Every day, one story that matters, broken down into three numbered scenarios, each with its own probability. Never fixed — it shifts as the situation changes.
Scénario
Sunday, sport
Milan-Cortina 2026: Will AI replace Olympic judges?
Will AI used to assist judges at Milan-Cortina remain a supportive tool, or will it become the primary benchmark in sports judging by Los Angeles 2028?
Publié le 11 octobre 2026
Share:
The facts
The Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics marked a turning point in the history of sports officiating. During the ice and snow events in February 2026, artificial intelligence made its official debut in judging booths. Developed in close collaboration with official timekeeper Omega Timing, computer vision technology* tracked athletes’ movements using 14 high-frequency cameras deployed around the Milan rink. The system captures up to 40,000 frames per second to analyze the exact trajectory of skates. Far from being a mere visual gadget for viewers worldwide, this tool provided official panels with real-time raw data on jump height, takeoff speed, and the precise angle of each landing.
The trial involved 4 major Olympic disciplines: figure skating, big air, halfpipe, and ski jumping. In these acrobatic sports, human judges face a daunting visual challenge. They must evaluate rapid sequences of tricks in fractions of a second, often from a restricted viewing angle and amid visual fatigue accumulated over successive runs. The computer system accurately counts the number of mid-air rotations and detects whether a blade touched the ice before completing a full turn. This automated measurement aims to eliminate unintentional human errors and reduce the disputes that frequently plague top-tier international competitions.
Understanding it
AI can measure angles but knows nothing of grace.
Artificial intelligence acts like a speed camera on a highway: it calculates indisputable raw figures, such as jump height or the number of rotations in the air. However, it cannot appreciate the beauty of a gesture, the fluidity of movement set to music, or the dramatic intensity that creates the emotional core of an Olympic routine.
The quest for objectivity responds to a recurring trauma in Olympic history. Judged sports remain regularly clouded by suspicions of favoritism or corruption, exemplified by the infamous scandal at the Salt Lake City Games in 2002. More recently, the floor exercise final in gymnastics at the Paris 2024 Games highlighted the vulnerability of manual scoring following coach inquiries over miscounted technical elements. In Milan-Cortina, the ice dance triumph of the French duo over their American rivals once again sparked accusations of bias on social media. Facing these relentless tensions, sports governing bodies are looking for an impartial, unquestionable judge to safeguard the trust of fans and sponsors.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) formalized this transition in its Olympic AI Agenda, an institutional roadmap outlining the phased integration of algorithms into competition organization and judging. For proponents of such software, such as entrepreneur Jeremy Bloom at the helm of startup Owl AI, fully automating physical criteria is the only way to ensure complete fairness. Under this technological vision, delegating technical fault detection to optical sensors would free officials from complex visual calculations. It would also make scoring scales instantly understandable to the millions of viewers watching the finals.
Yet this digital push faces significant philosophical and athletic pushback from ice sports experts. Prominent skaters and coaches argue that sport cannot be reduced to a sequence of geometric coordinates. A machine can measure a rotation down to the millimeter, but it remains incapable of sensing artistic emotion, musical interpretation, fluid transitions, or choreographic originality. Furthermore, absolute algorithmic strictness risks penalizing micro-imperfections invisible to the naked eye, discouraging risk-taking and homogenizing styles at the expense of live performance.
Understanding it
Surgical precision that threatens athletic daring.
If a thermal camera penalizes the slightest millimeter deviation in trajectory, athletes will choose mathematical safety over attempting spectacular, high-risk elements. Excessive technological rigidity risks turning skating into a soulless equation, where every speck of dust on the ice becomes a disqualifying mistake.
The upcoming Los Angeles 2028 Summer Games, scheduled for July 14 to 30, 2028, will serve as a decisive benchmark for global sports governance. International federations will have to establish the exact boundary between digital assistance and human authority. The debate pits two visions of athletic performance against each other: on one side, the pursuit of absolute mathematical truth guaranteed by infallible algorithms; on the other, the defense of human artistry and the spirit of the sport. Three distinct scenarios emerge to define the officiating of future Olympiads.
Olympic disciplines testing AI-assisted judging at Milan-Cortina 20264 disciplines Figure skating, big air, halfpipe, and ski jumping tested in 2026
Olympic judging: simple assistance or algorithmic takeover?
What we're assessing
FavorableL'IA demeure un copilote technique sous le contrôle souverain des juges humains.
StableLes fédérations déploient l'IA prudemment, au cas par cas selon les disciplines.
DégradéL'algorithme devient la référence dominante au détriment de la création artistique.
Favorable
40%
Likely
AI becomes the official technical assistant to human judges
In this first scenario, international sports bodies adopt a balanced hybrid approach combining technology and human sensitivity. The computer vision system developed by Omega Timing handles the mechanical counting of rotations, the measurement of jump heights, and the precise calculation of edge angles. This objective information appears instantly on judges’ screens as decision-support indicators. Human judges retain full final decision-making power and can adjust scores if a sensor experiences an isolated glitch. They focus entirely on evaluating artistic components, musicality, and choreographic quality.
This assistive model ensures maximum transparency without altering the essence of the Olympic spectacle. Unlike unchecked automation, the machine intervenes solely to resolve rapid factual questions, much like goal-line technology in professional soccer. Public and athlete trust in the scoring system would be strengthened ahead of the Los Angeles 2028 Games, as suspicions of collusion between delegations would lose their technical foundation while the beauty of athletic performance remains preserved by expert human evaluation.
Indicators affected
Disciplines olympiques avec assistance IA8 à 10 disciplines en 2028↑4 disciplines en 2026
The France angleFrance preserves its historic expertise in choreography while benefiting from more transparent technical judging. ↑ Rather favorable for France.
Stable
35%
Likely
Fragmented and cautious rollout varying by federation
In this second scenario, the adoption of digital tools progresses unevenly without an overarching doctrine from the International Olympic Committee. Federations governing purely acrobatic sports, such as freestyle snowboarding or ski jumping, swiftly implement 3D modeling to measure trajectories and validate complex landings. Conversely, disciplines with strong artistic traditions and intricate scoring codes, like figure skating or artistic swimming, restrict artificial intelligence to backroom trials with no direct impact on official scoring. The high cost of specialized cameras also slows adoption across smaller nations.
This disparity creates persistent regulatory ambiguity across the Olympic program. While a universal hybrid model would offer clear and uniform rules, this piecemeal approach generates confusion among fans and sports delegations. Controversies surrounding scoring discrepancies between human judges would continue to fuel post-event disputes at major international competitions, postponing structural decisions well past the Los Angeles 2028 Summer Games.
Indicators affected
Disciplines olympiques avec assistance IA5 à 6 disciplines en 2028↑4 disciplines en 2026
The France angleFrench athletes must adapt to inconsistent judging rules across different sporting events. ↓ Rather unfavorable for France.
Degraded
25%
Unlikely
Algorithms become the primary benchmark, sidelining artistic elements
In this third scenario, an obsessive drive for zero errors pushes federations to hand nearly all technical scoring over to computer vision software. Automated scores calculated by computers become the predominant legal standard, reducing human judges to rubber-stamping results on tablets. Under the pressure of this surgical scoring, skaters and gymnasts reshape their routines to maximize the geometric metrics detected by sensors. Athletes abandon expressive risk-taking and bold choreography that could trigger micro-penalties invisible to the naked eye but flagged by machines.
This technological shift turns sports competitions into displays of sterile, standardized mechanical execution. In stark contrast to the decision-support model, algorithmic dominance strips judges of contextual judgment and triggers a wave of appeals from athletes penalized for microscopic imperfections. This mathematical drift could alienate fans of creative disciplines heading into Los Angeles 2028 by erasing the human emotion that shapes the greatest moments in Olympic history.
Indicators affected
Disciplines olympiques avec assistance IA12 disciplines en 2028↑4 disciplines en 2026
The France angleThe French school, renowned for creativity and artistic interpretation, is heavily penalized by robotic scoring systems. ↓ Rather unfavorable for France.
Ordres de grandeur indicatifs pour les 3 scénarios ci-dessus, estimés avec l'information disponible à la publication et réévalués si la situation change — jamais des prévisions garanties. Learn more about our method →
Key takeaways
Will artificial intelligence push human sports judges into the background by the Los Angeles 2028 Olympic Games?
At the Milan-Cortina Winter Games in February 2026, AI was tested across 4 disciplines including figure skating, analyzing up to 40,000 frames per second to measure rotations and jump angles.
No, AI will not replace judges: our most likely scenario (40%) predicts it will remain a technical co-pilot for objective criteria, leaving artistic assessment to humans — compared to two other paths: a fragmented rollout by discipline (35%) or contentious algorithmic dominance (25%).
Signal to watch: initial official announcements from the IOC and international federations during preparatory meetings for the Los Angeles Games scheduled for summer 2028.
Slightly negative
Our assessment of the impact for France: slightly negative.the advantage of objective technical support for French athletes (40%) is offset by the risk of fragmented deployment (35%) or robotic scoring scales that penalize French creativity (25%).
Si tu devais retenir 1 chose
Expérimentée sur 4 disciplines à Milan-Cortina 2026, l'IA s'impose comme un outil d'aide aux juges olympiques sans remplacer l'évaluation humaine.
Don't miss the next edition:
For those new to the topic
Quick glossary
computer vision
Artificial intelligence technology enabling cameras to automatically analyze high-speed motion and trajectories.
