Following the 2026 Winter Olympics, the results of the ice dance competition have many questioning whether the current judging system is truly fair. The French duo, Laurence Fournier Beaudry and Guillaume Cizeron, finished ahead of the American team, Madison Chock and Evan Bates. This result sparked outrage among fans, experts, and athletes alike, as many believed the French team had far too many obvious mistakes to come out on top.
Their anger only intensified once the scoring sheets were released, and it became apparent that a certain judge had drastically different scores than the rest.
The results make it clear that the judging was biased and Chock and Bates should have won gold.
Olympic ice dancing is scored using two aspects: technical element scores, and component scores. Technical scores are based on the difficulty of each skill attempted; they are not affected by the actual execution of each skill. Element scores then build off of that. Each judge is capable of giving up to a 5 on each element based on execution. This is when factors such as synchronization and balance come into play. Using these scores, an average is calculated, excluding the highest and lowest scores, and that number is used to rate each skill. Component scores are based on things such as composition, presentation, and skating skills. Component scores primarily score the choreography and presentation of skills. All of this means, the technical difficulty of each skill is just as important as the performance itself.
When breaking down the scores, it only becomes more difficult to understand how the French pair came out on top. The French pair completed a total of nine elements of which the base difficulty scores added up to 46.79. After the judges’ element and component scores were added, the final score came out to 135.64. The American team also completed a total of nine elements of which their base difficulty scores also added up to 46.79. The difference is that their final score ended up at 134.67. This led to significant outrage, as it seemed quite obvious that the French team nearly lost balance on a lift and were not synchronized on their twizzles. The American team, however, seemed to have little to no noticeable error. So how exactly did these scores end up favoring the French by 0.97 points?
When calculating the score awarded by each judge for the French team, none of the scores seemed out of place. However, when it came to the American team, I found that the first judge’s scores varied greatly. Their score for the French duo was exceptionally higher than the score they awarded to the Americans. They awarded Fournier Beaudry and Cizeron a score that was 7.71 points higher than the score they awarded to Chock and Bates; a drastic gap compared to any other judge. I also found that they awarded the French pair a score of 137.45, which was the only score the first judge gave out that was over 130.
Is it possible that this judge simply preferred the French routine more? In theory, yes. But, after looking at a few more score sheets, this judge was Jézabel Dabouis of France. It’s no coincidence that a French judge ranked the French team significantly higher than any others. The judging of this event was clearly biased. When given the opportunity, anybody would take the chance to push their country to the top, and that’s exactly what happened. Either Dabouis’ scores should have been entirely disregarded from the final score calculations, or the teams should have been given an opportunity to perform again without Dabouis on the judging panel. Chock and Bates were obviously a level above the French and it doesn’t make sense that they wouldn’t see results that reflected that. If Dabouis’ scores had not been included in the final calculations, they would have won the gold medal.
If the IOC doesn’t get this right, there will continue to be unfair and biased results at the expense of talented athletes.
