Hi ISU
maybe it’s best if you ask your judges why they award certain marks. In the 2015-2016 season, we still didn’t know who assigned a particular mark, and when you don’t know something, you can think badly. I have some doubts about the Ladies’ free skate at the 2016 World Championships. I haven’t watched the whole competition, only the ten best free skate, but maybe in the future I’ll watch something else.
Why was a judge so severe with Satoko Miyahara? Beyond the layback spin, for all meritorious of a +3, one judge did not assign any +2, while all the others felt that she deserved some, and assigned her many +1 and four 0s. No other was so severe. As for the components, for Miyahara as for other skaters I highlighted when a judge assigned an overall score higher (in green) or lower (in red) than five points compared to the final score. Five points, plus the very strict GOEs, are a lot. Why was this judge so severe with Miyahara?
Why was a judge so generous to Anna Pogorilaya? Her GOEs are almost only +3 and +2, no judge has been so generous. She also gave her a +2 on a flat edge flip. Since the deduction for the edge of the flip goes from -1 to -2, for that judge the flip was otherwise perfect. I watched the jump, and despite not being a judge I would have something to say about the landing. Not enough for a deduction, but +2? Really? As for the components, that judge was really generous.
A judge awarded Elena Radionova four marks that were not awarded to her by anyone else, and she was very generous in the compnents as well. Why?
A judge awarded the combination of Rika Hongo 2A + 3T + 2T a -1. Where does that deduction come from? Looking at the combination I couldn’t figure it out. Another judge was very strict in the components. Why?
A judge awarded Gabrielle Daleman very high marks in components. Why? A judge was really strict in the components with Elizabet Tursynbaeva. Why? Components are not numbers that judges can write freely, depending on the inspiration of the moment. You have provided precise indications, and they should be respected.
In the protocols I have posted here there are these oscillations from the highest and the lowest mark:
| Max | Min | Diff. | ||
| Miyahara | TR | 8,75 | 7,75 | 1,00 |
| PE | 9,00 | 7,50 | 1,50 | |
| CO | 9,00 | 7,75 | 1,25 | |
| IN | 9,00 | 7,75 | 1,25 | |
| Pogorilaya | TR | 9,25 | 7,50 | 1,75 |
| PE | 9,00 | 8,00 | 1,00 | |
| CO | 9,25 | 7,75 | 1,50 | |
| IN | 9,50 | 8,00 | 1,50 | |
| Radionova | SS | 9,00 | 8,00 | 1,00 |
| TR | 9,25 | 8,00 | 1,25 | |
| PE | 9,00 | 8,00 | 1,00 | |
| CO | 9,25 | 8,00 | 1,25 | |
| IN | 9,25 | 8,00 | 1,25 | |
| Hongo | SS | 8,50 | 7,25 | 1,25 |
| TR | 8,25 | 7,00 | 1,25 | |
| PE | 8,75 | 6,75 | 2,00 | |
| CO | 8,75 | 7,00 | 1,75 | |
| IN | 8,75 | 7,75 | 1,00 | |
| Daleman | SS | 8,50 | 7,50 | 1,00 |
| TR | 8,00 | 6,75 | 1,25 | |
| PE | 8,50 | 7,50 | 1,00 | |
| CO | 8,75 | 7,50 | 1,25 | |
| IN | 9,00 | 7,50 | 1,50 | |
| Tursynbaeva | SS | 7,50 | 6,50 | 1,00 |
| TR | 7,25 | 5,75 | 1,50 | |
| PE | 7,50 | 6,00 | 1,50 | |
| CO | 7,50 | 6,50 | 1,00 | |
| IN | 7,50 | 6,25 | 1,25 |
I did not report all the fluctuations, only those from 1.00 points upwards. Seems like a huge difference to me. I remind you of the final classification of the competition.
| Result | Diff. | ||
| 1 | Medvedeva | 223,86 | |
| 2 | Wagner | 215,39 | -8,47 |
| 3 | Pogorilaya | 213,69 | -1,70 |
| 4 | Gold | 211,29 | -2,40 |
| 5 | Miyahara | 210,61 | -0,68 |
| 6 | Radionova | 209,81 | -0,80 |
| 7 | Asada | 200,30 | -9,51 |
| 8 | Hongo | 199,15 | -1,15 |
| 9 | Daleman | 195,68 | -3,47 |
| 10 | Nagasu | 186,65 | -9,03 |
| 11 | Li | 184,52 | -2,13 |
| 12 | Tursynbaeva | 183,62 | -0,90 |
| 13 | Rajicova | 173,05 | -10,57 |
| 14 | Choi | 159,92 | -13,13 |
| 15 | Kuchvalska | 158,99 | -0,93 |
| 16 | Rodeghiero | 158,41 | -0,58 |
| 17 | Chartrand | 157,82 | -0,59 |
| 18 | Park | 154,24 | -3,58 |
| 19 | Khnychenkova | 154,02 | -0,22 |
| 20 | Lindfors | 152,93 | -1,09 |
| 21 | Lin | 146,55 | -6,38 |
| 22 | Wories | 140,87 | -5,68 |
| 23 | Zhao | 139,67 | -1,20 |
| 24 | Galutsyan | 136,07 | -3,60 |
The points of difference I have indicated are those that separate each skater from the skater who precedes her. I haven’t looked at the skaters who didn’t qualify for the free skate, but their scores should also be watched carefully, for some skater qualifying, or failing to qualify, for the free skate can have a huge impact on his career. Some differences are very small, and in some cases there are more than two skaters separated by a minimal difference. Between Gracie Gold’s fifth place and Elena Radionova’s seventh place there are only 1.48 points, so it is important that all judges give their marks correctly.
Are the highest and lowest grades not counted precisely to reduce the risk that a single judge could influence the result by assigning absurd marks? True, but, in case you haven’t noticed, if the scores are very close, even a single judge can influence the score in a decisive way. To confirm this, I looked at Ashley Wagner’s score. I chose her for a very simple reason: she won a medal, in this case silver, with a small advantage over the skater who finished behind her. This is her protocol:
The first thing I noticed were those two 10.00 in the components assigned in a less than perfect program. Three jumps were performed in an imprecise way, even if they were problems whose impact is related more to the base value or to the GOE than to the components. These two were the only 10.00 awarded in the whole women’s competition. There was no American judge, so we have no obvious suspicion to point the finger at when talking about national bias. The reasons that led Judge 6 to assign those marks are mysterious, and will remain so.
Did Judge 6’s marks affect the final result? To understand this, I transcribed each vote on a file excel, then I deleted all the votes assigned by the judge 6. Only at this point did I delete the highest and the lowest marks assigned by the other judges. The AF-AG columns indicate the scores actually received by Wagner. In the AI-AJ columns I have indicated the score Wagner would have received in each item if the jury panel had been made up of eight judges and not nine.
And … surprise. The biggest difference does not come from the components, but from the GOEs. Had Judge 6 not been present on the jury panel, the silver would have gone to Anna Pogorilaya and not Ashley Wagner.
All of this is to say that even one judge can significantly influence the results, and that if we don’t know who assigned the marks we can’t ask the judges why they had given a certain mark, but the odd marks remain. Not publishing all the information relating to the results of the competitions, or publishing them late, perhaps it will prevent some scandal from breaking out because the press will be distracted, but it certainly will not help to have more fair competitions.
