INTERNATIONAL SKATING UNION PRESIDENT CAUGHT BY AUDIOTAPE

ISU Session Record Shows Cinquanta Insisted New Rule is Only a "Project"

Washington, DC. An audiotape from the June 2002 Ordinary Congress of the International Skating Union (ISU) reveals that ISU President Ottavio Cinquanta insisted more than 40 times that his proposed new system of judging, the radical Code of Points, was "only a project" to be explored through testing. However, when the updated ISU Constitution and General Regulations was issued in December 2002, it included the Code of Points as Rule 121 paragraph 3, in direct contradiction to Cinquanta's assurances that this system was to be a project only, "not a rule." The audio recording, transcript of the recording, and text of the new rule are available at http://www.frogsonice.com/skateweb/articles/oc-project.shtml

Skatefans for Accountability and ISU Reform (SkateFAIR) has paid careful attention to changes to the judging system proposed and implemented by the International Skating Union. In the 2002-03 season, elite skaters have already experienced two revolutionary changes to the judging system:

• Judges at ISU competitions now judge anonymously. Scores are posted in sequence from lowest to highest for both the technical and presentation marks. Neither the skaters nor the public can identify which judges gave which marks, nor match a particular technical mark with the presentation mark given by that judge. Only television networks covering the events have access to the ordinals that actually rank the skaters' performances; there are no public postings of the ordinals or any other information about the judging.
• From a pool of up to 14 judges, only a certain number of judges' scores count in the scoring. Again, no one knows which marks count and which do not; the selection is supposedly made by computer. SkateFAIR organized itself first and foremost to oppose judging system changes that remove accountability and threaten any remaining credibility of the sport.

The proposed Code of Points has been adopted in flagrant violation of the ISU Constitution, which requires a two-thirds majority vote by the Congress on a specifically-worded proposal, submitted well in advance of the time of consideration. Since the Congress was told it was not voting on a rule, there is no way to know how many members would have voted for it under the correct circumstances, and if they would have constituted a two-thirds majority. Since the Congress ended, one mathematician, a paid consultant to Skate Canada who was handpicked by the ISU, has analyzed the system and is now promoting it.

As the most radical change ever proposed to figure skating judging, the Code of Points is controversial, assigning as it does numerical values to the major elements in skating programs. SkateFAIR has not taken a position on the Code of Points. We do vociferously protest the deceptive manner in which this so-called "project" was presented to the ISU Congress, in brazen violation of the ISU rules and Constitution.

A SkateFAIR member, Katherine Godfrey, who earned her PhD in statistics from Harvard and is employed as a statistician in Cambridge, offered an analysis of the statistical issues raised by both random judge selection and the Code of Points. The attached analysis points out anomalies and unintended and perhaps unfair results that can arise from the new rules. Additionally, George Rossano, a skating judge and reporter with a PhD in mathematics, has posted another analysis at that substantiates some of the difficulties with the new systems(the link on Mr. Rossano's site is currently offline). An article by Sandra Loosemore, a PhD in computer science, entitled "What if the Secret Computer Crashes?," analyzes historical examples of computer problems at major competitions and calls into question the over reliance on technology presupposed by random, anonymous judge selection. (http://www.frogsonice.com/skateweb/articles/crash.shtml) . Articles in Science magazine and in the Chronicle of Higher Education also question the new system.

Dr. Godfrey's analysis offers this example of issues with random, anonymous judging, by using two sets of marks from a recent international competition:

Skater A:

Technical Merit	4.6	4.7	4.8	4.8	4.8	4.9	4.9	5.0	5.1	5.1	5.1	5.2	5.2	5.2
Presentation	4.9	5.0	5.1	5.1	5.1	5.1	5.1	5.1	5.2	5.3	5.3	5.3	5.3	5.4

finished ahead of:

Skater B:

Technical Merit	4.6	4.6	4.9	4.9	5.0	5.0	5.1	5.1	5.3	5.3	5.3	5.3	5.4	5.5
Presentation	5.2	5.2	5.2	5.3	5.4	5.4	5.4	5.5	5.5	5.5	5.5	5.5	5.7	5.7

despite the fact that "a simulation study randomly pairing 9 sets of technical merit and presentation marks for each skater produces the better placement for Skater B 90% of the time." In this particular instance, the scoring of the two skaters did not affect the podium. Looking forward, however, to more close competitions among elite skaters with the potential to medal, the possibilities illustrated here are certainly of concern. SkateFAIR calls for any and all scoring systems, including the present system, to undergo comprehensive testing and evaluation by qualified, independent and impartial third-party statisticians.

###

Media Note: SkateFAIR will protest the ISU leadership at 5:30 PM on March 28, 2003, outside the MCI Center on F Street NW in Washington DC where the World Figure Skating Championships will take place. For more information, please e-mail Naomi.Paiss@widmeyer.com and check www.skatefair.org..

Accompanying Document:

Statistical Consequences of the ISU's Proposed Cumulative Scoring System by Katherine Godfrey, PhD