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

bruno6
02-21-2012, 06:19 PM
Yes, cop 6.0... Blah blah ... What have we learned here. To answer your question Maofan7.. What the ISU did was indeed put a bandage over the problem. If you don't
Get rid of the cancer and prevent it from coming back... It's going to continue to grow.
And it is still growing very productively. Yes yes yes... You can easily corrupt this new
System and guess what it's not that hard to do. I have plainly seen it and a skater lost
By 2 points because of it. Reporting misconduct? It happens and yes , I know of letters
That have been written. But it still does nothing dramatic to change the system.
The cancer must be cut out first !! Or no system will ever work. So sorry the bandage is
Already half off.

cruisin
02-21-2012, 06:19 PM
^^ PDilemma, I totally agree. There are/were good points to both systems. Neither one was/is perfect. Judging is flawed. It was under 6.0 and it is under CoP. The only difference is that it was more apparent under 6.0.

Luna_skater, I don't have a chip on my shoulder :lol:. And I have witnessed judges getting lectured by referees after an event. But, they still judge. And the unfair marks don't change.

As to skaters getting feedback from judges after events. Of course they ask why they were rewarded for XYZ and penalized for ABC. I have seen situations where skaters were penalized for a move for some bizarre reason, then at the next competition they are rewarded and praised for the same move. Told to take something out by one judge, told to leave it in by another. Where is the consistency?

It does not take that much effort to manipulate CoP. Math is math. The system is not rocket science.

There are plenty of judges (I would even grant, the majority) who judge what they see at any given competition. But, at major competitions, the judges go to practices. The judges have their own room, where they have hospitality. Do you honestly believe that they do not discuss the practices? Do you honestly believe that they are not influenced by other judges? Whether that influence is getting a judge to score according to an agenda or according to what another judges sees as better, it is what it is. Do you honestly believe that judges do not judge based on prior skates? That skaters are not held up based on reputation? When a panel is judging at Nationals, do you think that in the back of their minds they are thinking - who do we want to send to Worlds or the Olympics? Do they want to send a skater who just happens to have the skate of a lifetime, that day, or do they want to send a skater who is consistent and well known, but who happened to have a bad skate that day? Do you not think that judges politick/persuade for their preferred skater?

bruno6
02-21-2012, 06:26 PM
The ISU .... Hates hates hates controversy .. They do not want any scandals small or large. They do what they can to minimize the problem and make it go away ASAP .
You say judges have been penalized for questioning results... That's why most shut their
Mouth and just conform.

bruno6
02-21-2012, 06:30 PM
Crusin ,you forgot the dinners with heads of federation and discret meeting places to talk.

gkelly
02-21-2012, 06:32 PM
Here's what I hate about this whole argument. It always goes like this:

Someone says: CoP has some very real problems.

The response is then loudly screamed: SO DID 6.0!

And that really isn't a valid argument. Saying that CoP has not solved the issue of biased judging or that it has weaknesses that may be hurting skating is not saying that 6.0 was a perfect system. In fact, I see a lot of posters who are not claiming 6.0 was flawless or even bringing it up at all. Throwing out the "6.0 was flawed, too!" retort is a logical fallacy. Because one system was flawed, it is not then okay that its replacement is flawed.

There are a lot of fans who would like to see improvements in judging. Why can't that discussion take place without the pointless 6.0 argument?

Primarily because of the way the questions are asked.

The initial post in this thread quoted an article that pulled together a bunch of criticisms and musings about, largely unrelated to each other, and asked "So, has the medicine done more damage than the original disease and is it time for COP/IJS to go?"

The poll, in response to the question "Is it time to get rid of COP/IJS?," offers the option of keeping the current system ("No" answer, with no elaboration, i.e., keep it as is), returning to 6.0, or rejecting both and coming up with a whole new system from scratch.

It seems to me a better way to address the question would be to ask what problems that we know existed under 6.0 as well have not been solved by introducing the new system and what might be some good ways to address them in the present context, without another massive overhaul of the scoring system.

And, separately, what problems have been introduced by IJS and how can they be addressed within the system, or are they so inherent in the approach to scoring that they could never be solved without scrapping the current system entirely?

And I think discussion of corruption in judging (under any judging system) probably belongs in a different thread (and a different newspaper article) from discussion of the aesthetic appeal of the programs, for example.

It's really too bad that the 2002 scandal caused the back-burner plan to update the method of evaluating the actual skating to be rushed into adoption along with other unrelated changes such as making judges anonymous. It seems impossible to keep the separate changes straight and evaluate them each on their own merits because they happened at the same time.

Maybe we can start a few different new threads:

*Have the introduction of the IJS and of anonymous judging at the international level improved the level of corruption? If not, what might be good steps the ISU could take to address the ongoing corruption?

*Has the IJS made skating programs less appealing to fans and/or skaters themselves? What changes could make them more appealing again?

*Has the IJS made the scoring harder for fans or skaters to understand? If so, how could it be made clearer?

Possible solutions to each of those questions might be 1) go back to 6.0 scoring exactly as it was practiced as of 2002; 2) start with 6.0 ca. 2002 and make X changes; 3) keep IJS exactly as it is practiced in 2012; 4) start with IJS as it is now practiced and make Y changes; 5) throw out both systems and start from scratch -- here's Z example of a new approach that might work better.

Of course, what happens if, for example, we decide that 2) would be the best approach for addressing corruption and 4) would be the best approach for making the scoring understandable?

bruno6
02-21-2012, 06:33 PM
Yes, I witnessed a deduct for an illegal lift, and That same lift was
Used at a prior event not long ago . And there was no deduction from the panel?
Why CORUPTION!!

bruno6
02-21-2012, 06:35 PM
We are getting so upset lol... Do you think the ISU give a shit! NO

cruisin
02-21-2012, 06:45 PM
gkelly, good post. Reasoned and productive. I'm not sure (right off the top of my head) what the best solution is. I'm not sure that 6.0 was adequate. The first system changes: putting 15 on a panel, making the judges anonymous, dumping 6 random scores, and listing the two marks in numerical order, so that they were not necessarily one judge's scores side by side, was an abysmal failure. CoP seems too abstract, but it could be worked on. And I am not sure that the technical controller/specialist method is good. I certainly do not agree that they should be working coaches. I do not like the required element aspect, to the degree it has become implemented. I also don't like that pure skating is not rewarded as much as it should be. Too much emphasis is being placed on tricks. There is athleticism in artistry. There is value in technique and good edges. We need to bring some of that back.

luna_skater
02-22-2012, 12:42 AM
There are plenty of judges (I would even grant, the majority) who judge what they see at any given competition. But, at major competitions, the judges go to practices. The judges have their own room, where they have hospitality. Do you honestly believe that they do not discuss the practices? Do you honestly believe that they are not influenced by other judges? Whether that influence is getting a judge to score according to an agenda or according to what another judges sees as better, it is what it is. Do you honestly believe that judges do not judge based on prior skates? That skaters are not held up based on reputation? When a panel is judging at Nationals, do you think that in the back of their minds they are thinking - who do we want to send to Worlds or the Olympics? Do they want to send a skater who just happens to have the skate of a lifetime, that day, or do they want to send a skater who is consistent and well known, but who happened to have a bad skate that day? Do you not think that judges politick/persuade for their preferred skater?

Cruisin, with all due respect, I don't think telling you what *I* believe is going to change your opinion of what kind of behaviour you seem to think judges engage in. What you're describing above is a gross misrepresentation of officials in general. That's not a "belief", that's a fact.

cruisin
02-22-2012, 12:49 AM
Cruisin, with all due respect, I don't think telling you what *I* believe is going to change your opinion of what kind of behaviour you seem to think judges engage in. What you're describing above is a gross misrepresentation of officials in general. That's not a "belief", that's a fact.

But, the facts I know, do represent that. We will have to agree that our experiences have been different and respectfully disagree.

bruno6
02-22-2012, 01:17 AM
Cruisin , I am with you 100%... From an international judges perspective. Not me of course
But close enough to me to know. You are right!!

Aussie Willy
02-22-2012, 01:34 AM
My problem with some of the arguments being put here is that they paint all officials with the same tainted brush. They do not take into account that it is a minority who are a problem, not the majority. But it is like the old customer service adage - if you get good service you tell one person, if you get bad service you will tell 12. In this case, people are going to scream loudest about the negatives, not the positives.

Under any judging system, regardless of how it is used and otherwise, it is not the system that is the problem, it is people and how it is applied. And as figure skating is judged by people, you are always going to have problems.

If you were to do an objective audit of both IJS and 6.0, IJS would win hands down as the more robust, transparent and accountable system. However the analysis though would always come down hard on the the lowest form of control which is your Administration level.

bruno6
02-22-2012, 01:37 AM
No it's about even.

bruno6
02-22-2012, 01:45 AM
Maybe you should go to an international level
For Australia .. The judge is very honest at that level
I can say that for sure

Aussie Willy
02-22-2012, 02:25 AM
No it's about even.
How do you know?

Seriously you are making lots of comments but where is the evidence.

Australian judges do have a very good reputation for being honest.