Lead
— At the Milano Cortina Winter Olympics, Madison Chock and Evan Bates of the United States finished second in the ice dance after judges awarded gold to Laurence Fournier Beaudry and Guillaume Cizeron. The International Skating Union (ISU) issued a defense of the panel’s scoring after one judge’s free-dance marks became the focal point of criticism. The result and the ISU response have renewed calls from athletes and fans for clearer, more transparent judging procedures.
Key Takeaways
- Madison Chock and Evan Bates won the silver medal in ice dance on Feb. 11, 2026, in Milan, finishing behind France’s Laurence Fournier Beaudry and Guillaume Cizeron.
- The American pair entered the free dance trailing by 0.46 points and left the event without gold due to the judges’ combined scores.
- One judge, Jezabel Dabouis, gave markedly higher free-dance marks to the French duo; Fox News reported her panel marks were nearly eight points higher in the free dance for the winners relative to other judges.
- The ISU issued a statement defending the panel, saying score variation among judges is routine and that it stands by the results and the integrity of the process.
- Chock publicly urged more transparent vetting and review of judges, saying skaters deserve a “fair and even playing field.”
- More than 14,000 people had signed a Change.org petition by Friday calling on the ISU and IOC to investigate the scoring; the petition highlights public concern over subjectivity in judging.
- Team officials said Chock and Bates left the competition proud of their performance and would consider an appeal while emphasizing they would not change how they skated.
Background
Figure skating has long combined technical measurement with subjective evaluation, leaving room for disagreement when panels evaluate execution and program components. The ISU scoring framework assigns numerical values for elements and program components that judges rate; panels typically include multiple judges to dilute individual bias. High-profile judging disputes have occurred in previous Olympics and world championships, prompting periodic rule adjustments and calls for greater transparency.
The two duos involved are among the sport’s most prominent teams: Cizeron and Fournier Beaudry are established international medalists with world titles, while Chock and Bates have been leading U.S. contenders seeking their first Olympic ice-dance gold. That competitive context intensified scrutiny of the Milan free dance, where small point swings can decisively alter medal outcomes.
Main Event
On the night of Feb. 11 at the Milano Ice Skating Arena, both teams delivered polished free-dance programs under heavy public and media attention. Judges scored the free dance using standard ISU protocols; when results were posted, the French pair edged the Americans overall. The margin and individual judge marks prompted immediate questions from athletes, broadcasters and fans.
Fox News and other outlets highlighted that one judge’s free-dance marks significantly favored the French team compared with the rest of the panel. Media reports noted that if that judge’s marks were excluded from the calculation, the Americans would have been placed first. That arithmetic became central to online reaction and the petition drive demanding an inquiry.
In the aftermath, Chock called publicly for more accessible explanations of judging and for routine review of officials’ performance. She said that fairness and credibility require judges to be vetted consistently, not only after controversial outcomes. Chock and Bates also said they were satisfied with their week’s preparation and performance even as they weighed options for appeal.
Analysis & Implications
The episode exposes the persistent tension in judged Olympic sports between technical scoring systems and subjective component evaluation. When a single judge’s marks move the outcome, questions arise about panel composition, oversight, and error-correction mechanisms. The ISU’s defense — that variability among judges is normal and that mitigation methods exist — underscores that the federation views the result as procedurally sound, but it does not silence critics who want clearer public accounting.
If the Americans pursue a formal appeal, the process will hinge on ISU and IOC rules for score review and the narrow grounds under which results can be amended. Historically, appeals that challenge judges’ evaluations on purely subjective grounds succeed rarely; changes typically require clear procedural error, arithmetic mistakes or evidence of misconduct. That reality makes a successful overturn unlikely unless new, demonstrable errors are produced.
Beyond the immediate outcome, the incident could accelerate policy discussions over transparency: publishing more detailed judge-by-judge rationales, improving real-time scoreboard explanations for viewers, or regularly auditing officials. Any reforms will require balancing judges’ independence with accountability, and they may take multiple seasons and governance votes to implement.
Comparison & Data
| Metric | France (Fournier Beaudry/Cizeron) | USA (Chock/Bates) | Noted Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre–free-dance margin | Leading by 0.46 points | Trailing by 0.46 points | 0.46 |
| Single judge free-dance swing (reported) | Judge’s marks favored France by nearly 8 points | Judge’s marks ranked USA lower by nearly 8 points | ~7.9 |
| Final medal outcome | Gold | Silver | — |
The table above uses figures reported in media coverage: the 0.46-point pre–free-dance gap and the near-eight-point divergence attributed to one judge’s free-dance marks. Those numbers illustrate how a single panel score can outweigh marginal pre-program differentials in closely matched contests.
Reactions & Quotes
“It is normal for there to be a range of scores given by different judges in any panel … we have full confidence in the scores given and remain committed to fairness,”
International Skating Union (official statement)
In the ISU statement, the federation emphasized established mitigation methods and expressed confidence in the panel’s integrity while stopping short of addressing calls for procedural changes.
“It would definitely be helpful if it’s more understandable for the viewers, to just see more transparent judging … the judges be vetted and reviewed,”
Madison Chock (interview with CBS News / Access Hollywood)
Chock framed her appeal as a demand for routine review and clearer public explanation rather than a personal attack on officials. The U.S. pair also signaled they may consider an appeal, a step that would move the matter into formal ISU/IOC channels.
Unconfirmed
- Whether a formal appeal will be filed by Chock and Bates remains undecided; the pair said they would “consider” an appeal but had not filed paperwork at the time of reporting.
- Any investigation by the ISU or IOC into the judge’s marks had not been announced publicly when this report was published.
- The precise arithmetic effect of removing a single judge’s marks depends on the ISU recalculation procedure and has not been independently verified by an official ISU re-computation released to the public.
Bottom Line
The Milan ice-dance outcome and the ISU’s subsequent defense have reignited longstanding debates over subjectivity and transparency in judged sports. While the federation asserts that variation among judges is expected and mitigated, athletes and fans call for clearer public explanations and routine review of officials to preserve confidence in results.
Practical change — whether stronger vetting, greater score transparency, or procedural reform — will require formal action from the ISU and likely the IOC. For athletes like Chock and Bates, the immediate focus is weighing an appeal against the reality that overturning subjective evaluations is difficult without evidence of procedural error.
Sources
- Fox News (media report summarizing ISU statement and athlete interviews)
- International Skating Union (ISU) (official governing body of international figure skating)
- CBS News (broadcast interviews with athletes)
- Change.org (public petition platform referenced in coverage)
- The Associated Press (wire reporting credited in original coverage)