- Joined
- Feb 26, 2014
And Hersh is different because he is so self-congratulatory. There is too much Hersh in his writing and not enough knowledge.
:thumbsup:
And Hersh is different because he is so self-congratulatory. There is too much Hersh in his writing and not enough knowledge.
Trying to get rid of anonymous judging is bogus anyways. Until the scandal in 2002 everyone knew who the judges were and it still didn't keep them from cheating and being corrupt. This sport has been corrupt since the Sonja Henie days and probably before even then.
Trying to get rid of anonymous judging is bogus anyways. Until the scandal in 2002 everyone knew who the judges were and it still didn't keep them from cheating and being corrupt. This sport has been corrupt since the Sonja Henie days and probably before even then.
True. Still…the current situation brings its own set of special problems. There is a greater emphasis on the technical aspects of the sport. This increases the power of the three-person technical panel, vis-a-vis the nine-person panel of judges. Put two like-minded people on the tech panel and that's that.
In an add-up-the-points system of scoring, a dedicated minority of judges can easily out-point an honest and uninvested majority.
Throw in anonymity and the ISU does not even need to acknowledge, much less respond to, fan dissatisfaction.
Are there anymore "sub-panels" to offset this? This sounds unnecessarily complicated and obviously corrupt.
I think there are two questions. First, does the current method for determining the winner make it easier than ever for someone to cheat and get away with it?
But there is another question that applies to judged sports in general. Assume for a moment that all judges are honest, unbiased and competent. Here are the scores (out of ten points maximum) given by nine judges (in an admittedly artificially extreme example). Who should win, skater A or skater B?
Skater A: 6 6 6 6 6 3 3 3 3
Skater B: 5 5 5 5 5 8 8 8 8
Please. I've read a lot, lot worse in sports journalism and gossip columns.
To quote Dustin Hoffman's character in Wag the Dog: "this is nothing".
Under the ordinal system such as the 6.0, Skater A wins because more judges placed him/her over Skater B.
Under the point system under which the highest and the lowest scores are discarded, Skater B wins with a higher total score (44 vs 33) despite having more points thrown out (13 vs 9 for Skater A)
The political voting system by district is similar to the 6.0 in that the smallest majority elects the representative in a district. A party or a president may be elected with a much smaller number of total votes than the defeated opponent party or candidate.
Maybe that is why the Americans are so attached to the 6.0.
And so…which is better, in your opinion?
louisa05 said:Yep. Columnists that write about football fancy themselves better coaches than the coaches.
Mathman said:No, I don't think so. There were nine voters and two candidates. Five of the nine voters voted for skater A. That seems pretty straightforward.
I can't speak for all Americans , but to me the real different does not have much to do with voting and scoring schemes, with cheating judges, or any of the rest of it. In my opinion the difference is that CoP is good for the participants -- skaters, parents, coaches, judges, officials -- while 6.0 was better for the fans (more-pleasing programs, more-satisfying performances). In numerous on-line discussions, the ever-patient GKelly has convinced me that skating ought to be for the skaters, especially the youngsters who never make it to TV. So be it
I tend to agree with him. The use of kowtow is an unfortunate choice, bringing with it a slew of colonial associations, but on the whole his criticisms are not unfair. Cinquatta has abused his privilege and power; anonymous judging is indefensible; judges with conflict of interest should not be on panels deciding the most prestigious prizes in the sport; there's no reason why all program lengths should not be the same.
It is beyond tiresome that every time someone points these problems out, he/she/they are accused of Russia bashing by someone on here. Beyond tiresome.
I think it's up the skaters (and their support teams) to adapt to the prevailing system if they want to win. Personally, I think a scoring system with clear rules and guidelines is better for everyone involved.
I agree that the COP, though not perfect and still evolving, is better for the participants. As for the fans, they are divided, with different reasons and opinions. For some, COP becomes the dumping grounds for frustrations and displeasure with the results as well as the governing system even if the real causes are extrinsic of the scoring
I cant stand his work
I still don't get why you people keep watching this sport if it sucks that much.Speaking of Hersh, here is an article by his Russian-German counterpart, the ever-entertaining Artur Werner.
http://www.wer-art.com/news/273.html
About anonymous judging, Werner makes the clever observation that Mrs. S. kind of gave up her own anonymity (to urbi et orbi ) in terms of which judge supported which skater by her actions immediately following the ladies free program at Sochi. He then proceeds to spin a tale about a meeting in Moscow where Mr. Piseev bullied representatives from former SSRs to vote down the proposal to eliminate anonymous judging leaving Russia itself on the side of the angles.
Most interesting, though, is Mr. Werner's account of a challenge based on European Union age-discrimination laws that could allow Mr. Cinquanta to serve as ISU president forever, or at least well past the ISU Constitution's requirement that he step down in 2014 -- oops, I mean 2016 (doggone that pesky constitution anyway).
Thanks to Vialiakid for posting this on FSU.
About anonymous judging, Werner makes the clever observation that Mrs. S. kind of gave up her own anonymity (to urbi et orbi ) in terms of which judge supported which skater by her actions immediately following the ladies free program at Sochi.
I still don't get why you people keep watching this sport if it sucks that much.
Here is a newsflash for the apologists: If the sport is going to ever be flush with cash again, it has to improve its reputation in North America. But instead of improving its reputation, IT IS AND CONTINUES TO LOSE GROUND IN NORTH AMERICA ON THE BASIS OF BEING CORRUPT. What happened at the Olympics has had a negative effect. (For those who disagree about the effect of the Olympics on the reputation of the sport, I want to smoke whatever they are smoking.) And for those who don't like how the North Americans are reacting en masse, most North Americans don't care. They are not watching anymore and they are not going to pay for it anymore.
Are you really suggesting that the rest of the world is corrupt and North America is the salvation because the pure and honest are all there?
You better gett-off the podium you've build up there. :sarcasm:
There are no apologists here towards ISU or Cinquanta. Just people who call things with their name: Hypocrisy and double standarts.
Separating the North American market from Figure Skating, however, is very bad for the sport. And that is what has happened: FACT.