PDA

View Full Version : Rachael's plans



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32

FunnyBut
07-13-2011, 02:52 PM
FunnyBut, lol maybe some bee repellant will help. lmao

Good suggestion. She might be allergic to bees, hence the spastic arms and hands.:yikes:

AxelAnnie
07-13-2011, 03:26 PM
^....and she is probably slightly hunched over in her effort to make herself smaller and thus skate UNDER the swarm! Totally makes sense now.

barbk
07-13-2011, 04:51 PM
;-) Just to revisit the Ladies step sequence (bees or not, LOL!) video montage from 2011 Worlds, Leonova (2.44 pts), V. Helgesson, J. Helgesson, Korpi, Czisny, Vanut, Hecken, Makarova, Gedevanishvili, Murakami, Phaneul, Asada, Kostner, Ando, Kim, thru Flatt (5.76).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2LcatX5L7k

That was really helpful -- but it reminded me of why I HATE the new definition for what constitutes a step sequence. For the most part, they've lost all the passion and excitement that a great step sequence could add to a program. I can see why Flatt's was the best -- but why did Hecken and Makarova earn the same score? I thought Ksenia's moved a lot better than Sarah's did.

(And boy do I miss some of the powerful step sequences from women in the past, where you'd hear the crowd roar as one would finish.)

Aceon6
07-13-2011, 05:10 PM
(And boy do I miss some of the powerful step sequences from women in the past, where you'd hear the crowd roar as one would finish.)

For me, the thing that destroys new ones is that skaters get points for hunching over, leaning, and other strange body positions. The 6.0 ones were spectacular when they built speed across the ice. Slute's one foot full length sequences come to mind. Can't do that today as it would leave too many points on the table.

gkelly
07-13-2011, 05:18 PM
I can see why Flatt's was the best -- but why did Hecken and Makarova earn the same score? I thought Ksenia's moved a lot better than Sarah's did.

Interesting question (but nothing to do with Rachael's plans, oh well)

http://www.isuresults.com/results/wc2011/wc2011_Ladies_SP_Scores.pdf

Both earned level 3.

Makarova got eight +1s for her step sequence and one +2.
Hecken got eight +1s and one 0.

After trimming the high and low scores, they each end up with all 1s.

Two judges thought there was enough of a difference in Makarova's favor to give a higher GOE for that element (2 vs. 1 or 1 vs. 0). The rest may or may not have seen a difference, but with only a narrow range of GOEs to use for most of the good but not exceptional step sequences, there wasn't much room to reflect that difference. Or did you think either of those sequences should have earned lower than 0 or higher than +2?

But there's another place where moving across the ice well can be rewarded.

Makarova did earn considerably higher component marks. My guess is that the skating skills demonstrated in the step sequence contributed especially to the Skating Skills component. Ditto, perhaps, for the Interpretation.

A point in Hecken's favor that might have helped her earn all those +1s: She put the one-foot section at the end of the sequence. Unlike most skaters who use the one-foot option, she couldn't use speed from preceding power stroking to carry her through the one-foot section. What speed she had there, and it was actually better than the more complicated earlier steps, was all generated by steps within the sequence and by the edge changes and turns within the one-foot section.

Ziggy
07-13-2011, 05:54 PM
The 6.0 ones were spectacular when they built speed across the ice. Slute's one foot full length sequences come to mind. Can't do that today as it would leave too many points on the table.

The technical demands limit the performative aspect of step sequences.

But it's not like "in the good old days," it was much different.

The majority were nothing special, the minority were outstanding. That is the way things go and that is still so today.

gkelly
07-13-2011, 08:44 PM
The majority were nothing special, the minority were outstanding.

If they were all outstanding, they wouldn't stand out. ;)

TheIronLady
07-14-2011, 08:01 PM
Pardon me if I missed the explanation in this thread, but is it true Rachael's whole family is moving to CA with her?

If true, this makes me think she and her forminable mother are quite serious about sticking it out.

FSfan107
07-14-2011, 08:11 PM
Pardon me if I missed the explanation in this thread, but is it true Rachael's whole family is moving to CA with her?

If true, this makes me think she and her forminable mother are quite serious about sticking it out.

Yes, they are moving with her. My understanding is that they are originally from that area of southern California.

MacMadame
07-14-2011, 08:12 PM
Stanford is in NorCal though.

madm
07-14-2011, 08:30 PM
Yes, they are moving with her. My understanding is that they are originally from that area of southern California.

Rachael's parents are moving back to Del Mar (near San Diego) where they used to live many years ago. Rachel will be attending Stanford University (San Francisco area), about 500 miles away. They are hardly "moving together" - they are moving at roughly the same time and will be a 10-hr drive away from each other. Rachel's dad is a high-level manager with a scientific company and is able to live anywhere in the U.S. and fly where he needs to be for work. There is no particular reason for the Flatts to stay in Colorado Springs.

FSfan107
07-14-2011, 08:38 PM
Rachael's parents are moving back to Del Mar (near San Diego) where they used to live many years ago. Rachel will be attending Stanford University (San Francisco area), about 500 miles away. They are hardly "moving together" - they are moving at roughly the same time and will be a 10-hr drive away from each other. Rachel's dad is a high-level manager with a scientific company and is able to live anywhere in the U.S. and fly where he needs to be for work. There is no particular reason for the Flatts to stay in Colorado Springs.

Ok, I didn't know they were moving to different places in California. My knowledge on the geography of California is sorely lacking. I thought Stanford was in southern California. BTW, I was in no way being critical or judging what the Flatts were doing and was just responding to the question posed by TheIronLady.

MacMadame
07-14-2011, 09:08 PM
My knowledge on the geography of California is sorely lacking. I thought Stanford was in southern California.

:lol:

Don't worry, you aren't the only one. When I moved to California, my mom would call me, worried, every time she heard about anything bad happening anywhere in the entire state! Eventually she learned to distinguish SoCal from NorCal but even then there were a few phone calls that I had me :huh:

Sasha'sSpins
07-15-2011, 02:51 AM
:lol:

Don't worry, you aren't the only one. When I moved to California, my mom would call me, worried, every time she heard about anything bad happening anywhere in the entire state! Eventually she learned to distinguish SoCal from NorCal but even then there were a few phone calls that I had me :huh:

My younger brother and sister are out in California and every time there's a tremor or heaven forbid an earthquake the whole family calls them to make sure they're okay. And my brother insists he and his wife live no where near a fault line. :lol:

Iceman
07-15-2011, 04:29 AM
Glad stanford doesn't start classes until late September. Gives Rachael a lot of time to get ready for next season.