The Judging Controversy Thread

[ILuvYuna]

You think PCS scores of 9.25, 9, 9.5, 9.25 and 9.75 (judge 7) is lowballing Yuna? Three of those are as high or higher than your "good judge" average.

You missed the point.
None of the (hypothetically) colluding judges' scores can accomplish anything on their own. Judge 7's scores would be part of a strategy in combination with Judge 2, 4, and 8.

Quote from the link I provided in a previous post:

A player's strategy, in game theory, refers to one of the options he or she can choose in a setting where the outcome depends not only on his own actions but on the action of others

**ETA - they have to incorporate high scores into the strategy, and vary them among the 4, because if they don't -- if all 4 judges were to score low across the board -- it would be too obvious. The point is not just to cheat, but to get away with it lol. The judge who scores totally high for Adelina, and totally low for Yuna, is essentially immune from issues of credibility, because those scores were thrown out anyway. Nonetheless they are the most important ones in this hypothetical strategy.

 

[usethis2]

http://vimeo.com/89457478

Thank you for that Italian commentary. The casters almost brought tears to my eyes! Especially the female caster who kept screaming "No, No, No!" (is that Italian? )

 

[Mathman]

How do you define "out of line"?

E.g., for PCS, if every judge on the panel was in the same range, then they were all in line with each other. None would be out of line with the panel.

They might be out of line with your assessment (or that of a large cohort of observers not on the panel), or another way of putting that would be that you/all those observers were out of line with the panel.

It's not meaningful to say that a panel that agrees within itself is out of line with other panels judging different performances at different events.

Nor to say that PCS are out of the line with the rules, since there are no rules to define what represent, e.g., a 9.5 performance vs. 9.0 or 8.5. It's a judgment call.

For GOEs, it's possible that all judges could be out of line with the rules, if the rules require negative GOE for certain errors, that error was clearly committed, and the GOEs were not negative.

I think it would be possible for scores to be out of line with common sense, or out of line with all that's good and holy.

If Patrick Chan gets 9.5 in skating skills, that's fair enough. Patrick Chan's blade to ice skills are among the all-time best.

If you get +3 GOE on a jump, that jump ought to be something out of the ordinary. If you get 9.75 in interpretation, you better have interpreted the heck out of that music.

The scores that are being debated here are…just…too…high. :yes:

 

[Mathman]

For Yuna's scores, the four I would single out for suspicion are columns 2, 4, 7, and 8.

http://korcan50years.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/yuna-kim.png

The way to determine which are more likely acting in collusion is to consider what they marked on each element.

For example:

In TES, Yuna opened with her biggest bv element, Row#1 (10.0), which she is capable of executing very well:

Judge Columns..........2.......4......7......8
3Lz+3T....................2.......2......3......2

Toss high and low, and Yuna averages +2 GoE (Actual Average before sov +2.38)…

I wish I had written that!

***DISLCAIMER: This proves absolutely nothing lol.

Yeah, sadly so. In any collection of data you can select the smallest numbers and say, look how small these numbers are compared to the rest. These small numbers must have conspired to bring down the average.

But I know that wasn't your purpose. Yes, this does how how it is possible for a minority acting in concert to affect a result disproportionately to their numbers.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

The scores that are being debated here are…just…too…high. :yes:

Here are the bullets for +GOE
1) unexpected / creative / difficult entry
2) clear recognizable steps/free skating movements immediately preceding element
3) varied position in the air / delay in rotation
4) good height and distance
5) good extension on landing / creative exit
6) good flow from entry to exit including jump combinations / sequences
7) effortless throughout
8) element matched to the musical structure

For +3, a skater must achieve 6+ bullets. When Adelina does her jumps well, as she did in Sochi aside from the 3-2-2, she checks off 2, 3 (delayed rotation), 4, 5 (note that 4 and 5 call for "good" not "the best"), 6, and 7.

"Long preparation" calls for a -1 to -2 reduction. Yuna and Carolina should almost never get +3 on jumps for this alone even if they achieve more that 6 +GOE features, with the exception of Caro's 3 turns into the 3Lo.

Basically, how I see it is that because Adelina does not have long jump set-ups +2 and +3 are appropriate. A great jump with all 8 +GOE features but with a long set-up should not be more than +2 ever, based on the rules. Why aren't we questioning why Yuna got more than +2 GOE for some of her jumps, in particular the 3-3? Was the set-up not long? Am I reading or interpreting any of this incorrectly?

 

[Mathman]

I will look at it again. Delayed rotation? Like when skaters such as Dorothy Hamill did a delayed (single} Axel? I don't think so.

5 and 6 I would say "satisfactory" rather than "good."

Don't get me wrong, Sotnikova skated her heart out and good for her. I still say that +3 on almost every element is hard to justify.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

I will look at it again. Delayed rotation? Like when skaters such as Dorothy Hamill did a delayed (single} Axel? I don't think so.

5 and 6 I would say "satisfactory" rather than "good."

You don't think her 2A or first 3T in the 3-3 have delayed rotation? She jumps high so she either delays rotation or rotates very slow, and I don't think she rotates all that slow.

"Satisfactory" is "good" isn't it? I mean, with the exception of a handful of skaters who are "great" I don't think more than 5 or 6 female skaters in the entire world do these points better than Adelina. If the rule were intended to be so limiting, wouldn't they use the term "excellent" instead of "good"? Your true colors are showing

 

[DarR]

Looking back at the FS protocol once again, I've noticed some discrepancies in terms of GOEs of certain elements given to Yuna. Disclaimer: Just my observation.

I♥Yuna has singled out judges 2, 4, 7, 8. I would like to discuss the scoring of judges 1, 2, 4.

Judge 1: Poor judging of Yuna's 3S by giving +3. Judge might have scored wrongly by mistake (i.e. neutral judge) or knows his score would be tossed away because no other judge would have given Yuna a +3. [of all elements, the only +3 he gave was on her 3S]

Judge 2: No discrepancies in terms of GOE scoring, but scores Yuna low across the board GOE and PCS wise. Ensures that other possible judge in collusion would have his score included in final scoring.

Judge 4: Scores Yuna's 3Lz-3T as +2, versus Yuna's solo 3Lz as +3. Knows his +3 GOE will definitely be tossed out. Gives Yuna +3 to reduce suspicion. Might be an honest mistake or poor judging altogether. [of all elements, the only +3 he gave was on her 3Lz]

 

[Mathman]

"Satisfactory" is "good" isn't it? I mean, with the exception of a handful of skaters who are "great" I don't think more than 5 or 6 female skaters in the entire world do these points better than Adelina. If the rule were intended to be so limiting, wouldn't they use the term "excellent" instead of "good"?

I ask myself, what would a jump look like if it got 0 GOE, with no errors. To me this would mean, she did everything OK but nothing particularly outstanding. She had satisfactory distance and height, but nothing out of the ordinary. Her landing edge and flow throughout the jump was OK. It did not look labored; it did not offend against the music. Good for her! Full credit for the jump, ta-da! 0 bonus points.

But you have a good point about the language. IIRC this change was deliberately made three seasons ago in order to encourage judges to give a wider range of GOEs. (To compensate they put in the factoring so that a +3 GOE was really only a 2.1 GOE, etc.) The old language did say things like "exceptional height and distance," "excellent flow throughout," etc. So maybe the ISU got what it desired.

Your true colors are showing

My true colors hung up her skates 8 years ago and is about to become First Lady of Rhode Island.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

I should say that I don't necessarily agree with how the GOE is rewarded; I feel that "excellent" height should somehow get a skater more credit than merely "good", but that isn't how the rules are written. The "long preparation" is a penalty regardless of how good the jump is otherwise, again which I don't like because I do love Caro's classic lutz.

 

[capcomeback]

My true colors hung up her skates 8 years ago and is about to become First Lady of Rhode Island.

Mine too... She was something!

 

[R.D.]

If that's the general consensus among ubers then really there is no possibility to assemble an unbiased judging panel ever.

Probably the ONLY statement you've made in this entire thread that I agree with.

It's true - the way the system is currently set up, you will NEVER have a truly 100% unbiased judging panel - no matter what. People are going to have their favorites and preferences and will mark accordingly. BUT, what you CAN do is try to minimize as much of that bias as possible so that you more or less produce a "fair" result. That was CLEARLY not done in Sochi.

 

[Rubirosa]

what are you whining about?? yuna got an edge call in her flip in the world championship last year..

That was wrong! Yuna was underscored in SP at Worlds-2013! The edge call was wrong! Yuna fans couldn't stop whining about that, like now the can't. They never knew how to lose with grace. You have your role model.

but her flips this year is much better/stable.. show me evidence to prove that this year she had problems with her so called "lip".. especially at this year's olympics.. unlike sotnikova in the slow mo it was obvious that it was a flutz..

You don't understand how Yuna fans have felt for many years when she got unfair edge calls for her worderful & technically perfect Flip.
A good Flip like Yuna's has 'slight' in-edge, not like Lutz that has 'obvous' out-edge.
You need to be able to evaluate the trace of the blade on the ace first to talk about Flip edge issue.

I hear, hear. Technical judges at competitions don't have an chance to go to the ice and evaluate the trace of the blade "on the ace" first to talk about flip issue. Yuna fans have such a chance. They know better. All decisions against Yuna's edge is wrong. She is perfect. Never has edge call, never under-rotate, her GOE must be 3, her PCS is 10, if not- it's judging controversy. That's so funny and pretictable. Yuna fans helped her the most to look like a sore loser. Now her federation is doing the same. Maybe Yuna want to escape all this but she can't.

 

[Rubirosa]

However, protests can certainly be based on legitimate disagreements with the technical panel and judging panel in which they did not act according to the rules and guidelines of the scoring system, which includes but is not limited to: 1) lack of a flutz call on Adelina Sotnikova 2) lack of a UR call on Adelina Sotnikova 3) incorrect footwork level calls for Adelina Sotnikova in her favor and Yuna Kim that were not in her favor 4) inflated GOEs for Adelina's elements.

You should continue to be objective:
5) lack of lip call on Yuna Kim 6) lack of UR call on Yuna Kim 7) incorrect layback spin level calls for Yuna Kim 8) inflated GOE for Yuna elements 9) inflated PCS for Yuna programs
Without 5)-9) you look biased Yuna fan who cannot be taken seriously by officials ISU.

 

[capcomeback]

You should continue to be objective:
5) lack of lip call on Yuna Kim 6) lack of UR call on Yuna Kim 7) incorrect layback spin level calls for Yuna Kim 8) inflated GOE for Yuna elements 9) inflated PCS for Yuna programs
Without 5)-9) you look biased Yuna fan who cannot be taken seriously by officials ISU.

I'm not a Yuna fan, but no fan of Adelina or Julia (or Gracie to a certain extent) should dare mention anything about inflated GOE's! You lose all credibility.

Judges 2 and 7 that gave Adelina 18 GOE 3's between them and 10 Component scores no lower than 9.25 (only 1 such score) and are an insult to the skating world. Their scores proclaimed Adelina Sotnikova to be the greatest woman skater ever and she's not close!

Please be objective when you reply.

 

[Rubirosa]

I'm not a Yuna fan, but no fan of Adelina or Julia (or Gracie to a certain extent) should dare mention anything about inflated GOE's! You lose all credibility.

Judges 2 and 7 that gave Adelina 18 GOE 3's between them and 10 Component scores no lower than 9.25 (only 1 such score) and are an insult to the skating world. Their scores proclaimed Adelina Sotnikova to be the greatest woman skater ever and she's not close!

Please be objective when you reply.

Thank you, lovely sarcasm. Adelina's fan would dismiss 1)-4) like Yuna's fans dismiss 5)-7). I am a Mao fan. We never had any credibility when it comes to Yuna. I know. :sarcasm:

 

[ILuvYuna]

Yuna's Scores: Suspicious vs. Not-so-much

TES

• Elements listed in order of highest impact on bv, to lowest (1)Jumps(2)Spins(3)StSq)
• Hi and Lo are NOT thrown out here, this is just to take a look at what each group thought about the skaters...
• GoE is scaled for each set of columns, with the actual GoE from competition in the middle, so you can see how much the cheating block was able to drag the score down (not taking into account the Hi&Lo dropped during competition, but keeping in mind that all scores from 4,7, and 8 counted, thanks to 2 scoring so egregiously low).
• Distribution of GoE's among the cheating block, and the other columns, with percentages.

JUMPS..........BV.......2.......4.......7......8...........GoE/Actual/GoE.........1.......3........5.......6.......9
3Lz+3T.........10.10......2.......2.......3......2...........1.58/1.60/1.68..........2.......3........2.......3.......2
2A+2T+2Lo....7.04x.....1.......1.......2......1...........0.63/0.79/1.00..........2.......3........2.......2.......1
3Lz...............6.60x.....1.......3.......1......1...........1.05/1.00/1.12..........2.......2........1.......2.......1
3S+2T...........5.50......1.......1.......1......2...........0.88/1.00/1.12..........1.......2........2.......2.......1
3F................5.30......1.......1.......1......2............0.88/1.20/1.54..........2.......3........2.......2.......2
3S................4.62x.....1.......1.......1......1...........0.70/0.90/1.26..........3.......2........1.......1.......2
2A................3.63x.....1.......1.......2......2...........0.75/0.79/0.80..........2.......1........1.......2.......2
(A. has skated at this point, Other Columns may not be as impressed with Y's jump height, and notice lack of "difficult" entries compared to A.)

Distribution I:
.........+1GoEs = 27 ...................................+2GoEs= 29 ................................+3GoEs = 7
Cheating Block =18 (67%)..................Cheating Block= 8 (28%)................Cheating Block = 2 (29%)
Other Columns = 9 (33%)...................Other Columns= 21 (72%)...............Other Columns = 5 (71%)

Distribution II:
......................Total GoE's.......%=1............%=2............%=3
Cheating Block........28...............44%...........29%..............7%
Other Columns........35...............26%...........60%..............14%
(The Cheating Block awarded mostly 1's, while the Other Columns awarded mostly 2's)





SPINS..........BV..........2........4.......7.....8.............GoE/Actual/GoE............1.......3........5.......6.......9
FCCoSp4........3.50..........2........1......2......2.............0.88/0.93/1.00.............1.......3........2.......2.......2
CCoSp4..........3.50..........2........1......2......1.............0.75/0.71/0.70.............2.......1........1.......2.......1
LSp3.............2.40...........1........1......1......1.............0.50/0.64/0.80.............1.......2........2.......2.......1
(Spins are Y's weakness, but notice Other Columns still scored her +.37 higher than the Cheating Block.)

Distribution I:
..........+1GoEs = 13........................................+2GoEs = 13........................................+3GoEs = 1
Cheating Block = 7 (54%).......................Cheating Block = 5 (38%).......................Cheating Block = 0 (0%)
Other Columns = 6 (36%).......................Other Columns = 8 (62%).......................Other Columns = 1 (100%)

Distribution II:
......................Total GoE's.......%=1............%=2............%=3
Cheating Block........12..............58%...........42%..............0%
Other Columns........15...............40%..........53%..............7%
(Same as Jumps: the Cheating Block awarded mostly 1's, while the Other Columns awarded mostly 2's)






STEP SEQ......BV..........2........4.......7.....8............GoE/Actual/GoE........1.......3........5.......6.......9
StSq3............3.30..........2........2......2......3............1.13/1.14/1.00.........2.......3........2.......3.......2
ChSq1...........2.00...........1........2......3......2............1.40/1.50/1.54.........2.......2........2.......3.......2
(Here, the Cheating Block feels comfortable scoring her well -- maybe because she's getting docked by the caller at the same time for L3? Also, notice that the only +1 came from the cheating block. It's from Judge 2, whose job it is to lower the curve = Strategy )

Distribution I:
.........+1GoEs = 1...................................+2GoEs = 12........................................+3GoEs = 5
Cheating Block = 1 (100%)..............Cheating Block = 5 (42%).......................Cheating Block = 2 (40%)
Other Columns = 0 (0%)..................Other Columns = 7 (58%).......................Other Columns = 3 (60%)

Distribution II:
......................Total GoE's.......%=1............%=2............%=3
Cheating Block........8...............13%............63%..............25%
Other Columns........10...............0%............70%..............30%







PCS

Components......2............4..........7...........8.........................................1..........3..........5.........6.........9
SS.................8.50.......9.00......9.25.......9.00.....................................9.00......9.50......9.50.....9.25.....9.75
T/L................7.75.......8.75......9.00........8.75....................................8.75......9.50......9.25.....9.00.....9.25
P/E................8.75.......9.25......9.50........9.50....................................9.25......9.75......9.25.....10.0.....9.50
Ch/C..............8.25.......9.00......9.25........9.25....................................9.50......10.0......9.50.....9.50.....9.75
Int.................8.75.......9.25......9.75.......9.50....................................9.25......10.0......9.50.....10.0.....9.75

Ind.Avg...........8.40........9.05......9.20.......9.20.....................................9.15.....9.75......9.40.....9.55.....9.60

(Looking into the averages, you can see Judge 2 sets the curve, making sure that the other 3 scores will count. The others have to score her in the 9's because it's Yuna Kim, so they make sure to stay below 9.25 LoL. On the otherside, Judge 1 is stingy, but the rest score her higher than anyone in the Cheating Block).

Group Average:
Cheating Block = 8.96
Other Columns = 9.49

And of course, despite everything presented here - it still means nothing

***Disclaimer*** I'm not a mathematician and I'm not perfect, so if you find any transcribing or calculation errors, I apologize. Just point them out and I'll fix it.. Adelina's protocol numbers should be examined the same as this, but I won't have time this weekend

 

[ILuvYuna]

I wish I had written that!

I made another one, too! It was fun lol

I♥Yuna has singled out judges 2, 4, 7, 8. I would like to discuss the scoring of judges 1, 2, 4.

Judge 1: Poor judging of Yuna's 3S by giving +3. Judge might have scored wrongly by mistake (i.e. neutral judge) or knows his score would be tossed away because no other judge would have given Yuna a +3. [of all elements, the only +3 he gave was on her 3S]

Judge 2: No discrepancies in terms of GOE scoring, but scores Yuna low across the board GOE and PCS wise. Ensures that other possible judge in collusion would have his score included in final scoring.

Judge 4: Scores Yuna's 3Lz-3T as +2, versus Yuna's solo 3Lz as +3. Knows his +3 GOE will definitely be tossed out. Gives Yuna +3 to reduce suspicion. Might be an honest mistake or poor judging altogether. [of all elements, the only +3 he gave was on her 3Lz]

I noticed Judge 1 was stingy as well. Who knows lol

 

[wolkenschloss]

Yuna's Scores: Suspicious vs. Not-so-much

(Looking into the averages, you can see Judge 2 sets the curve, making sure that the other 3 scores will count. The others have to score her in the 9's because it's Yuna Kim, so they make sure to stay below 9.25 LoL.

Thanks for Analyse! The point which role judge 2 took up for reducing Yuna's score is so ovious.
It would be nice if you have time to analyse Adelina's score soon!

 

[ILuvYuna]

I'll see if I can get to it this weekend.

I had this whole explanation typed up about Judge 1 from Yuna's probably being Judge 6 from Adelina's and then my touchpad did something stupid and the whole browser closed. Grr lol Oh well, suffice to say, I am pretty confident I've identified the supposed cheating block in Adelina's, and it shouldn't be that hard to do now that Kim's is done (just erase data, and plug in the new set).

This will probably be the last I contribute to this topic tho. I'm kind of more open now to the possibly that they were cheating, but ultimately this is an excercise in futility LoL (I only do it because I can't resist a good puzzle ). I'd rather spend time on revising the component explanations for the improvement thread (probably just as futile, but a goal more worth pursuing in my mind lol :thumbsup