Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by Vagabond, Jul 25, 2012.
I like this list so much!
Lambiel did quads, not "quads", and he wasn't relying just on them.
2005 Worlds were indeed pretty awful.
The part about Joubert and 2006 Worlds is true. Joubert skated really well all three times he won silver.
I don't hate or bash North American skaters, but to me Todd, Evan and Chan are zzzzzzzzz. Can't help it. Can't be anything but happy when they are votes out. I see their qualities on different aspects of their skating, but they are still zzzzzzzzz.
Boitano on the other hand...sigh, love him so much!
I couldn't vote in the last round. It was impossible to choose between my two favourite skaters ever.
Was my write in vote counted?
ITA. I was watching Todd's 2001 LP at Worlds, and have to say I was surprisingly impressed. Everything was done with such high quality. The jumps and spins were textbook, and I loved the huge death drop and Russian splits towards the end. The program may not be particularly sophisticated or innovative, but it was effective and skated thoughtfully. The program was backloaded too - he did the triple axels and triple lutz later on in the program - we hardly see this kind of construction. TBH Todd's performances at the 2001 Worlds were pretty comparable to what Lysacek did at the Olympics, and probably even better. Evan had the edge in transitions (although it was under CoP), but Todd's choreography was much more effective. Todd was really undermarked - I'd put him ahead of Buttle and Joubert, and compare with Lysacek.
A couple notes:
- As much as I love Takahashi, it's ridiculous that Plushenko gets voted out so early. This isn't objective at all.
- Chan may have dominated so far this quadrennial, but I don't think it was merited.
- Buttle was a one-hit wonder and almost incapable of skating clean LP. The only major time he really put together two good programs was 2008 Worlds.
Only in your dreams.
Now run along and help Jeffrey Buttle 2.0 Michal Březina break his potato's damnation.
Michal is not Buttle 2.0. Michal is way more attractive
Plushenko has won nationals and europeans last season, so I assume he has already come back.
He still was the best in the so-called weak field (because weak really is relative ). If you're better than the rest you deserve to win.
I don't recall 2005 worlds, so maybe he wouldn't have won a year before or a year later with that performance. But he didn't skate that performance a year before or a year later. He skated it then. At that point. And was better than anyone else. Or at least the judges thought so.
But there are qualifying rounds. How many skaters would have won if there hadn't been figures? How many competitions would Sasha have won had there not been a 4 minute LP? It's kind of ridiculous to say if there hadn't been a part of a competition because it was there and if Joubert messed up the qualifying round then he messed up. Period. Joubert had to skate as many portions of the competition as anyone else.
(And you seem to forget that Joubert has struggled to skate clean as well. He's a fighter, no doubt about it and when he's on, he can be very impressive. But has he truly delivered so many more clean skates that resulted in a medal win than Lambiel?)
And there is more to skating than jumps, as someone else pointed out. Yes, I do prefer a program that is skated cleanly but in the end it's not the jumps which, for me, personally, make a program memorable. It's the program.
I can acknowledge great jumping abilities and I find Plushenko's technical content impressive. Doesn't mean I find his programs memorable.
I know though that for me, Lambiel's Flamenco was one of the best and I will never forget the moment he finished his Cirque du Soleil program at Europeans 2002. He might not have had the jumping contents of a Yagudin but boy, was that a program!
I disagree, many skaters (dare I most) don't have consistent quads, that still leaves 6 other triple jumps, and you're saying Buttles inconsistency (note not inablility to do, rather inconsistency) condemns his other jumps? That doesn't make sense - look at his technique, he had great technique and you said he had "very poor jumping abilities" which IMO is not true and isn't based on sound logic.
Ignored when considering what? A discussion of his skills, his jumping ability? How does the judges over marking him have any relevance to his actual technique, or, in fact, anything to do with him and things he can control? I agree he has been overmarked, and I agree that it is scandalous that judges do it, but the judges are responsible for that not Chan himself.
Then there's a fault in your logic. Buttle didn't have a quad and it's seen as a weakness, Labiel does and it's also seen as a weakness? You can't have it both ways, it's one or the other.
2005 was not great but you specifically said Lambiel didn't have a triple axel and I was pointing you to a programme where he not only did it but did a really good one!
I would suggest posters who don't agree with marks given to Chan in the past few seasons to watch the ISU videos which explain various PCS criteria. He did indeed match most of the criteria for each PCS component.
Someone provided the link in another thread. Would someone be kind enough to post it again?
It is possible to disagree with Chan's marks for valid reasons and not out of ignorance, you know
I think part of the problem that some people have with Chan's scores are actually issues with the scoring system - for instance, how he gets rewarded despite making mistakes because he has, say, difficult jump entries; some fans think the quality of the jumps should override the quality of the entries. The IJS also tends to value the parts over the sum, and I think Chan is a good example of this sort of skating. But what the system emphasizes is not Chan's fault, and I don't think it should count as overscoring when he's simply playing by the rules. If someone has an issue with what the system rewards, it should be presented as such and not as "Chan is overscored".
The other issue, for me at least, is that Chan absolutely ticks off a lot of bullet points for high GOEs and PCS - but I don't think he ticks off quite as many as he's being given credit for. So in that regard, I have no problem saying that he is often overscored.
I do think he should have finished ahead of Ilia Kulik in this game, however.
Oh sure, I am not saying everyone who objected to his scores is ignorant. But the videos do explain a lot of why he usually scores so highly on PCS. IMO, as much as one extra rotation on a jump that happens in one split second over a 4:40 program does not, and should not, significantly affect PCS, neither should a fall that also happens in one split second over a 4:40 program. If people think a fall should cost more than just a mandatory -1, that's fine, but you will find that Chan will still have won many of the titles or medals that he won even if the mandatory deduction was increased to -2 or even -3. The videos will explain why perhaps he is just THAT good a skater.
On TES, remember back when Buttle and Lysacek won Worlds, people complained about how the system didn't reward difficult jumps enough and did not encourage the athletic side to be pushed forward. And now they do, and that's why he is scoring high on TES, because he always attempts 2 quads and 7 triples and almost always rotates them.
Anyway, thanks npavel for the link.
Here we go again, if someone you don't appreciate wins, it should be considered 'gifts from judges'. It works both ways.
If Lambiel only had quads to rely on to win, then all quad jumpers should win.
Chan should have placed 2nd behind Yagudin.
competitive survivors-plush, joubert, dai. & look at all the other top men they had to compete with!! i give my picks extra bonus "eys they can!" points too-& thanks so much guys for so many years of great skating! xoxoxo