1. 0
Originally Posted by cooper
they did?? including the known cheater balkov??
Balkov was 1/9.

2. 0
Originally Posted by AliceInWonderland
Balkov was 1/9.
so it's OK for you to let a known cheater to judge a very close scoring after the sp in the lp.. as they allowed a known cheater to judge again?? after all you said it's only 1/9.. that kind of thinking why many outsiders are saying that figure skating is not a sport..

3. 0
The ISU doesn't want you to know. They don't want you to know any of it. All of the obfuscation happens on purpose.

Edit: hmm this was a reply for Mathman, whose post fell into the black hole.
(and now appeared below mine)

4. 0
Actually, it is impossible to prove that, since you don' t know which scores go together. You can only prove it if every score of Adelina's is higher than every score of YuNa's. and even then you have the question of whether the tech panel's calls were correct or not.

http://www.isuresults.com/results/owg2014/index.htm

If you look at GOE and PCS, which are the scores judges give, YuNa is ahead on more than one judge's scorecard.
The IJS hornswoggles us out of making any sense of these numbers at all. Here are the total PCS given by the nine judges, listed in two different orders.

SOT 48.25…..48……48……47.75..46.5….45.5….45...44.25...44.25
KIM …48……….47.75……47……..46.25……46…….45.25…..42…48.25…...45.25

Sotnikova wins 7 to 2.

Here are the same numbers arranged differently.

KIM 48.25……48……47.25…47…..46.75….46….45.25…45.25….42
SOT ….48…...47.25….46.5….45.5…..45…..44.25….44.25… 48.25….48

Mow Kim wins 7 to 2.

Under ordinal judging, even with anonymity at least we knew how many forst place ordinalsd each skater received.

5. 0
Originally Posted by Mathman
The ISU's position is that they do not have to prove anything to anyone. They do not care what the KSU demands or does not demand.
Yup, there's the rub.

Reminds me of a mug I gave my best friend when her kids were little. It said "BECAUSE I'M THE MOMMY, THAT'S WHY."

6. 0
It is her base value that defeated her, and that is partially due to the tech panel and partially to her own choice of elements.

Adelina's base value was 61.43, YuNa's 57.49. 0.9 of that difference is due to YuNa being awarded level3 for her step sequence and her layback spin.
Actually, since the points are fungible, it's somewhat meaningless to talk about the points being due to any one thing. However, even if their base values were the same, Adelina would still have won because of the higher GOEs and technical calls etc.; she expanded her lead beyond the base values. Saying that it was the base values would be more appropriate if the points were such that Adelina's lead decreased once GOEs and technical calls were considered; it would mean that Adelina tried a harder program but wasn't as successful at it, but still eked out a win due to attempting a harder program.

The increase in the lead is why I don't really accept the "harder technical program" or "one more triple" argument for Adelina's win. Notwithstanding the other ladies who did 7 (or 8, Mao) triples, those arguments would only have been valid if Adelina's lead had decreased. For example, Yuna's short program had a higher base value (31.43 vs 30.43, so +1.00) and better PCS (35.89 vs 35.55, so +0.34), yet her overall score was only slightly higher (74.92 vs 74.64, or +0.28). In that case it would be appropriate to say that the base value was the reason (or really, one of the reasons, since she needed the PCS differential as well) why she "won" the SP, since if it were not considered, then she wouldn't be in first place after the SP. But this is not what happened in the FS.

Based on the points given, the judges were not merely saying that Adelina's program was technically harder (i.e. higher base value). They were also saying that the elements were performed with a better quality (higher GOEs, technical calls, etc.) and that both were virtually equally matched in terms of the program components (skating skills, interpretation, etc.).

Regarding the complaint, since ISU's rules apparently don't allow questioning how the scores were determined (i.e. the actual judging), unless it's the skater herself in question (or representatives) that filed the complaint, the Koreans don't have standing to question overly lenient calls given to other skaters. Thus the focus on other things like composition of judges and whatnot. I think whether or not the overall judging itself was according to the rules and guidelines would be more appropriate, but that's considered out of bounds and would have been rejected out of hand. Evidently there's a loophole in the overall scoring system and appeals process.

7. 0
Originally Posted by cooper
so it's OK for you to let a known cheater to judge a very close scoring after the sp in the lp.. as they allowed a known cheater to judge again?? after all you said it's only 1/9.. that kind of thinking why many outsiders are saying that figure skating is not a sport..
If Balkov's scores had been extremely high, they would have been thrown out. If his scores had been average, then his scores would not have been higher than the others' and therefore not problematic. TL; DR: Balkov alone could not have fixed the results. To fix the results, he would have needed 3 or more people on the panel helping him.

8. 0
It really took ISU long time!
Pangpangpangpangfan, can you remind how much exactly Putin paid them? I forgot the amount....

9. 0
Originally Posted by Vanshilar
Actually, since the points are fungible, it's somewhat meaningless to talk about the points being due to any one thing. However, even if their base values were the same, Adelina would still have won because of the higher GOEs and technical calls etc.; she expanded her lead beyond the base values. Saying that it was the base values would be more appropriate if the points were such that Adelina's lead decreased once GOEs and technical calls were considered; it would mean that Adelina tried a harder program but wasn't as successful at it, but still eked out a win due to attempting a harder program.
If the judges are convinced that one skater presented a program of greater difficulty as measured by the base values, and if the skater goes more or less clean, they often pile on the GOEs and PCS to ensure that this skater wins. So in that sense, yes, we can say that Adelina's victory was due to higher base value (together with the automatic GOE and PCS boost that accompanies it.)

On the other hand, sometimes the judges don't do that.

10. 0
Of course the ISU dismissed it, their complaint was backed up with flimsy and ridiculous arguments. The lawyer obviously wasn't very good.

11. 0
Originally Posted by cooper
so it's OK for you to let a known cheater to judge a very close scoring after the sp in the lp.. as they allowed a known cheater to judge again?? after all you said it's only 1/9.. that kind of thinking why many outsiders are saying that figure skating is not a sport..
He was punished and served his punishment. You want a one infraction equals permanent ban rule. And all the judges on the panel basically agreed with his scores- they were all very close.

12. 0
Originally Posted by gmyers
He was punished and served his punishment. You want a one infraction equals permanent ban rule.
Yes. Certainly from the highest levels of competition. Balkov should be judging nothing bigger than Nebelhorn or Finlandia the rest of his judging career... maybe a GP if we're being extra nice... not the ladies final of the Olympics.

13. 0
Yes. Certainly from the highest levels of competition. Balkov should be judging nothing bigger than Nebelhorn or Finlandia the rest of his judging career... maybe a GP if we're being extra nice... not the ladies final of the Olympics.
The rule could be passed but as there's no evidence of wrongdoing or abnormal scoring by him I don't even think that rule could pass!

14. 0
Originally Posted by gmyers
He was punished and served his punishment. You want a one infraction equals permanent ban rule. And all the judges on the panel basically agreed with his scores- they were all very close.
Why shouldn't this be the case? How is the figure skating judging anything but a strange and highly privileged position? If you screw up, you should not be allowed to do it anymore period.

15. 0
A complaint based on a bad judge being on the panel should be filed when the judge is assigned, not after the competition has concluded. It makes the complaint look more like they didn't like the outcome, rather than not liking the judge. (Although I agree it's stupid to have someone like that on the panel in the first place.)

Page 112 of 119 First ... 12 62 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 Last

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•