Did the Olympic Ice Dancing Judges Rob American Skaters of Gold? The Scandal That’s Sparking Fury—and a Deeper Debate
American fans are up in arms, but this controversy goes far beyond one gold medal. Here’s the full story—and why it’s reigniting a debate about fairness in Olympic judging.
On a glittering Wednesday night in Milan, French ice dancers Laurence Fournier Beaudry and Guillaume Cizeron clinched Olympic gold in their debut Games as a pair. But as the scores flashed across the screen, a wave of outrage erupted from American fans. Their outcry? Madison Chock and Evan Bates were robbed! The U.S. duo, adored for their electrifying performances, lost by a razor-thin 1.43 points. Their free skate, a dazzling toreador-themed routine, had left audiences breathless. Yet, the French pair’s performance was equally mesmerizing, with Slate’s Chris Schleicher hailing it as “frankly magnificent” and the night’s most aesthetically stunning display.
But here’s where it gets controversial... While the French duo edged out the Americans in total score, five of the nine judges actually preferred Chock and Bates. Eight judges awarded the Americans over 130 points—except one: France’s Jézabel Dabois. Dabois scored Chock and Bates at 9.5 across all three program components, their lowest mark of the night. Meanwhile, she gave her fellow French skaters a sky-high 137.45 points, 7.71 more than the Americans. J’accuse!
Hold on—before we grab our pitchforks, let’s understand how Olympic judging works. After a 2002 scandal (also involving France, coincidentally), the International Judging System (IJS) was introduced to replace the opaque 6.0 system. The IJS evaluates skaters on two fronts: technical elements (jumps, spins, etc.) and program components (artistry, performance). Technical scores are based on difficulty and execution, with the highest and lowest marks discarded to prevent outliers. Program components, more subjective, are scored on a 10-point scale in 0.25 increments, with the same outlier rule applied.
And this is the part most people miss... While the IJS aims for fairness, it’s not foolproof. Take Dabois’s scores: her low marks for Chock and Bates became part of their final average because other judges’ scores weren’t extreme enough to be tossed. Meanwhile, an American judge, Janis Engel, gave Chock and Bates their highest score—and the French pair their third-lowest. National bias? Maybe. But it’s not just France and the U.S. A judge from Spain gave their home team the highest score, as did judges from Italy and Canada. According to Skatingscores.com’s “National Bias-O-Meter,” nearly every 2026 Olympic judge favored their own country’s skaters—except, ironically, Finland. (Way to go, Finland!)
Here’s the bigger issue: A 2020 study by Vincent Dumoulin and Hugues Mercier found that national bias in skating judging is “endemic” and often larger than other judging errors. Even if it’s unconscious, the perception of bias undermines trust. The International Skating Union’s (ISU) current monitoring system? “Utterly inadequate,” say Dumoulin and Mercier.
So, what’s the solution? Some suggest judges should recuse themselves when scoring their countrymen. Others propose neutral judges, challenge systems for skaters, or even real-time feedback à la American Idol. And maybe, just maybe, judges with a history of bias (like China’s Huang Feng, suspended in 2018) shouldn’t be allowed to judge again.
But let’s be real—was bias the reason Chock and Bates didn’t win gold? Probably not. The scores were too close to blame any single judge. Yet, this scandal highlights a systemic issue: the ISU must do better to ensure integrity. As for me? I’m off to get my Finnish passport—I hear their ice dancers deserve a gold medal too. Just kidding... or am I?
What do you think? Is national bias an unavoidable part of judging, or is it time for a revolution in Olympic skating? Let’s debate in the comments!
