[Olympic][b]WE WERE ROBBED!!![/b]

[Desdichado]

This is figure skating at its base level. It is not written into the essence of figure skating that the judges dictate it entirely. That is why there has been such an uproar about this recent judgement. People want to know why the judges voted the way they did. They want to see a breakdown: This pair did 2 very difficult jumps, 3 medium, and 1 easy. That counts as so many points. If they fell that is minus so many points. If they are equal on all these criteria then the judges may debate about who did a better tripple.

Nope, you still have people deciding that this particular triple axel is better looking than that triple axel, and judging things based on entirely subjective criteria. You can't remove the entirely subjective element from events like figure skating. No matter how hard you try to grind them down to something objective, you still have some guy deciding that this sit-spin was better executed than that sit-spin for whatever aesthetically pleasing reason he finds important that day.

Again, there are objective criteria, despite your ignorant and repeated claims to the contrary. The Russian did not just "not look as good" as the Canadian, he put both feet down and momentarily lost his balance. Again, I was hardly an expert, but watching the men's competition today, the commentators were a lot more explicit about what elements were grounds for "mandatory deductions" in the technical scores. As much as you say otherwise, it's very clear that there is a codified and objective set of criteria relative to judging the technical merit of a figure skating program. Now, about the artistic aspect of it, you are entirely right.

However, one thing that I'm surprised to note no one has picked up on yet: just because you define a sport a certain way does not make it so. The Random House Dictionary defines a sport as an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature. If what you think is that figure skating is corrupt, then fine: say so, but you don't have to force us all to accept your worldview about what a sport is, or what role your definition of a sport has to do with what should or shouldn't be in the Olympics.

The judges are in fact supposed to look at the height of the jumps as well. Something as easily measured by someones eye as the person to cross the finish line first. It just has to be judged responsibly with an account or reason for the scores. Perhaps it can't be done. Perhaps there are too many calculations to make in short time they have during the routines. If this is the case then maybe figure skating needs to be changed. But nothing so drastic as be removed. (I hope).

A good many of these questions were answered in NBCs broadcast tonight for the men's short program (real shame about both Eldridge and Stojko, BTW.) Contrary to Storm Raven's continued assertions, there are objective judging criteria related to what elements are included in the program and what is not. NBC also showed these elements of both pairs doing all of those elements from the same angle. There should have been a mandatory deduction from the Russians due to the less than perfect, in a quantifiable manner, mistake of the Russians. However, three of the judges gave the same technical merit score to both pairs. In my opinion, that's a clear case of bad judging, but that is the judges fault, not figure skating as a whole. The criteria were right there; they just didn't follow them.

As to the judges not being able to catch the elements, Scott Hamilton confirmed tonight that they do have instant replay capabilities at their desk.

 

[Pielorinho]

A riddle I learned as a kid:

Q: How many legs does a sheep have, if you call its tail a leg?

A: Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn' t make it a leg.

A new riddle:

Q: Is figureskating a sport, if you claim that sports are only competitive activities with objectively defined winners and losers?

A: Yes. Claiming that's the definition of sports doesn't make it the definition of sports.

Honestly, anyone whose best thing to get worked up about is the inclusion of figureskating in the Olympics isn't trying very hard. And if I ever heard about a (for example) hockey player who was mad that she got the same kind of medal as a figure skater got, I'd hoot and holler.

Daniel

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

Its not a sport. Get it out of the Olympics. What next? Oil painting as an event?

Actually, I know for a fact that medals were awarded for painting competitions during some of the early olympics. It wasn't actually an olympic event though.

And IMO Sale and Pelletier were robbed! (I hope I am not dragging this thread too far out of topic with this comment...)

 

[Moulin Rogue]

Four of the judges who voted for the Russians are from former Soviet or communist countries; the four who voted for the Canadians are from countries in the Western bloc. The French judge was the exception, going with the Russians -- somewhat ironic, considering that Pelletier is French-Canadian.

And now it's being reported (apparently by USA Today, though I can't find any mention on their site) that the French judge admitted to people that she'd been ordered to vote for the Russians. The second half of this alleged deal will come when the Russian judge votes for the French pair in ice dancing.....

 

[omedon]

Storm Raven

Reading your reply to my last post it has occured to me that either (a) you either completely missed my points or ignored them or (b) Did not fully read my post.

So I will not push them any longer. But there is once thing I think it is very important that you see the signifigance of.

Nope. What I'm saying is that my criteria might or might not include poker as a sport, but that it reasonably excludes judged events. Since I am not interested in debating the merits of whether poker and shuffleboard should be included in the Olympics, your entire line of reasoning is irrelevant. [/B]

You are proposing a new criteria for a sport. One that you would arguably like others to adopt as their own definition I would guess or you wouldn't be arguing so strongly for it.

This definition is quite different than how the dictionaries define the sport, as Tysr and Joshua Dyal have pointed out. So you must prove to us why is better.

Your definition seems to be as of yet any non-judged event where the primary movement is human powered rather than mechanical.

But if this simple definition allows for such obvious, at least to me anyways, non-sports such as scrabble and poker to fit under the category of sport then it is a bad definition. If it doesn't work for poker. Including it as a sport when it should properly be excluded, then it doesn't work for anything even skating and the definition should be thrown out.

An arguement is deductively valid if and only if it is not possible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. And an arguement is deductivley sound if and only if it is deductively valid and the premises are true.

In other words if the premises lead to a false conclusions then the arguement isn't valid. And if your premises are false then your argument isn't sound.

If your arguement doesn't follow then these laws then it is illogical and equivalent to nonsense.

So it is of PARAMOUNT importance that you show people that your arguement is logical if you want them to take it seriously. This means proving that it doesn't lead to false conclusions. Which means that it includes things like shuffleboard and poker being considered sports.

Until then it is very much YOUR OPINION and IS JUST AS OR PERHAPS MORE subjective as the judging you seem to have such a dislike for.

I don't think I will be making any more replies, I was very dissapointed in your last post. You seemed to be at be attempting to make a reasonable arguement in your previous responses and brought up some valid points. However by reading this last post I have begun to seriously doubt that you truly understand what an arguement is (Perhaps you think it is a shouting match?). And as this appears to be the case I have no motivation to continue on with it as very little is to be accomplished. I found your point of view of what qualifies as a sport interesting and had hoped that you may develope it further so it could be put under scrutiny. However I now realize you have very little interest in doing so and would instead prefer to reduce things to a shouting match.


Here are some examples of invalid, valid, and deductively sound arguements for your perusal where P=Premise and C=Conclusion

Ex. 1 - Deductively Invalid: True Premise False Conclusion
P1: Some dogs have brown fur
C1: All cats are black

Ex. 2 - Deductiveyl Valid but not sound: - False Premises False Concluseion
P1: All dogs are black
P2: All poodles are dogs
C1: All poodles are black

Ex. 3 - Deductively Sound - True Premise True Conclusion
P1. All Mamals have bones
P2: All humans are Mamals
C1: All humans have bones

I hope these help you out.

I no longer see any point in pushing the matter any further. If you can't recognize the importance of sound arguements then I would ask that in the future that you avoid engaging in them.

 

[Corinth]

One Vulgar Display of Power Deserves Another

Hire hitmen, kill the offending judges and put the medals where they belong. Repeat the process until either the IOC actually cleans up the event or the IOC dumps figure skating from the games.

 

[MythandLore]

WOW! BOMBSHELL!

AXEL OF EVIL: SOURCES SAY RUSSIAN, FRENCH JUDGES MADE DEAL
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/winter02/figure/story?id=1330977
Brennan, one of the world's leading authorities on figure skating, says that reliable sources within the ISU told her that a collaboration between the French and Russian judges did happen.
"When (figure skating officials) investigate, I think they're going to find out that the French judge worked a deal with the Russians," said Brennan, one of the world's leading authorities on figure skating.

"There's absolutely no doubt that the Canadians should have won. Their 'Love Story' program was just marvelous. The performance was perfect.

"The Russian pair made small errors including a small mistake on one jump. To me it's clear. It should have been crystal clear for the Canadians."

Brennan said she watched the tapes again and the Canadians' performance only gets better.

"I was shocked the moment I saw the scores and I'm still shocked," she said. "I ran into three international judges, all of them judging at the Olympics, within three minutes after the competition. 'This is an outrage,' they said in unison. I've never seen judges come up to a reporter -- as opposed to going away from them -- and say this is an outrage."

 

[Bran Blackbyrd]

A riddle I learned as a kid:

Q: How many legs does a sheep have, if you call its tail a leg?

A: Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn' t make it a leg.

A new riddle:

Q: Is figureskating a sport, if you claim that sports are only competitive activities with objectively defined winners and losers?

A: Yes. Claiming that's the definition of sports doesn't make it the definition of sports.

Hahahahahaaa!

Pielorinho = Win.

While I'm awarding Pielorinho here the gold medal I'd like to say that for someone so concerned about what constitutes a sport, Storm raven, you seem to have little concern for exhibiting good sportsmanship. You have consistently belittled a number of the other posters in this thread, something that was entirely unnecessary. I imagine that people have read some of my posts and thought I came off sounding a bit abrasive, but I never set out to hurt people's feelings or make them feel small. That crap has no place in a clean debate, just like this post shouldn't have had to have been made in this thread.

My apologies for this post, delete as necessary.

 

[Winterthorn]

Hey! Thanks to all here for your support behind our "winning" pair. It's really reassuring that many non-Canadians agree that there is something truly unfair about the results last Monday night. Much appreciated.

I witnessed the whole spectacle on late night CBC. In fact, I was too nervous for our pair to watch them--I caught the story on first replay--I've seen too many performances by various skaters dashed by high stress foul-ups. I'd rather see the replay than watch the potential for disaster actually unfold my before me. Then again, I'm one of those individuals who can't stand the suspense and has to read the last page of a novel long before I'm supposed to...

So, the drama continues--it seems this story has legs... [ Thanks, MythandLore!]

Gotta stay tuned to this one... Given the previous vicious feeding frenzy by the world media upon the I.O.C. [Incompetent Overlords of Corruption] in the last few years, I'm surely this'll become a drama of "Olympic proportions."

I just hope when the dust settles Jamie Sale & David Pelletier benefit from poetic justice in their favour. Those cretinous judges be d****d. Thorvald's right: the Russian pair has to live with tainted gold medal because of the bad judging. I don't know what's worse, losing the gold medal knowing you should have won, or winning the gold medal knowing you shouldn't have won. Ouch.

Alas, the while "show" must go on, I think the "story" is vastly more interesting... LeCarré anyone?

 

[Tsyr]

Of course I have to support Canada Winterthorn... it's the 51st state, don't ya know? j/k

In all fairness, rivalries aside in sports, nobody likes to see sports rigged... It takes the fun away. Why even bother participating if that's the case? For myself I would be as upset if the situation was reversed and the canadians were handed an undeserved gold.