Monday, March 22 What do you think have made Patrick decide to withdraw and Sally so sad about the judging in the Vancouver Olympics? Please give your guess/thoughts about the specific cases where the wrong judges were done?

These are my guesses and thoughts, as you asked for. I haven't further elaborated with Patrick on his initial interview, nor have I discussed it with any of the people who sent me the letters in response.

I would say the biggest thing is that Ibens felt that he couldn't really do his job as it was originally intended, with the fluctuation of program components scores if he felt the skater deserved wide ranges. If you are going to present the criteria (or at least a general idea) for the components, then there should be no need to worry about marking within the "corridor" that has been mentioned so many times now and rather the judge should really be thinking about the program. That also has to do with start order and the "early" sessions vs. the "later" sessions. Just because Skater "A"'s world ranking isn't high enough to skate in the later session, doesn't mean that their skating skills, or choreography (or whatever you want to choose) isn't just as good as, if not better than skater "B" who skates much later. Like Ibens said, you mark a certain way for each group as the competition goes on and you are pretty much guaranteed to be right in the middle of the scores-- does that make it the right way to judge?

All of that is interesting to think about.


Anonymous said...

I'm the one who asked this question. Thanks for your thoughts.
Actually I expected more specific view on what has triggered them to pour out their hearts this much, because I was so shocked to read these articles.

I thought they must have sensed some dishonest judging in the Olympics. But I’m not gonna force you in an awkward situation!

I'm not sure if there is the best & complete way to judge this sport. The former judges here say comparative judging is the best way, but I think that the starting order back in the 6.0 system counted as much as now because both now and then the judges look saving the best score knowing that those with higher ranks are coming later.

At least anonymous judging must be stopped right away and the judges should have chances/responsibility to explain about the points/ranks they gave.

Tony said...

I don't think Ibens thought there was dishonest judging particularly in the Olympics. I just think that since he was retiring anyways, he felt that it was a good time to share the frustrations that have built up over time.

I have known Ibens for a long while now, and I simply wanted to originally just get his thoughts on the mens competition and specifically the Plushenko vs. Lysacek debate, since he was retiring and able to speak freely. But I saw the chance to dive much deeper into many topics, and he was fine with answering accordingly. For coming up with my list of questions in about 20 minutes, I'm extremely happy with the feedback from a simple little interview!

As far as the Bianchetti, Stapleford, and Lindgren replies... they have been out of the ISU for a while, and probably saw Ibens' comments as a way to add on to what they have already been saying, which is fine by me. You aren't going to hear from any current ISU judges about how they feel.. so this is the next best thing. I'm glad they added their thoughts :-)