Figure skating is a sport, and as a sport has his rules. We all agree on this? And the rules must be equal for all the skaters. It’s not important if a skater is nice or not, what is important is what he did during the competition. Nothing more, nothing less.
The judges must give their marks according to the rule book. A skater can’t be happy to receive a bad mark, but if the bad mark is deserved, the judge must give it. Sometimes a bad mark is due to a mistakes, a fall, a step out, something that happened that day but that perhaps in the next competition it will not happen. Sometimes a skater has a bad technique, and not to give him bad mark for is bad technique is terribly wrong.

It’s wrong because to give a gift to a skater is, in fact, a penalization for a skater that has a good technique but that see his advantage disappear because his rival has received an undeserved gift. And it’s wrong also for the skater who has received the gift. If a skater see that he has a bad technique, he can work and improve it. An example? This is Yuzuru Hanyu’s triple flip at the Junior Grand Prix Final in 2009.

His jump has received a “!” (but it deserved an “e”). In fact, the young Hanyu has received a lot of call on the edge of his flip. These are his junior and senior competition until his first Olympic season:

47 flip in competition, 30 “e”, 6 “!”, only 11 flip without a call, an average GOE of -0,38.  And the calls were done even at the National Championship, or after he established his first World record, or after his first Olympic gold medal. He knew that he has a problem on the edge of the flip and he has worked to fix it. In the last years there’s some call from time to time, usually when he’s tired, but his edge is almost always correct.

It’s difficult to find clear images, the replay are always done on the quads or on the triple Axels. This is Grand Prix of Helsinki 2018. He is coming on a clear outside edge, gradually changes inclination and at the take off he in on a slight inside edge. He has correct his technique. Now let’s see Nathan Chen’s triple Axel. This is the Olympic Games in 2018.

His take off is on a skid. For the ISU this is correct, even if the jump isn’t so good as from a clear forward take-off. In the fifth screenshot he is on the ice, in the sixth he is in air. Here his take-off is among 90° and 180° of prerotation.

World Championship 2019, SP. The take-off is among the third and the fourth screenshot, the skid is a little bigger. This jump has 3 second of preparation, is jumped from a skid, and in the landing the free leg go a little too high, so the jump isn’t effortless. And, regarding the dimension, the distance is 2.66 meters, the height 0.58 meters. Yuzuru Hanyu jump from a counter, exit with a twizzle, his jump is the biggest, 3.62 meters of distance, almost a meters more than Chen, and 0,70 meters of height, 0,12 meters more than Chen.

Hanyu is one skater among many, we can’t use only him to do comparison, so these are the dimension of all the triple Axel of the competition:

There’s two little mistakes in this table that I found on internet, Maierhofer and Virtanen jumped a double Axel, not a triple. Watching only the other 27 skaters, Hanyu’s jump is really big, Chen’s jump is in the average. Their marks must be really different. I remember the bullets:

Chen’s jump don’t deserves deduction (that aren’t included in my screenshot), but also don’t have the first 5 bullet. He don’t deserve more than +1. Hanyu’s jump have all the six bullet, he deserves +5. These are the protocols:

Only three marks on Hanyu’s protocol, and none in Chen’s protocol, are correct. Let’s see who has judged this competition:

• Judge 1: Miroslav Misurec (CZE). One of the two judges almost correct with Chen, but only +4 for Hanyu. What bullets the jump didn’t have for +5? According to the rules, the jump didn’t have two bullets among 4, 5 and 6. Two bullets missing, not only one. Which? The ISU should require to the judge to write which bullet are present and which not, only if all it’s clear we can be sure that judges’ valuation are correct. And if the judge must say why he has given a specific mark, probably he will think more carefully to the rules and he will do fewer mistakes.
• Judge 2: Antica Grubisic (CRO). +4 for Chen and Hanyu. How on the Earth the two jumps deserves the same mark? Is she blind, or what? And she’s not the only one to have made this mistake.
• Judge 3: Albert Zaydman (ISR). Same as judge 1.
• Judge 4, Bettina Meier (SUI). Same as judge 2, second blind or…
• Judge 5, Ariadna Morones Negrete (MEX). +5 for Hanyu, a correct score. But why +3 for Chen, where came from two bullets?
• Judge 6, Cynthia Benson (CAN). Same as judge 5.
• Judge 7, Anny Hou (TPE). +5 for Hanyu, ok, but where came from a +4 for Chen?
• Judge 8, Saoia Sancho (ESP). Same as judge 2.
• Judge 9: Philippe Meriguet (FRA). Same as judge 2.

So we have 4 judges totally blind and five that has made a mistake at least on Chen’s score. Chen’s 3A deserves 8.80 points, not 10.74, he has received a gift of 1.94 points. Hanyu’s 3A deserves 12.00 points, not 11.43. He was robbed of 0.57 point. Two different mistakes has given to Chen 2.51 undeserved points more respect Hanyu. I know, Chen has won with an advantage of 22.45 points, but this isn’t the only mistakes in the protocols, this is the only mistake that I watch now.

Ok, at the 2019 World Championship Chen’s skid was a little bigger than at the Olympic Games 2018. When a skid is too big? This came from an old ISU VHS seminar:

The first screenshot shows the momentum, with the alignment of the limbs. The last is the take-off, with the skater that hasn’t already rotated but is in the air, clearly going forward. Now let’s see at the ISU rulebook.

A clear forward (backward for Axel type jump) take-off will be considered as a downgraded jump.

So the Axel can’t have a backward take-off. If the take-off is done when the skater is already backward, the jump must be downgraded. This is Nathan Chen’s 3A in the SP at the National Championship 2021.

This isn’t a skid anymore, this is a jump done going backward. He has rotated of 180°, not anymore of 90°. The jump should be downgraded to a double. This is the protocol:

If an Axel of average quality Chen can earn +2.74 on GOE, why he should improve his technique? Without any call, and with GOE really high, his technique is worsened. His coach’s philosophy is not to improve, but to find loopholes in the rules (I don’t remember where I’ve read the interview, if someone is so kind to send to me the link, I will add it to my post).

Edit: statusgelaticus has kindly given to me the link to the translation: Rafael Harutyunyan: It’s not my plan for Nathan to compete with someone on equals at the Olympics « ⛸ FS Gossips (fs-gossips.com), Nymphea to the original Russian source: https://www.sports.ru/figure-skating/1090447851-rafael-arutyunyan-v-moi-plany-ne-vxodit-chtoby-na-olimpiade-chen-borol.html.

Now, with a jump that should be downgraded, he has earned +2.88. I wonder what the next step might be. If a bad technique isn’t penalized, not only the result of the competitions become a nonsense, figure skating itself don’t became better, but worst.

ISU must form better his judges, suspend the biased judges, do all with more transparency and give to the judges all the tools for a better judgments. They include slow motion also for take-off, more angles for the replay, but also a camera for the marks on the ice can be very useful. These screenshot are made from the same ISU seminar of before.

The first screenshot is from a perfect 3A, with the take-off fully forward. The second is also correct, but there’s a slight skid. With a slight release of the edge the blade begin the rotation on the ice, but there isn’t too much change of direction. The third is an Axel of poor quality (is the ISU’s DVD that talk about the poor quality, not I), as the Axel done by Chen in 2018 and 2019. The prerotation is almost 90°.
What mark can do a jump with a prerotation of 180°? Probably if the judge can see the mark, they can judge better. If ISU really want fair competitions and the improving of the discipline, they must give to the judges all the tools for correct judgments, and the judges must give to all the correct marks.