Globe & Mail Article - ISU on Thin Ice

[Mazurka Girl]

ISU on Thin Ice (http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/PEstory/TGAM/20021024/SFISP/sports/sports/sports_temp/1/1/26/)

Yet another article with the same old point of view from Beverley Smith. Although how come it's only the ISU that is taking a step backward if the judging system to keep the identity of the judges a secret was proposed by Skate Canada?

[Louis]

I disagree that this is the same old point of view from Beverley Smith. This article hits the nail on the head about the problems of the new scoring system without succumbing to sensationalism and cultural biases. I have to hand it to Smith here-- there was only a tangential mention of the SLC scandal and nothing about the mob or the Russians ruining the ISU, etc.

I'm not always Sally-Anne Stapleford's biggest fan, but she is absolutely on target with everything she says about the new scoring system. Thank you, Sally-Anne, for telling it like it is, and thank you, Beverley Smith, for reporting it with very little editorial comment.

[Mazurka Girl]

What I dislike about her article is not what they have to say about the judging system but that she always references the same sources or research with similar points of view. If her own country's federation is supporting an anonymous judging system, how comes there's no more comment about that when articles like this are written? Even Christine Brennan is willing to look at both sides of the USFSA's involvement in such issues.

[loveskating]

"But the new setup of judges review meetings after events particularly stirs Stapleford's ire. An interim judging system to keep the identity of judges secret -- proposed by Skate Canada -- included no references to changes in the way event review meetings are held, Stapleford said.

Although the ISU pronounced the new scoring system a big success at Obertsdorf, Germany, last month, when it was tested for the first time, confusion reigned over how review meetings will be run. First, "the powers that be" said there would be no meetings and then they told referees there would be a meeting, but the format would be changed, Stapleford said.

The changes are this: no marks or placings will be distributed; and no placings or marks will be discussed. There will be only a general discussion on the standard of skating. The referee and assistant referee will not release their own specific placements, but will speak only of group placements (such as that perhaps a skater should have been placed less specifically among a higher grouping of skaters). Any judge who would like to explain his or her marks in greater detail -- especially when they are quite different from others -- may do so orally or in a written clarification to the referee. The referee will keep it for reference when the work of all judges is assessed at the end of the season."

Ok, so the ISU said there would be no review, then apparently, they decided there would be a review (the article did not explain why?), and its the NATURE of the review that Stapleford objects to?

I don't understand what it is that she objects to since it would be impossible to review based on the old system...and since she did not offer a DIFFERENT review system that is based on the new system????

It seems to me that if a judge wants to influence things other than based on the skating, s/he would have to be EXTREME in his/her marks, would have to radically differ from the median in the HOPE that his/her marks would be chosen by the computer program.

Of course, this might define a competition, but it would make it far easier to root out corrupt judges, who can no longer play around with .1s here and there.

For this, however, there need not be a group review seems to me; for this, the appropriate people in the ISU can take a look at the marks and then the ISU can simply disenguage that judge. I would.

[Jenny]

My understanding is that this is a news report based on a press conference given by Stapleford in Spokane late yesterday. Every article doesn't have to be an in-depth analysis - some are just timely reporting of the latest developments.

Jenny