How is it necessary? EVERY JUDGE except the Canadian judge rated them second. The Canadian judge rated them first. I don't need to watch the program to get the context, that's just simple numerical relationships that offer exactly ONE really obvious explanation...and frankly I haven't thought of any other possibilities.
I don't understand why the ice skating authorities don't adopt the simple 'throw out high and low' that a lot of other sports use to avoid this problem.
I don't understand why the ice skating authorities don't adopt the simple 'throw out high and low' that a lot of other sports use to avoid this problem.
They do, actually, IIRC, so even without the Canadian judge being biased, the podium would probably be still the same.
The complaint was more about the fact that it's possible to have a judge having a vested interest in one of the competitor.
They do, actually, IIRC, so even without the Canadian judge being biased, the podium would probably be still the same.
The complaint was more about the fact that it's possible to have a judge having a vested interest in one of the competitor.
So this entire tempest is in the teapot of this judges score didn't even count? WTF? I mean, I enjoy a good squabble as much as the next guy, but c'mon.
It appears that "the next lowest score" was taken out...because it was one of the scores that was tied for highest score. That's what makes the Canadian score so obviously aberrant. Not only was it the lowest, but all the other scores are exactly the same.
My bad, I was looking at the bottom line as if it were a total. Still, I would argue that there are a couple judges who had 9.5 where judge one had 9.75, so even though they had more 10.0 scores on their card they might be 'lower' than judge one. In any event, the really aberrant score (judge two) did get tossed. Since coming up with nine judges and not having a single one of them have a countryman in the competition seems pretty far-fetched I think the system works as it stands. Maybe with nine judges it might call for a 'throw out the two highest and two lowest' system. I think that's what they do in diving.
Since this is now a general olympics thread can I just note that today I learned that Australia is better at the winter olympics than New Zealand and this blows my mind.
(They just won two bronzes today, which were their first medals since their solitary silver in 1992, their only previous winter medal. Australia has 15 medals, 5 of each colour)
Not really, the only outcry was before and during the competition when people were annoyed that obviously biased judges were allowed in. The french federation tweeted a sarcastic post about the Canadian judge placing the french couple 8th on the artistic score when everyone else put them first (or for one of the judges second), and the president of the federation mentioned it afterwards but that's it.
1) I never said they didn't deserve it.
2) They came in 2nd for the second program, so despite not making mistakes it wouldn't have been particularly weird if they came in second overall. Nor is it weird in itself that they came in first.
The only point here is that it's awful for the olympics that biased judges are allowed to officiate, as it makes the results dubious (especially with only 0.79 points in difference between the gold and silver). Who knows what the result would have been if there had only been fair judges ? Perhaps they'd have won but we'll never know.
Had J2 given the French skater 0.25 MORE points in EACH of the 5 categories and the Canadian Skater 0.25 LESS in EACH of the 5 categories the result would be the same (in regards to who won, but the margin of victory would be smaller).
French skater would have got 0.13 more points and the Canadian lost 0.21 points for a net margin of 0.44 points, which is smaller than the 0.79 that originally decided who won.
Unless you can explain to me the 'Executed Elements' scoring somehow affected it when judges scored a 2 instead of a 3, but it appears that score is just 'Base value' + GOE, and it doesn't seem to matter if they got 2s or 3s (unless perhaps if the majority of judges gave them a 2?, but that didn't happen for either skater in the scoring sheet you posted).
And of course that doesn't get into the bias of J6, which would have swung back into the Canadian's favor and widened the margin of victory.
As to the medal standings.....why we discuss this again? Americans have used the 'total' count since, forever. We get accused of it during the summer to put us first when we still use it in the winter when we are not first. And as I post this (could change as more medals are awarded), I just checked it, and both Canada and the US are in the same position whether we use golds or totals, so it doesn't matter. People are using selective memory and just remembering the times the US would be worst off if using the gold count instead of the total count.
And 'the US media' are each independent (although many do rely on the same AP sources), not all will operate exactly the same way 100% of the time, so there are a few examples of lazy news sources just taking the medal standings from the IOC instead of doing their own tally, it's not a conspiracy of 'changing the count' to put us first.
You're discounting the points the canadian judge gave in the first program, which I assume where similarly skewed. Once again perhaps the canadians would have won anyway if the 9 judges had been non-biased but it still looks bad.
You're discounting the points the canadian judge gave in the first program, which I assume where similarly skewed. Once again perhaps the canadians would have won anyway if the 9 judges had been non-biased but it still looks bad.
I'd have to see those numbers and run them. But I was being very generous in changing 0.25 in EVERY category. J2 didn't score 0.25 less/more than all other judges in ALL categories
Essentially what I did was make the Canadian judge biased to score the French skater as well as the French judge did and to score the Canadian skater as badly as the French judge did. Is that a 'non-biased' score?
No, but I don't have the numbers from the short program to compare them, so I double down on my original words : It's quite possible that the Canadians would have won either way, but it still looks bad to have clearly biased judges in an Olympic jury.
And as Tim noted, having judges from countries with no participants isn't likely. Tossing the top and bottom scores (the canadian judge's favorable scores for the Canadians and unfavorable scores for the French, likewise for the French judge's scores) is the most reasonable outcome.
Exhibition figure skating is very different from competition figure skating.
Are you suggesting that sports such as diving, synchronized swimming, gymnastics, snowboarding, and everything else that isn't just a matter of who is fastest, scores more goals, or throws the gizmo the farthest aren't legitimate athletic contests?
'Judging' sports is certainly not my cup of tea. Yes, there are possible bias in scoring so that detracts from it. Unless someone really screws up and falls down or lands shakily, it's hard to really tell the differences in performances to the casual observer.
But to be fair, some of the same critiques apply to what the NFL decides is a 'catch' and some penalties such as pass interference, balls/strikes in baseball, etc.
Personally I watch figure skating to see people fall down (assuming they aren't seriously hurt). People falling down just doesn't happen in sychronized swimming, so no I never watch that. Diving, no, I don't want to see someone hit their head on the diving board, wishing that on someone is terrible.
Exhibition figure skating is very different from competition figure skating.
Are you suggesting that sports such as diving, synchronized swimming, gymnastics, snowboarding, and everything else that isn't just a matter of who is fastest, scores more goals, or throws the gizmo the farthest aren't legitimate athletic contests?
Many's the time in the '80s and '90s when I'd be watching some championship or Olympics and yell "Come on, nice big splat!" at a skater or team I didn't want to win. Back in those days I had a VCR and would record these events. Record and play the tape back in EP mode, hit fast-forward, and sit back and giggle. The whole thing looks ridiculous, even the ones who never make any mistakes.
There have been some terrible injuries from people falling, though, especially the female skaters in the pairs teams. They're traveling very fast over the ice, being hoisted up in the air and tossed around, and they're at the mercy of their partners to catch them properly and set them down safely. Some awful head injuries have happened over the years when the man didn't catch them in time.\
Fortunately, you're not the arbiter of what is considered athletic. Just because part of skating is judged on artistic merit, that doesn't mean it isn't athletic. Do you have any clue at all how these people train? It's not all on skates.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
