Is the judging system corrupt?

[Big_rock_show]

After reading Angela’s public comments, I’m wondering if any judges are completely impartial and unbiased since many of them have relationships with gymnasts, coaches, or other judges.

For reference:

US WAG Olympic trials Night 2 (LIVE DISCUSSION) Olympics / Worlds / World Cups

Sooooooo Apparently, a USAG judge posted this NOT SO cryptic dig at Riley. Which maggie haney then liked: [image]

 

[Puffin]

Totally unprofessional and shows that there is something seriously wrong if a judge is trashing a gymnast on social media like a 13 year old mean girl

I would hope that this breeches usag rules but I won’t hold my breath :roll_eyes: :roll_eyes:

 

[Gymfan93]

Every job I have ever worked at has a social media policy, and this would have broken it.
Given that until recently USAG didn’t even seem to have a reporting child abuse policy, I won’t hold my breath either.

 

[RedBirdie]

USAG could revoke her membership. However, it is really the National Association on Women’s Gymnastics Judges that holds the power here. They’re the body that credentials all WAG judges (not USAG). If they revoke her credentials, she can’t judge any more, for any gymnastics body (USAG, NCAA, AAU, etc).

 

[Big_rock_show]

So the National Association of WAG judges - do they do an adequate job at holding their members accountable?

ETA: Oh wait, they even have their own code of ethics

https://nawgj.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Corrected-2-Code-of-Professional-Responsibility-October-2020.pdf

 

[FrolovasDoubleLayout]

All judges shouldn’t be painted with such brush based on the ridiculous post of one individual. NAWGJ judges range from those who judge compulsory levels through to level 10. I have some colleagues who are brevet judges who are also members of NAWGJ. This judge is obviously not a FIG brevet judge - just some (insert adjective(s)) individual who feels the need to kick someone when they are already down - so that should describe her personality and demeanour.

Remember that FIG judges can be sanctioned if they are perceived as biased by the JEP program and this can have serious impact on judging “careers”. I would doubt (hope) that any judge would blatantly and overtly show bias towards any athlete. Covertly I cannot say, but it is a sport that has a level of subjectivity involved (What is artistic to some is maybe less so to others). Internationally most judges have been gymnasts and/or trainers so they know what goes into any performance not just on the day, but in the years before.

 

[Denn]

USAG might actually have some way to punish her. Judges have to be USAG members in good status. Besides the background check and safety certification, judges are subject to being on the banned list.

Honestly, I suspect that this is the reason we don’t see more judges posting stuff like this, even semi-anonymously.

@FrolovasDoubleLayout She’s not a brevet… I mean USA only has like 22 WAG brevets, and they are mostly former athletes and loooong-time judges. Meanwhile the men’s program has 75. LOL.

Totally shifty stuff. There are undoubtedly other strong judges prohibited from participating. Talk about a culture issue…

 

[Big_rock_show]

Thanks for the info!!

And perhaps now that the culture of coaching has been looked at more critically, it would be a good idea to put the culture of judges under the microscope as well? Or maybe they’re afraid they’ll run out of judges if they do that?

 

[falcon9]

There are undoubtedly other strong judges prohibited from participating. Talk about a culture issue…

This 100x… there needs to be some changes.

 

[mnesiptolema]

On a somewhat related note, I will put on my conspiracy theorist’s hat and say the random draws for Worlds and Olympics rarely look all that random.

 

[irichluck21]

Why do you say that?

 

[Doug1233]

I’ve heard that NBC knew the US prelims draw in advance…

 

[irichluck21]

That is interesting. I wouldn’t be surprised.

 

[tempest]

I’ve heard that NBC knew the US prelims draw in advance…

where did you hear that?

 

[shirai]

 

[Doug1233]

Thank you @shirai comin up with quick receipts!

 

[irichluck21]

Yes.

But Spencer got that one wrong.

FIG didn’t say the draw was being conducted June 30, they said the draw would be released June 30. The actual draw was conducted on June 28.

It was rather late this Olympic cycle.
Normally the draw is set in stone and Olympic Trials mirrors the Olympic draw. In 2016 the US ladies started on floor exercise so they rotated starting on floor night 1 an night 2 of Trials.

 

[Doug1233]

Got it. Makes sense.

 

[RAFIKI]

Someone replied to Spencer in that thread saying that time had been on NBC’s website for months. Citation via wayback machine needed I suppose.

 

[mnesiptolema]

Since I brought it up, I felt compelled to hunt for some evidence of my earlier statement about random draws. So I wrote down the U.S.’ subdivision for every Worlds/Olympics for the last two quads. Of course, my results below mean nothing if qualification order for Worlds is seeded rather than by random lot. However, I had a look at the 2021 World Champs instructions uploaded on the FIG website and they are clear qualifications order is drawn by lot, which I assume is not a policy that has changed.

Here are my findings. Apologies for the formatting (I don’t know how to make a table).

YEAR - # SUBDIVISIONS - US’ SUBDIVISION
2013 — 5 — 1, 3, 4 (individual worlds)
2014 — 12 — 5*
2015 — 12 — 10
2016 — 5 — 4
2017 — 5 — 5
2018 — 11 — 5*
2019 — 12 — 12
2021 — 5 — 3

(*) Subdivision 5 was second-last on day 1 of qualifications in both instances.

Edit: removing the maths because it’s wrong. Will return with correct probability calculations!