Most Controversial Judging Decisions Ever

[Inessence]

Tara was 15 for the record. As far as Michelle's being "wooden", urban legend. The whole "tentative" thingy came about after the competition..but..beating that "dead horse" would be akin to animal cruelty.

Still, skate with no heart, leave with no gold. Just ask Nancy.

 

[briancoogaert]

Still, skate with no heart, leave with no gold. Just ask Nancy.

Who are you talking about ?

 

[Japanfan]

Who are you talking about ?

Nancy, I would say.

 

[Mad for Skating]

I actually agree with you that it was far from their best FD or the best performance of it but the only reason they won was because the other teams (C/B and W/P) made significant errors in their FD

That is true and I understand. I just think P/C's scores snowballed very quickly that year and should've been a little lower. They are exquisite, but they still looked very "young" to me in 2015 (which they were).

WHAT??? To this day Mozart is my favorite FD of theirs

That's okay! I don't think it was bad, I just prefer their newer programs. I'm not going to lynch you for holding a different opinion!

Another one for the thread title files! (Although I know we're not in the right thread for that)

I'll send it over to da bossman ASAP.

Miki Ando

I am surprised not more people challenegd when she narrowly won both of her world titles back then. Her PCS was outrageous compared to her closest competitors. I don't think I would have given her higher than bronze either time.

Miki wasn't the most artistic skater I've ever seen, but what she did have was massive jumps. I do think her PCS came from her TES, if that makes sense - we see this nowadays a lot. Like how Tarasova/Morozov got huge PCS for Candyman not because it was a good program (at all!), but because they were consistently delivering technically. It's not right to score PCS based on TES, but it happens.

 

[gk_891]

I remember there was some talk that Kovarikova & Novotny should've placed 3rd at the 1992 Olympics but I can understand why Brasseur & Eisler placed ahead of them. Not only are their pairs skills outstanding (e.g. lifts and twist) but they had much heftier reputations than the Czech team did which matters whether one likes it or not.

There was also some talk that Kovarikova & Novotny should've won the 1995 Europeans over Woetzel & Steuer. Later that year, some felt that Shishkova & Naumov should've won the 1995 Worlds over Kovarikova & Novotny. And some also felt that Shishkova & Naumov also should've won the 1996 Worlds. At the 96 Worlds, I think the ordinals were all over the place with S&N actually having 4 1st place ordinals but they still finished off the podium. I'm not sure how controversial these results actually were though (e.g. big outrage vs. people just talking about it).

In 1993, Annenko & Sretenski won the World Professional Skating Championships over Klimova & Ponomarenko. I personally found that decision very questionable. Granted, I didn't care for K&P's material when they went pro but they were still better skaters than A&S.

 

[Loves_Shizuka]

At the 96 Worlds, I think the ordinals were all over the place with S&N actually having 4 1st place ordinals but they still finished off the podium. I'm not sure how controversial these results actually were though

I've always found this really weird.

Shishkova/Naumov's ordinals were: 3 4 1 1 1 1 4 4 4

One of the most suspect set of ordinals I can remember. So half the panel thought they should be World champions. And the other didn't think they even deserved a medal?!

 

[VGThuy]

I've always found this really weird.

Shishkova/Naumov's ordinals were: 3 4 1 1 1 1 4 4 4

One of the most suspect set of ordinals I can remember. Literally half the panel thought they should be World champions. And the other didn't think they even deserved a medal?!

Those are the kinds of ordinals I love observing and makes me think I love figure skating some times. This sport can be so whacko that you have to admire the competitors who keep at it anyway.

 

[clairecloutier]

There was also some talk that Kovarikova & Novotny should've won the 1995 Europeans over Woetzel & Steuer. Later that year, some felt that Shishkova & Naumov should've won the 1995 Worlds over Kovarikova & Novotny. And some also felt that Shishkova & Naumov also should've won the 1996 Worlds. At the 96 Worlds, I think the ordinals were all over the place with S&N actually having 4 1st place ordinals but they still finished off the podium. I'm not sure how controversial these results actually were though (e.g. big outrage vs. people just talking about it).

Pairs was kind of a mess generally from 1995-1998. It wasn't a good quad for pairs. There were like 5 or 6 teams that were competitive for medals, but all of them were mistake-prone and none of them ever managed to really pull in front of the pack and set themselves apart. That's why so many of the results were close and with messy ordinals and much debate around them. It all culminated in 1998 with Kazakova/Dmitriev being among the weakest pairs OGMs of the past 40 years IMO.

 

[VGThuy]

I remember when ESPN Classic was doing a figure skating marathon, they chose some choice competitions to showcase and nobody understood why they decided to showcase 1997 Worlds Pairs LP.

 

[allezfred]

I remember there was some talk that Kovarikova & Novotny should've placed 3rd at the 1992 Olympics but I can understand why Brasseur & Eisler placed ahead of them. Not only are their pairs skills outstanding (e.g. lifts and twist) but they had much heftier reputations than the Czech team did which matters whether one likes it or not.

So much wrong in this paragraph I don't know where to begin.

 

[gk_891]

So much wrong in this paragraph I don't know where to begin.

I'm just saying that I reputation matters/mattered in skating whether one likes it or not. So even if one disagreed with the results and thought K&N should've won that bronze, it's still moderately understandable why the judges went with B&E whether one likes it or not. B&E were gold medal contenders due to their results in 1990 and 1991 whereas K&N were maybe considered outside shots for the bronze. Everyone knows that in performance-type sports, reputation and past results can and probably will play a role. It's just the nature of the sport (unfortunately).

 

[gk_891]

Those are the kinds of ordinals I love observing and makes me think I love figure skating some times. This sport can be so whacko that you have to admire the competitors who keep at it anyway.

I remember at the 1992 Olympics in the pairs event, the CBC commentators mentioned how Kovarikova & Novotny seemed to have defeated Shishkova & Naumov for the bronze by a 5-4 decision at Europeans earlier that year. But apparently Shishkova & Naumov's other 4 ordinals were high enough that they took the bronze instead. That makes me wonder if the ordinals were split between Bechke & Petrov, Shishkova & Naumov, and Kovarikova & Novotny, the teams that finished 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. And S&N managed to squeak by K&N because of that.

 

[briancoogaert]

I remember at the 1992 Olympics in the pairs event, the CBC commentators mentioned how Kovarikova & Novotny seemed to have defeated Shishkova & Naumov for the bronze by a 5-4 decision. But apparently Shishkova & Naumov's other 4 ordinals were high enough that they took the bronze instead. That makes me wonder if the ordinals were split between Bechke & Petrov, Shishkova & Naumov, and Kovarikova & Novotny, the teams that finished 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. And S&N managed to squeak by K&N because of that.

I'm confused gk_981. What competition are you talking about ? Shishkova&Naumov didn't finished 3rd at 1992 Olympics.

 

[clairecloutier]

I'm just saying that I reputation matters/mattered in skating whether one likes it or not. So even if one disagreed with the results and thought K&N should've won that bronze, it's still moderately understandable why the judges went with B&E whether one likes it or not. B&E were gold medal contenders due to their results in 1990 and 1991 whereas K&N were maybe considered outside shots for the bronze. Everyone knows that in performance-type sports, reputation and past results can and probably will play a role. It's just the nature of the sport (unfortunately).

I remember feeling, at that time, that Kovarikova/Novotny probably should have won bronze in 1992 and that Brasseur/Eisler got it mostly on reputation. That kind of thing was more common in those days, especially when decisions were close. Although obviously, not right.

 

[gk_891]

I'm confused gk_981. What competition are you talking about ? Shishkova&Naumov didn't finished 3rd at 1992 Olympics.

My apologies. I forgot to include the words 'at Europeans earlier that year'. I will edit my post.

 

[giselle23]

Still, skate with no heart, leave with no gold. Just ask Nancy.

Does that settle Sochi? For the record, I think it’s a stretch to say Tara skated with “heart.” She skated with energy and enthusiasm—not the same thing. Michelle got all (or nearly all) 5.9s for presentation, so her alleged lack of “heart” was not the problem.

 

[bardtoob]

I think Michelle and Tara skated well enough for gold, and it was random who won but attributable to the skating order. The judges leave room for the second competitor and have short memories . . . Goodness, even in 1936 Sonja Henie knew that the deck was stacked in her favor because Cecelia Colledge, who had the audacity to virtually tie Sonja in figures, was the first competitor to skate while Sonja was last. At that point, Cecelia had double jumps and spin positions that Sonja simply could not do.

 

[AngieNikodinovLove (ANL)]

So much wrong in this paragraph I don't know where to begin.

except the Brasseur & Eisler part. tee-hee

 

[gk_891]

One judging decision that I strongly disagreed with was Krylova & Ovsiannikov placing second in the golden waltz CD at the 1997 Worlds. They made a serious error towards the end of the pattern (the first go around).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KQIHfcznqs

Towards the end of the first pattern after the right inside swing of the open choctaw in foxtrot position, K&O failed to successfully change into a kilian position. That not only caused them to lose unison and go off-timing for the rest of that sequence in the corner of the ice but they also didn't really skate the left inside swing of the open choctaw in an actual kilian position. Not to mention the left inside edge of that part of the choctaw was very shallow, shaky, not in sync with the music, and not in unison. I thought they should've been 5th or 6th in that dance which i believe would've put them out of contention for the gold.

At the 1996 Worlds, I thought Anissina & Peizerat should've been on the podium. I thought 4th was fine for their compulsories but their OD and FD were definitely better than Bourne & Kraatz's and arguably better than Krylova & Ovsiannikov's. In fact, as snooze-worthy as their free dance was, I thought A&P's was the best that season in terms of general program construction. G&P, K&O, and B&K all had very underwhelming free dances that season.

There was a lot of talk about A&P placing behind K&O at the 1999 Worlds. Their free dance to the Man in the Iron Mask was thrilling but I thought it was a step-back for them in terms of content relative to some of their previous free dances. But African Drums was a mess of a program. Most of that free dance was skated hand to hand or side by side. It was very aggressively skated with a ton of speed and attack but I fail to see how it was actually difficult in terms of content. Not to mention it didn't highlight their strengths which was their phrasing and musicality. I almost got the impression that Linichuk & Karponosov were trying to turn them into one of their usual clones (a hyper-aggressive team who blasted through the music).

 

[UGG]

Has anyone actually watched Michelle’s program since 1998? There is nothing tentative or wooden or resembling 2002 at all. It’s a wondetfully skated program with a bit of a wobble on one jump but other than that, it’s beautiful and would have won 1994 and 2002. I think people need to rewatch it.

 

[SmallFairy]

In 1998 there was no chance for me in Norway to watch US nationals. I had no idea about Michelle's glorious and free skate there until years later. When I watched her in Nagano, I saw nothing but a wonderful performance, very free, full of joy. I couldn't compare it with US nationals as lots of people did. Mind you, I was no fan of Michelle, neither of Tara, I had no horse in the race and cried the most for Lu Chen's bronze medal, but both Americans skated really well, in two very different styles. It could have gone either way. Michelle's moved beautifully, Tara had the hard combos.

I remember the very knowledgable Swedish commentator was mesmerised during Kwan's skate and in the middle of it stated: "No one is beating this". So she felt the really high quality skating too.

 

[VGThuy]

I think a lot people saw Kwan's skate and thought she had done enough to win. It had been a long time since a ladies skater who was the favorite went out and pretty much nailed all of her planned jump content. Frank's face at the end of her skate said it all. She went out and planned 7 triples and landed 7 triples. She might have been the first ladies skater to do so at an Olympic games. I think what people didn't expect was for Tara to have the kind of magical, once-in-a-lifetime skate that she had. The conventional wisdom, which lifelong Tara supporters are totally free to gloat about because they never believed the "hype", was that if Kwan skated cleanly and well, she would have won because Tara couldn't compete against her second mark no matter how she skated. Tara proved everybody wrong. Her tech was excellent with a 3/3 and a 3/1/3 (at the end!) and her performance was so on fire and fast and sure that she bridged that presentation gap.

I remember there was an old article that asked like a dozen or so journalists who would win gold before the ladies event, and almost all of them said Kwan save for like two. I also remember Jeni Meno even saying that after Kwan had skated, there was a real feeling that she had done it, she had won. There was also Scott Hamilton's commentary after Kwan's skate. He was commentating as if she had secured gold and how her skating is what the ISU wanted to promote. Tara changed the conversation really quick after her skate.

 

[AngieNikodinovLove (ANL)]

I think what people didn't expect was for Tara to have the kind of magical, once-in-a-lifetime skate that she had

I dont think it was a once in a lifetime perfomance. 11 months earlier she had the same performance enabling her World Champion.

She wasnt on the scene long but the short time she was she was always a threat!

I knew she was gonna be on fire at Olympics because she was also at The Nationals right before it. (Nicole was the one that gave me an ulcer!)

Side note: Does anyone remember TV Guides that week of 98? There were 4 covers..and Michelle and Tara occupied 2 of those covers.

Michelle has the artistry and consistent jumps.

Tara had the difficult programs. And her presentation was good for a 15 yr old. Not Michelle-artistry but still respectable IMO.

 

[kwanette]

Who are you talking about ?

Michelle

 

[kwanette]

I dont think it was a once in a lifetime perfomance. 11 months earlier she had the same performance enabling her World Champion.

She wasnt on the scene long but the short time she was she was always a threat!

I knew she was gonna be on fire at Olympics because she was also at The Nationals right before it. (Nicole was the one that gave me an ulcer!)

Side note: Does anyone remember TV Guides that week of 98? There were 4 covers..and Michelle and Tara occupied 2 of those covers.

Michelle has the artistry and consistent jumps.

Tara had the difficult programs. And her presentation was good for a 15 yr old. Not Michelle-artistry but still respectable IMO.

I still have the TV Guides and the soup cans. Tara was also what at 98 US Champs? She was 4th after the sp.

 

[UGG]

I dont think it was a once in a lifetime perfomance. 11 months earlier she had the same performance enabling her World Champion.

She wasnt on the scene long but the short time she was she was always a threat!

I knew she was gonna be on fire at Olympics because she was also at The Nationals right before it. (Nicole was the one that gave me an ulcer!)

Side note: Does anyone remember TV Guides that week of 98? There were 4 covers..and Michelle and Tara occupied 2 of those covers.

Michelle has the artistry and consistent jumps.

Tara had the difficult programs. And her presentation was good for a 15 yr old. Not Michelle-artistry but still respectable IMO.

She was 2nd in the long program though, at 1997 worlds. She won overall because she was 1st in the short and Michelle was 4th with a botched jump. Michelle was 1st in the LP. Unless you mean her short program? Her worlds LP was good but it was 2nd and should have been...I don't think it had the same magic as her Nagano LP at all

 

[gk_891]

I think a lot people saw Kwan's skate and thought she had done enough to win. It had been a long time since a ladies skater who was the favorite went out and pretty much nailed all of her planned jump content. Frank's face at the end of her skate said it all. She went out and planned 7 triples and landed 7 triples. She might have been the first ladies skater to do so at an Olympic games. I think what people didn't expect was for Tara to have the kind of magical, once-in-a-lifetime skate that she had. The conventional wisdom, which lifelong Tara supporters are totally free to gloat about because they never believed the "hype", was that if Kwan skated cleanly and well, she would have won because Tara couldn't compete against her second mark no matter how she skated. Tara proved everybody wrong. Her tech was excellent with a 3/3 and a 3/1/3 (at the end!) and her performance was so on fire and fast and sure that she bridged that presentation gap.

I remember there was an old article that asked like a dozen or so journalists who would win gold before the ladies event, and almost all of them said Kwan save for like two. I also remember Jeni Meno even saying that after Kwan had skated, there was a real feeling that she had done it, she had won. There was also Scott Hamilton's commentary after Kwan's skate. He was commentating as if she had secured gold and how her skating is what the ISU wanted to promote. Tara changed the conversation really quick after her skate.

Do you think the ordinals would have been more split between Kwan and Lipinski if Kwan skated later in that final group?

 

[tony]

Another result I cannot figure out is how 5 judges thought Bonaly was better than Kwan in the short program at 1995 Worlds— and they skated one after another. It’s even questionable with the other skaters above Michelle, but especially with this head-to-head.

I know this is the year everyone said Michelle still looked too junior with her ponytail (and whatever other reasons), but nothing about her skating screamed immature or not ready for primetime. See Slutskaya in the same competition as someone who fit that definition IMO.

 

[Vagabond]

Michelle

It's always about Michelle, even when it purports to be about something else.

 

[MR-FAN]

She went out and planned 7 triples and landed 7 triples. She might have been the first ladies skater to do so at an Olympic games.

*cough Midori Ito 1988 cough*