ISU vote to abolish anonymous judging 
http://www.insidethegames.biz/index...em-in-figure-skating-to-increase-transparency
http://www.insidethegames.biz/index...em-in-figure-skating-to-increase-transparency
:thumbsup:
ISU votes to abolish anonymous judging
- Thread starter Taan
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2012
- Country
-
ISU vote to abolish anonymous judging
http://www.insidethegames.biz/index...em-in-figure-skating-to-increase-transparency
:thumbsup:
Yeah, the news was posted earlier in the Congress thread, and there has been reaction there.
Given that this is major news, I was surprised that it took until now for it to be given it's own thread.
(Perhaps the posts about this over in the other thread should be moved into this thread...)
Anyway, good move. Could never understand why it was anonymous anyway. I know it was brought in after the 2002 scandal, but my thinking was always that anonymous judging made it far easier for there to be dodgy things going on, rather than making it harder.
The only benefit I could see of anonymous judging was that it would save individual judges from getting criticised by people who didn't agree with their calls.
CaroLiza_fan
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
I think originally the idea was to protect judges from the pressure from their federations. The intent was for judging with integrity but, whether or not it worked that way, anonymity always causes suspicions.
I think public opinions and judgements can be a greater pressure and consederation than the federations'.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I don't think so. I think the intent was to get the IOC off the ISU's back after the public outcry in 2002, and to guarantee that deal-making and dishonest judging could more easily be hidden.
I think that was the real reason, if not the "official" one.
I agree. When I first told my mathematician husband about how the judging was changed after 2002, he thought about it and said something along the lines of, "It sounds to me like the scoring system was not designed to avoid cheating but to avoid scandal." I don't want to be so cynical as to say that they were intending to keep cheating but that the primary goal was to avoid scandal rather than to take away all possibility of cheating. But obviously I don't know as I can't read minds. Just that mathematically, it seems like you could design a better system for avoiding cheating than what we have now. Especially with the random picking of judges they had at first too.
So what makes a judge more accountable if their scores are public? Possible suspensions for national bias? Exclusion of the score from the final score? 6.0 had public judging and what was the result? People mocking the scores based on National bias or making villains out of people because of where they were from.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2014
- Country
-
But the East German judges *are* crooks and frauds because they never score Toller above 5.6, even in artistic impression, and instead gift that snooze fest Jan Hoffmann with such high marks...
Oops, wrong decade. But I have a lot to make up for
Comments will be, mmmm, fun?
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2011
Sochi was simply another in a very long line of examples. Mathman is right. It was implemented to guarantee that dealmaking and biased judging would be more difficult to uncover in order to assign accountability. And no judging system is ever going to be really respected unless there is a substantial measure of accountability.
Anonymous judging simply says, we don't care if you cheat but we do care if you get caught. Scandals are so... unpleasant.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2014
- Country
-
Oh for gods sake, I just had basically your exact entire post written out in my head as I was scrolling along and reading, getting ready to type it all out, and then BAM, end of page one and there you are.
I knew there was a reason I liked you! Anyway, as I was about to say, 21st century judge shaming on social media will bring about new meaning to the term "bloodbath" in the figure skating world.
I'm slowly working a huge "things I'd like to see changed in figure skating" post in an orgmode file that I hoped to get done before the ISU congress but didn't happen... here's the small section things I'd change within this judging system(in other sections I compare the two judging systems and talk about a "literate" alternative to both).
** Tech Panel
I think there's way too many edge cases in tech calling(edges, rotations, levels) which introduces a fog that potentially allows a tech panel to skew things in a biased manner. These tech call edge cases make me treat the whole system somewhat ironically(no matter how honest the callers) which is why I support Flex Medalling.
But without Flex Medalling, I think it's important to get the most unbiased calling for the biggest events. I'd like to see two separate Tech Specialists/Assistant Tech Specialists For the GPF, Worlds, Olympics and let their decisions count for half.
I'd also like to see literate tech calling. Too often I see ice dance couples who can't figure out how they lost a certain level. The awarding of step sequences often seems like voodoo. Tech panels should kind of document why they're making the calls they're making. This would also make figure skating more comprehensible.
** Judge Panel Size
A large panel size is the best way to insulate the impact of cheating. I think the decision to reduce the panel from 12 to 9 for financial reasons was penny-wise and pound-foolish. It should be 12-15 for the GPF, Worlds, Olympics.
http://web.icenetwork.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090428&content_id=64320&vkey=ice_news
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISU_Judging_System#Judge_reduction_in_2008
** Judge Selection
This is maybe too idealistic and maybe unnecessary with increasing the judge panel size... but... is there a reason for the big events(at least Worlds and Olympics) there can't be some kind of consensus judge selection? Like, 85% of the federations approve?
For Worlds and the Olympics, I'd like to see a random drawing of the 30 most approved judges.
Or maybe instead of having federations send a judge, have the federation nominate a slate of judges and then the other federations choose from that slate of judges.
** Judge Anonymity
I can't agree with the up-most prioritization that many give to ending anonymous judging. I personally think that changing how judges are selected, making the tech panel more robust, and increasing the amount of judges are more important than ending judging anonymity.
That being said, I also find the ISU's official reason for anonymous judging("in order to prevent pressure on the judges from their federations") to be weak. My issues with removing anonymous judging are:
1. Judges are no longer part of the spectacle under the new judging system as they were under 6.0.
2. I think the huge amount of numbers judges have to generate and "social media outrage" culture are a combustive mix.
Basically, what gives me qualms about removing anonymous judging is it would lead to an increased importance of the hivemind. More often then not when there is an OUTRAGE! over judging I find myself agreeing with the judges more than the OUTRAGED! The figure skating hivemind seems more conservative and narrow minded than the judges themselves. I'm personally not excited by the prospect of judges being bullied by the hivemind(a hivemind that would increasingly be astroturfed by PR professionals).
Personally, I'd rather have the scores released on a timely delay and have other aspects of judging be reformed before doing away fully with anonymous judging.
** Tech Panel
I think there's way too many edge cases in tech calling(edges, rotations, levels) which introduces a fog that potentially allows a tech panel to skew things in a biased manner. These tech call edge cases make me treat the whole system somewhat ironically(no matter how honest the callers) which is why I support Flex Medalling.
But without Flex Medalling, I think it's important to get the most unbiased calling for the biggest events. I'd like to see two separate Tech Specialists/Assistant Tech Specialists For the GPF, Worlds, Olympics and let their decisions count for half.
I'd also like to see literate tech calling. Too often I see ice dance couples who can't figure out how they lost a certain level. The awarding of step sequences often seems like voodoo. Tech panels should kind of document why they're making the calls they're making. This would also make figure skating more comprehensible.
** Judge Panel Size
A large panel size is the best way to insulate the impact of cheating. I think the decision to reduce the panel from 12 to 9 for financial reasons was penny-wise and pound-foolish. It should be 12-15 for the GPF, Worlds, Olympics.
http://web.icenetwork.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090428&content_id=64320&vkey=ice_news
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISU_Judging_System#Judge_reduction_in_2008
** Judge Selection
This is maybe too idealistic and maybe unnecessary with increasing the judge panel size... but... is there a reason for the big events(at least Worlds and Olympics) there can't be some kind of consensus judge selection? Like, 85% of the federations approve?
For Worlds and the Olympics, I'd like to see a random drawing of the 30 most approved judges.
Or maybe instead of having federations send a judge, have the federation nominate a slate of judges and then the other federations choose from that slate of judges.
** Judge Anonymity
I can't agree with the up-most prioritization that many give to ending anonymous judging. I personally think that changing how judges are selected, making the tech panel more robust, and increasing the amount of judges are more important than ending judging anonymity.
That being said, I also find the ISU's official reason for anonymous judging("in order to prevent pressure on the judges from their federations") to be weak. My issues with removing anonymous judging are:
1. Judges are no longer part of the spectacle under the new judging system as they were under 6.0.
2. I think the huge amount of numbers judges have to generate and "social media outrage" culture are a combustive mix.
Basically, what gives me qualms about removing anonymous judging is it would lead to an increased importance of the hivemind. More often then not when there is an OUTRAGE! over judging I find myself agreeing with the judges more than the OUTRAGED! The figure skating hivemind seems more conservative and narrow minded than the judges themselves. I'm personally not excited by the prospect of judges being bullied by the hivemind(a hivemind that would increasingly be astroturfed by PR professionals).
Personally, I'd rather have the scores released on a timely delay and have other aspects of judging be reformed before doing away fully with anonymous judging.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2013
- Country
-
Yawn, predictable. Probably shouldn't remind you that at the first attempt at this after Sochi the Russians voted to get rid of anonymous judging and the Koreans voted to keep it? No?
I wonder when the first recorded case of an assault against a judge by a psycho fan will be, now that psycho fans will know exactly who gave what score?
Similar threads
