PDA

View Full Version : Most poorly judged competitions



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18

RumbleFish
07-22-2011, 05:14 AM
So if A/P were the class of the field like you suggest then how come they only won the LP and the gold medal by a 5-4 split over Lobacheva/Averbuch?

I agree with you that the right (and best) team won that night but it never should have been that close. Just another example of the Russians trying to fix all the skating events in SLC.

Remember L/A were only 3rd at Europeans yet at Olympics they missed a gold medal by only 1 judge.

A/P destroyed all their competition at the compulsories and the OD IMO. In fact, I consider their flamenco OD as one of the greatest ice dance programs ever.

Their Liberta FD had a different twist, however. I absolutely loved the dance and it's theme, but did wonder how it would be taken by the mass, especially American casual fans. I remember Tom Hammonds saying something like "How dare the [evil] french turn Dr. Martin Luther King's historic speech into a [cheesy] ice dance routine." :rofl:

A/P took a risk in that program, and it almost cost them the gold, but their skills were good enough to get themselves out of the hole.

escaflowne9282
07-22-2011, 06:06 AM
.

And I feel exactly about B/S as you do about S/P - I never saw how superior they were or how brilliant their choreography was. People go on and on about the complexity of their programs, particularly their Olympic LP, and I think that complexity is somewhat of an illusion. Moskvina is a master at creating interesting and beautiful shapes with her skaters' bodies and movements, but that doesn't mean the program is more difficult.



You honestly don't see how doing connecting steps/transitions and continuous movement is more difficult than entering all your elements from crossovers or standing in place and miming a death scene? Compared to what B&S, S&Z, and even I&Z were doing in terms of choreography , I found Love Story to be very lacking. I really can't fault a judge for not preferring it on the night, particularly in the case of the Polish and Chinese judges who made a point of giving the higher tech marks to S&P while giving the Presentation(and placement) to B&S.

I thought the two were fairly even depending upon what one prefers. At times, I found S&P to be very "put on" in terms of presentation. They skated with a great connection and bravura and were a lot fo fun to watch, but were lacking in some of the more basic tennets of presentation (line , carriage, posture extention etc.).IMHO,they really needed to take advantage of the benefit that having more complexity gave them.

Re: Lori Nichol and Love Story. For some reason I remember this backwards. IIRC it was Nichol who went to the judges and reminded them that there was no penalty for repeating a program. She even made a comment about how the Nutcracker doesn't have only one Christmas.

This, after B&S were so roundly criticized for using Chaplin as being too theatrical, and there was a rumor that Sally Stapleford had said that if they reused it for SLC, they would/should not be champions. So they showed up with Meditation.

S&Z were also in a similar boat , they were largely villified for their lack of transitions and 'paint by numbers' choreography. They commissioned new programs which were extremely complex and really went to a lot of trouble to reinvent their presentation in order to adhere to what the Western judges wanted.

Meanwhile, S&P are reusing an old even more theatrical program with less skating content than the other two ?

julieann
07-22-2011, 06:28 AM
Actually, the poster I quoted did say it bothered her that Lipinski won world and olympic titles with a flutz and suggested that that was not right.

Secondly, how do you know whether or not the judges deducted for Lipinski's flutz? Just because it wasn't clearly mapped out, like with CoP, doesn't mean that it was ignored. Christine Brennan and friends made sure that everyone in the skating world knew about Tara's flutz and I'm sure the judges weren't blind to it. They simply thought, as I did, that she had enough technical merit in other places to justify high technical scores, particularly in the long program.

If TL (or any skater) won any title because judges overlooked a skater taking off of the wrong edge, and didn't take a deduction (or any other deduction), then yes it wasn't right if they won, back then or now.

Do I know if TL or anyone was given deduction for taking off on the wrong edge? No; does anyone? At least with the COP, you can see if it was taken or not and it should be for any skater.

Any skater can have multiple deductions and still win a competition, no lucid person would debate that.

julieann
07-22-2011, 06:43 AM
You honestly don't see how doing connecting steps/transitions and continuous movement is more difficult than entering all your elements from crossovers or standing in place and miming a death scene? Compared to what B&S, S&Z, and even I&Z were doing in terms of choreography , I found Love Story to be very lacking. I really can't fault a judge for not preferring it on the night, particularly in the case of the Polish and Chinese judges who made a point of giving the higher tech marks to S&P while giving the Presentation(and placement) to B&S.

I agree, S/P look amazing for what they did, I just don't think they did as much as B/S in terms if difficulty.

Marco
07-22-2011, 08:12 AM
2002 pairs was largely similar to 1994 pairs. Logic dictates that the cleaner program between 2 apparently equal pairs wins, and the public responds to the more passionate pair. But the purists are willing to overlook the minor mistake of the significant better pair.

BTW, did that final "stand on his thigh / besti squat" thing I&Z did at the end of their free attract / deserve a deduction?

RumbleFish
07-22-2011, 08:31 AM
2002 pairs was largely similar to 1994 pairs. Logic dictates that the cleaner program between 2 apparently equal pairs wins, and the public responds to the more passionate pair. But the purists are willing to overlook the minor mistake of the significant better pair.

This This
They have been pulling the exact same thing in the ladies trying to pin Asada against Kim for years.

Since Asada became a mess after Vancouver, they brought Ando into the role. :scream:

pat c
07-22-2011, 01:53 PM
Re: Lori Nichol and Love Story. For some reason I remember this backwards. IIRC it was Nichol who went to the judges and reminded them that there was no penalty for repeating a program. She even made a comment about how the Nutcracker doesn't have only one Christmas.

This, after B&S were so roundly criticized for using Chaplin as being too theatrical, and there was a rumor that Sally Stapleford had said that if they reused it for SLC, they would/should not be champions. So they showed up with Meditation.

S&Z were also in a similar boat , they were largely villified for their lack of transitions and 'paint by numbers' choreography. They commissioned new programs which were extremely complex and really went to a lot of trouble to reinvent their presentation in order to adhere to what the Western judges wanted.

Meanwhile, S&P are reusing an old even more theatrical program with less skating content than the other two ?

I remember at the GPF in Kitchener right before the olympics, CTV interviewed a lot of the skaters and one of the questions asked was what should S&P use for their oly lp. I still remember Gwendal Peizerat saying Love Story, what else would you use? ;)

And really, we beat using Love Story to death when Carmen and ilk have been used ad nauseum? Even Thais has been used many times.

Jenna
07-22-2011, 02:57 PM
This This
They have been pulling the exact same thing in the ladies trying to pin Asada against Kim for years.

Since Asada became a mess after Vancouver, they brought Ando into the role. :scream:

Yes, she became such a mess that she won her second world title a month later. :rolleyes:

Triple Butz
07-22-2011, 06:11 PM
If TL (or any skater) won any title because judges overlooked a skater taking off of the wrong edge, and didn't take a deduction (or any other deduction), then yes it wasn't right if they won, back then or now.

Do I know if TL or anyone was given deduction for taking off on the wrong edge? No; does anyone? At least with the COP, you can see if it was taken or not and it should be for any skater.

Any skater can have multiple deductions and still win a competition, no lucid person would debate that.
Well, one poster did suggest that having a flutz would make a skater unworthy of winning major titles, so I don't really understand your defense.

julieann
07-22-2011, 07:27 PM
Well, one poster did suggest that having a flutz would make a skater unworthy of winning major titles, so I don't really understand your defense.

Clearly :shuffle:

All things being equal the skater with a perfect lutz should win over a skater with a cheated jump.

Triple Butz
07-22-2011, 07:52 PM
Clearly :shuffle:

All things being equal the skater with a perfect lutz should win over a skater with a cheated jump.

So give me an example of a situation where "all things being equal" a skater with a flutz, in this case Tara Lipinski, was propped up over another skater with a true lutz.

miki88
07-22-2011, 08:05 PM
2002 pairs was largely similar to 1994 pairs. Logic dictates that the cleaner program between 2 apparently equal pairs wins, and the public responds to the more passionate pair. But the purists are willing to overlook the minor mistake of the significant better pair.

Hmm, so do the purists always have the better judgment? I always feel that those who focus on the details tend to overlook the bigger picture. Perhaps, sometimes, the cleaner and more passionate performance should win out despite the other pair/skater having better skating skills, because the results should be based on the actual performance rather than skating skills or scoring potential.

gkelly
07-22-2011, 08:08 PM
Perhaps, sometimes, the cleaner and more passionate performance should win out despite the other pair/skater having better skating skills, because the results should be based on the actual performance rather than skating skills or scoring potential.

I agree that the performance that day should be judged, and not the potential.

However, since skating as sport is primarily a contest of skating skills, not primarily a contest of passion, I do think that the skating skills as demonstrated in the actual competition should take precedence in the judging.

miki88
07-22-2011, 08:27 PM
However, since skating as sport is primarily a contest of skating skills, not primarily a contest of passion, I do think that the skating skills as demonstrated in the actual competition should take precedence in the judging.

I think this would make more sense if the skaters in question were of different levels (i.e. comparing intermediate to an elite). But since the skaters discussed are usually among the top of their field, there shouldn't be a huge disparity between their skating skills. There is already a section to score SS in PCS components. I think it should be possible for a skater to not achieve the highest SS but still edge out for the win by achieving higher marks in other component sections.

gkelly
07-22-2011, 08:47 PM
I think this would make more sense if the skaters in question were of different levels (i.e. comparing intermediate to an elite). But since the skaters discussed are usually among the top of their field, there shouldn't be a huge disparity between their skating skills.

Sometimes there is, sometimes there isn't. On the current scale, some senior skaters deserve Skating Skills scores in the 4s, most in the 5s, 6s, and 7s, and a handful of the best in the 8s and 9s. That can make a big difference even if the other components are judged completely independently from Skating Skills.

Under 6.0 some senior skaters deserved scores in the 4s and some in the 5s based primarily on skating skills. If they did the exact same jumps and earned 4.5, or even 5.0, and the other 5.5, then the better skater making one more big mistake wasn't going to give the weaker skater the win. But with enough mistakes from the stronger skater, then yes, it could happen.

Of course the actual numbers were more fluid under 6.0.

(Under both systems you would sometimes see senior skaters earning marks in the 3s, not necessarily with any major mistakes like falls, but those would be skaters that you would think were not really "senior level.")


There is already a section to score SS in PCS components. I think it should be possible for a skater to not achieve the highest SS but still edge out for the win by achieving higher marks in other component sections.

Yes, I think it should too. The skater with weaker skating skills can also prevail via TES by doing enough successful difficult technical content, even if the average GOEs might be lower than for the successful (or possibly easier) elements by the stronger skater.

It's always going to be a process of balancing out the strong and weak points of one skater against the different strong and weak points of another. How much better was each skater in the areas where s/he was better? Under 6.0, each of the judges had to decide for themselves about every skater compared to every other, based on their own individual weightings. Under IJS, to a large degree the Scale of Values and PCS factors end up determining the weightings.

In those situations where the choice comes down to clearly superior skating skills vs. clearly cleaner or more heartfelt program, I personally believe that the skating skills should win out. And I think that it often did in many of the controversial decisions under 6.0.

But the problem is that what's clearly superior to judges sitting at ice level may look pretty much the same to nonskaters watching at home on a TV or computer screen, or even to other skaters sitting at the top of the arena.

And then of course even the judges watching up close with all their training may see things differently from each other. They may agree completely on who was better at what but disagree on how much better, or (under 6.0, and in balancing some PCS criteria) on what should count more.