Lambiel robbed of new PB by technical specialist!

[Vash01]

Yes, Lambiel won, but also I find it very worrysome that in spite of the video he was not judged by the technical panel rightly. If as it seems that the technical panel of Scott Davies, Pirjo Uimonen and Benoit Lavoie did such a mistake e.g. at the triple axel, they should not be allowed to be in the panels at important competitions like Worlds or Olympics any more. THIS time it did not matter so much because Lambiel won anyway. NEXT time it might happen in a situation where it really matters. Incompetence should be noticed by ISU and an action to be taken, in my opinion.

In every sport referees have made mistakes at times. In the NFL they have called wrong pass interference penalties or a wrong call on fumble which resulted in one side winning/losing. Just ask Mike Holmgren, the Seattle coach, or someone from the Oakland Raiders when they lost a game as a result of a wrong call. There have been wrong calls in the NBA, or in world series (baseball). It is a part of sport. No matter how much they try to perfect it, mistakes can happen. That is no reason to penalize someone.

Vash

 

[slutskayafan21]

He not only had his triple axel awarded a double value, he had a spin in qualifying he did as a higher level demoted for so reason. One mistake like that is believable, two is not. There was something else up, and the technical specialist trio that determined its value should not be allowed back at another event. There is no room for those kind of people in the sport.

 

[Mathman]

In fact, he had two spins downgraded. But I think the Finnish judge, Ms. Uimonen, is in the clear. She was the technical specialist for Lambiel's qualifying group and she gave him level 4s for both of his change-combination spins. (She was only the Technical Assistant for the LP, and by that time, no doubt they had gotten to her.)

So Scott Davis must be the mastermind behind the conspiracy. Davis was the technical specialist for the other qualifying group and gave top scores to Lambiel's greatest threat, Nobunari Oda. Very suspicious, if you ask me.

MM

 

[Vash01]

MM,

Why did you think that Oda was the greatest threat to Lambiel? He was in second place, but he was skating in his first worlds and he did not have a quad. Joubert, by contrast, was skating really well, and he won the SP. I would have considered Joubert the greatest threat to Lambiel, regardless of what the standings were.

Vash

 

[antmanb]

What?! Are you sure? How could this be? Can you give me a link to the ISU rules?

What if a skater pops an intended triple Axel into a nothing, or just skates through it and doesn't jump at all. Are you saying that the judges would then give a negative GOE for an underrotation of 1160 degrees?

I'm bad at finding and posting links but i'm almost 100% that's the rule - Look at the criteria for GOE in the negatives it specifically says what the deduction is for an underrotation, and makes the distinction between less than and more than a quarter - why would a deduction be written in the rules if it could never be taken. in this example the 3A is cheated by a third of a turn, the caller calls it a 2A...if you are right and its an overrotated double then there is no need for their to be a rule about underrotating by more than a quarter turn, the fact there is tells me they take it.

Also the british commentators said it every time they thought a jump was more than a qyarter short - they kept saying "that'll be called a double and they'll get -2 at least for it".

Just to double check - everyone refers to the "double penalty" of the underrotation. Double penalty for both the call and the GOE, if it isn't the GOE then what's the other penalty applied?

Just to go back and asnwer you part about the popped triple axel. I have more problems with this...if the skater goes up on the take off and doesn't rotate, just bales on the jump, the jump is marked as "A" (on the score sheet for axel) and gets nothing. Despite the fact the skater might actually have covered it up or actually done a bunnny hop. The skater gets 0 points and one of the their jumping passes is taken - that is lunacy, and if it weren't for the crib sheet no-one would no.

As regards the rotation - no the judges are doing the job they have always done, they're marking the GOE of whhat they see. Skater pops a 3A to a 1A and they grade the single axel. Skater lands short on a triple axel, they're grading the underrotated 3A. The caller is calling according to the stupid rules that have been put on him and the two rules apparently conflict.

Ant

 

[antmanb]

In fact, he had two spins downgraded. But I think the Finnish judge, Ms. Uimonen, is in the clear. She was the technical specialist for Lambiel's qualifying group and she gave him level 4s for both of his change-combination spins. (She was only the Technical Assistant for the LP, and by that time, no doubt they had gotten to her.)

So Scott Davis must be the mastermind behind the conspiracy. Davis was the technical specialist for the other qualifying group and gave top scores to Lambiel's greatest threat, Nobunari Oda. Very suspicious, if you ask me.

MM

Even my conspiracy jokes (which is what they mostly were) aside. I'd still like the rules to be applied properly and in these early stages (and yes they are early despite $peedy having hissy fits everytime people talk about the "new" judging system - i loved his hissy fit at Gwendal on eurosport!!) of the system being in place everytime there's a mistke it needs to be flagged as such and corrected, especially where, as here, no-one has to give back a medal.

Ant

 

[antmanb]

MM,

Why did you think that Oda was the greatest threat to Lambiel? He was in second place, but he was skating in his first worlds and he did not have a quad. Joubert, by contrast, was skating really well, and he won the SP. I would have considered Joubert the greatest threat to Lambiel, regardless of what the standings were.

Vash

Vash i think MM was just being funny and over the top about conspiracy theories!

Ant

 

[Jaana]

In every sport referees have made mistakes at times. In the NFL they have called wrong pass interference penalties or a wrong call on fumble which resulted in one side winning/losing. Just ask Mike Holmgren, the Seattle coach, or someone from the Oakland Raiders when they lost a game as a result of a wrong call. There have been wrong calls in the NBA, or in world series (baseball). It is a part of sport. No matter how much they try to perfect it, mistakes can happen. That is no reason to penalize someone.

Vash

In figure skating today there is a very definite reason to punish faulty technical judging: They have the videos where matters (like a triple axel) can be checked.

 

[EvanLysacekFan]

He not only had his triple axel awarded a double value, he had a spin in qualifying he did as a higher level demoted for so reason. One mistake like that is believable, two is not. There was something else up, and the technical specialist trio that determined its value should not be allowed back at another event. There is no room for those kind of people in the sport.

You're right, it was a huge conspiracy to deny Lambiel the gold!

Oh wait... he won.

 

[Mathman]

...As regards the rotation - no the judges are doing the job they have always done, they're marking the GOE of whhat they see. Skater pops a 3A to a 1A and they grade the single axel. Skater lands short on a triple axel, they're grading the underrotated 3A. The caller is calling according to the stupid rules that have been put on him and the two rules apparently conflict.

Boy, they sure do! Thanks. I just looked up the document that spells out these GOE rules.

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-169439-186657-94938-0-file,00.pdf

Here are some of the puzzling items in the GOE guidelines for judges.

"Fall on take-off = -3 GOE"

Minus three taken off of what? If you fell on the take-off you didn't do any jump at all. So your jump card lists "triple Axel" there, the caller says "no element was performed," and judges put in -3 GOE for a fall on a triple Axel?

"Underrotated and downgraded = -1 to -3." (This is what you were tying to explain to me. I think I've got it now.) So the jump card says 3A, the judges see a legitimate attempt at a 3A, the caller downgrades it to a 2A, and the judges take an additional 1 to 3 points off the base score for a 2A because it was underrotaed as a 3A.

Am I crazy or is Speedy?

So this is where the scores of the judges are fishy in Lambiels case, right? If this is really what happened, the downgrade should have been reflected in the scores of the judges as well as in the caller's decision.

"Underrotated up to 1/4 revolution = -2." OK, this one makes sense. You get credit for a triple because you got around more than two and three-quarters turns, but then you get a GOE penmalty for not really completing the last revolution in the air.

MM

 

[Mathman]

PS. Ant, it's really easy to post a link. Go to the page that you want to link to. Highlight the url that appears in the address bar at the top. (Usually either right- or left-clicking will do this.) Copy the url (either by right-click "copy" or by edit "copy," depending on how your browser works.)

Go back to Golden Skate and go right-click "paste" or edit "paste in thee dialong box. The GS software will do the rest.

Or...just type the full url, starting with either http or www; anything starting like that will automatically appear as a clickable link.

MM

 

[slutskayafan21]

You're right, it was a huge conspiracy to deny Lambiel the gold!

Oh wait... he won.

Oh wait, you are a Lambiel hater, and you even claim there would have been controversy whatsoever if there was no qualifying round and Joubert had won even though the points from Lambiel's discounted triple axel, which TV camers around the World apparently showed was fully rotated, would have given him the gold. Oh right you are also the one who said if Lysacek skated his best he would automaticaly have made up the 6 points he was behind Lambiel in qualifying no matter what Lambiel did(for the record even if Evan's quad was clean in the long he would have only scored a 152.xx while Lambiel without his mistake and without his triple axel being stolen by the tech. specialist would have been 162.xx). Oh wait you dont have a clue.

 

[slutskayafan21]

In fact, he had two spins downgraded. But I think the Finnish judge, Ms. Uimonen, is in the clear. She was the technical specialist for Lambiel's qualifying group and she gave him level 4s for both of his change-combination spins. (She was only the Technical Assistant for the LP, and by that time, no doubt they had gotten to her.)

So Scott Davis must be the mastermind behind the conspiracy. Davis was the technical specialist for the other qualifying group and gave top scores to Lambiel's greatest threat, Nobunari Oda. Very suspicious, if you ask me.

MM

Is this Scott Davis the former skater Scott Davis?

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

It is Scott Davis, who could win US Nats but not much beyond that, and there was no conspiracy neither at the Olys nor at the Worlds.

Stephane Lambiel won his second World Championship!! - Over and out.

Joe

 

[Mathman]

It is Scott Davis, who could win US Nats but not much beyond that,...

But in 2004 he came roaring back as captain of team Fuzion of the Major League Figure Skating league.

Fuzion beat team Velocity, headed by Tonia Kwiatkowski (I have an autographed picture! ) for the championship.

http://www.mlfskating.com/shell.asp?Target=index

 

[slutskayafan21]

It is Scott Davis, who could win US Nats but not much beyond that, and there was no conspiracy neither at the Olys nor at the Worlds.

Stephane Lambiel won his second World Championship!! - Over and out.

Joe

God it was him, well that explains it all now. He is just jealous, since spinning was his specialty, to watch somebody who spins better than he did in his prime. He should be publicly reprimanded for cheating Stephane out of points and creating the possable of a huge scandal.

 

[EvanLysacekFan]

Oh wait, you are a Lambiel hater, and you even claim there would have been controversy whatsoever if there was no qualifying round and Joubert had won even though the points from Lambiel's discounted triple axel, which TV camers around the World apparently showed was fully rotated, would have given him the gold. Oh right you are also the one who said if Lysacek skated his best he would automaticaly have made up the 6 points he was behind Lambiel in qualifying no matter what Lambiel did(for the record even if Evan's quad was clean in the long he would have only scored a 152.xx while Lambiel without his mistake and without his triple axel being stolen by the tech. specialist would have been 162.xx). Oh wait you dont have a clue.

Actually, I don't hate Lambiel and I never said that.

 

[Tonichelle]

God it was him, well that explains it all now. He is just jealous, since spinning was his specialty, to watch somebody who spins better than he did in his prime. He should be publicly reprimanded for cheating Stephane out of points and creating the possable of a huge scandal.

so you read Davis' mind too?


and don't label other members on this board just because you're not winning your own argument. It's very unbecoming.

 

[antmanb]

Boy, they sure do! Thanks. I just looked up the document that spells out these GOE rules.

http://www.isu.org/vsite/vfile/page/fileurl/0,11040,4844-169439-186657-94938-0-file,00.pdf

Here are some of the puzzling items in the GOE guidelines for judges.

"Fall on take-off = -3 GOE"

Minus three taken off of what? If you fell on the take-off you didn't do any jump at all. So your jump card lists "triple Axel" there, the caller says "no element was performed," and judges put in -3 GOE for a fall on a triple Axel?

"Underrotated and downgraded = -1 to -3." (This is what you were tying to explain to me. I think I've got it now.) So the jump card says 3A, the judges see a legitimate attempt at a 3A, the caller downgrades it to a 2A, and the judges take an additional 1 to 3 points off the base score for a 2A because it was underrotaed as a 3A.

Am I crazy or is Speedy?

So this is where the scores of the judges are fishy in Lambiels case, right? If this is really what happened, the downgrade should have been reflected in the scores of the judges as well as in the caller's decision.

"Underrotated up to 1/4 revolution = -2." OK, this one makes sense. You get credit for a triple because you got around more than two and three-quarters turns, but then you get a GOE penmalty for not really completing the last revolution in the air.

MM

Thanks MM for doing the work and looking up the rules...i still struggle to find the COP rules - particularly the lefvel enhancers for spins.

You are certainly not crazy in the slightest its all $peedy's craziness...well actually the writers of the code but since $peedy is the big fromage then i'll blame him!

The "fall on the take off" i was thinking of was (i think) Sandhu slipping off the take off edge of his axel (a waxel of the worst kind) and he had "A" on his score sheet but the element was marked as "0" so the GOEs didn't count. What annoyed me was that it counted as a "juming pass" despite there being no jump.

Ant

 

[antmanb]

PS. Ant, it's really easy to post a link. Go to the page that you want to link to. Highlight the url that appears in the address bar at the top. (Usually either right- or left-clicking will do this.) Copy the url (either by right-click "copy" or by edit "copy," depending on how your browser works.)

Go back to Golden Skate and go right-click "paste" or edit "paste in thee dialong box. The GS software will do the rest.

Or...just type the full url, starting with either http or www; anything starting like that will automatically appear as a clickable link.

MM

Thanks for the tip MM, i'll see if i can drag myself into the light with regards computers!!!

Ant