2025 Worlds: Ice Dance thoughts and comments

[4everchan]

This is the problem.

These things are extremely important to the technical evaluation of ice dance.

But they are not being measured objectively with instruments. They are being assessed by the human eye.

It is possible to assess them without bias, with more knowledge than most fans can bring to the process and from a better seat.

In the sense that such assessment is unbiased (except in those situations when it isn't), it could be considered "objective."

But it still relies on human perception. Which are estimates, not exact measurements. And potentially affected by external factors such as expectations, skate order, etc. So unfortunately we can't really call these assessments perfectly objective. They're just the best we have available for now.

Technology that would actually measure things like ice speed, edge depth, edge security would make the evaluation more objective in a true sense of the word. But at what costs (financially and otherwise)?

For fans at home, camerawork and editing can also introduce huge distortions of the relative quality of different teams. Most likely unintentionally, at least in terms of trying to influence which teams look "better" on video. But, e.g., the perception of smoothness and flow, or even of speed, can be significantly influenced by the number of cuts or dissolves between cameras or the number of closeups vs. medium shots, etc.

I agree... it's the same in my field. The objective components are still evaluated by human ears. But it's not like an experimented judge cannot recognize quality here.

It's not quantitative objectivity but it is qualitative and that is a major part of the scoring system. Judges are SUPPOSED to be able to do that in a professional and fair manner. When I am invited to judge a music competition, I have to apply these objective parameters to determine who played better technically. I agree that part of my score will be subjective based on things that are harder to measure like "musicality" for instance... but still, even there, there is a sense of objectivity because a musician able to share beautiful flowing phrases needs the technical ability to do so... so even the parts that are more left to "personal taste" can be found in mastery of technique.

 

[TontoK]

There will always be disagreements over judging. But even if IJS didn't solve all the issues, I'll take it over 6.0.

It was easy for me to understand when I watched Torino as a four-year fan. And I trusted those results more than 6.0.

Here's one thing I will say about IJS. Nobody's placement is safe. For the most part, performances are judged by what the skaters deliver that day.

I think the judges have preferred Chock and Bates for the past three years. Fair enough, they're perceived as being pretty danged good. But, the judges weren't afraid for Piper and Paul win both segments at 4CC, because they were better on that day. And I'm pretty sure Piper and Paul have, in the past, won one of the segments when skating against them at other events. Similarly, I think Olivia and Tim's RD placement in Boston was 9th, and they bounced back with a 3rd in the FD. I don't think you'd have seen either of those happen in 6.0.

Heading into next year, with the caveat that none of us have seen any of the programs yet, I'd put Chock and Bates as the favorites, just because history has shown they can best deliver what the judges want. But by no means are they a lock for any competition. They could win everything all year and still lag behind another team at the Olympics. That's exciting.

 

[Diana Delafield]

I am not sanguine about the ISU's prospects for making people trust the scoring of a judged sport.

Suppose the ISU convened a tribunal and called the 2025 Worlds ice dance panel on the carpet.

ISU: Why did you score this team so high?

Judges 1-5: We were impressed by their speed and glide, the quality of their edges.

ISU: Did Carol Lane make you do it?

Judges 1-5: Who?

ISU to judges 6-9: Why did you score this team so low?

Judges 6-9: We were not overly impressed with their speed and flow nor with the quality of their edges.

ISU: Did Yuri Balkov make you do it?

Judges 6-9: Who?

Back in 2002 the ISU hoped that the IJS would make figure skating judging less controversial. Has it? It seems like after every competition, no matter who wins or loses, fans rush to the internet to post stop-frame screen.captures proving that some skater should have got a q on her triple Salchow, those rotten cheating lying tech specialists!. I do not expect this to change, no matter what the ISU does or doesn't do to win over fans or to educate them about the scoring rules.

This happens in all judged sports, no matter how niche or widely popular.

 

[throw_triple_flip]

Which was correct ? In your opinion... I believe this is one of the rare occasions that C POM have beaten LaLa... a collateral damage from the lowballing form judges 6-9.


I am not contradicting myself when I mention this because I was refering to programs who may appeal to a broader audience and LaLa's free dance missed the mark this year... does it mean it was badly skated? Does it mean their skillset is inferior ? Or do we see a switch in judging to reward what the public may like or be excited about " Dune" "Disco Brits" rather than classical lyrical free dances.

but that's the point . Their performance was good.
Lilah and Lewis had 2 major mistakes yet are on the podium

That's quite a contradiction right ?

He was correct- they placed higher. They have had relatively similar scores to each other all season, the American team performed really well. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that they could place higher. I wasn't really struck on either team's frees this season, but that does not mean the judges were wrong, or conspiring to push them ahead of other talented teams. Lajoie and Lagha have also won medals over some very talented teams themselves with mistakes. So isn't that a contradiction too? Where are your conspiracies when that happens? Or perhaps, like other teams, they have other qualities that can make up for some mistakes.

If we're going to single out judges and invent wild conspiracies, why those particular judges? Perhaps the other judges were wrong, etc, etc, etc. The teams I liked here weren't going to medal (and some didn't even make the free- e.g Ukrainian and Japanese teams). Does that necessarily make them robbed or conspired against victims? No.

 

[4everchan]

Piper and Paul have beaten them many times... Just not for the big prize. They won gpf. Won the fd art Worlds last year. 4cc. Etc and they used to be ahead of them a while back...

I agree with the possibilities with ijs mentioned

Here's one thing I will say about IJS. Nobody's placement is safe. For the most part, performances are judged by what the skaters deliver that day.

I think the judges have preferred Chock and Bates for the past three years. Fair enough, they're perceived as being pretty danged good. But, the judges weren't afraid for Piper and Paul win both segments at 4CC, because they were better on that day. And I'm pretty sure Piper and Paul have, in the past, won one of the segments when skating against them at other events. Similarly, I think Olivia and Tim's RD placement in Boston was 9th, and they bounced back with a 3rd in the FD. I don't think you'd have seen either of those happen in 6.0.

Heading into next year, with the caveat that none of us have seen any of the programs yet, I'd put Chock and Bates as the favorites, just because history has shown they can best deliver what the judges want. But by no means are they a lock for any competition. They could win everything all year and still lag behind another team at the Olympics. That's exciting.

He was correct- they placed higher. They have had relatively similar scores to each other all season, the American team performed really well. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that they could place higher. I wasn't really struck on either team's frees this season, but that does not mean the judges were wrong, or conspiring to push them ahead of other talented teams. Lajoie and Lagha have also won medals over some very talented teams themselves with mistakes. So isn't that a contradiction too? Where are your conspiracies when that happens? Or perhaps, like other teams, they have other qualities that can make up for some mistakes.

If we're going to single out judges and invent wild conspiracies, why those particular judges? Perhaps the other judges were wrong, etc, etc, etc..

Not conspiracy, merely observation. Have a look at skating scores and then we can talk

 

[Mathman]

Have a look at skating scores and then we can talk

Well, I will probably regret it, but I did look at the skating scores TSS score data from the free dance.

This is what I got out of it.

Judge #! (KOR): Chock and Bates 2, Gilles and Poirier 1, Lajoie and Lagha 4
Judge #2 (CHN): C&B 2, G&P 2, LaLa 5
Judge #3 (USA): C&B 1, G&P 2, LaLa 4
Judge #4 (LTU): C&B 1, G&P 2, LaLa 7
Judge #5 (ITA): C&B 1, G&P 2. LaLa 7
Judge # 6 (AZE): C&B 1, G&P 3, LaLa 10.
Judge #7 (EST) C&B 1, G&P 2, LaLa 10.
Judge #8 UKR): C&B 1, G&P 3, LaLa 12
Judge #9 (SVK) C&B 1, G&P 2, LaLa 12.

There was also some information given about standard deviations and z-scores.which did not look alarming to me. For such small sample sizes the z-scores would have to be 3 or so to raise any statistical eyebrows, and plus, this kind of analysis is based on the expectations of randpm sampling, not on purposeful choices.

As for Lajoie and Lagna, yes it does seem like Korea, China and USA liked their dance better than the Eastern Europeans did.

 

[4everchan]

Well, I will probably regret it, but I did look at the skating scores TSS score data from the free dance.

This is what I got out of it.

Judge #! (KOR): Chock and Bates 2, Gilles and Poirier 1, Lajoie and Lagha 4
Judge #2 (CHN): C&B 2, G&P 2, LaLa 5
Judge #3 (USA): C&B 1, G&P 2, LaLa 4
Judge #4 (LTU): C&B 1, G&P 2, LaLa 7
Judge #5 (ITA): C&B 1, G&P 2. LaLa 7
Judge # 6 (AZE): C&B 1, G&P 3, LaLa 10.
Judge #7 (EST) C&B 1, G&P 2, LaLa 10.
Judge #8 UKR): C&B 1, G&P 3, LaLa 12
Judge #9 (SVK) C&B 1, G&P 2, LaLa 12.

There was also some information given about standard deviations and z-scores.which did not look alarming to me. For such small sample sizes the z-scores would have to be 3 or so to raise any statistical eyebrows, and plus, this kind of analysis is based on the expectations of randpm sampling, not on purposeful choices.

As for Lajoie and Lagna, yes it does seem like Korea, China and USA liked their dance better than the Eastern Europeans did.

And how did these judges mark the Georgians?

 

[chepe]

Free dance score differential for top pairs (Highest score - lowest score):
Euros:
Guignard/Fabbri 9.9 (130.98-121.08)
Fear/Gibson 18.43 (135.10-116.67)
Lopareva/Brissaud 5.82 (126.67-120.85)
Turkkila/Versluis 7.56 (127.68-120.12)
Smart/Dieck 13.17 (127.57-114.40)
Orihara/Pirinen 17.29 (124.36-107.07)
Davis/Smolkin 12.32 (121.55-109.23)
Taschlerova/Taschler 11.66 (119.21-107.55)

4Cont:
Chock/Bates 4.65 (133.69-129.04)
Gilles/Poirier 8.26 (135.20-126.94)
Lajoie/Lagha 8.82 (122.34-113.52)
Carreira/Ponomarenko 7.79 (121.37-113.58)

Worlds:
Chock/Bates 3.73 (132.99-129.26)
Gilles/Poirier 7.41 (133.38-125.97)
Guignard/Fabbri 7.9 (128.11-120.21)
Fear/Gibson 12.14 (129.57-117.43)
Turkkila/Versluis 5.83 (123.91-118.08)
Lajoie/Lagha 12.73 (123.99-111.26)
Carreira/Ponomarenko 5.33 (127.24-121.91)
Lopareva/Brissaud 8.41 (120.87-112.46)
Smart/Dieck 6.49 (125.88-119.39)
Orihara/Pirinen 13.49 (121.51-108.02)
Davis/Smolkin 16.56 (123.39-106.83)
Green/Parsons 13.88 (120.00-106.12)
Taschlerova/Taschler 13.53 (119.99-106.46)

Hypothetically, large differential might imply promoting/dumping by one or two judges, or somehow controversial or divisive program. Of course, sometimes judges might just not see the same mistakes. Small differential shows consensus about the pair's performance.

Another way would be to look at the placement differentials, it would tell slightly different information, as judges may have different 'scale' on their points. Otoh some detail would be lost due to granularity of data points.

As can be seen, judges were on remarkably even base about the score of Chock/Bates, even if not all of them placed them #1.

Source for points is skatingscores, any errors by me hand typing the values...

 

[Andrea82]

And how did these judges mark the Georgians?

Judge #1 (KOR): 11
Judge #2 (CHN): 12
Judge #3 (USA): 11
Judge #4 (LTU): 8
Judge #5 (ITA): 15
Judge # 6 (AZE): 6
Judge #7 (EST): 9
Judge #8 (UKR): 5
Judge #9 (SVK): 9


The UKR judge here used to be AZE and the AZE judge used to be UKR. They switched Feds around a decade ago.

 

[4everchan]

Judge #1 (KOR): 11
Judge #2 (CHN): 12
Judge #3 (USA): 11
Judge #4 (LTU): 8
Judge #5 (ITA): 15
Judge # 6 (AZE): 6
Judge #7 (EST): 9
Judge #8 (UKR): 5
Judge #9 (SVK): 9


The UKR judge here used to be AZE and the AZE judge used to be UKR. They switched Feds around a decade ago.

So the 5 judges ranking them above their final ranking
Lithuania
Azerbaijan
Estonia
Ukraine
Slovakia

all former soviet republics or state under the influence of the soviet world.

In some ways, I'd be tempted to think that perhaps if they had skated a free dance with a classical ballet theme, or were a team with balletic aesthetic, I'd be willing to say, it's a question of cultural tradition/taste. But that's not the case with the Georgians. They are severely lacking the extension and refinement linked to some of the former greats from the Eastern European tradition.

I am sorry but it's hard for me, considering a formerly suspended judge, Salome Chicogidze, from Georgia, was around judging pairs, to not think about yet, another Yuri B incident type.

 

[4everchan]

Free dance score differential for top pairs (Highest score - lowest score):
Euros:
Guignard/Fabbri 9.9 (130.98-121.08)
Fear/Gibson 18.43 (135.10-116.67)
Lopareva/Brissaud 5.82 (126.67-120.85)
Turkkila/Versluis 7.56 (127.68-120.12)
Smart/Dieck 13.17 (127.57-114.40)
Orihara/Pirinen 17.29 (124.36-107.07)
Davis/Smolkin 12.32 (121.55-109.23)
Taschlerova/Taschler 11.66 (119.21-107.55)

4Cont:
Chock/Bates 4.65 (133.69-129.04)
Gilles/Poirier 8.26 (135.20-126.94)
Lajoie/Lagha 8.82 (122.34-113.52)
Carreira/Ponomarenko 7.79 (121.37-113.58)

Worlds:
Chock/Bates 3.73 (132.99-129.26)
Gilles/Poirier 7.41 (133.38-125.97)
Guignard/Fabbri 7.9 (128.11-120.21)
Fear/Gibson 12.14 (129.57-117.43)
Turkkila/Versluis 5.83 (123.91-118.08)
Lajoie/Lagha 12.73 (123.99-111.26)
Carreira/Ponomarenko 5.33 (127.24-121.91)
Lopareva/Brissaud 8.41 (120.87-112.46)
Smart/Dieck 6.49 (125.88-119.39)
Orihara/Pirinen 13.49 (121.51-108.02)
Davis/Smolkin 16.56 (123.39-106.83)
Green/Parsons 13.88 (120.00-106.12)
Taschlerova/Taschler 13.53 (119.99-106.46)

Hypothetically, large differential might imply promoting/dumping by one or two judges, or somehow controversial or divisive program. Of course, sometimes judges might just not see the same mistakes. Small differential shows consensus about the pair's performance.

Another way would be to look at the placement differentials, it would tell slightly different information, as judges may have different 'scale' on their points. Otoh some detail would be lost due to granularity of data points.

As can be seen, judges were on remarkably even base about the score of Chock/Bates, even if not all of them placed them #1.

Source for points is skatingscores, any errors by me hand typing the values...

Thank you, very interesting information.

 

[FSFan1999]

Free dance score differential for top pairs (Highest score - lowest score):
Euros:
Guignard/Fabbri 9.9 (130.98-121.08)
Fear/Gibson 18.43 (135.10-116.67)
Lopareva/Brissaud 5.82 (126.67-120.85)
Turkkila/Versluis 7.56 (127.68-120.12)
Smart/Dieck 13.17 (127.57-114.40)
Orihara/Pirinen 17.29 (124.36-107.07)
Davis/Smolkin 12.32 (121.55-109.23)
Taschlerova/Taschler 11.66 (119.21-107.55)

4Cont:
Chock/Bates 4.65 (133.69-129.04)
Gilles/Poirier 8.26 (135.20-126.94)
Lajoie/Lagha 8.82 (122.34-113.52)
Carreira/Ponomarenko 7.79 (121.37-113.58)

Worlds:
Chock/Bates 3.73 (132.99-129.26)
Gilles/Poirier 7.41 (133.38-125.97)
Guignard/Fabbri 7.9 (128.11-120.21)
Fear/Gibson 12.14 (129.57-117.43)
Turkkila/Versluis 5.83 (123.91-118.08)
Lajoie/Lagha 12.73 (123.99-111.26)
Carreira/Ponomarenko 5.33 (127.24-121.91)
Lopareva/Brissaud 8.41 (120.87-112.46)
Smart/Dieck 6.49 (125.88-119.39)
Orihara/Pirinen 13.49 (121.51-108.02)
Davis/Smolkin 16.56 (123.39-106.83)
Green/Parsons 13.88 (120.00-106.12)
Taschlerova/Taschler 13.53 (119.99-106.46)

Hypothetically, large differential might imply promoting/dumping by one or two judges, or somehow controversial or divisive program. Of course, sometimes judges might just not see the same mistakes. Small differential shows consensus about the pair's performance.

Another way would be to look at the placement differentials, it would tell slightly different information, as judges may have different 'scale' on their points. Otoh some detail would be lost due to granularity of data points.

As can be seen, judges were on remarkably even base about the score of Chock/Bates, even if not all of them placed them #1.

Source for points is skatingscores, any errors by me hand typing the values...

I do think this competition the tech panel level scoring was more worrying than the judging. And more obviously inaccurate/had double standards.

And that's what's really dissapointing for me.

 

[4everchan]

I do think this competition the tech panel level scoring was more worrying than the judging. And more obviously inaccurate/had double standards.

And that's what's really dissapointing for me.

I think both the tech panel and the judges were having "fun"

 

[Mathman]

And how did these judges mark the Georgians?

Good morning!

Well, as reported above, judges from AZE, EST UKR and SLV ranked Davis and Smolkin 6th, 9th, 5th and 9th, compared to rankings of 8th through 12th for the other judges on the panel, in TSS. Not a good look, but for me it is hard to know what conclusions can be drawn. It seems likely that some old guard soviets are in a posture of "hunkering down and circling the wagons" these days. I am, however, somewhat leery of trying to psychoanalyze strangers from afar, and also about jumping to general conclusions on the basicsof statistical anomalies. For one thing, it is not so clear whether EST and SLV got the memo -- or at ;least, they got the part abut holding Lajoie and Lagha down but not so much the part about propping Davis and Smolkin up.

I am somewhat reminded of the situation in 2002. It was widely believed that Piseev and Gailhaguet had come to an accord whereby the French judge would vote for Berezhnaya and Sikharulidze over Sale and Pelletier in pairs, while the Russian judge would vote for Anisinna and Pieserat in ice dance. When it came down, the French judge did support Berezhnaya and Sikharulidze (and was briefly banned, along with Gailhaguet when everything was laid bare). The Russian ice dance judge voted for Lobecheva and Averbukh.

As Aragorn famously said in the Lord of the Rings, speaking about the Orcs, "With such as these, we cannot tell when they are in league and when they are cheating one another."

The ISU, of course, responded by introducing -- not the IJS but rather "anonymous judging." Their motto became," Never again will the ISU open itself up to criticism by hanging out its dirty laundry in public."

 

[TontoK]

I do think this competition the tech panel level scoring was more worrying than the judging. And more obviously inaccurate/had double standards.

And that's what's really dissapointing for me.

Please be specific, because it's hard to uncover the cause for your disappointment if we don't know the specifics.

Which elements from which duo were over-leveled/under-leveled by the technical panel? Which features of those elements do you think were not credited to the skaters because the panel missed them? Which features of those elements do you think the judges incorrectly rewarded?

 

[Andrea82]

So the 5 judges ranking them above their final ranking
Lithuania
Azerbaijan
Estonia
Ukraine
Slovakia

all former soviet republics or state under the influence of the soviet world.

In some ways, I'd be tempted to think that perhaps if they had skated a free dance with a classical ballet theme, or were a team with balletic aesthetic, I'd be willing to say, it's a question of cultural tradition/taste. But that's not the case with the Georgians. They are severely lacking the extension and refinement linked to some of the former greats from the Eastern European tradition.

I am sorry but it's hard for me, considering a formerly suspended judge, Salome Chicogidze, from Georgia, was around judging pairs, to not think about yet, another Yuri B incident type.

Aze judge underscored everyone in the Free Dance except for Fear/Gibson (he had them 2nd), Davies/Smolkin, Chock/Bates and Smart/Dieck.
UKR judge was on the low side for few couples (Lajoie/Lagha, Orihara/Pirinen, Smart/Dieck and Gilles/Poirier). She especially liked Taschlers, Davis/Smolkin, Fabbri/Ayer and Demougeot/Le Mercier. And Fear/Gibson.
Lithuanian judge overscored compared to the panels many couples but especially Davis/Smolkin, Fear/Gibson and Bekker/Hernandez.
Slovakian judge didn't like Lajoie/Lagha and Fear/Gibson. He didn't overscore Davis/Smolkin. They were 9th rather than 10th in his ranking because of the low score for L/L. He liked the Taschlers and Bekker/Hernandez.

 

[Mathman]

Aze judge underscored everyone in the Free Dance except for Fear/Gibson (he had them 2nd), Davies/Smolkin, Chock/Bates and Smart/Dieck.
UKR judge was on the low side for few couples (Lajoie/Lagha, Orihara/Pirinen, Smart/Dieck and Gilles/Poirier). She especially liked Taschlers, Davis/Smolkin, Fabbri/Ayer and Demougeot/Le Mercier. And Fear/Gibson.
Lithuanian judge overscored compared to the panels many couples but especially Davis/Smolkin, Fear/Gibson and Bekker/Hernandez.
Slovakian judge didn't like Lajoie/Lagha and Fear/Gibson. He didn't overscore Davis/Smolkin. They were 9th rather than 10th in his ranking because of the low score for L/L. He liked the Taschlers and Bekker/Hernandez.

To me, it seems hard to draw any conclusions from these data. Different judges scored various teams higher or lower than their colleagues did.

Well, that's what judges do. They offer their judgements.

 

[MiraiFan]

Did not love the results here at all. Piper and Paul were far superior--the creativity and ice coverage across both programs was fantastic. I don't mind Bock, but their free dance was a snooze and the music cuts in the rhythm dance were horrid. LaLa and G&P both got hosed. I don't understand the C & P love at all. I mean, Carmen??? Just no. G & P are the only top US dance team who actually train in the US and their federation seems to totally hate them. I hope they make the Olympic team despite this--they are wonderful!

 

[4everchan]

Good morning!

Well, as reported above, judges from AZE, EST UKR and SLV ranked Davis and Smolkin 6th, 9th, 5th and 9th, compared to rankings of 8th through 12th for the other judges on the panel, in TSS. Not a good look, but for me it is hard to know what conclusions can be drawn. It seems likely that some old guard soviets are in a posture of "hunkering down and circling the wagons" these days. I am, however, somewhat leery of trying to psychoanalyze strangers from afar, and also about jumping to general conclusions on the basicsof statistical anomalies. For one thing, it is not so clear whether EST and SLV got the memo -- or at ;least, they got the part abut holding Lajoie and Lagha down but not so much the part about propping Davis and Smolkin up.

I am somewhat reminded of the situation in 2002. It was widely believed that Piseev and Gailhaguet had come to an accord whereby the French judge would vote for Berezhnaya and Sikharulidze over Sale and Pelletier in pairs, while the Russian judge would vote for Anisinna and Pieserat in ice dance. When it came down, the French judge did support Berezhnaya and Sikharulidze (and was briefly banned, along with Gailhaguet when everything was laid bare). The Russian ice dance judge voted for Lobecheva and Averbukh.

As Aragorn famously said in the Lord of the Rings, speaking about the Orcs, "With such as these, we cannot tell when they are in league and when they are cheating one another."

The ISU, of course, responded by introducing -- not the IJS but rather "anonymous judging." Their motto became," Never again will the ISU open itself up to criticism by hanging out its dirty laundry in public."

Here is a thought..

why 5 judges from former soviet world on a panel of 9?

only 1 judge from Western Europe...

No canada... no france... no Uk judge (ok UK was on the TP)

My point is : i can imagine that a different judging panel may have brought in different results... and that's what is making me edgy.

If you insert Canada (though they have a reputation for not judging their own too favorably) and France, I bet LaLa and Lopareva Brissaud would score higher...


I am not surprised either that a crowd of judges from former soviet influence -let's not forget that probably most these judges were born soviet... considering average age of judges.... would like CPom.... Ponomarenko senior was a huge star and olympic champion and of course, they can relate to Carmen... a classic

 

[4everchan]

To me, it seems hard to draw any conclusions from these data. Different judges scored various teams higher or lower than their colleagues did.

Well, that's what judges do. They offer their judgements.

Aze judge underscored everyone in the Free Dance except for Fear/Gibson (he had them 2nd), Davies/Smolkin, Chock/Bates and Smart/Dieck.
UKR judge was on the low side for few couples (Lajoie/Lagha, Orihara/Pirinen, Smart/Dieck and Gilles/Poirier). She especially liked Taschlers, Davis/Smolkin, Fabbri/Ayer and Demougeot/Le Mercier. And Fear/Gibson.
Lithuanian judge overscored compared to the panels many couples but especially Davis/Smolkin, Fear/Gibson and Bekker/Hernandez.
Slovakian judge didn't like Lajoie/Lagha and Fear/Gibson. He didn't overscore Davis/Smolkin. They were 9th rather than 10th in his ranking because of the low score for L/L. He liked the Taschlers and Bekker/Hernandez.

Interesting... but there are conclusions that could be drawn in my opinion.. .

Maybe the agenda is not to mark up/ low ball in block... but maybe it's just a thing about LaLa versus Georgians... I won't give more than that because if I can observe this, the rest would be speculation and I am not into that Observation is fine by me though