PDA

View Full Version : 2002 Judging Scandal: Has The Medicine Done More Damage Than The Original Disease?



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17

magnolia
02-20-2012, 05:19 AM
There is so much in your post that is convoluted but I want to answer the bolded items above....there have been very few Oly wins that have a public opinion consensus, where just about everyone says yes that was a true win. And you certainly can't use Oksana Baiul as an example. Her win has been a controversy for years, so was Katya's 2nd win.

I know Oksana Baiul's win was controversial. I thought the explanation that she managed to win gold because she tacked on an extra double-axel at the very end was very stupid.

You're missing the larger point that I was making.

Baiul and Gordeeva won in an era when CoP and interactive media didn't exist, so there was no way to substantiate the suspicion that the win was manipulated. Now we live in the age of CoP and interactive media, and any win can be confirmed as legit or not via combination of CoP and interactive media, and so even if you award someone with a gold medal, that's not enough to create a figure skating star.

I was suggesting that what is perhaps more essential ingredient to have to create a figure skating star is to find/have someone whose image is unanimously admirable, someone like Michelle Kwan or Mao Asada, whose skating and character (and probably physique as well, unfortunately) is, for the want of a better word, 'beautiful'.

And then I opined that to create a figure skating super-star, you had to get someone who doesn't have an established reputation for being the judge's favorite win the Olympic without falls on difficult jumps and beautiful execution and who also has some sort of a tragic or adverse personal background (particularly in the case of female skaters). That's such a difficult PR feat to pull off, I don't think that can be manipulated. It just has to happen.

I think it's possible to go back to 6.0, but there's no way to go back to an era when interactive media doesn't exist, and bad judging will always be discussed and revealed in YouTube and even on this board! So for example, Ashley Wagner won 4CC and some teenager who has never been interested in figure skating hears about this on TV or newspaper. So this teenager's interest is piqued, and what is he/she likely to do first? She/He will do a google search on 'Ashley Wagner' and '4CC'. One of the first things she/he reads will be about how her PCS was too high or Mao's too low, and her win was due to it occuring on American soil. This teenager will quickly lose interest because who wants to support a false star? Another potential figure skating fan lost. End of the story.

gkelly
02-20-2012, 05:36 AM
The short program is supposed to be the technical program and the long program is supposed to be the artistic program.

That sounds more like the way professional competitions were often set up, with the first program (not necessarily shorter) emphasizing technical content and the second program, often explicitly called "the artistic program," emphasizing artistry. More like Landover rules than ISU rules.

In ISU-style amateur/eligible skating, the short program was for a while called the technical program. It has required elements (or more recently recently required kinds of elements with some options on specifics for most of the slots) and penalties for not getting them right on the first try, no possibility to try again.

The long program has always officially been called the "free program." Historically that meant the skaters could include whatever they wanted to show off their own best skills. Over the last three decades there have been more and more restrictions, guidelines, and outright requirements added in pursuit of requiring all skaters to show a balance of skills, to the point that under IJS there really isn't much freedom left for skaters to decide what they want to include or leave out, nor the freedom to make an extra try at a failed element.

Starting in 1988-89 under 6.0 judging the second mark ("artistic impression" or "presentation") became the tiebreaker whenever a judge gave more than one skater the same total. But other than that, there was never any rule that artistry was more important than technical content in the free program.


If I were in control, I would make PCS count even less in the short and even more in the long. This makes hitting the technical elements in the short program even more important and showing skills / expressions in the long program even more important.

This isn't a return to the way it ever was before, but it is worth considering.

If we really wanted the first program to be primarily about technical content and the second program to be primarily about artistry, then it would make sense to use something like the current long (but not very free) well-balanced program rules for the first program, with the full-length long program, and to give skaters more flexibility in types of elements, numbers of elements, and perhaps even length of program for the second program.

judgejudy27
02-20-2012, 05:40 AM
The media and NBC thrash team fabricated judging scandal was a huge blow to skating in every rsepect. I hope the likes of Sandra Bezic, Scott Hamilton, Phil Hersh, Christine Brennan, and the schizo Marie Reine LeGougne are all happy now. The North American skating hype distributers did nothing but create a false impression of the worst kind to the casual North American skating fan, and make the sport almost extinct in many ways (TV coverage, interest, tours/pro competitions/TV sponsored cheesfests and exhibitions) in this part of the World, essentialy killing their own product that they make a living and lifestyle off of as well.

Triple Butz
02-20-2012, 08:05 AM
I see no problem with this.

The short program is supposed to be the technical program and the long program is supposed to be the artistic program. The skaters typically have no choice BUT to focus on the technical elements during the short program due to time constraints. They have more time and opportunity to show off their skills, choreography and artistry in the long program. Plus, it really is physically demanding enough already that they have to do 4 / 5 more jumping passes in the long program for another 110 seconds.

If I were in control, I would make PCS count even less in the short and even more in the long. This makes hitting the technical elements in the short program even more important and showing skills / expressions in the long program even more important.
Both programs are supposed to exhibit technical skill as well as presentation.

The short program was designed with specific elements in mind, forcing skaters to perform similar maneuvers and focus on QUALITY. The free program was meant not only to show artistic expression, but technical diversity as well. The goal was to design a short program that displays the basic elements of skating and design a long program that lets the skater showcase their unique abilities (technical AND artistic).

Aussie Willy
02-20-2012, 08:22 AM
No , this judge did judge them at the grand prix that season. Maybe I'm just not explaining it correctly lolIf it was a judge who judged them at an event then that is perfectly natural to ask the judge for feedback and comments after it to find out where the skater could improve.

I don't mind skaters coming and talking to me because it takes away the mystic of judges. So many skaters are literally shit scared of judges. I want them to feel comfortable that judges are not the boogieman. And it is always nice to go up to a skater and tell them how well you thought they performed.

cruisin
02-20-2012, 01:37 PM
Bingo... Well then you answered my question . So a judge can't
Go to a skating rink in the summer after a program is complete and give tips
About levels... Especally if they have no affiliation with the skaters country. And are only a friend of the coach.

I'm not sure I did answer your question. Judges are brought in for mentoring all of the time, especially with international skaters. They are asked to critique and advise on the programs. The USFS encourages it. There are also big competitions in the US, where National/International judges are used and there are critiques held after the events. However, there are also situations where a skater/team is expected to win, a judge takes them under their wing and goes too far. Not so much with advise, but with politicking for them.

As far as coaches being friend with judges, it happens. These people have known each other for years. They form relationships, they are their social and work circles. However, those friendships should go right out of their heads when it's time to judge. Some judges can do that, some can't.


No , this judge did judge them at the grand prix that season. Maybe I'm just not explaining it correctly lol

Did the judge, judge them before or after they came to the US to mentor them? It is unusual for a judge from another country to be flown in. Usually it is home judges that mentor.



(The best heroines are probably someone like Oksana Baiul or Katerina Gordeeva. They are seen to have won the Gold legitimately and some other thing in their life makes them tragic heroines as well.)

I don't know that Oksana won unfairly, but her win was controversial. Her fame was not long lived because she crashed and burned after she won.

As far as Kristy, she never wanted to play the game with sponsors. She did what she thought was relevant. She was a spokesperson for reading, but didn't want to do the light stuff. She did very well performing in shows.

winterchik
02-20-2012, 01:42 PM
Winterchik you don't know who I am... Empty statements?? Really for all you know I could be one of those corrupt Judges... So I'm not posting just to talk about bullshit.
Empty statements ... Who are you to say that. Go back to being a fan just watch the show.
Really after reading your comments and statements..your are neither a Judge of figure skating / ice dancing or knowledgeable enough to discuss technical details..
the name you are looking for before is Alla Shekhovtsova and i can tell you , this committee is full of heavy weights and none bigger then Robert Horen.
and if you were correct and Alla is the ultimate power then please explain why in the cup of Russia 2012 she didn't rig the technical panel???

I do enjoy the show:D

demetriosj
02-20-2012, 01:59 PM
Used to enjoy the "do or die" aspect of the short program under 6.0.

If you fell, or sometimes even bobbled any jump, you would surely not be in the top 5-6 after the short.

You were shooting for a difficult (within your jumping skills), clean short program, (which I think audiences also liked.)

gkelly
02-20-2012, 02:18 PM
Used to enjoy the "do or die" aspect of the short program under 6.0.

If you fell, or sometimes even bobbled any jump, you would surely not be in the top 5-6 after the short.

That wasn't "surely" at all. It depended on the strength of the field and how well everyone else skated.

It was a pretty good bet that at a big important competition like Worlds or Olympics you'd be unlikely to be in the top 3 after a fall in the short, but top 4-6 was not uncommon for top skaters in that situation. E.g., Ito and Harding 4th and 6th at 1992 Olympics SP, Plushenko 4th in 2002. Lots more Worlds examples.

bruno6
02-20-2012, 02:45 PM
Maybe if you read my post, you would see Peter Kriek makes
The final decision and has to ok her invitations . So blah blah.
Again , I post my way for a reason. So believe what you want.
Your thoughts and words don't affect me at all.
So like I said .. Just enjoy the show.

briancoogaert
02-20-2012, 03:04 PM
That wasn't "surely" at all. It depended on the strength of the field and how well everyone else skated.

It was a pretty good bet that at a big important competition like Worlds or Olympics you'd be unlikely to be in the top 3 after a fall in the short, but top 4-6 was not uncommon for top skaters in that situation. E.g., Ito and Harding 4th and 6th at 1992 Olympics SP, Plushenko 4th in 2002. Lots more Worlds examples.
That's right, but the fact that Slutskaya and Cohen finished 1 and 2 at 2005 Worlds SP is a weird thing about CoP, it would have never been possible under 6.0. They would have finished in 3rd and 4th, maybe, at best.

winterchik
02-20-2012, 03:50 PM
Maybe if you read my post, you would see Peter Kriek makes
The final decision and has to ok her invitations . .

really you don't understand the process..

but try this name "Peter Krick"

julieann
02-20-2012, 04:35 PM
You could fix figure skating tomorrow by going back to 6.0. It's that simple.

OR you can keep tweaking and keep tweaking CoP year after year after year and then lose what's left of the casual fans and only have people who were raised under the CoP system still following figure skating. By that time when the CoP becomes understandable, everyone will be wearing solid black onesies and doing the exact same program to Tango de Roxanne.

OR you could come up with something closer to 6.0 that fans can understand. But it has to be an ultimate score that points are deducted from. Not racking up points. No one can understand what these huge numbers mean. I've listened to people like Scott Hamilton wait for scores not having any idea what a skater will get. That's insane. How can a normal personal then get anything from what looks like a random number? If the top score in all disciplines was something like 100 and then points were deducted for falls, under rotations, finishing after the music, etc., then that would be easier to understand for everyone. Any normal American watching a program where someone did most of their jumps and had great presentation skills and seeing that the person got a score of 85, would say 'okay he fell and he got a what amounts to a B grade. That makes sense.' or 'Oh she was pretty perfect and got a 95, which is like an A. That makes sense.' It's really not that hard to make everyone happy.

Skating rules are not that complicated for even a casual fan to learn especially compared to most other sports whose fans care enough to take the time to learn them.

Maybe the ISU needs to publish 'COP for Dummies'; it could be on their youtube channel so we can see visual examples. Do one for each discipline.

bruno6
02-20-2012, 04:36 PM
Ok I am not good at spelling the names of officials... But I can say that one of my family
Members is an international judge. And I can say, I have gone to many events with them
And I have heard over the last 15 years all about the inside track of corruption that goes
On there. I have listerned to the story's almost every time they have come back from
A event they were judging. So maybe I'm not that good with the English language...
But what I do speak about is from first hand info. If you believe it or not is your
Choice but to say, I don't understand the proccess is laughable!! Again Move On...

allezfred
02-20-2012, 04:39 PM
Again Move On...

You might like to take your own advice. Just a thought.