I wrote this many moons ago so don't expect a masterpiece. LOL. Anyway, it was a short editorial piece I wrote for political web site which doesn't exist anymore. I needed something to help fill up this forum..


SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND…FIGURE SKATING?

Salt Lake City, Utah –
Monday, February 25, 2002

A dark cloud of hot air hung over the Utah Mountains this week overshadowing Park City and the 2002 Winter Olympic games. It was not the sudden movement of the jet stream bringing a warm breeze in an otherwise frigid terrain but cries of foul play from former political foes spoke stronger than friendly competition of international athletes. Words of ‘judging misconduct, improprieties, collusion, and bloc voting’ became household terms not heard since Cold War rhetoric of the 80’s or some spy novel long lost since the dissolution of old Soviet Russia. Watergate became Skate gate and anti-doping meant unfairness and finger pointing as if a lost medal was more important than the fight against terrorism and reduction of WMD. One recalls how the US stared intently at their Russian counter parties in 1989 Moscow while signing a reduction in arms supplies knowing full well they were increasing deliveries to Afghan rebels and Russia amassed thousands of soldiers whose intent was to increase their sphere of influence through the central Asian nation.

The argument is that people lie, deceive, and change their minds. It is that which separates human thought from the scientific method – and for that matter the animal kingdom. Throughout history, it was the separation of church and state brought about by new ideas in scientific development. That moved nations from being based on common religious ties to secularity, capitalism, and the almighty evil – ‘mass production’ as experienced in Industrial England. Fast forward a hundred years, the scientific method and communal norms have switched roles; technology is the defining measurement by which conflicts are settled. The scientific method is defined by reliability, accuracy, and efficiency.

To understand this shift and relevance to modern sport, we must understand this change from religious norms to scientific thought. Anthropology tells us a community is based on the common bond or norms between groups of individuals. A large group of similar communities form a society. Societies are usually determine by economic or geographic boundaries; hence, we call it nation building. Thus, one nation is different than that of another. Norms of one society is different between nations. Ah, the development of nationalism and patriotic fervor. The problem this causes is that one group feels their ‘norms’ are more or less morally correct than the other group. Thus, this conflict must be solved by an independent adjudication. In the land of norms, this is solved through a court of law or international law, which hopes its precedents, is acceptable throughout nations. The assumption is that every nation must have some common rules of behavior, which determines what action is morally right or wrong. In Olympic Sport, the International Olympic Committee runs that. The problem here is that each nation’s Olympic Committee believes the IOC is not using the right measurements and therefore, resulting in ‘discriminatory judging improprieties’. The scientific method is not implemented in every sport and leaves open the opportunities to cry ‘cheats, unfairness, and political finger pointing’. The scientific method does not care about norms but facts as facts which are determined based on verifiable technology which cannot be ruled out whether you like it or not. Where an event is timed or measured, uncertainty based on opinion need not exist. Everyone can see whether you did it or not. Period. Skate gate? No way. Who cares about artistic expression and technical merit! Not weight lifters, that’s for sure.

One can go as far as implementing the scientific method on figure skating. With today’s technology, computer simulations can determine the perfect triple axle or quadruple spin by calculating the arc, spin, and landing based on historical performances deemed to receive perfect scores. The performance of skaters can then be matched against the computer model and any variance can be calculated to determine deduction of points against the simulated performance. In essence, it becomes a regression model with the difference in the predicted and actual results calculating the overall score. Not going to work they say because everyone will argue the legitimacy of the model variables and assumptions of the platform. Hence, the reference to the court of law in which international norms form the basis of what is morally and legally correct across nations. Likewise, IOC must determine the legitimacy of arguments of all national Olympic Committees to form legal and impartial determinants of judging standards. What variables are to be included, assumptions to be used, point deductions, and others will be argued by all sides to favor their athletes to get to the podium. Ah, the scientific method in progress…

In domestic court of law, it is believed the side whose preponderance of evidence better helped their presentation in front of a judge won the day for their client. Over the years, this has been believed to be a partial method as those who have more money can buy a better argument by hiring better experts. To equate all sides, science was introduced to break down the economic barrier. Forensic science and development of DNA matching helped those who could not help themselves. This erased the premise that a better argument won the day because science does not argue. It leaves room for the truth to be discovered. For if science determines without a doubt that a guilty person be jailed, then let it be as the most expensive defense cannot dispute an undisputable fact. Likewise, for sporting competitions to be judged fairly, the processes of opinions must be eliminated for the scientific process. Gone will be judges for opinions leave room for uncertainties and the opportunity for disputes. Yes, that’ll save us money so we can invest in better servers. Cool, say the twenty-something’s who grew up with Intel chips and ATI graphics. No way, say the stereotypical middle-aged politicians who believe the old method still rule. The old boy’s network? More politically correct the old person’s network.

Let’s rule that as humans we agree to disagree. When Jaime Sale and David Pelletier of Canada were awarded the gold medal in pair’s figure skating after three days of so-called decision-making process, two sides erected their ugly heads. Those who supported the decision says technically they were better and deserved it. The opposing side says artistic expression accounts for 50% and the Canadian pair should not receive the gold medal, as the Russian interpretation was ‘better’. The missing factor is the scientific method. We have all lived through this from performance reviews at the office to why a parent likes you better than me. When person’s opinion becomes involved it is tainted because as human beings we understand favoritism, deception, and betrayal. Our opinions are based on thought processes we learned as a child based on norms taught by our parents and what we see in the media. Until technology rules our lives 100%, the accuracy of judging – be it in sport competition or landing a gold star beside our name for being good – will forever be in dispute.

For those who believe in the scientific method, the movement has minimized the difference in discretionary practice over the years but its acceptance still has a long ways to go. On the final day of the Olympics, the gold medal cross country skier, Johann Muehlegg, for Spain and the gold medal cross country skier, Larissa Lazutin, for Russia had their medals stripped for using a new drug detected by updated methods in anti-doping. Apparently, the new drug enhances development of red blood cells, which stimulates oxygen buildup. This prolongs endurance in muscle use as in a long distance race. Russia cried foul as the scientific method was deemed arbitrary and unreliable. Ha, we say for they have finally been caught red handed.

In the end, the IOC’s decision will be final despite appeals. Science you see does not favor countries or athletes. It produces results that are reliable, accurate, and efficient. Too bad opinions aren’t. Go figure...

.

I am a big big fan of figure skating ever since i was little. I would watch and tape every competition.

Before the kerrigan/harding debocle there was great corrupton in skating. People were given points on looks not talent and the judges favored those families who came from money and kissed but. When Harding went to so far as hurt another skater it shed light on many of the past mistakes in judging. Harding was the first American woman to land a triple axel yet everyone remembers her for something horrible.

I was never a fan of kerrigans although i never wanted her to get hurt but I did notice her double jumps and awkward movements were not as difficult as hardings. I did not believe that kerrigan was a great skater although the judges loved her.. I did htink harding was a great skater but she didnt fit the profile of a ice princess and that the judges disliked.


Later on to the later issues of Suryia Bonaly and the judges basically saying she sucked when she should have gotten first prize and the figure skating competition where the Canadians cried foul play .. it shed further light on how corrup figure skating really is.

With all these scandals it took away the magic of figure skating for me. I still love to watch though.