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

[PDilemma]

One random thing I hate, hate, HATE! is the idea that good footwork requires a lot of upper body movement. This seems to fly in the face of a 100 years of tradition stressing upper body control (no matter what the skates are doing).
sense.

Yeah, I am puzzled by this as well. I've been doing an adult beginning ballet class and the hardest thing is to do certain movements with legs and feet and keep the upper body still. It requires core strength and control of both halves of the body. I don't understand, other than maybe in terms of balance, how the excessive upper body movement is demonstrating any control or strength.

[gkelly]

There's a difference between uncontrolled upper body movement that results from instability in the body core and instability over the edges vs. upper body movement that is an intentional choreographic choice that challenges the stability (and therefore indicates higher skill if the skater can deviate from a neutral position without losing control).

However, with some choreographic choices it's easy to use the intentional movements to cover up for less than optimal control, so there won't always be a direct correlation between the amount of intentional movement and the level of skill.

[PDilemma]

There's a difference between uncontrolled upper body movement that results from instability in the body core and instability over the edges vs. upper body movement that is an intentional choreographic choice that challenges the stability (and therefore indicates higher skill if the skater can deviate from a neutral position without losing control).

However, with some choreographic choices it's easy to use the intentional movements to cover up for less than optimal control, so there won't always be a direct correlation between the amount of intentional movement and the level of skill.

I get the sense we are seeing more of your second paragraph than your first. That's my problem with it.

[Zemgirl]

I can't say I was very impressed with the article; the scandal was more complex than the way it was described, and it just seemed like someone tried to condense what should have been a longer piece into the length than the WaPo ran.

As for CoP - I like the idea of it, but have issues with the implementation. I don't think skating can or should go back to 6.0, but the current system needs more than the usual post-season tweaks. And I'm another fan who's not happy about the emphasis on upper-body movement in step sequences.

Just wondering are any of those judges still around? I would hope not. Hoping they were banished to detriot or siberia.

What, the SLC pairs panel? Were there accusations of wrongdoing against anyone but Le Gougne? These were the officials and judges:

Referee Ron Pfenning ISU
Assistant Referee Alexander Lakernik ISU
Judge No.1 Marina Sanaia Russia
Judge No.2 Jiasheng Yang China
Judge No.3 Lucy Brennan USA
Judge No.4 Marie-Reine Le Gougne France
Judge No.5 Anna Sierocka Poland
Judge No.6 Benoit Lavoie Canada
Judge No.7 Vladislav Petukhov Ukraine
Judge No.8 Sissy Krick Germany
Judge No.9 Hideo Sugita Japan

Ron Pfenning lost his eligibility for his role in the establishment of the short-lived WSF. Alexander Lakernik is chair of the ISU's singles and pairs technical committee; there's an interview with him over on GSD. I believe most of the judges continued on at least for a few years; Anna Sierocka, for instance, was the referee of the pairs event at 2012 Euros, and Sissy Krick was the technical controller for the ladies' event.

Marie-Reine Le Gougne has tried to run for president of the FFSG in the past, without success.

Benoît Lavoie is the president of Skate Canada. He and Sissy Krick were the two judges to place S/P first in the SP. I'm sure they had very good reasons for doing so.

[Mafke]

I get the sense we are seeing more of your second paragraph than your first.

thank you for saying it more quickly and eloquently than I could/would have.

[Aussie Willy]

He and Sissy Krick were the two judges to place S/P first in the SP. I'm sure they had very good reasons for doing so.

I am judging with Sissy Krick this week at an adult event here in Melbourne. Met her the other night at a seminar she did for us. She is a very passionate and knowlegable woman and it is lovely of her to come and do our event.

[Rochelle]

I really disagree with that. Sitting at nationals, I watched Rudy's winning FS on the jumbotron and realized how far skating has come. Honestly, Josh Farris' programs are more interesting than Rudy's was. Sure at the time he was great, but skating has progressed so far. Skaters are learning to do transitions AND be artistic at the same time. Skaters who just do the transitions (like Angela Wang) without the artistry still get punished in the component mark; while skaters like Ashley Cain who have beautiful artistry and no transitions, still end up with some of the highest component marks.

This I agree with! I have the same thoughts when watching many of the elite, winning, "memorable" performances from 1994-2002ish.

Another thing that's great about COP is the immediate feedback about the elements executed. For a skater to be able to see immediately that they are loosing credit for underrotated jumps, edge calls, weak spins, weak foortwork, etc. is a huge help in terms of communication between the officials judging the event, and the skaters/coaches/parents.

Judges still deduct for such poor quality elements in 6.0 (at their own personal, individual scale, since scores behave more as an overall placeholder in the 6.0 system) -- the skaters are just left in the dark on where they 'lost points', other than the feedback of their final overall result. At most American local non-quals, skaters don't even see their tech score / presentation score under 6.0 judging -- just their total ordinal placement from each judge. Thus, what competitors often don't see that when the ordinals are all over the place, that it's often because the officials all had those competitors scored with totals ranging 0.0(tie breaker used) to 0.2 apart.

[demetriosj]

Yes, it has.......

[IceAlisa]

I think CoP is a zillion times better than 6.0, but it's also very far from perfect. It has its own flaws and its own ridiculousness.

It leaves very little space for creativity. All the programs are so similar.
It kills the real artistry in the name of transitions.
It makes people do ugly things just to get higher levels on elements.
It kills ice dance big time.
The judging stays subjective anyway.

Well said. CoP has lots of issues, including those you've listed, however, it does help to focus on specific elements and problems and gives you a lot more information about a performance than a mere 6.0 mark.

[IceAlisa]

I think CoP is a zillion times better than 6.0, but it's also very far from perfect. It has its own flaws and its own ridiculousness.

It leaves very little space for creativity. All the programs are so similar.
It kills the real artistry in the name of transitions.
It makes people do ugly things just to get higher levels on elements.
It kills ice dance big time.
The judging stays subjective anyway.

Well said. CoP has lots of issues that you've listed, however, it does help to focus on specific elements and problems and gives you a lot more information about a performance than a mere 6.0 mark.

[IceAlisa]

delete

[maharbabackward]

I think that GOE is not being used as effectively as it should be. In this way, skaters may benefit from doing a simpler level of an element really well (think Angela N.'s layback spin with no change of edge or position) versus a hard level that looks awkward and slow (see many level 4 spins that contort). It's also confusing to see twizzles (example: D/W from skate america sd) get +GOE when there's a glaring unison problem. I think that if there is a mistake on an element, it should be negative goe. I don't care if the take off, air position, height, and difficult arm position if the person two-foot's the jump. It should get negative goe. and I think that's what is confounding people. I still think how Lambiel got lower spin scores than if I recall correctly Lysacek or Plushenko (I'm not completely sure about this, but I know it occured). Sure, Stephan's spins maybe didn't switch an edge or didn't contort himself to a bad position but he still spun better than anyone in the men's competition and this was evident to even ones with just basic knowledge of the elements.

[peibeck]

I just don't get why people think going back to a system that had absolutely no transparency is the way to go. And it was really just a placement system. Whether you think PCS are being misused or not, they are laid bare for all to see (boy it just gives fans more to complain about so everyone should be happy). And people seem to forget that the system is for the skaters, coaches and judges, who are the ones that are really affected by it.

I absolutely do appreciate that skaters, coaches and choreographers can get nearly instant feedback on their programs, but I would disagree that COP is all that transparent when the judges remain hidden and can give their marks anonymously.

And, in most cases, though not all, it seems judges still use PCS as placemarkers rather than as objectively as they could. I mean, look at Plushenko averaging 8.25 for transitions in his free skate at Europeans. What does that say about the knowledge of the judges? Yes, he should win the tech marks and perhaps the performance/execution marks, but for transitions as well? Really? C'mon! It's dubious things like that which make me feel like figure skating judging has not changed in the least since the days of 6.0.

[Aussie Willy]

I absolutely do appreciate that skaters, coaches and choreographers can get nearly instant feedback on their programs, but I would disagree that COP is all that transparent when the judges remain hidden and can give their marks anonymously.

You are only looking at what happens at major international events where the judges are put into random order. At most national and local competitions, the judges are identified. So for all those skaters who compete at those levels the judges are totally transparent. And there are a lot more skaters doing those events than those who compete in international events.

[bruno6]

I think the problem is with the judges, not the system. What's mind boggling to me is why coaches are now teck controllers. That is bias in it's purest form. And should be illegal. They are judging skaters. Grand prix events should not allow coaches who have
Teams in the grand prix judge their rival skaters. This is a joke. Save the system out the
Judges...

[peibeck]

You are only looking at what happens at major international events where the judges are put into random order. At most national and local competitions, the judges are identified. So for all those skaters who compete at those levels the judges are totally transparent. And there are a lot more skaters doing those events than those who compete in international events.

Thanks, Aussie Willy. That is good to know. I know at US Nationals and smaller events here the judges are also identified.

However, I still think it is a mistake for the governing body of the sport to hide the judges behind anonymous marks. The 2002 judging scandal was about collusion, and that is something that has not been dealt with, but indeed, completely ignored. The creation of a different judging system can only do so much if the basic problem remains. This is not to say I think all international judges are corrupt, but when one sees marks like the ones I posted above about Plushenko's transitions...

[Aussie Willy]

I think the problem is with the judges, not the system. What's mind boggling to me is why coaches are now teck controllers. That is bias in it's purest form. And should be illegal. They are judging skaters. Grand prix events should not allow coaches who have
Teams in the grand prix judge their rival skaters. This is a joke. Save the system out the
Judges...

Knowing a few Technical Specialist, including those who have done international events, the last thing they are looking at when doing their job is the skater themselves. They are focussing so much on the elements and levels that who the is skater is irrelevant. It is actually the most unemotional and detached aspect of how skaters are evaluated and personality is taken right out of the equation. Sit on a technical panel doing data entry or video replay and you will see how it works. Plus there are 3 people sitting in that seat, not one.

As for it being coaches doing the TS role, there they are not allowed to be on panels where their own skaters are competing (even at a local level competitions). And many of them are not your top international coaches anyway so they would not be doing TS for events they have skaters competing in.

At the end of the day, the workforce is volunteer so I ask who do you propose to take on those roles if you don't think it should be coaches?

[demetriosj]

I think the problem is with the judges, not the system. What's mind boggling to me is why coaches are now teck controllers. That is bias in it's purest form. And should be illegal. They are judging skaters. Grand prix events should not allow coaches who have
Teams in the grand prix judge their rival skaters. This is a joke. Save the system out the
Judges...

I'll second that!

[johndockley92]

^^ Also I'm pretty sure they can't call at any qualifying competitions in the same level as their skater??

[essence_of_soy]

Sissy Krick gave Tonya Harding a 6.0 at Skate America in 1991. Boy, would I love to ask her what it was like to see that performance LIVE.