Domnina/Shabalin's FD performance at Delaware

[i love to skate]

No, I don't actually think the same will happen if Chan wins. The European media for once is a lot less powerful and a lot more diverse than the North-American one - which is absolutely natural, because we are dozens of different countries and not just 2 different ones.

I meant the tone on the boards...

It was particularly bad during 4CC last year and will only be multiplied during the Olympics.

 

[Medusa]

I meant the tone on the boards...

It was particularly bad during 4CC last year and will only be multiplied during the Olympics.

As I said, I don't think a handful of posters will be of great importance.

I was also thinking more of the big picture, since the journalists probably didn't think of skating boards when they talk about big controversies.

 

[i love to skate]

As I said, I don't think a handful of posters will be of great importance.

I was also thinking more of the big picture, since the journalists probably didn't think of skating boards when they talk about big controversies.

I only brought it up because you said you would stay away from the boards because all hell would break loose if Plushy or Joubert wins. It would be the same if any Canadian wins. I am staying away from the boards during the Olympics as well - expect if maybe I can post a practice report - for this very reason.

Sure, journalists think and use skating boards. Skating boards were where Hersh got information from his last article.

 

[Mathman]

Figure skating judging still open to controversy, says Dick Pound

http://www.skatebuzz.com/ViewNewsArticle.aspx?id=82152cde-51f7-4b5d-b62b-6fab22504859

Thanks for the link. Pound's main point, besides wanting to get rid of anonymous judging, is that the judges are selected by and must report back to their national federations. Since most national federations come right out and say, on page one of their by-laws, "the purpose of this organization is to win as many medals for our skaters in international competition as possible," it is easy to see the problem.

Not so easy to see the solution, though. I believe this was one of the main reasons for coming up with the tech specialist. The technical panel is appointed directly by the ISU and -- in principle -- is not beholden to any individual national federation.

But the ISU itself is a collection of just such federations. I doubt if the ISU has the resources to train its own judges, even if it had the will to do so. Bottom line -- the main job of a figure skating judge is to "win as many medals as possible for his/her country's skaters." I don't see anywhere in the charters of the federations anything about, "and supply honest unbiased judges to the ISU."

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Thanks for your response, Medusa - as ill-phrased as the question might have been.

 

[jcoates]

I have the same feeling. And I wouldn't have a problem with it - if there wasn't always the slight indication that only the Europeans are the evil ones and that every non-European skater always deserves her / his marks or was even robbed.

I think it is partly cultural, partly a left-over from the bygone Cold War era and partly a remnant of the old 6.0 system when boosting by judges for their own skater or those of an "allied" country were fairly obvious and now is obscured due to anonymous judging. Unfortunately, the judging scandals since the Cold War ended have only served to harden people's perceptions, biases and opinions when they should have actually faded over time.

The cultural aspect is that many western countries were perceived among themselves as approaching judging over the decades in a different way than eastern/former Soviet bloc countries did. No bloc judging, no supporting each other's skaters, no national bias, etc. Was this always true?... of course not. Still the general values favored transparency, honesty and impartiality. Of course this was colored by a western aesthetic sensibility that did not always favor an opposite approach. There were likely many reverse feelings on the other side as well.

Look at any old Oly or World vid, especially from British Eurosport from the 70's, 80's or 90's. The commentators regularly point out the favoritism among judges for their own countryman including western judges. In fact, while I know he is very unpopular in this thread right now, Aunt Joyce actually had a post on this subject last week or the week before where he linked to a vid compilation of judging "curiosities".

 

[i love to skate]

Thanks for the link. Pound's main point, besides wanting to get rid of anonymous judging, is that the judges are selected by and must report back to their national federations. Since most national federations come right out and say, on page one of their by-laws, "the purpose of this organization is to win as many medals for our skaters in international competition as possible," it is easy to see the problem.

Not so easy to see the solution, though. I believe this was one of the main reasons for coming up with the tech specialist. The technical poanel is appointed directly by the ISU and -- in principle -- is not beholden to any individual national federation.

But the ISU itself is a collection of just such federations. I doubt if the ISU has the resources to train its own judges, even if it had the will to do so. Bottom line -- the main job of a figure skating judge is to "win as many medals as possible for his/her country's skaters." I don't see anywhere in the charters of the federations anything about, "and supply honest unbiased judges to the ISU."

Pound didn't do his homework before he made his statement and he clearly has an agenda. For people who don't know, he really likes to go on "witch hunts". I don't give much value to anything he says. CEO of Skate Canada's response

http://www.ctvolympics.ca/figure-skating/news/newsid=25612.html

 

[Mathman]

Pound didn't do his homework before he made his statement and he clearly has an agenda. For people who don't know, he really likes to go on "witch hunts". I don't give much value to anything he says. CEO of Skate Canada's response

http://www.ctvolympics.ca/figure-skating/news/newsid=25612.html

Interesting.

"The anonymity was put in place to free judges from pressure from their federations, which is what the problem was in 2002," Thompson said.

I think Mr. Thompson is at best naive if he believes that anonymous judging addresses this problem. Anonymous judging does not free judges from pressure from their federations -- that is absurd. The ISU and the federation bosses know exactly how the scoring went, it is just the public that is kept in the dark.

"There are still programs that look for biased judging and, if they detect it, identify the judge and then the judges get sanctioned. So it's not like there's no accountability and no penalties. It's just that it's not public which judge it is.

I think this is a big public relations problem that the ISU seems oblivious to. The ISU says, just put your trust in us, we will handle everything correctly behind the closed doors of our inner sanctum and tell you no more than we want you to know. This is why people like Mr. Pound continually express suspicion.

 

[i love to skate]

I think Mr. Thompson is at best naive if he believes that anonymous judging addresses this problem. Anonymous judging does not free judges from pressure from their federations -- that is absurd. The ISU and the federation bosses know exactly how the scoring went, it is just the public that is kept in the dark.

Well considering he was an Olympic level judge I would believe his statements. He knows more about it than anyone of us does.

I think this is a big public relations problem that the ISU seems oblivious to. The ISU says, just put your trust in us, we will handle everything correctly behind the closed doors of our inner sanctum and tell you no more than we want you to know. This is why people like Mr. Pound continually express suspicion.

The ISU is not doing anything differently than any other sporting organization. We don't know the "internal going ons" just what we are given. There is a huge controversy right now in the NHL because a player has alleged that a referee took him aside and told him he was going to "get back at him" for a call that happened in an earlier game. What happened? The ref called a ridiculous penalty at the end of the game which caused the Canucks to lose the game. What happened? Nothing happened to the ref and the player was fined.

Pound has never liked skating and he always speaks out about something. I find it quite ironic that he is saying the ISU is corrupt when in fact he belongs to the most corupt organization (IOC) on the planet!

 

[Mathman]

Well considering he was an Olympic level judge I would believe his statements. He knows more about it than anyone of us does.

Do you mean that Mr. Thompson has first-hand experience of being pressured by his federation to score a certain way, and now that pressure is less intense because of anonymous judging? Or that by sitting on judging panels he obsereved this with respect to judges of other countries?

I would believe that the ISU is telling the truth if they came right out and said, we want secret judging for the same reason that the National Hockey League does, or for that matter, the IOC itself -- to cover up all the questionable schenanigans that go on. It is when they say, we want everything to be secret because anonymity produces better judging -- that's the part I have to question.

 

[i love to skate]

Do you mean that Mr. Thompson has first-hand experience of being pressured by his federation to score a certain way, and now that pressure is less intense because of anonymous judging? Or that by sitting on judging panels he obsereved this with respect to judges of other countries?

I would believe that the ISU is telling the truth if they came right out and said, we want secret judging for the same reason that the National Hockey League does, or for that matter, the IOC itself -- to cover up all the questionable schenanigans that go on. It is when they say, we want everything to be secret because anonymity produces better judging -- that's the part I have to question.

I was referring to these comments from Thompson:

"I was an Olympic-level judge, I have judged with these people and the vast, vast majority are simply trying to do the best they can, and they are doing it honestly and in good faith. They are not trying to manipulate the result. They're trying to get the right result."

"The anonymity was put in place to free judges from pressure from their federations, which is what the problem was in 2002," Thompson said. "There are still programs that look for biased judging and, if they detect it, identify the judge and then the judges get sanctioned. So it's not like there's no accountability and no penalties. It's just that it's not public which judge it is.

"All the penalties and whatnot are certainly in place."

My point was that Pound simply did not do his homework on the new system. There are penalities for improper judging and the ISU knows who each judge is.


These comments from Jennifer Robinson also point out that he has always had a beef with figure skating, questions the timing of this statement, and mentions an agenda:

This hasn't come out of the blue," said Robinson, a six-time Canadian figure skating champion. "He has always had an issue with figure skating and the judging system."

"I do find his timing interesting though. A Canadian Championship coming up, an Olympic Games coming up in Canada. No idea what the agenda is there, but it just seems interesting."

While the figure skating world doesn't deem its judging system perfect, its experts do feel the current system is a huge improvement over the old one.

"The judging system has come a long way, and you can't say there isn't great mathematical merit to it," said Robinson."There is still a long way to go, but the scoring is much, much better."

Pound is getting slammed in the media here, BTW.

 

[oxade21]

Anonymity does not make any difference in terms better judging BUT it helps to prevent circus like in SLC.

 

[Mathman]

Anonymity does not make any difference in terms better judging BUT it helps to prevent circus like in SLC.

Exactly. Anonymous judging does not produce better judging. It just hides problems from public scrutiny. Public circuses are good. Sneaking around in the dark alleys is bad.

Power to the people, up the establishment! The people may have a right to a secret ballot, but judges do not have a right to conduct secret trials.

You go into the Star Chamber to face the judges in secret...maybe you don't come out again. I am not consoled by the hope that the Emperor might later review the conduct of the judges -- in secret.

I was referring to these comments from Thompson:...

I agree with everything Thompson said except this:

"The anonymity was put in place to free judges from pressure from their federations."

Yes, this is the official explanation. But I think the real reason was, as Oxade says, to prevent public circuses like what happened in Salt Lake City.

In other words, the purpose of secrecy is not to prevent wrong-doing but to hide it. (That almost seems like a tautology to me. That's what secrecy means -- hiding something.)

...the ISU knows who each judge is.

So do the leaders of the powerful national federations. The only people who are in the dark are us.

This is a bad thing. Forget Mr. Pound. Anonymous judging undermines public confidence in the objectivity of the sport.

 

[i love to skate]

This is a bad thing. Forget Mr. Pound. Anonymous judging undermines public confidence in the objectivity of the sport.

Does it really though? No one is suggesting that skating is without a level of subjectivity, that will always be part of it and therefore it can't remain totally objective. However, if the now head of Skate Canada, who was an Olympic judge in two events in 2006, says that the vast majority of judges are good, honest people and that the annoymous judging is better for the sport then I am going to believe him.

Was there any major controversies, scandals, or outrage over the placements in 2006? Nope. How about 2002? Yes. How about 1998? Yep. How about 1994? Sure was. Doesn't 2006 seem like an improvement over those three Olympics? The 1994, 1998, and 2002 judges were all known to the audience and we had two of the largest scandals in figure skating history in two of those Olympics.

 

[Mathman]

However, if the now head of Skate Canada, who was an Olympic judge in two events in 2006, says that the vast majority of judges are good, honest people and that the anonymous judging is better for the sport then I am going to believe him.

I, too, believe that the vast majority of judges are good, honest people.

As for believing that anonymous judging is a good thing because the President of the Canadian skating federation tells me so, I am not so eager to jump to the tune. I am pretty sure that Ottavio Cinquanta -- with 15 years experience at the helm of the major international figure skating organization -- will tell me the same thing.

It just seems like common sense to me. If you want to cheat, are you more likely to cheat in secret or out in the open?

 

[i love to skate]

As for believing that anonymous judging is a good thing because the President of the Canadian skating federation tells me so, I am not so eager to jump to the tune. I am pretty sure that Ottavio Cinquanta -- with 15 years experience at the helm of the major international figure skating organization -- will tell me the same thing.

I don't expect other people to believe him for that reason. For me, as a member of the CFSA/Skate Canada for the past 21 years who has had nothing but positive interactions with this association, volunteers, and staff members, yes that makes me inclined to believe him. Plus, he actually judged in 2006 under the annoymous system.

 

[Mathman]

I apoligize if you took any of my comments as unwarrented criticism of Skate Canada officials.

But however knowledgable and well-intentioned they are, they are not immune from making public relations errors. I think this is one.

We are all agreed that the ISU and its member federations know which judge gave which scores. This throws out the window the official explanation for anonymous judging (which Mr. Thompson repeats here) -- that it protects judges from their own federations. Whatever the real reason, anonymous judging gives the appearance that the figure skating establishment has something to hide. Why go out of your way to make yourself look like a shady character?

 

[i love to skate]

We are all agreed that the ISU and its member federations know which judge gave which scores. This throws out the window the official explanation for anonymous judging (which Mr. Thompson repeats here) -- that it protects judges from their own federations. Whatever the real reason, anonymous judging gives the appearance that the figure skating establishment has something to hide. Why go out of your way to make yourself look like a shady character?

I think it is only the ISU who knows who each judge is. The individual federations would not know. Also, it seems that only if a mark is outside the "acceptable margin" it is then looked up and the identity of that judge revealed to the ISU.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

I think you just inadvertently proved Mathman's point.

 

[i love to skate]

I think you just inadvertently proved Mathman's point.

How? The federations don't know if their judge's score was one that was thrown out or used. They indvidual federations also don't know what score the judge gave. The judges are annoymous to the individual federations and the public but not to the ISU.