Judging the "Old-Fashioned" Way

[Mathman]

Skate America (2003?) that I attended in person and saw [Jenny Kirk] skate live.

That was Skate America in Reading, Pa., right? I think you have lots of company in chosing that competition as your number one memory of Kirk's skating. In the opinion of the great majority of the audience, Kirk won and wuzrobbed by Sasha Cohen on "reputation scoring."

My favorite Kirk memory was the year before, Skate America in Spokane. Kirk was second after the short program and she and Ann-Patrice McDonough (second in the free and overall) were the belles of the ball. Both the Spokane media and the audience ate them both up with a spoon. They completely overshadowed winner Michelle Kwan in terms of buzz around town.

 

[gkelly]

Thanks for the link.

I do think there are several good judges that do understand the program components. It’ll be a while before we get the majority of them on the panel, but that’s life. But I feel that some skaters are getting what they deserve and that’s very important. I still teach the judges every year which I love to do. It’s very important to me to further their education and motivating them to educate themselves as well. And I am noticing more and more are getting much higher in quality and more serious about spreading the marks.

First of all, I don't want to try to speak for Lori Nichol. I'm not in her head and I don't have her expertise. I'd love to sit in on a seminar she gives to judges -- would you?

Just as a guess, I think what she's saying here is that the IJS requires a different way of thinking about the numbers than 6.0 did, and that, as of 2007 when she gave this interview, she felt that the majority of judges had not yet made the adjustment to using the five program components the way she felt they should be used. If you read to the end of the paragraph you see that she thought the quality of judging components was improving as of 2007 -- it would be interesting to hear whether she thinks that trend has continued.

 

[jatale]

A few final observations. First and foremost, I'm SURE (without any doubt) that the decline in figure skating TV coverage in the USA has NOTHING to do with 6.0 vs. CoP. Second, I think any comparison between the relative interest or popularity in the USA of say Nadia vs. Yuna (in their time) is without merit - it is comparing apples to oranges. The internet DID NOT EXIST in Nadia's time! Yuna has fan websites all over the globe! Yuna has won many awards in the USA (the Time 100, US sportswoman of the year, etc.) that did not exist in Nadia's time. Interest in Nadia was piqued because she came from behind the Iron Curtain. The ONLY avenues for news in Nadia's day were TV, radio, and newspapers, try comparing that to sources of news today... there is no comparison. How do you measure the "popularity" of Nadia versus Yuna in the USA? Do you base it on a bald assertion (not quantified in any way) that Nadia was MUCH MORE POPULAR than Yuna is now? I certainly won't accept that unless it is backed up by concrete numbers which would require a doctoral dissertation to assemble based on media coverage, web coverage, etc. etc. between Nadia's time and the present day. Good luck doing that! I'm done. Peace.

 

[janetfan]

A few final observations. First and foremost, I'm SURE (without any doubt) that the decline in figure skating TV coverage in the USA has NOTHING to do with 6.0 vs. CoP. Second, I think any comparison between the relative interest or popularity in the USA of say Nadia vs. Yuna (in their time) is without merit - it is comparing apples to oranges. The internet DID NOT EXIST in Nadia's time! Yuna has fan websites all over the globe! Yuna has won many awards in the USA (the Time 100, US sportswoman of the year, etc.) that did not exist in Nadia's time. Interest in Nadia was piqued because she came from behind the Iron Curtain. The ONLY avenues for news in Nadia's day were TV, radio, and newspapers, try comparing that to sources of news today... there is no comparison. How do you measure the "popularity" of Nadia versus Yuna in the USA? Do you base it on a bald assertion (not quantified in any way) that Nadia was MUCH MORE POPULAR than Yuna is now? I certainly won't accept that unless it is backed up by concrete numbers which would require a doctoral dissertation to assemble based on media coverage, web coverage, etc. etc. between Nadia's time and the present day. Good luck doing that! I'm done. Peace.

I am old enough to remember the difference in their popularity and name recognition. One girl's Olympic performances caused a sensation in USA and the other's did not.

We can disagree about reasons why but not what actually happened. Maybe you need to go read about things that happened before you were born and write your own paper.

I am more interested in reasons why winning Olympic skating medals has lost so much of it's lustre in USA.
We can leave Yuna out and use Evan, or D/W.

D/W is interesting and with the reality TV Dance craze I thought their OSM and recent WC would cause a stir in USA.

It hasn't and they are no better known in USA than Evan or Yuna.

I say that because it seems since 2006 skating has been sliding off the map in USA. Just a coincidence that the CoP has been in place for those years?

Last year nobody including internet sites felt 4CC was important enough to show in USA.

This argument is getting old and the question is not whether CoP is better than 6.0 but why American fans seem to be losing interest in skating, particularly since 2006, or what we could call the "CoP era."

Or maybe is it just easier to pass out the blinders :think:

 

[jatale]

I was an adult already when Nadia won, so I remember the whole thing very well. I too was captivated by Nadia, the TV networks and newspapers had a field day with her. But the news frenzy only lasted for a limited time, it didn't go on forever.

Are you sure there really is a loss of audience interest in figure skating in the USA? How do you quantify this? Less TV coverage is not a convincing argument, why TV stations cover what they cover is due more to advertising dollars and audience demographics than anything else. Maybe an audience composed of mostly young girls and their mothers on weekend afternoons is less desirable than one composed of middle aged men who want to see billiards - I don't know.

For the sake of argument, let's assume you are correct and that interest in figure skating as a sport has waned in the USA. What are the reasons? Well, how about the much wider selection of sports available for viewing today (both on the web and on cable TV) than in the good old days when there were just the 3 major networks? People today have maybe a hundred or more "channels" of sports coverage to choose from, that surely is going to fragment your audience tremendously. Most importantly, there are MANY new sports today than there were in times past. I think any decline in figure skating interest is probably due to that fact. For girls, the number of competitive sports for them to participate in has EXPLODED in recent years, maybe they like soccer or golf or softball or tennis or field hockey or roller blading more than figure skating...

 

[janetfan]

I was an adult already when Nadia won, so I remember the whole thing very well. I too was captivated by Nadia, the TV networks and newspapers had a field day with her. But the news frenzy only lasted for a limited time, it didn't go on forever.

Are you sure there really is a loss of audience interest in figure skating in the USA? How do you quantify this? Less TV coverage is not a convincing argument, why TV stations cover what they cover is due more to advertising dollars and audience demographics than anything else. Maybe an audience composed of mostly young girls and their mothers on weekend afternoons is less desirable than one composed of middle aged men who want to see billiards - I don't know.

For the sake of argument, let's assume you are correct and that interest in figure skating as a sport has waned in the USA. What are the reasons? Well, how about the much wider selection of sports available for viewing today (both on the web and on cable TV) than in the good old days when there were just the 3 major networks? People today have maybe a hundred or more "channels" of sports coverage to choose from, that surely is going to fragment your audience tremendously. Most importantly, there are MANY new sports today than there were in times past. I think any decline in figure skating interest is probably due to that fact. For girls, maybe they like soccer or softball or tennis or roller blading more than figure skating...

Thanks, I appreciate your reply and basically agree with you.
But TV is a double edged sword because with so many TV channels the possibilty does exist for expanded coverage of skating.

I believe it is Joesitz who wishes he could see more of the GP, and not just tape delayed highlights.

gkelly said Olympic skating coverage was the same as in years past but it seemed to me that we saw less skating from Vancouver than ever before.
I was very surprised when NBC did not show Laura or Akiko and basically all we saw was the last group of the Ladies.

The Olympic skating Gala used to be a big deal and was even advertised during the Olympics as an event not to miss. The coverge of the Gala from Vancouver was awful and did not seem the same to me.

Based on ratings throughout the games NBC chose to show other events. I don't blame them for that since they lost a considerable amount of money broadcasting the Vancouver games.

 

[Mathman]

Just as a guess, I think what she's saying here is that the IJS requires a different way of thinking about the numbers than 6.0 did, and that, as of 2007 when she gave this interview, she felt that the majority of judges had not yet made the adjustment to using the five program components the way she felt they should be used.

Here is a nice article/interview with Lori Nichol in 2010, about choreographing Evan Lysacek's Olympic LP.

http://www.zimbio.com/Lori+Nichol/articles/d2KrwiH2HXG/Lori+Nichols+Choreographer+Figure+Skating

 

[seniorita]

But TV is a double edged sword because with so many TV channels the possibilty does exist for expanded coverage of skating.

Traditional tv is in crisis in general, less series are made and less coverage there is for many sports. In order to find reasons for decline of the sport in US you need more observation time than the last 5-6 years. How much more popular was skating then? And if Cop is a fact, then somehow it didnt affect the popularity of the sport in Asia and Europe. Although Eurosport doesnt show GPs anymore. I say the thing is that there was the Kween and she retired , and there was no super dominant skater who crashed everybody anymore. Besides Kwan how many skaters were household names in USa the last 15 years?
Off topic, I thought the coverage of the world swimming Ch. was awesome this week, is Lochte as much popular as Phelps in Usa?

 

[janetfan]

Traditional tv is in crisis in general, less series are made and less coverage there is for many sports. In order to find reasons for decline of the sport in US you need more observation time than the last 5-6 years. How much more popular was skating then? And if Cop is a fact, then somehow it didnt affect the popularity of the sport in Asia and Europe. Although Eurosport doesnt show GPs anymore. I say the thing is that there was the Kween and she retired , and there was no super dominant skater who crashed everybody anymore. Besides Kwan how many skaters were household names in USa the last 15 years?
Off topic, I thought the coverage of the world swimming Ch. was awesome this week, is Lochte as much popular as Phelps in Usa?

CoP defenders say skating is only down in USA but we know that is not true and many parts of Europe have cut TV coverage as you mentioned.
EuroSport shows "Darts" rather than GP's and that seems to say it all.

Skating fans need for Darts to go to a CoP type of scoring and then maybe EuroSport will show skating ahead of Darts.

Darts, hmmm, that is considered nothing more than a bar game in USA.

Canada just had to give up it's "B" event for lack of interest/funds so not so sure comments from Canadians that claim "skating is booming in Canada" are true.

It's the "Curse of Points" IMO that is the driving factor in such a broad loss of interest in skating.

 

[Tonichelle]

Not to be completely dense, but why even bother debating this point. No one is going to "win". This is probably the same outcome that network heads and ISU leaders are dealing with. How the heck are we supposed to market this as a sport? Or should we just give up our rights to be in the Olympics and forget the sport aspect? IOC wants a more sport approach to skating, okay so we go away with the first second third voting and rack up points. No one will be any happier with CoP if the anon. judging goes away because it's still a mathmatical equation that no one wants to deal with. (I think that's the largest problem with the CoP currently, but that's another rant). All members of the board seem to do is throw juvenille (if that) insults at one another to try and prove superiority. And we wonder why the fandom has died? Maybe it's the elitest attitude so many of the fans hold.

 

[janetfan]

Not to be completely dense, but why even bother debating this point. No one is going to "win". This is probably the same outcome that network heads and ISU leaders are dealing with. How the heck are we supposed to market this as a sport? Or should we just give up our rights to be in the Olympics and forget the sport aspect? IOC wants a more sport approach to skating, okay so we go away with the first second third voting and rack up points. No one will be any happier with CoP if the anon. judging goes away because it's still a mathmatical equation that no one wants to deal with. (I think that's the largest problem with the CoP currently, but that's another rant). All members of the board seem to do is throw juvenille (if that) insults at one another to try and prove superiority. And we wonder why the fandom has died? Maybe it's the elitest attitude so many of the fans hold.

Please continue your "rant" and don't hold back.

If you have it in for me on a personal level please send a PM.

To me it is quite clear that fans are NOT enamored with the CoP. TV ratings and revenues don't lie. The lack of sponsors is obvious.

IOC made it clear that the "cheating and politics" had to go or figure skating would be gone from the Olympics.

Olympic money is essential for a "sport" like figure skating to continue (meaning the perks of 4 star hotels and gourmet dining on expenses can't continue for the "dogs" that run ISU without IOC money).

Does anyone have a link where IOC said "6.0 must go or figure skating will be eliminated from the Olympics" :think:

Of course no one has a link for that because it doesn't exist.

The new system was created out of fear. Fear of being caught again at being the most crooked, political, nationalistic and dirty sport in all of the Olympics.

So the powers that be (who presided most contentedly over cheating and manipulation for years) decided to introduce a new system that would make it next to impossible to GET CAUGHT cheating.

That is all the CoP is about and that is why it was introduced.

It has nothing to do with being the best scoring system for a sport/competion/pageant as unique as figure skating.

Why are some of you so surprised a system designed to protect cheaters is NOT POPULAR with long time skating fans?

Why are you surprised ratings are down in the traditional markets and that ESPN and EuroSport are divorcing themselves from Speedy and his lapdogs?

The network executives are showing more good sense that some GS members who will defend the CoP like it is a member of their family and that it's success is a matter of their personal honor. :disagree:

Quite pathetic IMHO.

 

[Mathman]

I think it would be useful to separate the wheat from the chaff in this debate (combustible though the chaff may be. )

Nobody likes cheating judges. We didn’t like them in 1908 when Gilbert Fuchs refused to compete in the Olympics because the judges had already decided to give the title to Ulrich Salchow, and we don’t like them now.

Nobody likes politics in figures skating. We didn’t like it when Sonia Henie’s father was bribing and browbeating judges in the 1930s, and we don’t like it now.

No one on this board likes anonymous judging (although for some people it is only a minor nuisance and for others a deal-breaker).

The IOC is not going to kick their marquee money-maker out of the Winter Olympics, even though the lights are starting to dim and the money is not what it once was. (The Winter Olympics might just silently fade away on its own, but it won’t be because people don’t like the scoring system in figure skating or biathlon.)

Now…having gotten that out of the way, I do believe that there is substance for serious discussion here.

What would best serve the needs of the sport?

(a) We should go back to the 6.0 system. It is more audience-friendly for a sport that is based, halfway, on performance art.

(b) The current system is fine. The drop in popularity of skating is due to societal factors far, far, far beyond the reach of organizations like the USFSA, the ISU, and the IOC.

(c) We can do better. There are many minor ways to tweak the current rules that might better reflect the fact that figure skating is based, halfway, on the demonstration of a specific athletic skill set. (Blades of Passion has a very well thought-out scheme for accomplishing this, and many others have offered their thoughts.)

(d) We can do even better than that. What about a radical revision that blends the best features of the two system, like the one proposed by gkelly (post 112 on this thread)?

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...ioned-quot-Way&p=576268&viewfull=1#post576268

Not a single poster responded to any of the substantive points offered for discussion in this post.. It is more fun for us to “blow, blow, and crack our cheeks!”

 

[gkelly]

Does anyone have a link where IOC said "6.0 must go or figure skating will be eliminated from the Olympics" :think:

Of course no one has a link for that because it doesn't exist.

In the 1990s, more like "Ice dancing must go"

Pretty vague and not online, but here's a quote from an article called "Shall We Dance" by Nancy Rappaport in the Dec 1996/Jan 1997 issue of International Figure Skating:

Before the ISU introduced new rules in 1992, there was talk that ice dance might be removed from the Olympic Games because it was no longer a sport -- a claim which many vehently oppose.

Followed by quotes from ice dance coaches and competitors, but no quotes from whoever had been talking about removing it. Presumably representatives of more quantifiable Olympic sports.

After the 2002 scandal, yes, there was a big push from IOC president Jacques Rogge to change the scoring system in judged sports

Rogge will meet Tuesday with the heads of all the international governing bodies for summer and winter Olympic sports. He's likely to receive further updates on a request he made immediately after the Salt Lake City Games ended — that all federations overseeing judged sports review their judging systems.

"Most federations replied to us and said they were studying that, and many have explained what they were doing. I think there is a general consensus that this is a factor where improvements are possible," Rogge says.

Note that Pound does not see improvements with the new system (i.e., it hasn't gotten worse, but it hasn't gotten better, and he still hates the whole sport because of the potential for cheating under both systems)

but Rogge does seem to prefer the new system that he pushed for

 

[gkelly]

You asked

Does anyone have a link where IOC said "6.0 must go or figure skating will be eliminated from the Olympics"

Of course no one has a link for that because it doesn't exist.

I provided links showing that there had been threats to remove ice dancing from the Olympics and pressure from the IOC to change the scoring system . . . the next best thing

So now you want to sidestep the question of threats or pressure from the IOC to change the scoring system by undermining the integrity of those exerting the pressure.

The IOC could be the biggest thugs in the world, worse than any corrupt skating judges or outsiders who tried to influence them. But they control access to the Olympics. If they told the ISU to make changes or else, the pressure existed, even if it was corrupt pressure.

Of course the whole change was rushed through by a speedskater without proper advance testing or proper input from the whole figure skating community, precisely because of the need by the IOC and the ISU to appear to be taking action. The actual changes were primarily developed by a select group of figure skating experts, but much of the constant tweaking and rule changes we've seen for the past 8 years could probably have been minimized if there had been more testing and more input in advance. It was pressure from the IOC that forced the rushing.

 

[Tonichelle]

Not a single poster responded to any of the substantive points offered for discussion in this post.. It is more fun for us to “blow, blow, and crack our cheeks!”

and that's what I mean. no one wants to offer anything of substance, and those that do, don't get read/heard.

 

[silverpond]

I applaud the posters who provided detailed suggestions to improve the process and quality of judging at figure skating competitions. Well done!

In my opinion, there have been times that a competitive skater’s scores have defied reason. I’m not referring to the dreaded “national bias”, which unfortunately will probably always be part of the equation, and hopefully a very miniscule part of the equation.

My angst focuses on a basic knowledge of figure skating technique – how axels, lutzes, flips, loops, camel spins, sit spins, scratch spins, etc – are supposed to be performed. Let’s stick to the basics, please. Judges have to be extremely knowledgeable on the elements if there is to be any level of expectation that they will award appropriate scores.

If I’m correct about this, national and international skating judges are required to pass competency tests and remain current on the process of judging. No doubt, some of them opted to jump ship when the tried and true 6.0 system was abolished. Those who chose to stay, and all new judges, absolutely MUST be up to speed on this process. Granted, it can be difficult to watch every single element in a four-minute routine, especially when they are delivered in rapid succession; however, that’s the way it is, and you have to keep your eyes focused like a laser beam on the programs if you’re a judge.

Personally, I would like to keep this as simple as possible. Most of us are not Einsteins, and the CoP is, most likely, very confusing for many folks and drives them away from following the sport.

I prefer a “KISS” (keep it simple, skating) approach to scoring. Have a basic point assignment for the jumps – perhaps a 6 for a quad, a 5 for a triple/triple combination, a 4 for any other triple, a 3 for a double, a 4 for combination spins, a 3 for “single” spins, 4 for serpentine footwork, etc. Right next to the base element, have a point score of 1 to 5 for presentation. A completed quad would receive a 6, and if it was executed perfectly, it would receive a 5, for a total of 11. If a completed quad was executed poorly, it would receive a 1, for a total of 7.

I would award scores only on what was performed. If a skater falls on a lutz, that jump would not receive a score, plain and simple.

The panel of judges would consist of a dozen people representing the world on a global basis. Six would serve as “technical” judges and six would serve as “presentation” judges. They would be paired in six teams, with two judges on each team.

The overall point totals would be calculated, as quickly as possible.

Overall total scores:
90 and above = 6.0
85-89 = 5.9
80-84 = 5.8
75-79 = 5.7
70-74 = 5.6
65-69 = 5.5
60-64 = 5.4
And so on…..

Let the computer calculate the scores, and let the scores be “easy” for us to see. This could be a great partnership between the marvels of the computer and the 6.0 system.

Just my two cents, of course.

 

[gkelly]

My angst focuses on a basic knowledge of figure skating technique – how axels, lutzes, flips, loops, camel spins, sit spins, scratch spins, etc – are supposed to be performed. Let’s stick to the basics, please. Judges have to be extremely knowledgeable on the elements if there is to be any level of expectation that they will award appropriate scores.

If I’m correct about this, national and international skating judges are required to pass competency tests and remain current on the process of judging. No doubt, some of them opted to jump ship when the tried and true 6.0 system was abolished. Those who chose to stay, and all new judges, absolutely MUST be up to speed on this process.

So where does your angst come in? Do you see a problem with the current knowledge level of the judges? the knowledge level fo the fans? the disconnect between them?

I prefer a “KISS” (keep it simple, skating) approach to scoring. Have a basic point assignment for the jumps – perhaps a 6 for a quad, a 5 for a triple/triple combination, a 4 for any other triple, a 3 for a double, a 4 for combination spins, a 3 for “single” spins, 4 for serpentine footwork, etc. Right next to the base element, have a point score of 1 to 5 for presentation. A completed quad would receive a 6, and if it was executed perfectly, it would receive a 5, for a total of 11. If a completed quad was executed poorly, it would receive a 1, for a total of 7.

I would award scores only on what was performed. If a skater falls on a lutz, that jump would not receive a score, plain and simple.

This has potential for a simplified version of elements scoring. A lot of the specifics would still need to be worked out, after which it might not be quite so simple. But if the idea is that every judge is allowed to make his or her own determination of the value of each element, according to the rules, then there will often be major disagreements on how to score specific elements but as long as each judge is working from their best possible knowledge of elements and rules and visual perception of the elements, then getting different points of view is why we have judging panels in the first place instead relying on just one person.

The panel of judges would consist of a dozen people representing the world on a global basis.

For major international events. Obviously this wouldn't be possible or necessary at domestic events, and it might be cost prohibitive at smaller internationals.

Six would serve as “technical” judges and six would serve as “presentation” judges. They would be paired in six teams, with two judges on each team.

Are you suggesting that one judge in a team would contribute a technical score, one would contribute a presentation score, and the scores would be combined into a single ordinal to be calculated by the majority system?

I remember hearing a similar idea floated by some figure skating officials back around 1998, but I foresee a lot of paradoxical unintended consequences with that approach. If that is what you were thinking of, I'll explain what I think the problem could be. If not . . . whoops, never mind.

Also, if you want to go back to the majority system, remember that you need an odd number of judges, or judge pairs as the case may be. So 10 or 14 judges, but not 12.

Overall total scores:
90 and above = 6.0
85-89 = 5.9
80-84 = 5.8
75-79 = 5.7
70-74 = 5.6
65-69 = 5.5
60-64 = 5.4
And so on…..

I know these are just rough examples. If you do want to work out the details, remember that the numbers have tocover a wide enough range to accommodate the weakest international skaters, who may struggle with double jumps etc. (or lower than that if it's to be used at even lower levels domestically), and with the envelope-pushing quad jumpers, and every level in between. And they need to be flexible enough to distinguish between multiple skaters who are close to exactly the same skill level, so when they all do the same elements the results will come down to very fine points of technique and, yes, individual judges' preferences.

The cutoff for a maximum score (6.0 or whatever you call it) would have to be well out of reach of the best jumpers of the current generation, and even so some fluky jumper would probably come along and break through the ceiling long before the powers that be anticipate that the scores need to be recalibrated.

How were you thinking that judges would determine their presentation scores?
Would breakdowns of the elements and different aspects of presentation be available after the fact, as in the current protocols, or only ever one mark for tech merit and one for presentation as under 6.0?

Just my two cents, of course.

Interesting thoughts! Want to play with the details?

 

[Mathman]

So where does your angst come in? Do you see a problem with the current knowledge level of the judges? the knowledge level of the fans? the disconnect between them?

I think that the disconnect is a big problem. Nobody likes to be stupid. Nobody likes to be told he is stupid. Nobody likes to pay good money to have his ignorance rubbed in his face.

The audience does not like to be told (even when it is true), "I'm the expert, you're not, now sit down and shut up."

When you go to a baseball game, you might be entirely ignorant of the finer points of the game, but you can tell when someone knocks it out of the park.

In figure skating, someone can knock it out of the park, but you are not allowed to jump up and cheer because you have to wait until after the game is over and the experts come out and tell you, "Oh you silly person, that performance wasn't a home run. She turned in the other direction less than one-third of the time and she took an extra step between positions in her combination spin. The other team won. Go home and don't come back until you have read chapter 29(a) of the CoP rule book!"

 

[gkelly]

Off topic, but how often does a team with no home runs beat an opposing team who knocked out at least one?

I.e., the difference between landing a quad and doing enough other things right to win without one. One home run does not equal a whole performance/game. But the game is slower so there's plenty of time to cheer for each great play separately, whereas with skating the most intense cheering comes after the whole performance is finished.

And how often does a ball go out of the park but get called as a foul?
(=downgraded quad)

I don't think that the disconnect between judges' priorities and fans' priorities was really any less under 6.0 -- it just seemed that it was, so whenever fans disagreed with the judges, they could blame it on the judges getting it wrong due to politics etc. and boo with glee.

 

[gkelly]

For example

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss8T7aGr9ZI
vs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8xjFTEpo7I

Watching in the stands at the time I was bewildered by the results. I thought Weiss had done enough to win even if the quad wasn't perfect. It wasn't until I went home and watched the video a few times that I came to understand the majority of judges' point of view, and learned something in the process.

And that took being interested and willing to go to the trouble. But it was a lot harder then than now to gain the necessary knowledge to understand the results.

Watching on TV, you'd have to hope the commentators cared to explain. Sometimes they did and sometimes they fanned the flames.