Can [pretty] fair judging be a double-edge sword?
In comparison to the other national championships that took place this season, scoring at U.S. Nationals was tame, especially when you look at Russians and Canadians. The winners at the other two events were outrageously overmarked in both GOEs and Program Components. And not to say that there weren’t inflated marks at U.S. Nationals, but they were more internationally realistic relatively speaking. The reason for the overzealous judging is to give their skaters a numerical bump in their scoring reputation before a huge competition like the Olympics or Worlds. But of course, when there are sports reporters out there who are comparing Patrick Chan’s score at Canadians with Evgeni Plushenko’s score at Russians with Jeremy Abbott’s score at U.S. Nationals, it does the readers (and the IJS) a disservice. What is supposed to be a more objective scoring system gets utilized pretty much like the ordinal-based 6.0 system in the past. What was good to see was that pre-competition favorites were
Related Questions
- Is it fair to say that, as a human, you enjoy the chaos and beauty of wilderness and nature, but not enough to prefer it over right angles, sterilized order, pathological security and rigorous predictability?
- How do I enter items for judging and blue ribbons into the Fair?
- Where can I learn more about Science Fair judging on the web?
