Irina Slutskaya and Olympics 2002

[Thrashergurl]

When did Michelle fall twice at the Olympics? She fell on the Triple flip at SLC. I was there and I don’t recall any other fall in the program. Are you confusing her with Sashas 2006 LP where she fell twice?

 

[Mathman]

When did Michelle fall twice at the Olympics?

I guess in my mind I was considering the mistake on the triple-triple attempt (first jump two-footerd and only a +double) as the equivalent of a fall.

 

[lilshorty]

I guess I'm the only one who thinks Michelle should have won...even with a fall on the flip.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

How would that mark not count, LOL? He clearly thought she was the worst of the 4. Trying to use this as some kind of statement of bias is empty rhetoric anyway. It's also far easier to argue the judges were biased in favor of Slutskaya because of her reputation. You show your own bias by declaring that 3 Americans can't be on the podium.

I've never said they can't be, i said they can't be with exact performances they show at one exact competition. You are doing again what you always do. Taking one word out of the context and making your narrative around it. As you are always taking only some part of the performances and generalize it to the whole skaters performance. And according to ISU that is a bias. It is also a 'bias' (in todays system) highest and lowest marks and they don't count in the final scores. In that sense, marks from that one judge who was the only one to put Irina in 4th are 'biased'. As your marks would be.

 

[Skatesocs]

As you are always taking only one part of the performances and generalize it to the whole skaters performance. And according to ISU that is a bias.

I do not understand what this means. When did the ISU (or anyone) define bias like this?

And really, given that you've claimed to not know how 6.0 works, how can you make such statements? And why wouldn't you just analyse performances instead of all this?

 

[Baron Vladimir]

There are different types of 'biases' or subjective preferences which lead to mistakes in judging, and one of them is when a judge generalize on the whole mark based only on lets say four categories from all six of which the mark is made of. The other one is to make conclusions about someone based on his name

 

[Skatesocs]

First of all i never used the word national bias to begin with.

And whatever knowledge they have about figure skating, it just makes them nationalistic, subjective or simply 'personal' about the topic, and nothing more than that...

Not that I was asking about "national bias" there. Really, how is "as you are always taking only one part of the performance and generalize it to the whole skaters performance" = "bias" according to "ISU"?

 

[Blades of Passion]

I've never said they can't be, i said they can't be with exact performances they show at one exact competition. You are doing again what you always do. Taking one word out of the context and making your narrative around it. As you are always taking only some part of the performances and generalize it to the whole skaters performance. And according to ISU that is a bias. It is also a 'bias' (in todays system) highest and lowest marks and they don't count in the final scores. In that sense, marks from that one judge who was the only one to put Irina in 4th are 'biased'. As your marks would be.

That's nothing but nonsense. YOU are the one taking something out of context and only looking at one single thing ("Irina didn't fall! Therefore it's impossible she can be placed lower!") and building a whole narrative around it, not me.

I constantly provide more detail than just about anyone and I've not taken anything out of context, you literally said it's American bias only to think the 3 Americans should be on the podium (strange then how an Italian judge and non-American posters are coming to this conclusion). You simply don't want to listen to the very valid reasons for why people feel Slutskaya should have been off the podium, and you haven't written any comparative analysis of the skating. You tried to claim Slutskaya should receive higher components under CoP (which is not quite relevant to how it was judged in 2002 anyway) and I disproved that statement, to which you don't respond to anything I wrote. You just keep repeating it's wrong for Slutskaya to be off the podium. That doesn't take the discussion anywhere.

 

[Skatesocs]

In general, though, Irina did have very efficient and powerful stroking and command of one-foot skating.

Of course. She did do a one foot step sequence in the SP - but how it applies to her LP, I still don't know.

As for Kwan's one foot spiral sequence, she really was the best in the field in terms of skating skills.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

That's nothing but nonsense. YOU are the one taking something out of context and only looking at one single thing ("Irina didn't fall! Therefore it's impossible she can be placed lower!") and building a whole narrative around it, not me.

I constantly provide more detail than just about anyone and I've not taken anything out of context, you literally said it's American bias only to think the 3 Americans should be on the podium (strange then how an Italian judge and non-American posters are coming to this conclusion). You simply don't want to listen to the very valid reasons for why people feel Slutskaya should have been off the podium, and you haven't written any comparative analysis of the skating. You tried to claim Slutskaya should receive higher components under CoP (which is not quite relevant to how it was judged in 2002 anyway) and I disproved that statement, to which you don't respond to anything I wrote. You just keep repeating it's wrong for Slutskaya to be off the podium. That doesn't take the discussion anywhere.

I didn't say majority of that. Its just your subjective conclusions about some parts of my sentences, connected the way you wanted to. As it is (for me) your explanation about SLC performances. After all, you are trying to explain opinion of that one judge, which in today system would be nothing more but a statistic mistake (made of bias or not). He and you (and maybe somebody else) are certainly not the 'all people' I should agree with. Or you think i need to do exactly that? I listen, and i don't agree with your explanation. That's all.

 

[Blades of Passion]

I didn't say nothing of that. Its all your subjective conclusions about some parts of my sentences, connected the way you wanted to.

You said it's the propaganda of a USA-centric forum to argue the 3 American ladies were better than Slutskaya at this competition. Exactly what is that supposed to mean, then?

I'm not simply trying to explain the opinion of one judge either. I am explaining MY opinion, and others throughout this thread have as well. You try to say that different opinions are nothing more than a statistical mistake. Absolutely fallacious reasoning. You also keep trying to talk about different things from how the competition back then was actually scored. Even catering to your request and judging the competition under a CoP mindset, your suggestions do not stand up. The other ladies deserve to outscore Slutskaya on the overall CoP components. Slutskaya did not show the level of skating skills or speed in her LP that you tried to claim.

Here's a simple fact about Slutskaya's speed in the LP: it took 10 seconds for her to get across the rink to do her second Lutz. It took Kwan 8 seconds to do that same thing. Have you ever considered that your own opinion is the more incorrectly biased one?

 

[Baron Vladimir]

You said it's the propaganda of a USA-centric forum to argue the 3 American ladies were better than Slutskaya at this competition. Exactly what is that supposed to mean, then?

I'm not simply trying to explain the opinion of one judge either. I am explaining MY opinion, and others throughout this thread have as well. You try to say that different opinions are nothing more than a statistical mistake. Absolutely fallacious reasoning. You also keep trying to talk about different things from how the competition back then was actually scored. Even catering to your request and judging the competition under a CoP mindset, your suggestions do not stand up. The other ladies deserve to outscore Slutskaya on the overall CoP components. Slutskaya did not show the level of skating skills or speed in her LP that you tried to claim.

Here's a simple fact about Slutskaya's speed in the LP: it took 10 seconds for her to get across the rink to do her second Lutz. It took Kwan 8 seconds to do that same thing. Have you ever considered that your own opinion is the more incorrectly biased one?

I pointed out on which merrits judges put Irina in 2nd place overall (talking about speed i was saying precisely 'taking into account both short and free', so again its you who is not listening). Narrative how my opinion, which is the opinion of the seven judges on the panel is biased, and how opinion of one person on the panel is the only one unbiased, is by deffinition an error. I didn't say your conclusion and conclusion of that one judge is unrealistic to happen, just how is less valid, and because of that, it may be called as biased. Especially when you 'named' Irina the way you did. You realy didn't need to explain anything after it.

 

[Blades of Passion]

A well informed and reasoned opinion is not "by definition an error". Strange how you choose to continually sidestep the discussion and facts about the actual skating. You also just keep changing your story. We were talking specifically about the LP's (you said "given the fact they fell, Slutskaya's performance component should be higher") and now you claim something else. You also outright lied about watching the commentary and saying they agreed with you about Slutskaya's speed, when this is what Sandra Bezic said: "known for her speed, she's not going fast right now."

An archaic majority opinion (of a mere 9 person sample size) does not mean something is accurate or the more intelligent conclusion. People used to think the world was flat. Pointing at an outdated opinion and acting like it means something useful is not any kind of worthwhile argument. Talking about the judges at the competition is irrelevant.

 

[Mathman]

Narrative how my opinion, which is the opinion of the seven judges on the panel is biased, and how opinion of one person on the panel is the only one unbiased, is by deffinition an error..

I think there is some confusion as to what "biased" means.

Definition: Unfairly prejudiced for or against someone or something.

It has nothing to do with majority rule or the number of judges that score one way or another. It is certainly possible for a single judge to be unbiased and for many to harbor unfair prejudice.

Not that I accuse any of the 6 judges who put Irina ahead of Michelle of prejudice against Michelle -- just trying to make clear what "bias" means. In particular, when the ISU uses this term they almost always mean a natural predidice in favor of skaters from one's own country, as when a judge systematically and without justification gives high marks to his own skater and low marks to his skater's rivals.

(It's that "without justification" that is hard to prove, and is why in practice it is hard for the ISU to take any action against biased judging.)

 

[Baron Vladimir]

I think there is some confusion as to what "biased" means.

Definition: Unfairly prejudiced for or against someone or something.

It has nothing to do with majority rule or the number of judges that score one way or another. It is certainly possible for a single judge to be unbiased and for many to harbor unfair prejudice.

Not that I accuse any of the 6 judges who put Irina ahead of Michelle of prejudice against Michelle -- just trying to make clear what "bias" means. In particular, when the ISU uses this term they almost always mean a natural predidice in favor of skaters from one's own country, as when a judge systematically and without justification gives high marks to his own skater and low marks to his skater's rivals.

(It's that "without justification" that is hard to prove, and is why in practice it is hard for the ISU to take any action against biased judging.)

I agree. But 'biased' also means this: 'giving results that are not accurate because information has not been collected correctly'. Now, the cause of this may (or may not be) some sort of prejudice or subjective preference, the point is that cognitive process is affected, not by outside but by individual (emotional or motivational) factors. So, in that (maybe more statistical) sense, you can use word 'biased' to say why lowest and highest marks for a skater are not part of their final rankings anymore. Not that BOP opinion is necessarily wrong and biased (for me personally it is!)- it can be viewed as another option from many possible options which are realistic to happen, but in a context of other 'actual' opinions - options who we saw being actually realized - it may certainly be called as that (even without taking into consideration words he used to describe Irina). I bet that one judge could explain why he/she put Sarah Hughes in 10th place after the short, that doesn't mean that his/her opinion (by today's 'rules') wouldn't be called as 'biased' too.

 

[Skatesocs]

So, in that (maybe more statistical) sense, you can use word 'biased' to say why lowest and highest marks for a skater are not part of their final rankings anymore.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

A well informed and reasoned opinion is not "by definition an error".

A better explained ('reasoned') opinion is not also a more valid one in terms of 'objectivity'. These are some of the 'mistakes' you made in your judging:
1. Using certain criteria only (favorites one) and arriving at an average for the program
2. Forgetting to evaluate the direction of skating (and changes) as well as one foot skating
3. Forgetting variety of skating and variety in body movements
4. Forgetting that serious errors/falls impact the overall continuity and fluidity of the program and its delivery especially when there is a strong ending

 

[Skatesocs]

A better 'reasoned' opinion is not also a more valid one.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

You can have a better written or explained opinion in debating purpose, but if it is still subjective, it has no the same 'objective' validation. Explaining and 'debating' more for the sake of the debate doesn't mean being closer to the 'truth'. And the process of judging is certainly not trying to convince the others in your opinion, that is nothing more than trying to win in a debate.

 

[Skatesocs]

You can have a better written or explained opinion in debating purpose, but if it is still subjective, it has no the same 'objective' validation.

Weren't you the person who was trying to say a while back that we have to be objective when scoring PCS? Really, what is your consistent philosophy regarding this?

Explaining and 'debating' more for the sake of the debate doesn't mean being closer to the 'truth'.

How are you able to mind read Blades of Passion and know that he is debating for the sake of debate? Really, from my vantage point, it is you who is trying to prove your own point about him being biased - with absolutely no regard to the actual discussion of skating.

Since you were also trying to convince everyone that PCS should be scored entirely objectively, how do you propose to do that without debate about such things, if I may ask?

And the process of judging is certainly not trying to convince the others in your opinion, that is nothing more than trying to win in a debate.

The process of judging not trying to convince someone else isn't the point. This is a discussion forum, so people are free to discuss - which is exactly what the rest of us were doing before your attempts to bring epistemology into this.