sometimes are not the ones who I believe have skated the best programs. However, I generally feel the judges are scoring the programs based on the requirements of the scoring system. When Chan wins, there is at most one Canadian on the judging panel so it's really hard for him to "cheat".
At the National level, I do think favorites are held up a bit and the politiking that the coaches do is perhaps more effective. For me, the result of the season that bothered me the most was Agnes almost winning the SP at Nationals. She fell and she isn't very artistic, yet somehow she gets marked above several decent programs.

Mathman said:

I am pretty sure Canada did not have a judge on the men's panel. USA either.

The full judges pool (SP and LP) for the event was Austria, Belarus, Bulgaria, Taipei, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Poland, Russia, Spain, and Turkey.

Some people (not you, missdaisy) just ignore the facts each and everytime when the facts have been laid before them.
 

gkelly

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
It's like they made this tremendously detailed grading system to determine which person who messed up in the long program should be put ahead of who messed up in the short program, or will they both be behind the person who skated clean but too slow?

For better or for worse, I don't think there's any single individual in a position anywhere in the system to make those kinds of global decisions. Everyone is only contributing pieces to the puzzle, and then the computer, programmed with the rules and the scale of values, spits out the results.

The computer doesn't care where the points came from or how one skater compares with another or who messed up in which program -- only what the technical panel calls were and what those elements were worth (including second-half bonuses) and what GOEs and PCSs the judges awarded and whether there were any deductions.

So it's better in that everyone can see exactly where each skater earned and lost points, and in that even if an individual official did want to cheat they can't force a specific result without an active conspiracy.

It's worse in that no one is looking at the big picture in the process of determining results. Often the results are not what anyone -- fans, skaters, judges themselves -- would expect if simply asked "Who skated best overall?"

Would there be any way to build in more global assessments while still retaining the advantages?


And do we want the judges under either system to be thinking during the long program "If I mark this performance exactly as this performance itself deserves, because of the short program standings and the way everyone else has skated tonight, this skater will end up placing higher/lower than I think s/he really deserves for the competition as a whole. So I'll adjust my scores for the long program to try to make the final results come out the way I think they should."?

Wouldn't that kind of manipulation be . . . cheating?
 
Top