Did Bonaly deserve any of of the 93, 94 and 95 worlds?

Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by Lnt175, Sep 6, 2013.

  1. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    7,144
    620
    113
    I personally think she should've won the '93 World Crown. Those were the cleanest, most inspired performances she'd ever given.

    I agree with Judgejudy, because I remember the commentators even from the US at '93 Worlds gushing forever about the heretofore unknown Baiul, her tragic backstory, her presence on the ice, etc.

    Sometimes I wonder though if Baiul won because TPTB didn't think Bonaly in any way deserved a world championship due to her complete inability to fit into the classic Ice Princess box
     
  2. Jaana

    Jaana Well-Known Member

    3,884
    168
    63
    Did Bonaly deserve any of of the 93, 94 and 95 worlds?

    No, in my opinion. Her skating looked horrible with no flow at all. She was a good jumper.
     
  3. briancoogaert

    briancoogaert Well-Known Member

    12,553
    1,336
    113
    Surprinsingly, not in 1993. I find her 1993 Worlds programs to be skated with better flow than 1994 and 1995, and more polished.
     
  4. lao1234

    lao1234 Member

    95
    9
    8
    Perhaps TPTB were responding to her poor skating skills and as Marco said, the jumps were muscled through, although at times extremely impressive. But do you really want to encourage jumps from a standstill?
     
  5. smarts1

    smarts1 Well-Known Member

    2,103
    135
    63
    ^ In her later years before she started to fizzle out, her jumps were no longer done from a standstill and used to have some decent flow out of them. It was just in some of those earlier years that they were like that.

    Either way, she definitely deserved the 93 title. 94 title, no. Her going on the podium and doing that was ridiculous because Sato outskated her even in technical terms. But yes, I think she was basically just protesting all the c*** that had happened to her those past two seasons. There is an argument for 95 Worlds. Surya was nearly perfect in terms of jumps, but Lulu also had everything (besides a doubled lutz). But of course, in the end, the artistic mark is the tie breaker in the LP, so the judges went with Lulu. And wasn't Surya also 4th after a terrible SP?
     
  6. bardtoob

    bardtoob Well-Known Member

    8,233
    1,294
    113
    At 1989 Worlds, her skating skills were like an 11 year old skater that had been skating since she was 7 or 8, and by the 1998 Olympics, her skating skills were like a mature skaters. However, her ruptured achilles tendon in 1996 really ended any hope of anything beyond a consistent 3F, although she could still do 3T-3T. I do think she should have been 3rd or 4th in the SP at Nagano, but it was clear she would not be able to maintain that position in the LP.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2013
  7. lulu

    lulu New Member

    5,615
    342
    0
    Thanks for the info.
     
  8. caseyedwards

    caseyedwards Well-Known Member

    6,590
    282
    83
    EM Swift of SI said a lot about how baiul was so good artistically for someone her age. Said Bonaly improved but no match for baiul. Hersh was mostly about how bad Kerrigan did but didn't say anything skepitical about baiul sweeping the artistic mark. Just 2 examples.

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1137514/2/index.htm

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...iple-jumps-world-figure-skating-championships

    The story was Kerrigans total collapse as she was the one who was supposed to win! Then because she bombed so bad it just wasn't much at issue who the winner was and if deserving because they skated better than Kerrigan!
     
  9. KimGOAT

    KimGOAT Active Member

    759
    47
    28
    I agree it is a shame too bad she accepted the medal. If she had refused to then the silver could have gone to Szewcenko and the bronze to Kiellmann which would have been the right result anyway. Bonaly's sucky skate that night didnt deserve any medal, let alone the gold. Then Bonaly also probably would have been banned from ISU skating forever for refusing to show up for a Worlds medal ceremony, and Bobek and Kwan would have gotten the silver and bronze at next years Worlds, where Bonaly was gifted another silver. No harm, wouldnt be missed, and good riddance. So like you I wish she had just not taken the medal at all.
     
  10. KimGOAT

    KimGOAT Active Member

    759
    47
    28
    Her jumps did not get much height, had very bad and improper technique, and entered and exited with no flow. It is a myth she was ever some great jumper. She could pull around and stand up alot of hard jumps, will give her that, but that doesnt make a great jumper.

    She did maybe deserve the 93 World title, but to talk about 94 or even 95 is a joke, and shows how delusional she and her "team" had gotten to her abilities by then.
     
  11. lulu

    lulu New Member

    5,615
    342
    0
    Thanks so much for the articles
     
  12. PairSk8Fan

    PairSk8Fan Banned Member

    330
    42
    0
    1993. It was absurd how low her technical scores were compared to what the other skaters received for what they skated. And Surya had just beaten Oksana at Europeans. The judging was suspect.
     
  13. Erin

    Erin Well-Known Member

    5,247
    964
    113
    I wouldn't consider her FP "nearly perfect in terms of jumps" at all. I re-watched her skate just to make sure, and the toe in her triple flip-triple toe was badly cheated (over half rotation done on the ice), the salchow in her triple toe-half loop-triple salchow was also cheated, amd her second triple lutz was two-footed. That leaves her with 4 clean triples, less than Lu Chen's 5. And I know that cheats didn't matter as much during 6.0, but Surya's were bad enough that the CBC commentators were spotting them in real time.
     
  14. judgejudy27

    judgejudy27 Well-Known Member

    13,704
    787
    113
    That is what was remarkable about her 93 Worlds performance. ALL her jumps were completely clean which is very rare for her. Had she done that performance at the 94 Olympics she would have deserved to win there too (although even less likely the judges would have given it to her than at the 93 Worlds). I know marks are relative to your competition but how on earth were Bonaly's technical marks at the 95 and 94 Worlds much higher than the 93 Worlds which was by far her best technical performance of the three. Also how were her technical marks further ahead of Sato and Chen, than they were over Baiul in 93, when of the three Baiul was the furthest behind in technical caliber of performance on those 3 occasions. Really indicates the ridiculous judging, both at times in or against Surya, and in or against certain other skaters more than others too.

    I did love her 95 Worlds LP though btw and might have scored her a bit higher on the 2nd mark which might have given her the title over Chen, although her technical marks were generous and her short program marks were generous, so the final result was probably just all things considered.
     
  15. Aussie Willy

    Aussie Willy Well-Known Member

    18,148
    2,174
    113
    For me she was the skater who on rewatching a competition I would fast forward through. Without knowing much about skating at the time, I just didn't like her and thought her programs were boring.

    With regards 1993, Baiul was a natural artistic and had that it factor that you cannot teach. Bonaly was hard work (in terms of her skating and having to watch her).

    Even someone like Lu Chen was much more appealing and attractive than Bonaly and should have been placed higher than her in 93.

    Bonaly was an example of a skater who thought she was much better than she was.
     
  16. David21

    David21 Well-Known Member

    2,035
    166
    63

    Being "boring" or "attractive" or "natural artistic" or having the "it-factor"...that all has very little to do with how skaters should be judged by the judges.
     
  17. Aussie Willy

    Aussie Willy Well-Known Member

    18,148
    2,174
    113
    And now as a judge, there are a number of other factors that I would consider why I still don't think she probably should have won a world title which include skating skills (which were dreadful), the way she used the music and the lack of quality in what she did which would all come into play in the components and presentation side of things. Back then skaters could win events based on their presentation too.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2013
  18. JJS5056

    JJS5056 Active Member

    263
    134
    43
    This thread is rehashed every year and the consensus is almost the same: 1993 was her best shot, 1994 was not even close (in favor of Sato), and that 1995 could have gone either way, but most feel Chen was a deserving champion.

    When it comes to 1993, I think this must be a case of judging past competitions by standards that just weren't being applied at that time. The triple-triple craze didn't come to the forefront of discussion until Slutskaya came roaring back to form in 2000 to challenge Kwan. Even Lipinski's 3r-3r and 3t-3s were rarely mentioned in the discussion of how she stacked up against Kwan. Looking back now, it is clear that Tara's technical merit was well ahead of Michelle's both years, but especially in Nagano, and yet, the thought at the time was that a clean Kwan had more than enough content to still win. It was Kwan's tentativeness that was, and is, consistently cited as the reason for her loss, not Lipinski's combinations.

    In 1993, very few ladies were even attempting a full set of triples, let alone 7 triples with triple-triple combinations or sequences. It's impossible to now try and guess what value the judges put on going that far to the technical extreme. Also remember that just 1 year prior, the best athletes were throwing triple axels, while the "artist" Yamaguchi was doing 3z-3t. It's very possible they didn't consider something like a 3t-3s sequence all that impressive, which was the most difficult thing Surya attempted in Prague.

    Also, attempts at 7 triples were a fairly new trend. Yes, that became a standard later in the decade and the top ladies were expected to complete 7, with 2 lutzes preferably, but that just wasn't the norm in 1993. So, Oksana, showing the full set of triples, and doing them all better in terms of quality, than Surya, may not have been judged as being all that inferior to Surya.

    This was also a time when the SP was known as the technical program and the professional scene was at its peak with its technical + artistic program format. There were also no "well balanced program guidelines." In any case, while it may have been expected, it might not have been that big of a deal for a LP to be missing spins, combos and footwork. Baiul demonstrated that she could complete those elements in her technical program, whereas her LP showcased her other strengths which were landing the other set of triples and interpreting music. I don't think for a minute that someone as savvy as Zmievskaya would've let her go out there with a program that didn't fit the rules/standards of the time, when she was more than capable of doing all of those elements. I just truly don't think it was that and big of a deal, and the commentary of the events supports that- Bezic mentions the lack of combos (likely in comparison to Bonaly), but we never hear criticism of her spins, the lack of footwork, etc. at any point during her career.
     
  19. bardtoob

    bardtoob Well-Known Member

    8,233
    1,294
    113
    But none the less, it was very important under the 6.0 system.

    Yes, but field moves beyond picking up one's feet to the rhythm of the music can be taught. To bad nobody taught Oksana :slinkaway
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2013
  20. Mafke

    Mafke New Member

    1,125
    220
    0
    Yeah. To drag up a favorite dead horse of mine (take that dead horse! and that! and that!)

    Baiul and Bonaly in 1993 were the poster children for why simply dumping figures wa not the very best idea the ISU ever had. I think both would have benefitted enormously from (in Bonaly's case) having to seriously work at them or (in Baiul's case) having to learn them (and different turns) in the first place.

    Bonaly was showing some real progress in 1993 and the judges not recognizing that probably had a lot to do with her backsliding in the next few years. Why should she believe the CW about what was wrong with her skating when the judges seemed so eager to promote someone with serious gaps in her skills?

    Baiul had a _huge_ store of natural talent but her skating skills (in her short competetive career) were not especially great. But to paraphrase a judge at the time : Who the hell was looking at her feet?
     
    bardtoob and (deleted member) like this.
  21. Aussie Willy

    Aussie Willy Well-Known Member

    18,148
    2,174
    113
    They both would have to learn figures. Figures were dropped out of competition in 1990. Bonaly would have had to do them as Junior competitor. I daresay Baiul probably did them early on but by the time she was competing at Senior level she would have dropped them.

    Anyone know more about figures for lower levels back then?
     
  22. bardtoob

    bardtoob Well-Known Member

    8,233
    1,294
    113
    Having rewatched programs for both the Chen Lu thread and Bonaly thread, it is glaringly obvious that Lulu's LP was constructed significantly better than Oksana's and Surya's programs, and I don't think Oksana or Surya could have replicated what Lulu was doing. Of course, Oksana was a better spinner and Surya was a better jumper, but Lulu was the better skater.
     
  23. bardtoob

    bardtoob Well-Known Member

    8,233
    1,294
    113
    You're going to love this :p

    Here is footage of Surya doing figures at the senior level at 1989 Euros captured on video because VANESSA RILEY DID NOT LIKE HER COSTUME :rofl:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=D8ECupWBess#t=154
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2013
  24. Mafke

    Mafke New Member

    1,125
    220
    0
    Bonaly did do them through 1990 (horribly by all accounts but she did them) but she knew they were on the way out and probably decided to get horrible marks for a couple of years and make her big move starting in 1991. I think she would have been a very different skater had she had to take them seriously.

    Baiul almost certainly did not do them. The USSR (or so I've read) did not have any kind of figure testing system, skaters mostly learned through MITF and only practiced the figures needed for competition. Since the decision to dump figures was made in the summer of 1988 and there was certainly no idea that Baiul would be competing internationally before 1991 she most certainly did not receive any training in them as no one around her would have thought she'd ever need them.
     
  25. JJS5056

    JJS5056 Active Member

    263
    134
    43
    I agree that looking back, Chen had by far the best programs and skates in 1993. I think her programs did her no justice... Her SP was dreadful, and the LP, while intricate, didn't show off her strengths IMO. Her Claire de Lune the following year showed she was already capable of being incredibly lyrical. I think a softer LP would've benefitted her. The Nausicaa program was a bit heavy and seemed to weigh her down. It almost made her seem a lot older than she was... things that shouldn't have mattered, of course, but hard to believe she was just a year older than the energetic Baiul.

    In terms of skating skills, can someone point me to specific examples of skaters other than Lu Chen who were showing examples of superior skating skills in their actual competitive programs? I am genuinely curious.

    I think Oksana's speed, flexibility, and edge work were all more than adequate and showcased fine skating skills, and her footwork and spirals, while not extraordinary, as shown in her technical programs, were more than adequate per the standards of the time.

    Had there been a MITF requirement, for example, I am sure she would've included one and done it quite well.

    I also highly doubt Bonaly slacked off following Baiul's win in 1993. If anything, it would've shown that she still had a ton of work to do, and she continued to improve, especially choreographically, all the way up until 1998.
     
  26. Mafke

    Mafke New Member

    1,125
    220
    0
    I basically agree.
     
  27. Aussie Willy

    Aussie Willy Well-Known Member

    18,148
    2,174
    113
    :lol: Thanks for posting the clip. I have never seen Vanessa Riley interviewed. She always looked much older when they showed her on the judging panel. Maybe she was wearing glasses.
     
  28. Coco

    Coco Well-Known Member

    10,988
    1,613
    113
    Yes, as others have said, her reaction in 1994 was probably as much in reaction to the 93 result as it was to the 94 result. It was a meltdown caused by the cumulative effect of both decisions.

    For years, all the wonderful qualities Sato had went unrewarded. Then all of a sudden, she was finally marked appropriately, more or less. The upending of all the unwritten rules and the abandonment of "the way things are done" must have felt like a massive slap in the face. It also was awkward, because Sato's marks were totally defensible on merit, and yet based on how everything had happened in the previous 4 years, still unfair. Surya still shouldn't have done what she did at the podium, but I always found her frustration very understandable.

    Her sp and her exhibition in '94 were lovely.
     
  29. KimGOAT

    KimGOAT Active Member

    759
    47
    28
    Sato was not undermarked before the 94 Worlds. She either didn't have a triple lutz or triple flip yet (pre 94 season) or blew it (short program at the Games).
     
  30. Karina1974

    Karina1974 Well-Known Member

    2,666
    240
    63
    Butyrskaya was the first to win World's, in 1999. Slutskaya didn't win until 2002.