Does reward = earned = deserved in the way you've worded it??
I'm really curious about this undertone/implication that I'm reading in the language of several messages on this thread
...and using your response above , Olympic, as a random example....nothing personal (I enjoy reading a lot of your msgs).
The implication (actually innuendo from the judges perspective) is that they will knowingly, willfully, deliberately, not judge based on the application of CoP rules/scoring on the skater's observable performance in front of them, but rather collude....engage in some kind of konspiracy to annoint the "right" skater with the "right medal" (or not)...or would conspire on an individual basis, if not in unison with the wishes and "Worlds strategy" of USFS.
What I keep reading here is the basic assumption that the judges will not/may not give the skater's what their performance deserves, but rather a score (deserved or not) to serve another agenda....which would be fraudulant behavior... and I assume violate the judges code of conduct on some level.
We might as well condone Marie-Reine Le Gougne in Salt Lake City, if this is how US figure skating officialdom is conducting itself.....Are we???
Besides the combination of FSUers simply disagreeing with the judges at times, combined with suspicion and/or speculation, what is your evidence that any judge or panel of them have or would "place" skaters on the podium based on something other than a scoring of the actual performance itself?
I'm not a naive type of person...OTOH, maybe I'm reading too much into these various comments on this thread.
Please clarify....tell me it's not what folks here mean even though it sounds like it.