Maybe 2016. The ISU Congress only happens in even-numbered years.
The COMPLETE Guide to Fixing the Scoring System and Improving Ice Skating
- Thread starter Blades of Passion
- Start date
Maybe 2016. The ISU Congress only happens in even-numbered years.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
I hope they remove the anonymous judging, for the sake of figure skating, for all the skaters who have trained so hard, not for the sake of federations playing politik.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2010
It is called bitter irony with a whisk of sarcasm... I am not a fan of federation politics/incompetence and ISU dictatorship which imo has disenfranchise the individual athletes a long time ago. I much prefer this sport stop being about US vs Russia vs Canada, Japan vs Korea etc... but more about the individuals but hey I am only a dreamer.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2014
- Country
-
Same here, but nationalism isn't going to go away any time soon, unfortunately. One of the best ways to support the athletes is to ensure the integrity of the judging and removing anonymity would have been a step in the right direction. Sadly, it appears that the federations voting against it have other priorities. :disapp:
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2010
Same here, but nationalism isn't going to go away any time soon, unfortunately. One of the best ways to support the athletes is to ensure the integrity of the judging and removing anonymity would have been a step in the right direction. Sadly, it appears that the federations voting against it have other priorities. :disapp:
I have always thought there should be an organisation that represent the atheletes interest, but it is not so.
Whoever started this movement trying to remove anonymous judging are not terribly smart about it. If the votes are solely down to federations, then what they should do is also propose an even MORE radical change at the same time, like propose no skaters should be allowed to skate at major home events (which ironically would make the whole sport fairer and minimize federation influence). At the same time the anonymous proposal would look pale in comparison, it might just be enough to distract and go through. Just wishful thinking perhaps...
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
Okay, if we HAVE to live with anonymity for a while, then what about ideas that would help us improve the situation?
What about changing the protest procedure/rules? The time limit would be raised to 12 hours, not just within 30 minutes? Or at least 3 hours?
If a result that received any protest from any federation with reasonable comments about TES (GOE, wrong edge...) the identity of the judges must be revealed?
What about changing the protest procedure/rules? The time limit would be raised to 12 hours, not just within 30 minutes? Or at least 3 hours?
If a result that received any protest from any federation with reasonable comments about TES (GOE, wrong edge...) the identity of the judges must be revealed?
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
But why not just reveal the identity in the first place, why wait for there to be a problem?
As far as I know, isn't there a judges' meeting after each competition? Although it's behind closed doors so they could simply be drinking and laughing their faces off for all we know.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
I said I am against anonymous judging. But at this rate I am afraid we will have to live with it at least until 2016. So if we HAVE to live with it, then at least the protest procedure/rules should be changed.
Or we wait until Speedy is down in 2016? I mean for 2 more years.
I really want to curse but try not to. Some people should to hell with all the dubious stuffs they are doing.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Country
-
I like the idea of a press conference where anyone within a set amount of points of 3rd and their coaches get to grill an ISU representetive who has to defend the ISU's judges marks. If they are going to be anonymous then make someone defend them on behalf of the ISU showing that they are willing to defend who they put on the panels. Oh..the drama. 
I too am a dreamer
I too am a dreamer
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
They should have made some broadcast worldwide.I like the idea of a press conference where anyone within a set amount of points of 3rd and their coaches get to grill an ISU representetive who has to defend the ISU's judges marks. If they are going to be anonymous then make someone defend them on behalf of the ISU showing that they are willing to defend who they put on the panels. Oh..the drama.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2010
One way to ensure anonymity is not abused is to have an external auditor/ selection panel to ensure federations agendas/individual biases do not impact the credibility and the legitimacy of the sport. This can also be done through automation even anonymously, taking track of judge's personal history and records in black and white. Even with anonymity, imo the judges should have a score card much like someone's driving license history, noting how many times they committed penalty, abuse anonymity etc.
For example, at Sochi, IF say the Russian judge reserved most of her highest mark for home skater Adelina, and Yuna Kim (direct rival where majority of other judges awarded 1st or 2nd mark) the absolute the lowest mark (way outside the corridor, placement), this is clearly agenda driven judgement rather than credible judgement, and it should bring up warning lights to automatically discount the judge's score for the 2.
There are preventative measures, precautionary measures, to put together a non partisan panel beforehand no different than how jurors at court cases to be scrutinized and to ensure no judges are already biased at start only to serve federation interests.
E.g How is Alla able to judge at all of Adelina's competition through out the ENTIRE year, 5 out of 5, and what has been the pattern of judging, if it is on an consistent inflation, then how does it differs from other judges regardless how she performed? I actually think although complaints has been about a conflict of interest that she is married to Chairman of Russian Federation, but imo it is only a conflict of interest if she ALREADY proven she is strongly biased to favour Russian skaters through out her history of marking, and that should invalidate her status by the selection committee more than any personal / national affiliation. The trouble with anonymity is it is also unfair to the judges, since who knows, maybe she is a fair judge :think: but she has no way of proving it without transparency.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
It seems like a lot of smaller countries voted no. I wonder if it is to protect their judges from scrutiny if they mark programs out of line with other judges on the panel due to under-training/incompetence.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2014
- Country
-
I like the idea of a press conference where anyone within a set amount of points of 3rd and their coaches get to grill an ISU representetive who has to defend the ISU's judges marks. If they are going to be anonymous then make someone defend them on behalf of the ISU showing that they are willing to defend who they put on the panels. Oh..the drama.
Holy moly -- I'd pay good money to see that!
How would this work? Who would be allowed to protest calls/results within that time? The skater and coach, or an official from their federation on their behalf? Could judges question tech panel calls, refs or tech panel members question judges' GOEs that are required to be negative or required to be -3 and aren't? Could judges change their own scores after the fact if they realize they made a mistake?
Can federations/coaches/skaters question only their own protocols or also those of their rivals?
Would any outside observers with no official standing (e.g., fans, journalists) be allowed to introduce questions about calls that seem wrong to them?
Will the referee and controller and accountant need to hold off on finalizing the results until after the deadline for protests has expired? Should the medal ceremony be delayed until after the deadline?
Or what happens if the medal ceremony is held, a review/protest is submitted after the ceremony, one or more calls get changed, and the final standings would change as a result? Time for a new medal ceremony and a new press conference?
I.e., should it be a normal part of the process to review the protocols in detail after the event is over and the provisional medalists have been named?
Or should results be finalized as soon as possible and protests should be rare and discouraged, but allowed
Doesn't gymnastics charge the federations money to submit protests of that sort?
There isn't any meaningful way to protest PCS, as you acknowledge by not listing them here. That's where the judges will have the most influence.
The only GOEs that really should be challenged are those that are flat-out wrong -- the rules say they must by negative, or in some cases must be -3, for certain errors, and judges gave higher GOEs than allowed in those cases. Otherwise, any just a matter of opinion.
Those mistakes will not likely make much difference in the final results.
It might be worth identifying individual judges whose scores trended high for certain skaters and low for others across the board, but even if the judges' scores are all in the same columns for each skater with the judges' name attached, that's not something that can really be identified and proven as invalid with within a 12-hour time period -- you'd need to give the judge an opportunity to explain the scores before throwing them out and changing the results.
As for downgrade and edge calls (which will become more significant under the new 2014-15 rules), and perhaps level calls as well, those are the technical panel's responsibility, not the judges'. So anonymity is already not a factor and not proposed to change.
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
So they can protest if the downgrade, edge calls and GOE are wrong? Still within 30 minutes is not enough. I hope it will be 3 hours at least. For people to have enough time for reviewing the scores if they want to protest.
Are you asking what the current rules are?
I can't find the ISU document, but here's the USFS Post-Event Error Correction Protocol, which may have some differences.
Note that the only thing a skater or coach is allowed to challenge after they've seen the protocols are obvious identification errors (e.g., toe loop called a loop, double called a triple), or data input or calculation errors in the computer, and only as they affect that skater.
The intention is very clearly not to allow a skater who thinks a rival benefited from overly generous calls to question that other skater's calls.
Downgrades or edge calls or level calls cannot be changed after the technical panel leaves the stand.
If you think that technical panels might systematically make incorrect calls, it might make sense to allow for them to be challenged within a larger window of time and corrected if found to be mistaken. But who is going to make that determination, if the tech panel is in fact corrupt? What would be the procedure for the person(s) initiating the challenge and the tech panel members to review the official video and determine that the call was mistaken and should be changed or that the call was correct and will stand and the challenger just wasted everybody's time (and delayed the medal ceremony?) with their whining?
For the obviously incorrect GOEs for elements with certain errors, maybe there could be a way for the controller or referee to flag these in the computer and draw a judge's attention to them so they can correct their mistakes right away.
Identifying incorrect individual scores that should be changed ASAP (and that might change the competition results) is one thing.
Identifying corruption is a whole separate process that can't really happen within a few hours. Meaningful investigations and penalties for proven cheaters should be increased, but that's going to happen well after the fact, too late to affect the competition results. (SLC pairs was an exception because LeGougne basically admitted to not judging impartially while everyone was still on site)
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Country
-
If the skaters do then I will too :yes:
Lol, in what world would Korea ever "get their turn"? Even if they are the host country, the federation has no power at all. They'll file an appeal because they believe they were cheated out of a OGM and want fairness, but they are willing to keep the current rules because they themselves want to cheat as well? Okay.The same applies to those fans who go on for 100+ posts about fairness, justices and "saving FS" but then turn their heads and say Korea should have the chance to do what Russia (supposedly) did. Obviously all that talking was just a cover, cause all they really wanted was the gold for their "queen".
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
It's called giving them a taste of their own medicine. If you can't get fairness and justice through the proper channels, then fight fire with fire.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Country
-
Who is them?
Similar threads
