Do you think Michelle

[R.D.]

I don't know anyone who questions that Slutskaya shoudn't have won the LP and title in Moscow. The question is whether the scores in Moscow and particularly in Torino were inflated and disproportionate to the actual performance.

EXACTLY. I'm not even that familiar with the scoring system and I think Irina was held up more than she needed to be. But WHY? WHY, I ask? She won the **** thing, she didn't NEED to be held up! Couldn't the judges just think fair for ONCE? They knew Irina won already, so maybe they didn't care- they'd figure they could get away with it...

(BTW- there are those who think Irina shouldn't have won the SP, or was way overmarked in the SP. However with that FS performance she would have easily come back anyway.)

 

[nymkfan51]

(BTW- there are those who think Irina shouldn't have won the SP, or was way overmarked in the SP. However with that FS performance she would have easily come back anyway.)

But you see, here is where I have a bit of a different feeling abou that. I contend that you cannot assume a skater would skate the same performance in the LP if their placement in the SP was say 3rd, instead of 1st. Now probably Irina would have won anyway, but there is no way to be sure of that. With all the pressure she had put on herself to win in Moscow, what if she had been 3rd or 4th in the short (where she belonged, IMO). As it was, she had to feel some sense of relief that she could skate not at her best, and still come out with those high scores ... plus, that maybe she didn't have to be absolutely perfect in the LP. My thinking is that could have eased some of the pressure and allowed her to skate more freely in the long.
I could also be completely wrong ... but we will never know how things would have turned out if the judging had been different.

 

[euterpe]

The point (with Irina's 1st in the Worlds 05 SP and Euros 05 FS) is in the PCS scores, the judges are not judging the performance they are seeking in front of them. They are scoring based on who they want to win the competition.

If that is not a definition of cheating, I don't know what is.

 

[Mathman]

For two reasons: 1. to use their judgement by following the guidelines that are there to ensure the correct weight of each aspect of skating, instead of overinflating and overemphasizing a specific aspect of the skate and 2. to make performances over different competitions comparable, which doesn't work if #1 doesn't happen. There's a reason for each element's and each component scores value.

To me, what's missing is the "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" thing.

How shall we reward a performance like Shen and Zhou's Turandot at 2003 Worlds, or Yagudin's Winter SP, that rocks the house and leaves you laughing, crying, cheering, and just overall glad that you are watching figure skating instead of football. 3 touchdowns + 3 extra points + 2 field goals = 27, somebody wins, someboy loses, ho hum.

MM

 

[hockeyfan228]

But you see, here is where I have a bit of a different feeling abou that. I contend that you cannot assume a skater would skate the same performance in the LP if their placement in the SP was say 3rd, instead of 1st. Now probably Irina would have won anyway, but there is no way to be sure of that. With all the pressure she had put on herself to win in Moscow, what if she had been 3rd or 4th in the short (where she belonged, IMO). As it was, she had to feel some sense of relief that she could skate not at her best, and still come out with those high scores ... plus, that maybe she didn't have to be absolutely perfect in the LP. My thinking is that could have eased some of the pressure and allowed her to skate more freely in the long.
I could also be completely wrong ... but we will never know how things would have turned out if the judging had been different.

This reasoning would be pertinent to 6.0, but not nearly as much under CoP, at least in Moscow, when the margins are so small. While looking element by element I could argue that she should have lost a few points here or there, even based on the .25 factored standings from the quali rounds, the only skater she would have been behind was Cohen, and then just barely. Even so, her quali skate was 4.5 points higher than Cohen's, and that didn't include the higher base difficulty in her LP. I don't think Slutskaya would have been terribly worried about the LP, if she were marginally out of the lead after the SP. (The media might have made a big deal of it.) Kwan and Kostner, who were both comparatively undermarked in pre in my opinion, were far enough behind after the quali round that they wouldn't have moved ahead of Slutskaya after the SP, even with a shift of a couple of points.

I thought Cohen herself was overmarked for a rather tepid performance of her SP, including a shaky spiral sequence in which she lost her hand grip and in which her edge was tentative as she tried to rebalance on one phase, and she still received +GOE on it, with only on -1 mark, and little impact on her PCS. If Slutskaya was inconsistent technically, she wasn't muted.

Plushenko had a dilemma, because, while he and Lambiel were in a virtual tie after the quali round, he dropped 7 points in the SP. If both skaters had matched their performance in the quali round in the LP, that margin would have held. Ironically, Lambiel's score in the LP was 7.82 points less than his score in the quali round, but Plushenko was in too much pain from double hernias and his knee to even attempt to match his quali skate. Because Plushenko was so far behind after the SP, I don't think the pressure on Lambiel, Joubert, and Buttle would have been any different if EP had skated: all three knew the world title was in their grasp and that EP was ailing.

 

[hockeyfan228]

To me, what's missing is the "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" thing.

If that's missing, then the judges should have discretionary "whole is greater than the sum of its parts" points that are accounted for separately, instead of inflating scores that are unrelated.

Then again, S&P's LP at SLC had a "wow" factor -- aptly described by Bianchetti in her book -- that B&S's didn't have, and the results there will be debated until there are no more discussion boards, because of comparison of more tangible factors.

I was at DC when Shen/Zhao performed Turandot, and, yes, there was an intangible element to it and I stood like everyone else, but their closest competition, who had a more intricate program with better ice coverage, were saddled with a program with inappropriate style and music. (I miss those dance lifts from T/M's latest programs.)

 

[R.D.]

I contend that you cannot assume a skater would skate the same performance in the LP if their placement in the SP was say 3rd, instead of 1st.

This is a really good point. But I would imagine that such a placement might have the opposite effect (you never know, though)- a skater might feel MORE pressure in 1st place than in 3rd or 4th. So I think Irina would have won no matter what. If she was able to "close the deal" while in first place, imagine how she would feel if she was lower in the standings.

 

[luvsasha]

Kwan is already our 2006 US National champion (unless she pulls out).

well, i don't think she is. if she skates really bad, and sasha doesn't, then sasha should get it. Unless the judges are really biassed and GIVE her 10 titles.

Plus, it's under COP.

 

[R.D.]

if [Kwan] skates really bad, and sasha doesn't, then sasha should get it.

I agree, but what's the likeihood of that happening? That's what I base my "predictions" (more like visions) of the Nats on. I just cannot see Kwan not winning next year, regardless of the scoring system. Cohen MAY have an edge but it's up to her to take advantage of it.

 

[luvsasha]

true. Sasha has at least has 9 COP points on Michelle.

 

[mzheng]

true. Sasha has at least has 9 COP points on Michelle.

You mean last worlds or did u see MK's program already?

 

[Mathman]

I agree, but what's the likeihood of that happening? That's what I base my "predictions" (more like visions) of the Nats on.

I love it! Visions! Now you're talkin'!

You mean last worlds or did u see MK's program already?

In a vision, LOL.

MM

 

[Mathman]

Then again, S&P's LP at SLC had a "wow" factor -- aptly described by Bianchetti in her book -- that B&S's didn't have, and the results there will be debated until there are no more discussion boards, because of comparison of more tangible factors.

I don’t regard differences of opinion as necessarily negative. At the Nagano Olympics six judges (and a bunch of people watching live and at home) thought Tara’s performance was Wow. Three judges (and lots of other folks) thought Michelle’s performance was Wow. Setting aside the bunches and the lots, Tara wins, six to three. What’s controversial about that?

To say that Michelle should have won, as if we are passing a moral judgment, or to say that Michelle really did win but wuzrobbed, as if we are groping towards cosmic Truth, seems kind of silly to me.

I am not dismayed that people still argue about whether Sale and Pelletier’s emotive story-telling was better than Berezhnaya and Sikharudlidze’s intricate choreography. In fact, it’s good for the sport that they do. Four judges liked one pair, four judges liked the other, one judge’s vote was thrown out for improprieties. So if the judging panel is split, why should we be surprised that fans posting on the Internet are split, too?

Yes, the CoP was ballyhooed as a way to take the subjectivity out of judging. But I can’t say that I am shocked to see that it didn’t. In sports it is the job of a referee to see that the rules are fairly executed. Judges judge. I don’t see anything wrong with that.

MM

 

[R.D.]

To say that Michelle should have won, as if we are passing a moral judgment, or to say that Michelle really did win but wuzrobbed, as if we are groping towards cosmic Truth, seems kind of silly to me.

ITA. (Goes for all other skaters as well.)

Yes, the CoP was ballyhooed as a way to take the subjectivity out of judging. But I can’t say that I am shocked to see that it didn’t. In sports it is the job of a referee to see that the rules are fairly executed. Judges judge. I don’t see anything wrong with that.

There are some cases where refs' decisions determine outcomes of (close) games, but more often than not, the teams involved control their own destiny.

Here's the problem with judges- you tend to have favoritism. At least a ref's job is simply to determine whether the rules of the sport are being followed. (Now, don't get me wrong- there are cases of biased refs, but due to the "mechanics" of the sport these are easier to spot IMO). The judges' job is to determine the outcome of the entire event. This is the real reason why I can't call FS a sport- there's no way to win an event just by following the rules. Someone has to determine the winner, and that somebody will always be biased. If it's not towards a specific skater, it may be towards a specific style of skating or move in skating. JMO

 

[hockeyfan228]

I don’t regard differences of opinion as necessarily negative. At the Nagano Olympics six judges (and a bunch of people watching live and at home) thought Tara’s performance was Wow. Three judges (and lots of other folks) thought Michelle’s performance was Wow. Setting aside the bunches and the lots, Tara wins, six to three. What’s controversial about that?

To say that Michelle should have won, as if we are passing a moral judgment, or to say that Michelle really did win but wuzrobbed, as if we are groping towards cosmic Truth, seems kind of silly to me.

What I find interesting about the "wow" performances is that more people admit to changing their mind that the "non-wow" skater team should have won (B&S in 2002, Kerrigan in 1994, Kwan in 1998) after watching the performance many times and over time than those who go the other way. I don't think the judges who voted for them thought that B&S, Kerrigan, and Kwan were "wow," but that they were more accomplished in traditional skating skills and that this should carry weight over "wow." When you take the immediate emotional reaction out of it, the conclusion can be quite different. The "I know it when I see it" performances are very different than judging the apples and oranges of Kwan vs. Chen at 1996 Worlds or trying to judge between two pretty flawed performances.

I don't have a problem with judges judging; I have a problem with them making up the criteria and reformulating the balance as they see fit, to meet the needs of their deals and biases. The whole point of being trained as a judge is to differentiate and to try to keep bias out of the decision as much as possible. "Activist" judges on figure skating panels don't belong there, in my opinion.

 

[Piel]

I promise to be unbiased if they will let me on the judging panel for the ladies FS of the Olympics! AND I will forgo the anonymity and let the world know how I scored them and why!:thumbsup:

 

[R.D.]

Next thing you know, for some odd reason Kwan has 200 points hwell:

 

[mzheng]

I don't have a problem with judges judging; I have a problem with them making up the criteria and reformulating the balance as they see fit, to meet the needs of their deals and biases. The whole point of being trained as a judge is to differentiate and to try to keep bias out of the decision as much as possible. "Activist" judges on figure skating panels don't belong there, in my opinion.

ITA. I just hope these judges judging more consistantly from Olympics to Olympics, competetions to competetions......I would think if they prefered Bauil at 1994, they should've prefered Kwan at 1998, yet they diddn't........

 

[Piel]

ONLY if she earns them the old fashioned way....with that amazing Kwan Smiral! Home many points does one add for Kwanderfulness?

 

[Piel]

......I would think if they prefer Bauil at 1994, they should prefer Kwan at 1998....

These are probably the same judges who thought Kwan was too young to be a ladies champion but had no problem with Tara .......who looked about 12!