PDA

View Full Version : Meditation vs Love story at SLC Olympics



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8

Mafke
02-26-2012, 09:55 PM
I generally just don't get why to discuss old results over and over and over again when you just know it's probably going to be the same usual discussion/arguments.


Hardcore fans of a sport tend to discuss close competitions (esp when controversy is involved) a lot. They seldom find new ground to cover but the process is still enjoyable for its own sake.

CassAgain
02-26-2012, 11:44 PM
Grown men in my state still cry over a football game from 1969--this is nothing.

Japanfan
02-27-2012, 12:11 AM
But now in my videos, I have at least a whole bunch of shows and videos from the next day after Lp, 3 of them are S/P interviews , talking about their perfect skate, saying nothing of course of wuzrobbed feelings but all the commentators are doing the work fine, with Hamilton, Bezic and some host in the studio, they are having side by side videos of the mistakes of B/S contrary to the S/P perfect landings while Hamilton is talking with another man I dont know, the top cherry is a poll they had by 200.000+ viewers, who you think should have won, with 96% in favor of S/P.
I feel sorry for B/S if no media went to them after the Lp, that was a bitter win.

I'm sure the Russian media interviewed B/S and spun the story in their favour.

UGG
02-27-2012, 12:43 AM
Grown men in my state still cry over a football game from 1969--this is nothing.

hahhaa. so true.

But at the end of the day, Scott H, the North America Media and S&P had nothing to do with the dual gold medal.

If the French judge had not decided before the competition to cheat, this would have been a non issue. She should have just been an honest person. If she had, no matter what the outcome, there would not have been dual gold medals.

If someone admits cheating and their decision skews the results, why is it wrong to make it right?

ltnskater
02-27-2012, 03:09 AM
Except that's not the way 6.0 was supposed to work. In the short program, there were deductions for specific errors, and each judge was supposed to calculate a base mark and deduct from it. (We can see how well that worked when a skater received a technical mark of 5.5 after a .5 required deduction, which would mean a 6.0 base score that the skater never received when every element was excellent.)

In the free skate, skaters were supposed to get credit for what they did. That should mean that skaters who had more an/dor harder elements should have gotten credit for them cumulatively, and a harder element done imperfectly could receive the same credit as an easier element done very well, the concept on which CoP is based.

For example, In the 1994 Pairs FS, Gordeeva/Grinkov had lower difficulty in some elements -- M/D did SBS 3T's, for example -- but G/G had more elements, including two death spirals vs. one, and an extra lift, as well as more positions in their SBS spins and a three jump sequence. Just on that alone, some judges, who were adding up base value, might have had G/G ahead technically; others might have weighted the hardest elements more, in which M/D would have been ahead, since lifts, spins, and death spirals often got little respect. Also, G/G had errors on two double jump elements, where he singled, but M/D were far from perfect: two of their jump elements were out-of-synch on the take-off, there was that mess of a start of the footwork, where he tried to flip her over him, and he was out-of-synch in the middle of the sequence. Some judges might have ticked off the "harder jumps" and ignored the synch issues; others might have been harder on them.

One big problem with 6.0 is that you couldn't tell from competition to competition what would be credited and debited. Whether clean and simple over difficult with flaws seemed to depend on the field as well as the judging panel.



I agree with you, and yes, that is how 6.0 is supposed to work. The way I worded it sounds more like how you describe the short program, but what I said about the 6.0 system where a slightly less difficult program skated clean beating a slightly more difficult program with mistakes is valid.

The key is slightly (which is why I included this in both my posts actually, slightly meaning if both elements for example, were done just as well as the other, the harder element should get more credit, but even if there was a minor mistake/imperfection on the harder element, the easier element should get more credit), when you say a harder element done imperfectly could receive the same credit as an easier element done very well, that is very much true, but only one scenario, because that really depends on:

- the degree to which the harder element was harder than the easier element
- how big of a mistake/imperfection was on the harder element
And this is the center of the debate. To apply this to 2002, was B&S's program really that much more difficult and complex than S&P's to warrant them winning even with their mistakes and subpar performance that evening?

We have heard both sides, both with very valid opinions, because I would argue that B&S's program was only slightly more difficult than S&P's (and even that opinion may have been affected by people saying it was harder, because I really don't see it being more difficult as I have stated concrete examples in my earlier posts, but I do see how some people would say it is more difficult so I will take that stance), but not difficult enough to win when looking at their performance as a whole on top of the shaky elements. Some people agree with me, others don't (those thinking that B&S's program was so much more difficult and complex than S&P's, that even with the mistakes they made and that performance, it deserved to win), and that is where the debate lies.

Let me give you an example, I would argue a team who does sbs triple flips where one of the partner is leaning a lot in the air but just manages to save the landing with a small touch down with the free leg on the landing should get same if not a little more credit for that element, than another team who does nice, clean sbs triple sals. (this would be the case of the harder element done imperfectly being credited the same/a little more than the cleaner element)

On the other hand, sbs triple flips with one partner 2-footing and the other stepping out, compared to clean sbs triple sals, I would argue the team that did the clean triple sals should garner more credit for that element than the team who did the flips.

Which, of course, you mentioned in your post, what do judges really consider more difficult? What should get more credit/less credit? etc. and more often than not, 6.0 system was never used the say it should have been anyways because it was used more or less just to prop up the judges' favorites.


Love to see how people can't seem be over beating a dead horse... not! :blah:

Because discussing this 10 years later is really going to make a difference...

I'm glad you asked... here is why...
Because this is page 4, and it is very surprising that no one has mentioned... we all know who... I will bring her into the thread now... it is past her due time:

MICHELLE KWAN!

So to answer your question, it is so that there is another thread made for the Kween to invade and conquer!! :)

Zemgirl
02-27-2012, 06:19 AM
But at the end of the day, Scott H, the North America Media and S&P had nothing to do with the dual gold medal.

If the French judge had not decided before the competition to cheat, this would have been a non issue. She should have just been an honest person. If she had, no matter what the outcome, there would not have been dual gold medals.

If someone admits cheating and their decision skews the results, why is it wrong to make it right?
Well, Le Gougne said she was pressured to put B/S first after Sally Stapleford cornered her about it. Then she said she was pressured to confess and there had been no shady dealing. Then she said everyone pressured her - her own federation (Gailhaguet), Russians, Canadians, you name it. Then a few years ago she ran into David Pelletier and made some sort of teary apology - for what, I'm not certain. I'm not sure what exactly she was up to, but I don't think anything was ever conclusively proven, certainly not at the time the second medals were awarded.

If it weren't for the media storm, I seriously doubt that the IOC or the ISU would have bothered changing the results; it's not like there hadn't been controversial decisions in skating (or in other sports) before. Also:


The result of 2001 Worlds was a far bigger scandal than anything that happened in Salt Lake City. Of course, nothing came of it since the "right" team won.
Indeed.

kwanfan1818
02-27-2012, 06:53 AM
The dual gold solution was created because Skate Canada was about to file with the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which would have meant lawyers and an in-depth investigation of the ISU.

The media fury would have blown over with the next big story, had LeGougne not broken down in front of the elevator and, more importantly, at the judges' meeting, and the other eight judges hadn't signed statements about what she said.

Japanfan
02-27-2012, 09:37 AM
The dual gold solution was created because Skate Canada was about to file with the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which would have meant lawyers and an in-depth investigation of the ISU.

A terrifying prospect for the ISU, so they gave out the second gold medal.

I would have preferred the investigation to go forward and am sure many in the skating world would have as well.

Proustable
02-27-2012, 03:30 PM
The dual gold solution was created because Skate Canada was about to file with the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which would have meant lawyers and an in-depth investigation of the ISU.

The media fury would have blown over with the next big story, had LeGougne not broken down in front of the elevator and, more importantly, at the judges' meeting, and the other eight judges hadn't signed statements about what she said.

Link to filing document (http://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/sites/CaseLaw/Shared%20Documents/OG%2002-004.pdf), though this was just a preliminary order.

UGG
02-27-2012, 03:43 PM
Well, Le Gougne said she was pressured to put B/S first after Sally Stapleford cornered her about it. Then she said she was pressured to confess and there had been no shady dealing. Then she said everyone pressured her - her own federation (Gailhaguet), Russians, Canadians, you name it. Then a few years ago she ran into David Pelletier and made some sort of teary apology - for what, I'm not certain. I'm not sure what exactly she was up to, but I don't think anything was ever conclusively proven, certainly not at the time the second medals were awarded.

If it weren't for the media storm, I seriously doubt that the IOC or the ISU would have bothered changing the results; it's not like there hadn't been controversial decisions in skating (or in other sports) before. Also:


Indeed.

No I understand all that. But in general (and this is not directed at you, just in general) I always get annoyed reading how Scott Hamilton and the media whining got S&P their gold medal when that is not the case. If there was no corruption and cheating, all the whining in the world would not have resulted in dual gold medals because there would be nothing to cover up. And the gold medals were given to cover up what was going on...or I guess a better way to say it is "make it go away:.

pat c
02-27-2012, 04:10 PM
No I understand all that. But in general (and this is not directed at you, just in general) I always get annoyed reading how Scott Hamilton and the media whining got S&P their gold medal when that is not the case. If there was no corruption and cheating, all the whining in the world would not have resulted in dual gold medals because there would be nothing to cover up. And the gold medals were given to cover up what was going on...or I guess a better way to say it is "make it go away:.

Exactly. The IOC were the ones who put pressure on the ISU. There is no provision for the ISU to award 2 medals in figure skating the way it happened. The ISU had a choice, they could have done an investigation into the judging or put a bandaid on it and fix it quick. They chose quick.

Zemgirl
02-27-2012, 04:46 PM
If there was no corruption and cheating, all the whining in the world would not have resulted in dual gold medals because there would be nothing to cover up. And the gold medals were given to cover up what was going on...or I guess a better way to say it is "make it go away:.
There was no conclusive proof of corruption and cheating, just a whole lot of allegations. I agree that figure skating politics can be very unsavory and neither the ISU nor the IOC wanted them to be a continued subject of discussion and media attention. So I disagree that the NA media did not play a major role.

And with that, I believe I will let this particular equine rest in peace.

martyross
02-27-2012, 05:35 PM
Love to see how people can't seem be over beating a dead horse... not! :blah:

Because discussing this 10 years later is really going to make a difference...
maybe there are new skating fans who wants to learn something of the story of the sport? :D

ltnskater
02-27-2012, 11:51 PM
The dual gold solution was created because Skate Canada was about to file with the Court of Arbitration for Sport, which would have meant lawyers and an in-depth investigation of the ISU.

The media fury would have blown over with the next big story, had LeGougne not broken down in front of the elevator and, more importantly, at the judges' meeting, and the other eight judges hadn't signed statements about what she said.

This has actually gotten me very interested! I wish we knew what really went on behind the scenes, imagine what such a investigation could have dug out!

Coco
02-28-2012, 12:35 AM
You know, if I wanted to embarass my arch rival AND bring scrutiny to the ice dance judging to protect my team, I'd do exactly what the French Judge did regardless of facts.

If I was dishonest and manipulative, that is.