Hamm and Yang

[Vash01]

Paul Hamm is angry and expressing his anger openly. He needs to vent his anger privately, with his family and friends, and maintain his dignity.

He needs to let the authorities handle this. He need not offer his gold medal to Yang. He did not give the marks and he does not make these decisions.

He is clearly a better gymnast than both Koreans but his fall in the vault was what put him in a position to have to fight to even medal. The Koreans were not as good as him but they performed adequately to be in a position to be at the top, so that should not be an issue in this case. If they followed the correct procedures but were denied fairness, that mistake needs to be corrected. I am against taking away a medal from any athlete unless he/she fails the drug test (or some other DQ). That leaves just one other option.

Normally I would not support changing the results of a game (in this case an mpic event). However, a precedent was set in Salt Lake City- a duplicate gold was awarded almost immediately. It did not move S&Z to a silver medal. To be consistent and fair, Yang should be awarded a duplicate gold without changing the results for anyone else. In fact the duplicate gold ceremony should be televised during prime time. Otherwise this will be a case of double standards (of course people in different parts of the worlds will perceive this differently).

 

[mzheng]

Paul shouldn't have won in thd first place, IMO. After his huge mistake in vault, judges had been try to prompt him up at the cost of other competetor, which included the other US athleter.

Complainning not only from Korean, they happened to have some slolid proofs. I've read in other web site. The complains about Paul's allround gold came from Rominian, Rusian, etc. Chinese expert had kept the quite at the time. A formal china Oly all around gold Li Shao Shuang(?) said after men's all around, 'Never saw in gymnastics could win all around after such a big mistake. But Paul proved he is best gymnatics in today's men's field'. After Patterson won women's all around he said 'If there is any doubt about Paul's win. Then patterson's win was well deserved".

And now all NA media starting propganting that South Korean diddn't file the complaining before next round started. The fact was they made the inqury at the time, but they were told to file written protest direct to next level officialy. Thus they filed written protest the next day. I happened to think the difficult in communication in English directly was also cause of some misunderstanding. I doubt the result will be overturn or second gold be rewarded (I hope at least they will do this). Korean simply don't have super power media on their side. Even though their own media can protested all they wanted but no general viewer from other country would understand them.

So far I only see NA protests got ruled on their favor. Not chinese or Korean. Chinese lost gold in men's team fencing to Italy because of Judg's obvious bias error/mistakes. And one of the judge had been suspended on spot, late suspended for life time. Even then chinese only was told by some authority right after the competetion that 'we were really sorry, the judge will be investigated but the result couldn't be changed'. That's it and chinese just accepted it.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5788776/

 

[Vash01]

I am surprised by the amount of detail given in one of these articles (can't remember which one). Apparently the Koreans tried every possible way to get the error corrected, but they were not given anything. Their only option appears to be to go to the court of arbitrations. I don't believe anything will come out of it. The Koreans don't have powerhouse media on their side, and S.Korea does not have the political clout of the USA. Had the situation been reversed, where a US athlete had been marked incorrectly, we might have seen a complete reversal of reactions, and perhaps even a second gold medal.

 

[mzheng]

The Koreans don't have powerhouse media on their side, and S.Korea does not have the political clout of the USA. Had the situation been reversed, where a US athlete had been marked incorrectly, we might have seen a complete reversal of reactions, and perhaps even a second gold medal.

That's exactly my point. In general US athelters been cut a lot slacks.

The woman 200 breath stoke, IMO, the gold should've gone Austrialia Jones. Beard out touched the Jones, but Beard's used the butter fly kick at final to do so.

Piel's last turn in his 200 back strokes was 'ilegal', IMO, he made a stroke after his body complete faced down. But on other hand I thought he deserved his win because leads more than 2 seconds, enough to put him at the leade even without that 'advantage'.

 

[hockeyfan228]

According to the LA Times, the Koreans have the USOC on their side:

Hours after international gymnastics officials acknowledged a key judging mistake in the men's all-around event, U.S. Olympic officials said yesterday that they would support South Korean officials in a bid to award duplicate gold medals to American Paul Hamm and Korean Yang Tae Young.

.

(Free registration required):

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-oly22aug22,1,6821342.story

The FIG and IOC would have to agree to a duplicate gold.

 

[Mathman]

Piel, I am inclined to agree with most of what you say. Giving Yang the gold isn't just switching places between the two men. That would mean the silver medalist would be down-graded to bronze. He may not agree with that at all. If the judges had started with 10.0 as the starting point, might they not have been more critical of what Yang actually performed. I don't remember exactly his routine, but others have said that he had several form breaks, wasn't perfect, and may still have performed close to what he did score. Might a higher score by Yang then have inspired others to tighten up their routines and score better? This has a potential "domino effect" where one performance or "score" effects the others to come? Just a thought..................42

Unfortunately, I think this is the point of view that will and must prevail. If something had been different, everything might have been different from then on -- both the performances of the athletes and the marks of the judges.

Would Michelle Kwan have skated better in the LP at Salt Lake City and won the gold if the judges of the SP had put Irina Slutskaya ahead on Thursday, as many thought was right? There is no way that any sports association can take might-have-beens like that into account in awarding medals.

Mathman

 

[Piel]

We can all agree that once again judges have managed to screw up a wonderful sport!

 

[soogar]

I think the problem is that the Koreans did bring the issue up as soon as the score came out but like figure skating , there has to be so many letters written that the score can't be corrected on the spot. I don't really get all the letter writing and faxing that needs to be done to correct the problem. Other sports (ie tennis) just deal with protests on the spot and the correction is made right away. I think that this procedure just discourages people from questioning their scores. And then when they do, they just get the line that the competition is already over so they just need to live with the results.

 

[RealtorGal]

Duplicate gold medals were awarded in SLC because by removing the French judge's decision, there were 4 votes in favor of each team. This is not the case here. Awarding a second gold medal would be, in effect, making Paul's gold null and void, regardless of whether or not he got to keep it.

 

[soogar]

Realtor Girl:
I think that Paul's medal is already null and void, esp since they did find that there was a scoring error and made an affirmative ruling on that. I think a duplicate gold medal is the kindest thing that can be done for Paul, verses the just thing in just awarding him the silver and giving the Korean the sole possession of the gold. Paul would not have scored a 9.9 on the HB. The judges didn't even give a great pommel horse routine (done by a Chinese gymnast in the team final) a 10 even though Dagget said that the program was a few tenths higher in difficulty than everyone else's program in the games.

 

[mzheng]

Duplicate gold medals were awarded in SLC because by removing the French judge's decision, there were 4 votes in favor of each team. This is not the case here. Awarding a second gold medal would be, in effect, making Paul's gold null and void, regardless of whether or not he got to keep it.

But they can use SP result as the tie break.

"Paul would not have scored a 9.9 on the HB"

IMO, he already got propped up at HB. The other guy, had the most difficult routine on HB and performed just as flawlessly as Paul, but Paul got almost the same score as that guey, just because he had more reputation than that guy.

 

[Mathman]

Paul would not have scored a 9.9 on the HB.

Then again, maybe he would have.

No, maybe not.

Actually, I have a lot of sympathy for the predicament that the judges of sports like gymnastic, diving and figure skating are in. No matter how you slice it, no matter how precise you try to make the CoP or it's equivalent, it still comes down to whose performance you liked better. Whatever you say or do, half the people in the arena will think you are a fool or a crook.

Mathman

 

[Mathman]

But they can use SP result as the tie break.

But you can see how wrong that would be. Sale and Pelletiere should have won the short program, except for all the crooked anti-Canadian judges who marked them down for falling on their final pose.

No wait. The SP should have been a tie.

No, wait, I mean they should have used the vote of the alternative judge to make up the complement of nine for the LP. So S&P should win.

No, I mean B&S.

Mathman

 

[mzheng]

I gave the girl commentator at diving a lot praise. She talks professionally, and dose her best for 'no bias' comenting.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Joe, my understanding (or misunderstanding ) of gymno scoring is that there are two panels of judges. One panel determines the SV and the other panel is only looking for deductions. This should mean that if the panel changes the SV, then the deductions should not be affected. It also raises the question of whether or not judges decisions concerning deductions are affected by the SV, even if they did not determine what it is. I hope that made sense.

Thanks, Lynn - I am now beginning to understand the judging in Gynaststics. However, these tricks have a certain value, I presume. I would think that the coaches when working out the gymnast's routines that they would know what the SV should be before the competition. If the Panel determing the SV comes up with a different value are the coaches permitted to file a complaint at that point? I am presuming that the SVs are made public before the competition.

As you say decisions of judges when an SV is changed affects the judging is a moot point. We will never know for sure with this piece of subjectivity.

Main question for me and others: Are the SVs made public before the competition
Joe

 

[lavender]

If I were Paul I would just say forget it and take your medal and walk away with nothing. He doesn't need this crap. If they are going to crap all over Paul then lets just review the whole competition and make adjustments here and there and see if any of them medal. :\

 

[Yazmeen]

I posted this on FSU, and I'll post it here. (To clarify, there is another issue of controversy--apparently, Yang had four holds on the bar in one event when only three are permitted, and he should have had a MANDATORY TWO TENTHS point deduction for that).

My main point: I wish Christine Brennan and the rest of the columnists could just take a chill pill and sit on their typing hands while the gymnastics federation and IOC figure this out, but that's not likely to happen.

The columnists don't give a damn about Paul Hamm. They just want their happy ending. Paul acting saintly and giving up the medal is a story they can capitalize on for WEEKS and MONTHS, much less a few days. Many, many columns and tons and tons of self satisfaction that they "helped" him "do the right thing." Just like they managed to cast Elena and Anton as evil Russians two years ago even though that decision was also completely out of the athletes hands, too, they have to cast this story to fit their own needs and desires to have the best report.

Funny, American columnists who magnified B and S's "flaws" in SLC to significantly bigger than they actually were (and I believe S and P deserved the gold and should have clearly won) are now ignoring everything besides that "1/10th" of a point, including a mandatory deduction missed for Yang in another event for too many holds --not to mention the actual possibility that that tenth might not be as absolute as they think in regard's to Yang's score. On top of all that, they aren't even taking into consideration that the gymastics federation might disagree SEVERELY with Paul going ahead and just giving up that medal without their OK. Nope, they want their happy, All - American story with a selfless hero so that they can pat themselves on the back for how great they are. A pity that Paul and everyone else involved may suffer for their vanity and "sacrifice anything and anybody for a good story" attitude.

And they have the gall to call Paul Hamm SELFISH. Yeesh!

 

[Vash01]

Duplicate gold medals were awarded in SLC because by removing the French judge's decision, there were 4 votes in favor of each team. This is not the case here. Awarding a second gold medal would be, in effect, making Paul's gold null and void, regardless of whether or not he got to keep it.

Realtorgal,

If what you say is true (4 votes for each pair by removing the vote of the french judge), that would have meant a tie in the LP. However, B&S had already won the SP with a 7-2 decision. So it could not have been a tie. However, the duplicate gold was awarded mainly to appease the local population and the media onslaught, without any thought into how it would impact the future of the Olympic games. Had the IOC been firm about not changing the results once a game was over, or at least without a proper investigation without a governing body, perhaps we would not have heard so much whining. Once a precedent was set, it was bound to lead to a situation like this one. I am with the Koreans. It sounds like they really did follow the procedure, as they were told, and hence a duplicate gold medal should be awarded without changing any of the other results.

Vash

 

[berthes ghost]

However, the duplicate gold was awarded mainly to appease the local population and the media onslaught, without any thought into how it would impact the future of the Olympic games. Had the IOC been firm about not changing the results once a game was over, or at least without a proper investigation without a governing body, perhaps we would not have heard so much whining.

I totally disagree. The IOC told the ISU to straighten out it's mess, and pronto. It was the ISU who came up witht the brilliant idea of duplicate golds and have shown no interest whatsoever in investigating the alligations and/or cleaning house of crooked judges, probably because the whole think has Speedy's fingerprints all over it.

 

[hockeyfan228]

SLC was not the precedent for duplicate golds, nor was it the precedent for whining. There have been other instances of duplicate golds awarded, among them to a synchronized swimmer from Canada, whose opponent from the US won the original gold. The "all powerful" media from the US couldn't stop that from happening.