Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by Sandra Loosemor » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 10:29:54


Quote:

>     I honestly believe that in dance, the judges still place teams by their
> ranking, which changes only very slowly (if at all) through the season. This
> is a system they used openly many years ago - it's just gone underground.
>     There is no other plausible explanation as to why there is no change in
> placements from one event to another, time after time.

"No change in placements"?  Did Bourne & Kraatz not win the Grand Prix
Final this season and then go to the OOOOOs and finish behind two of
the same teams they had beaten at the GPF?  Did Lobacheva & Averbukh
not beat Fusar-Poli & Margaglio at the OOOOOs in spite of finishing
behind them at Europeans?  How about Drobiazko & Vanagas beating FP&M
at the GPF but not at the OOOOOs?  And why is there such controversy
over Chait and Sakhnovsky's bronze at Worlds -- many people seem to
think that the fact that they *didn't* finish behind D&V as they had
at Europeans and the OOOOOs was evidence that the judging was "fixed".
It can't work both ways....

-Sandra the cynic

 
 
 

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by David Blythi » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 11:08:02

Sandra,
    the GPF finishes were the odd-ball results of the season, and all of the
judges had to write reports to explain their actions.
Dave

Quote:

> >     I honestly believe that in dance, the judges still place teams by
their
> > ranking, which changes only very slowly (if at all) through the season.
This
> > is a system they used openly many years ago - it's just gone
underground.
> >     There is no other plausible explanation as to why there is no change
in
> > placements from one event to another, time after time.

> "No change in placements"?  Did Bourne & Kraatz not win the Grand Prix
> Final this season and then go to the OOOOOs and finish behind two of
> the same teams they had beaten at the GPF?  Did Lobacheva & Averbukh
> not beat Fusar-Poli & Margaglio at the OOOOOs in spite of finishing
> behind them at Europeans?  How about Drobiazko & Vanagas beating FP&M
> at the GPF but not at the OOOOOs?  And why is there such controversy
> over Chait and Sakhnovsky's bronze at Worlds -- many people seem to
> think that the fact that they *didn't* finish behind D&V as they had
> at Europeans and the OOOOOs was evidence that the judging was "fixed".
> It can't work both ways....

> -Sandra the cynic


 
 
 

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by Rick » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 10:45:14

Quote:


>>     I honestly believe that in dance, the judges still place teams by
their
>> ranking, which changes only very slowly (if at all) through the season.
This
>> is a system they used openly many years ago - it's just gone underground.
>>     There is no other plausible explanation as to why there is no change
in
>> placements from one event to another, time after time.

>"No change in placements"?  Did Bourne & Kraatz not win the Grand Prix
>Final this season and then go to the OOOOOs and finish behind two of
>the same teams they had beaten at the GPF?  Did Lobacheva & Averbukh
>not beat Fusar-Poli & Margaglio at the OOOOOs in spite of finishing
>behind them at Europeans?  How about Drobiazko & Vanagas beating FP&M
>at the GPF but not at the OOOOOs?  And why is there such controversy
>over Chait and Sakhnovsky's bronze at Worlds -- many people seem to
>think that the fact that they *didn't* finish behind D&V as they had
>at Europeans and the OOOOOs was evidence that the judging was "fixed".
>It can't work both ways....

Oh yes, it can. Just close your eyes, and you can believe anything you want!

- Rick, wishing he had a complete database of ISU judges marks and a little
more math skill

 
 
 

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by Sandra Loosemor » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 12:25:35

Quote:

>     the GPF finishes were the odd-ball results of the season, and all of the
> judges had to write reports to explain their actions.

So how do you explain the changes in placements between Europeans and
the OOOOOs, and the OOOOOs and Worlds?  :-)  Do you just close your eyes
and pretend they didn't happen because it doesn't fit in with your pat
little theory that the judging is all fixed because the placements
never change?  :-P

-Sandra the cynic

 
 
 

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by Trudi Marrapo » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 19:33:38


Quote:


> >     I honestly believe that in dance, the judges still place teams by their
> > ranking, which changes only very slowly (if at all) through the season. This
> > is a system they used openly many years ago - it's just gone underground.
> >     There is no other plausible explanation as to why there is no change in
> > placements from one event to another, time after time.

> "No change in placements"?  Did Bourne & Kraatz not win the Grand Prix
> Final this season and then go to the OOOOOs and finish behind two of
> the same teams they had beaten at the GPF?  Did Lobacheva & Averbukh
> not beat Fusar-Poli & Margaglio at the OOOOOs in spite of finishing
> behind them at Europeans?  How about Drobiazko & Vanagas beating FP&M
> at the GPF but not at the OOOOOs?  And why is there such controversy
> over Chait and Sakhnovsky's bronze at Worlds -- many people seem to
> think that the fact that they *didn't* finish behind D&V as they had
> at Europeans and the OOOOOs was evidence that the judging was "fixed".
> It can't work both ways....

> -Sandra the cynic

I knew some judging apologist or other would come along and mention
this...and accuse those who are unhappy now of being unhappy when the
placements DON'T change, and equally unhappy when the placements DO
change, so long as the placements don't change the way THEY want them to.

Well, Sandra, why don't you tell us what was so great about Chait &
Sakhonovsky that they deserved to place above Drobiazko & Vanagas at
worlds, then. I know you're at a disadvantage from not seeing all phases
of the competition, but could you at least float a few reasonable
theories?

As for me, those words of Alexander Gorshkov (I think it was Gorshkov)
after the GPF keep coming back to haunt me: about how not only was ice
dancing allegedly set back X number of years by the results, but that of
all the couples, the Israelis were one of the few who really "danced." And
that the Lithuanians lacked basic dancing skills altogether. In his
opinion.
--
Trudi
adding the question "What do you mean?" to every post, just in case...

 
 
 

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by tina » Mon, 01 Apr 2002 16:04:38


Quote:


> > >Because if it's true
> > >what these articles are saying--that there are impressions being spread
> > >around that Michelle Kwan is slow, that her jumps are small, that she's
> > >too old and can't jump anymore...well, what does that say about the
other
> > >Americans?

> > What does it say about Slutskaya, who is older than the thus-described
creaky
> > Kwan?

> > Ah, logic.

> > Peg

> There IS no logic to it. Not really. Just national bias, which says "This
> skater is 21 and aged," whereas "That skater is 23 and just coming into
> her full powers." Hmph.

Do you know anything???

- Tina

- Show quoted text -

Quote:
> --
> Trudi
> adding the question "What do you mean?" to every post, just in case...

 
 
 

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by Robert Diste » Tue, 02 Apr 2002 11:43:22


Quote:


> [snip]
> >IIRC wasn't there no
> >change in placements at all for the top 10 dancers at Olys (which is
> >simply preposterous if there is actual judging going on).

> I understand there *was* movement within individual judges, and that it was
> only the overall standings that remained unchanged. It may be statistically
> unlikely, but the alternative seems to be that *all* the judges (or at least
> many of them) got together and planned out how they would change their own
> rankings in a way that wouldn't change the overall results. Even as
> suspicious as we all have become of judging honesty, that seems far less
> likely.

I doubt that ice dance judges are that clever or ambitious, either.
There is usually a bit of movement in an individual judge's score, but
the amount of change per individual judge is so small that the overall
evaluation of the panel seldom results in a dance team moving up or down
by more than one placement. Ice dance judging seems to be a combination
of marking according to a preconceived pecking order with *slight*
variation by individual judges, along with proven unethical behaviour on
the part of some judges. The only other alternative is that the various
teams' skills do not significantly change with respect to the 3 phases
and 4 parts of the dance competition, which then makes one wonder why
the ISU bothers to make the skaters demonstrated their skills four times
throughout a competitionl. It would be very interesting to statistically
analyze the variance in placements of individual judge's marks in dance
relative to the variance in marks in the other disciplines. I would
guess that the standard deviation of dance marks is very small.

Bob

 
 
 

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by Shillelag » Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:44:22


Quote:

> >     the GPF finishes were the odd-ball results of the season, and all of
the
> > judges had to write reports to explain their actions.

> So how do you explain the changes in placements between Europeans and
> the OOOOOs, and the OOOOOs and Worlds?  :-)

Well, for one thing, the Canadian team wasn't at the Europeans, and the
French and Italian teams weren't at Worlds, so that's like comparing apples
& oranges.  And, were L & A at Europeans? - I have no idea.
8>P

Shelagh

 
 
 

Smith: SLC Ice Dance Plot

Post by Chad Beck » Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:20:16

Quote:
>> So how do you explain the changes in placements between Europeans and
>> the OOOOOs, and the OOOOOs and Worlds?  :-)

>Well, for one thing, the Canadian team wasn't at the Europeans, and the
>French and Italian teams weren't at Worlds, so that's like comparing apples
>& oranges.  And, were L & A at Europeans? - I have no idea.

L & A placed 3rd at Euros.

Chad