Judge Yuri Balkov (UKR) banned

[reneerose]

Maybe if judges are trying to influence events, they shouldn't do it with text messages that can be forwarded on to the authorities.

Next time they should involve a sports journalist, then it will be ISU Signal-gate. Joking aside, this sort of horrible chronic type of cheating should never be allowed to ever happen again.

 

[Skating91]

This is how I suspected it is done and I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it here. Sometimes it is blatant what is going on, but there is no need to blatantly fix anything.

If both skaters skaters deserve a score of 70, you don't give one 76 and the other 70, or one 70 and the other 64, you just massage it little so one is 73 and the other 67.

They are only 3 points off what they should have received, it's all explainable, but you have still created a net 6 point difference

 

[Mathman]

It’s not that there is a sanction. It works like this: skater A skates. Judge 1 gives skater A all +5 GOE. Judge 2 gives skater A all -1 GOE. The competition stops and they have a discussion of the scores until a consensus is reached.

Thank you.

I wonder how often this occurs and if it ever happens that the +5 judge and the -1 judge are adamant that their scores are correct and so no consensus can be reached.

Anyway, this is a terrible black eye for the ISU. If they had taken proper steps back in 1998 this situation could have been resolved then. Bit I suppose we should give them credit for not trying to cover it up in 2025.

 

[moonvine]

Thank you.

I wonder how often this occurs and if it ever happens that the +5 judge and the -1 judge are adamant that their scores are correct and so no consensus can be reached.

Honestly it doesn’t happen often at all. Maybe in the beginning. But the scores aren’t that off very often. If one gives a 10 (only 2 judges in regular college season) the other gives a 9.95 and it ends up 9.975. I don’t think they want to delay the competition for hours arguing about it if one gives a 10 and one a 9.

Anyway, this is a terrible black eye for the ISU. If they had taken proper steps back in 1998 this situation could have been resolved then. Bit I suppose we should give them credit for not trying to cover it up in 2025.

I’m so sick of it.

 

[lariko]

Yeah, ice dance judging, lol. At least they still need more than one because only one out of the highest and lowest scores are dropped. No wonder Mrazkova/Mrazek can't get ahead in seniors and loose out to a certain couple. Or that new couple with an old skater suddenly advance from barely being able to skate together. Gah.

And they only made it easier this year when certain elements score have GoE marginalizing base values.

If one wants the real can of worms, they should audit technical controllers/panel, because their power to call vs not call is basically a deciding factor in final placements in top 6.

Lol, I am pretty sure there is more than one faction that does it, in more than one discipline. These ones were just easy to catch. The only way to avoid it is to do have AI judging and technical values have higher weight than judges' marks for GoE and PCSs.

 

[Mathman]

I am still baffled by this whole situation,

This long discredited (though largely ubpunished) judge, one day out of the blue shoots off a text message with the content, "hey there, it's your old pal Yuri. Remember me?

"You can do me a big favor by giving the following skaters 8s in PCSs in the junior competition coming up next week, OK? Isn;t that a good idea? Sure, that's a good idea, LOL."

Now, I have never met Mr. Balkov. But... is he a personality of such overwhelming charm that people fall all over themselves to please him? Has he kidnapped your first-born child so that you have no choice but to accept his "offer that you can't refuse? Does he somehow have the power to reward you if you co-operate and punish you if you don't?

The whole thing does not make any sense to me.

 

[4everchan]

I am still baffled by this whole situation,

This long discredited (though largely ubpunished) judge, one day out of the blue shoots off a text message with the content, "hey there, it's your old pal Yuri. Remember me?

"You can do me a big favor by giving the following skaters 8s in PCSs in the junior competition coming up next week, OK? Isn;t that a good idea? Sure, that's a good idea, LOL."

Now, I have never met Mr. Balkov. But... is he a personality of such overwhelming charm that people fall all over themselves to please him? Has he kidnapped your first-born child so that you have no choice but to accept his "offer that you can't refuse? Does he somehow have the power to reward you if you co-operate and punish you if you don't?

The whole thing does not make any sense to me.

It makes perfect sense in a culture of reciprocal cheating.

I help you now you help me next

 

[Mathman]

I help you now you help me next

That seems so-o-o 2002.

 

[4everchan]

That seems so-o-o 2002.

The culture hasn't changed unfortunately.

 

[Mathman]

The culture hasn't changed unfortunately.

I know, I know. I am just resisting this conclusion with all my might and main.

I cannot wrap my mind -- I mean, I cannot wrap my heart -- around the notion that figure skating judges as a class are more dishonest than, for instance, football referees -- or architects or plumbers. Or that there is something about figure skating that poisons otherwise ethically stalwart people.

The only thing that prevents society from being overrun by crime is the fact that habitual criminals comprise only 3 per cent of the population, giving the other 97 per cent a fighting chance. Is this the case in figure skating?

 

[4everchan]

I know, I know. I am just resisting this conclusion with all my might and main.

I cannot wrap my mind -- I mean, I cannot wrap my heart -- around the notion that figure skating judges as a class or more dishonest than, for instance football referees -- or architects or plumbers.

The only thing that prevents society from being overrun by crime is the fact that criminals comprise only 3 per cent of the population, giving the other 97 per cent a fighting chance. Is this the case in figure skating?

I would say that there are more than 3% criminals in the sport of figure skating. Sorry to sound cynical but there hasn't been a year since I have followed the sport that at least one competition brought major question marks, starting with 1988 Olympics.
Justice for Manley.

 

[Magill]

I know, I know. I am just resisting this conclusion with all my might and main.

I cannot wrap my mind -- I mean, I cannot wrap my heart -- around the notion that figure skating judges as a class are more dishonest than, for instance, football referees -- or architects or plumbers. Or that there is something about figure skating that poisons otherwise ethically stalwart people.

The only thing that prevents society from being overrun by crime is the fact that habitual criminals comprise only 3 per cent of the population, giving the other 97 per cent a fighting chance. Is this the case in figure skating?

No.
If plumbers or architects cheat, they face criminal code and criminal justice. Different situation whatsoever.
I have no idea about American football, but soccer does not really have too great reputation when it comes to corruption - and I do not mean fan opinions, but criminal cases which resulted in arrests and such. Pretty scandalous. So not really the best of possible examples.
According to the research what prevents people from crime is not the severity of punishment but its perceived probability, or as they like to call it - its certainty. And here in FS.... cough cough....
Another preventing factor is the social approval / disapproval within the immediate environment. And here, judging by the blatant texting... cough cough...
There are UN and EU draft documents calling for turning cheating results, intentional misjudgment in sports, into a crime against the public order, irrespective of whether committed for money or for love, and persecuted by law. Which would make Mr Balkov's texts a matter for police and court, not a disciplinary committee. This would obviously have a sobering effect on too enthusiastic referees and judges, bringing their position closer to that of plumbers and architects. Still the proposals, though publicly known, have been lying in drawers for years now... you know why? Because it is difficult to solve the question of who and how is to determine whether the result was misjudged, and intentionally, while representing justice and not the same or rivalling group of judges. Why is it so? It is all about the objective measurement...

 

[Mathman]

Because it is difficult to solve the question of who and how is to determine whether the result was misjudged, and intentionally, while representing justice and not the same or rivalling group of judges. Why is it so? It is all about the objective measurement...

This is quite true. If there is no other evidence tan just some statistical trends (a judge gave higher PCSs to skaters from a particular country than the other judges did) -- that's not what courts of law mean by "evidence."

I was once asked by a political campaign to appear as an expert (haha) witness when they lost an election even though their own polling showed they were winning, so there must be electoral fraud going on, right? I had to tell them that I am not a laywyer, but you don't have a case.

In figure skating, even if AI says that this skater performed the best according to its algorithms, a human judge could still disagree without necessarily being dishonest.

 

[Magill]

This is quite true. If there is no other evidence tan just some statistical trends (a judge gave higher PCSs to skaters from a particular country than the other judges did) -- that's not what courts of law mean by "evidence."

I was once asked by a political campaign to appear as an expert (haha) witness when they lost an election even though their own polling showed they were winning, so there must be electoral fraud going on, right? I had to tell them that I am not a laywyer, but you don't have a case.

In figure skating, even if AI says that this skater performed the best according to its algorithms, a human judge could still disagree without necessarily being dishonest.

I also think what makes it so difficult is that it needs to be applicable across all sports, no matter their peculiarities. But OTOH, the evidential difficulty is an actual encouragement for all those who are dishonest, providing them an excuse and a sense of impunity

 

[Mathman]

with I would say that there are more than 3% criminals in the sport of figure skating. Sorry to sound cynical but there hasn't been a year since I have followed the sport that at least one competition brought major question marks, starting with 1988 Olympics.
Justice for Manley.

I think that Elizabeth Manley's placements at the 1988 Onlypics do provide an interesting example of 6.0 judging. Manley won the free skate, based primarily on the intangible WOW factor of her performance rather on the more objective criteria of what jumps she landed, etc. Plus, she brought the cowgirl to Calgary, delighting the home crowd. As for her rivals, Debi Thomas took herself out of it with a disastrous free skate and Katarina Witt, though uninspired, was competent enough for second place with two 1sts, four 2nds, and three 3rds. Fair enough.

Manley got first place ordinals from 7 of the 9 judges (Switzerland, USA, Great Britain, Japan, West Germany Canada and Czechoslovakia), while Witt got first place only from East Germany and the Soviet Union and even lost some second place placements to Midori Ito. If you want to complain about Cold War blocs, it this example the "Western Bloc" clobbered the Soviet Bloc.

Otherwise, Witt was 3rd in figures and 1st in the SP while Manley was 4th and 3rd. Witt eked out a win overall, considering all three segments of the competition. As wonderful as Manley's free skate was, I did not feel that this event was an outrageous example of corrupt judging. Not at all. (Not like Sonja bHenie at 1937 Worlds, for instance.)

 

[4everchan]

I think that Elizabeth Manley's placements at the 1988 Onlypics do provide an interesting example of 6.0 judging. Manley won the free skate, based primarily on the intangible WOW factor of her performance rather on the more objective criteria of what jumps she landed, etc. Plus, she brought the cowgirl to Calgary, delighting the home crowd. As for her rivals, Debi Thomas took herself out of it with a disastrous free skate and Katarina Witt, though uninspired, was competent enough for second place with two 1sts, four 2nds, and three 3rds Fair enough.

Manley got first place ordinals from 7 of the 9 judges (Switzerland, USA, Great Britain, Japan, West Germany Canada and Czechoslovakia), while Witt got first place only from East Germany and the Soviet Union and even lost some second place placements to Midori Ito. If you want to complain about Cold War blocs, it this example the "Western Bloc" clobbered the Soviet Bloc.

Otherwise, Witt was 3rd in figures and 1st in the SP while Manley was 4th and 3rd. Witt eked out a win overall, considering all three segments of the competition. As wonderful as Manley's free skate was, I did not feel that this event was an outrageous example of corrupt judging. Not at all. (Not like Sonja bHenie at 1937 Worlds, for instance.)

I don't think we are allowed to discuss at length, other cases. The corruption may or may not have been there. I won't elaborate but i don't agree with all the statements made in your post, other than Debi Thomas took herself out

My point was more to say that corrupt judging and block judging has been part of the sport since I have started following it... and even the first time I followed it, at the Calgary Olympics, I felt something was off with the results in the women's event.

Like we say in French : Chat échaudé craint l'eau froide. ( Scalded cat fears cold water)