<소트니코바가 김연아를 이긴 이유, 러시아인어서 점수 부풀리기?>
Adelina Sotnikova skated the program of her life on Thursday, landing monstrously huge triple jumps and capturing the Olympic gold medal . If only she deserved it.
Experts and skating fans were baffled to see the results , particularly after South Korea’s Kim Yu-na sailed through two difficult, effervescent programs. Queen Yu-na, as she is called, should have locked up figure skating’s top prize. But she inexplicably ended up five points behind.
<세계 피겨 전문가들과 팬들을 어리둥절하게 만든 소트니코바의 금메달 획득은 어이가 없다. 김연아는 두개의 어려운 피겨 경기를 성공적으로 보여줘서 누구나 보기에도 그녀가 금메달을 따는 것이 확실해 보였다.>
A petition on the Web site change.org calling for an investigation into the event’s judging had 1.6 million signatures as of 9 a.m. Eastern time. Officials said the petition was generating the most traffic they’d ever seen.
Controversial decisions in skating are nothing new, but this travesty calls into question the sport’s complex judging system that was supposed to make skating more transparent.
Au contraire. Instead, the International Skating Union has created a system that cloaks judges in anonymity and hides individual ballots in a Swiss safe. Somehow this was supposed to prevent corruption. But events like Thursday’s show the current system can be just as easily manipulated as the previous 6.0 system. It also keeps judges away from any public scrutiny, making it easier to cheat and virtually impossible to hold judges accountable for stupid decisions.
<오심과 부패를 막겠다며 도입한 익명 판정 제도는 지난번의 6.0 점수제 판정 시스템보다 깨끗하지 못하며, 이번 경기를 통해 우리는 새 판정제도가 얼마나 쉽게 썩어빠질 수 있는지를 극명하게 알 수 있게 되었다.>
The trouble has been making observers stew during Patrick Chan’s shocking domination of the men’s field over the past three years leading up to these Olympics despite flawed performances. The instances of fluffing scores were so obvious that fans started calling it “ Chanflation .” Now these problems have been made apparent on the world’s biggest stage. Anonymous judging must end.
That skating finds itself in another scandal besmirches what was a great women’s competition, featuring compelling performances and contrasting styles. If the judges had done their jobs properly, this morning we’d all probably be talking about Japan’s Mao Asada and her master class in jumping technique, surging her placement from 16th to sixth. Or the sad wilting of Russian wunderkind Julia Lipnitskaia , who finished fifth. Or the marked improvement of the United States’ Gracie Gold , who finished fourth.
<명백하게 엉덩방아를 찧은 율리아가 5위를 했다는 것도 황당하고 아사다마오가 16위에서 6위로 껑충 뛴 것도 의아스럽다.>
Most of all we’d be talking about the Queen, the most ferocious women’s figure skater in the history of the Olympics. She put on a textbook short program, displaying a newfound sophistication and maturity on the ice. Under tremendous pressure, after five solid long programs from her nearest competitors, she returned the next day and skated almost as well.
<올림픽 역사상 가장 굉장한 실력을 가진 김연아는 피겨 스케이팅의 교과서라 불릴만한 연기를 선사했고, 다른 5명의 경쟁자들과는 비교할 수 없는 실력을 보여주어 피겨 스케이팅 계의 여왕이라 불릴만 하다.>
(At this point, there are probably some readers who are saying the talk of “sophistication and maturity” is what makes the sport silly. Those readers are wrong. Those terms are tangible, exemplified in the depth of a skater’s edge — made noticeable by a lean of the body — and the patience not to rush various movements on the ice. )
If you watch every four years, here’s a quick synopsis of how judging works: There are two marks, one for technical elements and one essentially for artistry. Every jump, spin and section of footwork is evaluated by a technical specialist who will assign a base value for the program. Judges then evaluate how well those skills are performed, on a scale of minus-three to three.
The artistic mark — known as the component score — evaluates skating skills, transitions, execution, choreography and timing. Judges evaluate those criteria on a scale of 1 to 10. In both marks, the judges’ scores are averaged and weighed.
Analyzing the scores, Kim’s marks were generally on point. But the judging was most questionable for Sotnikova. Her short program featured tremendous power and speed, but it was the easiest of all the top short programs.
<피겨스케이팅의 점프 착지, 판정 등 여러 요소들이 있는데 이러한 부분을 자세히 설명해주고 있습니다. 판정상 김연아의 판정에는 별 가산이 없었는데 소트니코바는 별로 힘들이지 않고도 엄청난 점수를 땄다.>
Her component marks were as high as Kim’s, but the idea that Sotnikova is anywhere as close to an artist as Kim is laughable. They are both good, yes, but there are levels of good. One is good in the way you call your grandmother a good dancer because she does the cha-cha slide at the family reunion. The other is a prima ballerina.
<김연아도 잘했고, 소트니코바도 잘 했다는데에는 이의가 없다. 그러나 소트니코바가 김연아에 근접한다거나 필적한다고 말한다면 웃기는 소리다. 소트니코바의 실력은 어느 모로보나 김연아 근처에도 미치지 못한다.
"잘 했다"는 것에도 등급이 있다. 김연아의 잘함이 프리마돈나의 발레 비유할 수 있다면, 소트니코바는 집에서 춤추는 할머니의 차차차 실력 정도의 잘함이다.>
In Thursday’s long program, Kim sailed across the ice, landing jumps with the same speed with which she entered them. She had one wonky landing on her hardest jump, the triple Lutz. She emoted in ways we had never seen her do before. She was a true woman on the ice.
Compared to the intricate transitions that came with Kim’s program, Sotnikova’s might have struck people as seeming a little junior. How right they were — Sotnikova skated this program at the junior level. And with it, she won the Olympics. In the long program, again, inexplicably, her presentation marks were inflated to be just as good as Kim’s.
<김연아의 점프 착지는 매우 훌륭하다. 점프와 착지의 스피드가 똑같다. 우리는 그녀의 연기를 그녀 이전에는 한번도 본적이 없을 정도로 훌륭하다. 그녀는 빙상 위에 존재할 수 있는 오로지 단 한 사람이다.(최고다). 소트니코바의 점프는 겨우 주니어 레벨 수준이다. 그리고 그 수준으로 그녀는 올림픽 금메달을 땄다. 황당하게도 점수상에서 소트니코바의 점수는 김연아와 유사하거나 많다.>
Were we seeing “Russiaflation” in this women’s event? In my mind, absolutely. No peace was found, then, reading a description of judges in the New York Times : one was suspended on the suspicion that he was fixing results in the 1998 Olympics; another is the wife of the head of Russia’s skating federation.
The mind doesn’t have to stray very far to conjure up controversies that could have led to this result. But even worse, the anonymous judging system provides no absolution or chance for judges to mount a defense.
<러시아인이기에 그녀의 점수가 부풀려졌을까? 심정적으로는 100%다. 뉴욕타임즈에 의하면 심판 중 한사람은 러시아 빙상연맹 회장의 부인다. 점수 판정에 문제가 심각하지만, 익명 판정제도는 아예 이러한 부정 부패가누구의 잘못인지 판단할 수 없게 만든다>
Credit needs to go to Sotnikova, the most unaccomplished women’s champion in the history of the Olympics. She is a protoypical Russian female figure skater, with an emphasis on powerful strokes across the ice and explosive jumps. She completed seven triple jumps; Kim completed six. But there is a reason that Russians have never won the Olympics in women’s figure skating — because the sport has always been more than jumps.
<소트니코바는 올림픽 역사상 가장 형편없고 실력이 없는 올림픽 금메달리스트이다. 그녀는 러시아 여자 피겨스케이터들의 전형일 뿐이다. 혹자는 소트니코바는 7번 점프했고 김연아는 6번 점프했다고 하는데, 러시아 선수들은 늘 그래왔으나, 여태 한번도 올림픽 피겨 메달을 딴 적이 없다는 것이다. 피겨스케이팅은 점프 숫자로 메달을 결정짓지 않는다.>
On Thursday, a 17-year-old Russian skater with no medal in any world championships had a great moment in her life. It would have been an accomplishment for her to receive a medal of any color. But we can no longer see Sotnikova in that context. Now her moment has been tarnished by a flawed judging system and the politics of her crazy, dramatic, addictive sport
<올림픽을 빼고, 세계 대회에서 단 한번도 수상해보지 않은 소트니코바를 앞으로 우리가 세계 대회에서 볼 일은 없을 것이다. 17세 소녀인 그녀에게는 올림픽 금메달이 대단한 것이겠지만,
그녀의 메달은 엉터리 판정과 정치적 부패로 얼룩진 것이다.>
출처:비공개카페
"소트니코바와 김연아는 모두 잘했다. 하지만 잘한것에도 레벨이 있다. 가족모임에서 할머니가 라인댄스를 추실때 잘했다고 하는 것이 있고, 또 하나는 프리마 발레리나다."