So, how to judge? While the Canadian pair had a flawless performance, did it really win over the harder and equally artistic program of the Russians? How does a minor fault in a harder program balance out in the final score?
To add more judges and randomly select scores is the silliest idea I've ever heard. Why not look at a scoring system that factors in all the elements of skating? Have a base score that has clear rules for deductions like we have now, but then add to that technical difficulty and artistic merit measures that are specific and clear. Interestingly enough, sports like snowboarding do this! They have determined the factors that make up the performance, and they score those factors separately. If a judge had the opportunity to show how they came up with the score they did, I think there would be less complaining about the scores, and less opportunity for a judge to hide their biases. While we may disagree with the final result at times, the judge can point to each factor in their score. They would be less likely to cheat if they knew their scoring could be scrutinized specifically as well.
But it will be what it will be - traditions die hard, and I doubt that judging reforms will be significant or meaningful any time soon.
I am pleased that Sarah Hughes won the gold, even though I was hoping that Michelle Kwan would win. I was sorry that I had to hope that Irina would fall (a couple of times!) so she could win! Michelle was robbed in Nagano, even though folks don't talk about that, since Tara Lipinsky is an American - the proof of Tara's skating has been in her career after the Olympics. It will be interesting to see what happens with Sarah's career - she's very talented and appealing; I certainly wish her the best.
