Christina Gao writes for the Harvard Crimson about her thoughts on the judging: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/2/26/on-thin-ice/
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Christina Gao writes for the Harvard Crimson about her thoughts on the judging: http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/2/26/on-thin-ice/
Seems like you keep sidestepping the issue. Your simple formula on the number of winning and losing pairs is simply irrelevant.
The point of the whole thing, over 30 pages, was that between 6 and 7 judges likely favored Adelina. Not 2. That debunks any myth that fewer than 4 judges could have favored her, and that the number is very likely 7 statistically. By statistically, I mean statistical likelihood.
This is not a contest weighing the likelihood of 6-7 versus 2 versus 4.
Somebody please enlighten me how Adelina compares to Gracie.
The point of the whole thing, over 30 pages, was that between 6 and 7 judges likely favored Adelina. Not 2. That debunks any myth that fewer than 4 judges could have favored her, and that the number is very likely 7 statistically. By statistically, I mean statistical likelihood.
Her programs in Sochi or as skaters in general?
The qualities that count for PCS. I just don't see how Adelina is 7 points better than Gracie.
Gracie would have been closer had (a) she not fallen and (b) they were in a neutral geographic area where there wasn't home cooking.
But it’s interesting to consider a hypothetical scenario—what if the Olympics had been held in Japan? Would Nagoya native Mao Asada, who placed sixth in Sochi, have medaled? She had a stellar free skate, but dropped like a rock in the standings after the short program–would sympathetic judges have been more forgiving? What about the 15-year-old Russian girl, Julia Lipnitskaia who placed ahead of America’s Ashley Wagner? The young girl fell a few times yet Ashley remained on her feet. The final rankings are all contingent on differences in a few points here and there, leading to placements that the audience doesn’t understand.
I don't understand the mentality of posters who can use 'home cooking' as a legitimate reason to explain away strange scores. That's like saying 'If Usain Bolt runs 9.58 in Jamaica, it should be counted as 9.40, but if he runs in Russia, then it should be counted as 9.70, and that's okay, because that's how 'home cooking' works in this sport.'
'Home cooking' is a way the judges cheat, for chrissake!! Are you blind to that?
No but there's a lot of myth debunking to do here. You accept most judges favored Adelina but many others don't.
Gracie would have been closer had (a) she not fallen and (b) they were in a neutral geographic area where there wasn't home cooking. The whole season I think Adelina has been getting better marks than Gracie though. Adelina's programs, aside from the technical elements, are very intricate and difficult, although apparently not everyone's cup of tea choreographically. Gracie probably does not have as much going on between the elements.
I don't think drivingmissdaisy was saying it is okay.. nobody is endorsing of it but simply acknowledging that it exists
and that thus we have to take the scores with a grain of salt.
So cheating = home cooking exists. I'm glad we agree. I'm glad drivingmissdaisy agrees cheating exists. So the question is, why would anyone be crazy enough to want to legitimate cheating?
Of course scores based on judges cheating have to be taken with a grian of salt. It's a lie, after all.
