- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
2004 US FS Championships- Review
- Thread starter gsk8
- Start date
Cohen and the 6.0
I just don't understand how any judge give a skater who falls and makes another boo-boo or two a 6.0.
Just how does that make any sense?
If that happens again - regardless of who is skating - they'll need to come up another new way of scoring, adjudicating the skaters.
Good Grief!! sh
I just don't understand how any judge give a skater who falls and makes another boo-boo or two a 6.0.
Just how does that make any sense?
If that happens again - regardless of who is skating - they'll need to come up another new way of scoring, adjudicating the skaters.
Good Grief!! sh
Shdotz,
ITA that the 6.0 for Sasha was wrong. However, they have come up with a new scoring system--the COP. Although I think the COP needs tweaking, I hope the ISU uses it for all events starting next season. With the COP, any judge who's score is way out of line with the rest of the judge's marks, either high or low, gets thrown out.
One thing about the scores, including Sasha's 6.0, in the end they don't really matter. All that matters are the ordinals. All 9 judges gave Michelle first place ordinals. We may get annoyed at a skater getting a mark that is too high, but what counts is the ordinal. Michelle got all first place ordinals and the gold medal. IMO, that's what matters. Also, hopefully the USFSA will ask the judge to justify why s/he gave Sasha a 6.0. If that judge cannot justify it, s/he hopefully won't receive top judging assignments in the future.
Rgirl
ITA that the 6.0 for Sasha was wrong. However, they have come up with a new scoring system--the COP. Although I think the COP needs tweaking, I hope the ISU uses it for all events starting next season. With the COP, any judge who's score is way out of line with the rest of the judge's marks, either high or low, gets thrown out.
One thing about the scores, including Sasha's 6.0, in the end they don't really matter. All that matters are the ordinals. All 9 judges gave Michelle first place ordinals. We may get annoyed at a skater getting a mark that is too high, but what counts is the ordinal. Michelle got all first place ordinals and the gold medal. IMO, that's what matters. Also, hopefully the USFSA will ask the judge to justify why s/he gave Sasha a 6.0. If that judge cannot justify it, s/he hopefully won't receive top judging assignments in the future.
Rgirl
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
I, too, hope they will do that. Personally I didn't think that Sasha's performance deserved it, but I'm tired of people putting her down for a mistake of the judge.Rgirl said:
However, I remember some other instance when someone probably fell, too (I don't remember it too well), and she/he got a 6.0, and I remember thinking that I could agree with that, because that person gave a really good performance. I remember a discussion somewhere about it -- do mistakes (that didn't seem to really disturb the program) count for presentation marks, and should they? Now I think they should count, of course, but I wasn't so sure then. Unfortunately I can't remember who it was we talked about.
Now you're talking science fiction.
Windspirit,
Excellent point that skaters who receive a 6.0 for a flawed performance tend to get blamed rather than the judge who gave the bogus score. The skaters just skate, for better or worse. They have nothing to do with the scores, unless the skater is bribing the judge and somehow I don't see that in this situation at all.
As for my comment that hopefully the judge who gave the 6.0 won't receive top judging assignments being science fiction--too true, sigh, too true. In fact, that judge will probably be promoted, lol.
Rgirl
Excellent point that skaters who receive a 6.0 for a flawed performance tend to get blamed rather than the judge who gave the bogus score. The skaters just skate, for better or worse. They have nothing to do with the scores, unless the skater is bribing the judge and somehow I don't see that in this situation at all.
As for my comment that hopefully the judge who gave the 6.0 won't receive top judging assignments being science fiction--too true, sigh, too true. In fact, that judge will probably be promoted, lol.
Rgirl
Sasha's 6.0
Please allow me to clarify my position:
No one can blame Sasha for the 6.0; that's just plain silly.
The judging system cannot legitimately give a 6.0 when there's a fall as well as other, even slight errors.
The computer system is gambling - a crap shoot.
We all saw the 6.0; there's no denying that mistake, and yet it could have cost another the title if the scores were close. That is the point I was trying to make.
As it is, there's no way that 6.0 could unravel MK's glorious skate; not this time, but what if the scores were much, much closer. Then, it would be horrible. What a scandal that would create!
sh
Please allow me to clarify my position:
No one can blame Sasha for the 6.0; that's just plain silly.
The judging system cannot legitimately give a 6.0 when there's a fall as well as other, even slight errors.
The computer system is gambling - a crap shoot.
We all saw the 6.0; there's no denying that mistake, and yet it could have cost another the title if the scores were close. That is the point I was trying to make.
As it is, there's no way that 6.0 could unravel MK's glorious skate; not this time, but what if the scores were much, much closer. Then, it would be horrible. What a scandal that would create!
sh
I read on another board that Michelle Kwan once got a 6.0 for a fall, and then someone was very quick to point out that despite the fall she landed a 3/3 and a total of 5 or 6 triples, while the others didn't do so well.
I wouldn't have had a problem with Sasha's 6.0 had it been deserved compared to a weak field. But it wasn't. It was too high a score for her skate that night.
Does anyone know if the judge was questioned?
I wouldn't have had a problem with Sasha's 6.0 had it been deserved compared to a weak field. But it wasn't. It was too high a score for her skate that night.
Does anyone know if the judge was questioned?
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2003
I just don't see receiving a 6.0 with a fall....EVER. I don't care how sublime the rest is, 6.0 implies perfection and a fall is not perfect. Michelle received a 6.0 for presentation (from the Russian judge I believe!) in the LP at the 1999 Skate Canada. She fell once and the rest was beautiful, but even then I didn't agree with a 6.0. A 5.9? Sure. Can anyone remember other flawed performances that received a 6.0?
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2003
At the 1972 Olympics, Janet Lynn had a fall but got a 6.0. I think it was on a spin though. I can't recall anyone complaining against it, the general view was that her skating transcended the fall.
Steve Winkler was the judge who gave Sasha the 6.0. That was bad enough, but he also gave her 5.7 technical, with 5 skaters in the final group left to go. He wasn't exactly leaving room, was he? The only marks better than 5.7/6.0 are 5.8/6.0, 5.9/5.9, 5.9/6.0, 6.0/5.9 and 6.0/6.0. Winkler was basically saying as far as he was concerned, Sasha had already won unless someone else could skate perfectly.
Kwan skated close to perfectly, and so Winkler gave her 5.9/6.0, but he had boxed himself in and more or less had to give the 5.9 because she had NO mistakes compared to Sasha's two.
I believe Kwan also got that string of 6.0s because the judges' presentation marks for Sasha were all 5.8s and 5.9s.
I'm not sure the same thing couldn't happen under CoP. Remember the GPF? Sasha fell twice and got three 9.0s in Skating Components.
Kwan skated close to perfectly, and so Winkler gave her 5.9/6.0, but he had boxed himself in and more or less had to give the 5.9 because she had NO mistakes compared to Sasha's two.
I believe Kwan also got that string of 6.0s because the judges' presentation marks for Sasha were all 5.8s and 5.9s.
I'm not sure the same thing couldn't happen under CoP. Remember the GPF? Sasha fell twice and got three 9.0s in Skating Components.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
The only skaters to get a score of 9+ in the GP after trimmed mean was applied were Navka/Kostomarov, who got a 9.15 in Interpretation for their Free Dance at Cup of Russia. The rest of the 9's were either from judges that weren't selected or scores that were trimmed or averaged down.
dewet said:
Go look again at the Detailed scores for Sasha Cohen, GPF Free Skate. Judge #6 gave Sasha 9.0s in Performance/Execution, Choreography and Interpretation. And Sasha fell twice during the program.
Yes, those scores would have been thrown out, but if one judge marks like that, the day may come when multiple judges do it.
6.0 and judge and cohen
Well, we know very well that a 6.0 was unearned and that someone wanted Sasha to win regardless of how others skated.
Cheating. Again.
Will this ever end?
I often wonder why the skaters skate when they know the deck is stacked.
Terrible. sh
Well, we know very well that a 6.0 was unearned and that someone wanted Sasha to win regardless of how others skated.
Cheating. Again.
Will this ever end?
I often wonder why the skaters skate when they know the deck is stacked.
Terrible. sh
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2003
Jimmy Hoffa said:
It did. She got a row of 5.9s and 6.0s and the bronze medal. I thought she fell on a jump, but I could be wrong. I remember her falling, then Uncle Dick interviewing her after she learned she'd won the bronze. She just glowed.
If people don't like the 6.0 system because judges may give inflated and undersevered score to some skaters and they don't like the COP even though the high and low scores are thrown out because someday a lot of judges may give scores you feel are inflated and undeserved, what judging system would people support? Just curious.
BTW, at Nationals, I think the final placements of the skaters were correct. We can speculate forever on what might have happened if the scores had been closer, and we can even look at competitions where the scores really were close and the vote of one judge by 1/10th of 1 point made the difference, eg. '94 Olympics, Oksana and Nancy; '84 Olympics, Kat Witt and Roz Sumners, but I think that first we have to decide if the final outcome of the event is fair. If so, then judges who gave out-of-line scores, like the 6.0 for Sasha, should be required to justify their marks to the USFSA. I know, in my dreams, lol. Seriously, I don't think one can assume judge Steve Winkler was cheating, that is, purposefully trying to rig the outcome of a competition no matter how the skaters performed. I think we can assume his judging skills are poor, but other than that, we can't see inside his mind as to what his motives are. His 5.7 for Sasha's technical mark certainly was not out of line with the rest of the judges. And if most of the judges gave Sasha 5.8 or 5.9 for presentation, perhaps they see things in her skating thatnonfans of Sasha don't. Bottom line, Michelle won and again I would like to emphasize that the scores don't really matter much. It's the ordinals that count. No matter what scores the judges use get to the ordinals, as long as the placements are correct or justifiable, then to me the scores don't matter.
This is only one reason I like the COP, despite its need for tweaking. ChuckM is correct that Sasha got three 9.0s at the GPF in her component scores. They were all from judge #6, one for Performance/Execution, one for Interprtation, one for Choreography. Because judge #6's 9.0s in those three compoent areas were the highest, they were thrown out, along with the second highest scores for each component and each technical element, plus the two low scores for each component and each technical mark, plus the scores of two random judges. That means it would be almost impossible for enough judges to get together and in advance fix the scores so a certain skater would win without it being extremely obvious that collusion was involved. Essentially, ALL scores would have to be unreasonably inflated and any mistakes or falls on jumps and other technical elements flat out ignored. True, anything is possible. But under the COP is it probable? No.
IMO, I find it more useful to evaluate judging in terms of probabilities than possibilities. With the COP, it's possible for a wealthy fan of a particular skater to secretly pay off all 11 judges so they will give his/her skater the highest marks no matter what the skater does. But the probability of that happening is so low as to be highly insignificant, not to mention that happening without it being obvious, causing a hue and cry about true cheating.
Sasha's 6.0 was underserved. But it did not affect the final results. It could have, but it didn't. Event the judge who gave Sasha the 6.0, Steve Winkler, gave Michelle the first place ordinal. He did not completely box himself in as he had plenty of options for scoring the other five skaters. Perhaps he did not want to see the first skater penalized for going first--another thing that is not a problem with the COP--thought of course I don't know what was in his mind. Whatever it was, IMO, the final placement of the ladies at Nationals was correct. Next year I hope they will use an improved version of the COP at all events so this kind of thing does not happen.
Interesting comments from all
Rgirl
BTW, at Nationals, I think the final placements of the skaters were correct. We can speculate forever on what might have happened if the scores had been closer, and we can even look at competitions where the scores really were close and the vote of one judge by 1/10th of 1 point made the difference, eg. '94 Olympics, Oksana and Nancy; '84 Olympics, Kat Witt and Roz Sumners, but I think that first we have to decide if the final outcome of the event is fair. If so, then judges who gave out-of-line scores, like the 6.0 for Sasha, should be required to justify their marks to the USFSA. I know, in my dreams, lol. Seriously, I don't think one can assume judge Steve Winkler was cheating, that is, purposefully trying to rig the outcome of a competition no matter how the skaters performed. I think we can assume his judging skills are poor, but other than that, we can't see inside his mind as to what his motives are. His 5.7 for Sasha's technical mark certainly was not out of line with the rest of the judges. And if most of the judges gave Sasha 5.8 or 5.9 for presentation, perhaps they see things in her skating thatnonfans of Sasha don't. Bottom line, Michelle won and again I would like to emphasize that the scores don't really matter much. It's the ordinals that count. No matter what scores the judges use get to the ordinals, as long as the placements are correct or justifiable, then to me the scores don't matter.
This is only one reason I like the COP, despite its need for tweaking. ChuckM is correct that Sasha got three 9.0s at the GPF in her component scores. They were all from judge #6, one for Performance/Execution, one for Interprtation, one for Choreography. Because judge #6's 9.0s in those three compoent areas were the highest, they were thrown out, along with the second highest scores for each component and each technical element, plus the two low scores for each component and each technical mark, plus the scores of two random judges. That means it would be almost impossible for enough judges to get together and in advance fix the scores so a certain skater would win without it being extremely obvious that collusion was involved. Essentially, ALL scores would have to be unreasonably inflated and any mistakes or falls on jumps and other technical elements flat out ignored. True, anything is possible. But under the COP is it probable? No.
IMO, I find it more useful to evaluate judging in terms of probabilities than possibilities. With the COP, it's possible for a wealthy fan of a particular skater to secretly pay off all 11 judges so they will give his/her skater the highest marks no matter what the skater does. But the probability of that happening is so low as to be highly insignificant, not to mention that happening without it being obvious, causing a hue and cry about true cheating.
Sasha's 6.0 was underserved. But it did not affect the final results. It could have, but it didn't. Event the judge who gave Sasha the 6.0, Steve Winkler, gave Michelle the first place ordinal. He did not completely box himself in as he had plenty of options for scoring the other five skaters. Perhaps he did not want to see the first skater penalized for going first--another thing that is not a problem with the COP--thought of course I don't know what was in his mind. Whatever it was, IMO, the final placement of the ladies at Nationals was correct. Next year I hope they will use an improved version of the COP at all events so this kind of thing does not happen.
Interesting comments from all
Rgirl
Similar threads
