Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by caseyedwards, Aug 20, 2011.
Scott Hamilton's commentary.
It just shows how much weaker the 2010 field was then the 2002. The expectations of what it took to win were equivalent that it would take only a 7th place performance in the 2002 event to do so.
I don't know how well it would hold up in comparison to the top scoring programs under CoP. The jumps would score high of course and get positive GOE - there was only one less than perfect landing. However, the footwork wouldn't be a high level and I don't know how it would score for spins and transitions.
At least one of the spins wouldn't count -- four were required then, three is now the maximum. Those that do count would probably be level 1 or 2.
It's hard to say about Transitions scores because judges still don't seem to have reached much consensus on how to score that component.
Yes, thanks to Vagabond for posting that 2010 Lifeskate interview with Tim Goebel -- I don't remember seeing it back then. I think Tim was very articulate and insightful with his comments re the quad and the 2010 men's Olympic freeskate showdown.
Perhaps the below more recent manleywoman skatecast interview with Tim (June 2011) has already been posted and discussed here somewhere. Again, a great interview with Tim! I especially enjoyed hearing his takes on the 2002 Olympic judging scandal, the difficulties of the technical specialist job, quads in general, and again, his interesting take on the 2010 men's Olympic freeskate quad controversy @ about 1:02:10 to 1:07:40. Tim also reflects again in this interview re the possibility of quints ever being performed -- God forbid!
Well, OBVIOUSLY, since he didn't do 4/3/3 and 4/3/2 and 3A/3T etc etc.
I've never understood the concept of Yags' LP being "safe". Safe would have been like...one quad, one 3A. Or no quad. Which he absolutely could not afford to do.
SASHA WUZ ROBBED!
You mean, the footwork wouldn't be a "high" level because it actually told the story instead of containing every turn twist and hop that ever existed?
I really hate CoP footwork.
Since when do emoting feet garner points?
which was absolutely ridiculous
SOme COP footwork can be brilliant, but some is like watching grass grow. Chan and his like (Jason Brown, Adam Firus, Takahashi, etc) can have brilliant footwork pieces. Give me that over a running on the spot, hip thrust, blow kisses, I'm number 1 segment anyday.
Yagudin didn't play it safe in an absolute sense, but he played it safe comparatively because Plushenko and Honda was attempting 2 quads and 2 3axels and Goebel was attempting 3 quads, and he himself was attempting harder content earlier that season.
But he absolutely did enough to win by a mile, especially with Plushenko not controlling his destiny so he was smart with what he did and deserved the win.
It's like how people say Kwan played it safe in 1998 despite the fact she skated cleanly and did 7 triples including two Lutzes and two Loops when the previous Olympic champion had arguably 3 triples and no triple combinations, and the one before that fell-out of her Loop and Doubled her Salchow (or was it the other way around) and how the one in 2006 did 5 triples and Doubled her Loop.
It's all relative to their competition and how we usually see the skater perform.
SAY IT LOUD: "SASHA WUZ ROBBED" !!!!!!
Agreed. I'm always startled at the hate for COP footwork - some's brilliant, some's mediocre, some's awful. But it's more technically challenging and at it's best another world from what skaters were doing before. Love it.
I'm among those who aren't too enamored of CoP step sequences. I often find myself enjoying level 2/3 sequences much more than the infrequent level 4s. There's the overemphasis on upper body movement, for one - I'd like to see more importance given to the footwork and less to bending, flailing, high-kicking etc. Also, I think the current scoring encourages choreographers to put together very similar step sequences that often bear little relation to the music. And they can go on forever while skaters check off all the requirements - even relatively fast skaters. It's true that today's step sequences are often more challenging than 6.0 footwork, and that some skaters can pack in more difficult content than others and be rewarded for it, but surely we can find some middle ground between 6.0 and some of the less attractive features of the current system?
Personally, I would like to see straightline step sequences that go in something resembling an actual straight line, more originality in content and construction, at least some pretense of paying attention to the music and the concept of the program (if there is one), and less difficulty just for difficulty's sake.
I agree, and they are being more lenient with the elusive lv4 this season (see: JGP) so hopefully that will help. Still, my biggest beef with CoP is that it seems to favor quantity over quality. Concerning spins, footwork, choreography, and transitions it seems like it doesn't really matter if the positions/edge work are of good quality and reflect the music, it only matters that they are there and meet the requirements.
I actually agree with this assessment...Here is the 6th place performance from 2002. Not a Todd fan, but I think this program was a lot stronger than Evan's 2010 winning LP. Basically the same jump content, with a decent attempt but failed quad. I think this program is also one of the few times when Todd effectively expressed sensibility and vulnerability.
I think the problem with COP footwork is that it is usually not coherent with the rest of the routine and that it at times takes up almost 25% of a skater's routine. Also, the footwork is where the skaters put all of their over-emoting and posing into the routine rather than trying to actually put it throughout the program (more transitions does not equal more music interpretation). I simply think it's distracting and at times looks very ridiculous.
What criteria are you applying? Lysacek was skating to CoP, and his spin and footwork content was much more difficult than Eldredge's. If Lysacek had spent the previous quadrennium skating under 6.0, he probably would have spent more even effort than he did working on his jumps and less on his other elements.
I personally prefer Eldredge's skating to Lysacek's, but I also recognize that the change in the judging system had profound effects on the way skaters trained and developed their programs.
Obviously you cant do a true comparison of CoP to 6.0 programs, but my point is that, overall, I found Eldredge's program to be a lot stronger in jumps and presentation, as I noted specifically. In terms of footwork, Lysacek did more, but I don't think it was done well in terms of balance, line, or relation to the music. His spins were harder, but Todd's spins are classic, and he spins a little bit faster and has better centering, which I think is the hallmark of a good spinner, not the gimmicky edge changes and silly positions that garner high levels in today's rules.
Eldredge is far and away a better spinner than Evan or anyone else in the last decade or so apart from Lambiel. I am sure the COP rules for level 4 spins would be easy for him to meet, and he would still do them better than anyone else.
I don't disagree, but Triple Butz and you were originally comparing their actual programs, not their overall ability or their potential.
Hasn't there been a rule change such that only one of the two footwork sequences will be scored?
That certainly will create more of a middle ground. I think it is a very positive change because it will allow skaters to focus solely on music and interpretation in one sequence. This could contribute to Performance and Choreography, will skaters with better basics/more difficult footwork will still be rewarded for it in the other sequence.
The second (choreo) step sequence does receive points, assuming it meets the minimum requirements to count as a step sequence. But unlike the first sequence there are no levels, so unlike the leveled step sequence there is no benefit to doing all different kinds of turns or turns in both directions or half the sequence on one foot or using modest or full upper body movement.
Everyone gets the same base mark of 2.0 for the choreo step sequence, with the only difference being the GOEs, positive or negative.
So this would be the opportunity to show off whatever kinds of steps the skater does best and can earn pluses for on quality or, say, quickness or originality, and to enhance the choreography and interpretation and earn pluses and higher PCS that way.
It's only been a year so far, and last year some of the skaters probably had their programs choreographed before the rule was published, so hopefully going forward the skaters and choreographers will get the hang of using the choreo step sequence for its intended purpose.
I agree with all my heart. While overall level of SS is improved, current criteria incourages senseless flailing, unrrelated to music and expression. Often I want to scream- "Stop the endless windmill with your hands, bending and kicking and listen to your music!" Some compromise must be found, or it becomes a parody.
I think it'll depend on what sort of content and execution will get high GOEs. I know in theory GOEs and levels are not based on the same things, but if the judges score the choreo steps in a similar way to the regular step sequences, I'm not sure we'll see much differentiation between the two.
Separate names with a comma.