Discussion in 'Great Skate Debate' started by Ninchen, Jul 27, 2010.
What is most interesting to me is how the interviewer brings up the comments that Joe Inman made before the Olympic Games. Last time I checked, the original source of the drama came from the same website AND interviewer (from Absolute Skating) when Plushenko himself said the following:
It just doesn't make much sense to me that the same interviewer this time would ask
I dunno, maybe I lack comprehension, but I still think it was Plushenko basically telling the world that he didn't have any transitions and dragged Joubert into that mess himself. If there was a translation error or mis-wording on the part of the interviewer originally, it still wouldn't necessarily be Inman's fault for copying and pasting the comment, right? The interviewer seems to have told or suggested to Joubert that Inman basically came out of nowhere talking trash about Plushenko and Joubert, when in reality Inman was using her own article as an example! She should have really clarified that it was a copied comment made by Evgeny.
I also don't know how Joubert can go on to say
Sorry, but if he's admitting right before this that he hasn't even seen the programs, then his opinion becomes silly. I know he's all about the quad, but there's so much more to a program even if someone does land the quad. Brian knows that.
Anyways, I still always find myself rooting for Joubert even if I know he lacks some of the strengths in components that some of the others have.
It still makes me that judges need Joe Inman or Plushenko or anybody else to tell them something that is very clearly visible to everyone.
Good interview, I love how you can sense that all these disappointments make him more mature. And I completely agree with him that a 4-2 in the sp needs to have a much higher value than a 3-3. As he said having a quad in the SP changes EVERYTHING, including your approach, your pacing, your train of thought, and your nerves.
And I also think transitions and choreography need to be more representative of what the skaters actually do on the ice
The critera for what a transition is totally open for interpretation. You can read the criteria and it doesn't seem to require anything at all be done with skates. Everyone thinks only spread eagles and ina bauers and knee bends are transitions-well the criteria doesn't say those are the only transitions.
For a skater like Joubert who has worked so hard to do a quad because he felt it was necessary to win events to know of a skater not land a quad in their Olympic program and win in 2010 I am sure it is totally baffling and dispiriting. From 1997 to 2007 all world champs had a quad and the Olympic champions of 1998, 2002, and 2006 had one. It was seen as necessary to TRY IT! If you failed you lost-If you did a quad and did everything else you won. To do everything else but not a quad meant you lost!
Who is this "everyone"? You would have to be an very uninformed observer of skating to think that "only spread eagles and Ina Bauers and knee bends are transitions".
And most people would probably agree that at the senior elite international level, straight stroking, crossovers, and maybe the occasional 3-turn or mohawk is not enough transitions, or not difficult enough transitions, to gain legitimate high marks. Which is the issue with your boy Plushenko, who (as stated above) says he doesn't do transitions.
The article is interesting. He did mention that he tried doing his SP with a 3-3 and it was much easier for him to do. I tend to agree with him on this point because if it weren't so, more skaters would be attempting 4-3 combo. They should find a better method of rewarding the different combinations.
Both men who won World Championships and the man who won the Olympics did, in fact, try it. One of them landed it a couple times.
You left out a variable - what if you have a quad, but not much else?
You beat on this dead horse so much, and yet you haven't made anyone agree with you buy those few who already did. Do you think you're going to change anyone's opinion? Or do you just enjoy hitting that horse so much?
My comment came from reading stuff like you wrote about how stroking crossovers and 3 turns should not be enough to get a 7 or an 8 in transitions marks. It doesn't say anywhere in the rules that doing crossovers and stroking and 3 turns would not be deserving of a 7 or 8. So what would be worth a 7 or 8? Stuff like spread eagles and ina bauers or waltz jumps or whatever. Maybe the rules for transitions should be more clear because nowhere does it say that the blade moves are transition moves. It is very clear that arms and the head are included in transitions.
From the ISU Components Criteria:
Variety, difficulty, and intricacy wouldn't exactly include stroking and three-turns. It even says in the rules, minimum use of cross-cuts, which I suppose you missed. Also, three-turns were something everyone can do in the first few months of skating. I'd hardly consider them to be difficult or intricate or showing variety when the Sal, toe loop, and flip already have three-turns into their entrances. I also don't think a bunch of arm flailing while skating around on two feet and doing crossovers into everything is showing variety, difficulty, or intricacy; then again, maybe some find it difficult to have arm and head movements while doing crossovers in the same way that some people can't rub their stomachs and tap their heads at the same time.
That's why skaters who:
a) control the position of their arms and head all the time (so they are nicely aligned and not just dangling)
b) are able to move them to the music whilst skating
Should be getting higher PCS (this will reflect both under Transitions and Interpretation - provided it's performed to the music - there is a lot of crossover like that with PCS where certain things come under criteria of two or more components).
And Joubert really lacks this kind of detail.
So what is your point again?
Sure -- and in the 90's the triple axel was a must have jump, and male skaters were expected to deliver ALL the triples. Now we have had years with men on the podium at Worlds who don't have all the triples. I'm not sure that having a quad while not having a triple axel is much, if any of an improvement.
Also, I personally disagree that 4/2 should be worth much more than 3/3.
Getting a 3 jump off another jump is very hard because you don't have the preparation time and speed you would normally get.
What if a certain skater has a quad, but has an injury (Evan)?
It is wise to leave it out rather than risk a fall, or further injury.
That said, I still have a little soft spot for Joubert - Plushenko? Not so much.
I don't think it was just the injury that had Evan leave out the quad, he did at nationals. I think it was the fact that Evan was inconsistent with the quad and to be frank Joubert has a point at least in Evan's direction. Whenver Evan tried the quad even it was clean, he normally messed up somewhere else probably due to energy given towards the quad.
Landing a quad much, much harder.
Is there any male skater capable of qualifying to the LP at a major competition who can't do a 3-3? Now how many of them can do a quad, let alone a 4-2?
yes a 3-3 is hard, but a 4-2 is much, muuuuuch harder.
Which reminds me, Evan has spent a couple of seasons attempting a quad in the SP, was he ever able to deliver a clean SP with the quad? (I don't think so, but I could be wrong)
Okay. I still maintain that Evan was the rightful champion that night. He DID have a foot injury at Worlds 2009. It was still (Frankly ) wise to leave it out in order to skate cleanly, and have a well balanced program.
Plushenko apparently knows the COP rules, as evidenced by his remark about transitions. He didn't maximize the 2nd half of his program. He seemed to ignore the rules...
If the quad was EVERYTHING, then Kevin Van der Pants and Timothy The Tree Goebel would be World Champs.
Should they be equal? I struggle with this question.
The New York times did a study and when it came to Lysaceks quads he was 4 for 13. 31% success rate.
I think the best are the ones with a triple axel and a quad. Lambiel was the only top level skater I can think of as someone who stopped doing triple axels. I think doing a quad should be the new triple axel but the point system needs to concrete the quad by making it worth more.
I was pointing out that virtually anyting a skater does inbetween elements can be counted as a transition.
I saw the cross cut thing but there are lots of elements and judges can decide to judge based on some or all or whatever they want. You have Inman going around saying what he thinks should get high marks but his opinions are not the rules and no judge has to pay attention to anything he says and just based their opinions on their readings of the rules and criteria.
Yes, and most judges are wise enough to recognize that what Joubert and Plushenko do are not, in any way, the sorts of transitions that skaters of their caliber should be doing. And they mark them accordingly. Joe Inman not needed.
Why do you hate Joubert and the quad so much? just curious.
And please, look how many girls can perform a 3/3 - even if it's just 3toe-3toe, it's still that 3 jump off another jump that is so very hard to do in your opinion. And now show me a girl who can perform a solid quad and then yet another jump after that.
Seriously, I think this kind of attitude is exactly was has brought us to a situation that we now have Olympic champion without a quad, without artistry, without anything worthy. Sorry, Evan fans.
Didn't even read the interview yet, but as I can see, the quad bashing is back and strong
Well I think Plushenko maximized the first half by doing a quad triple! LOL
Okay, in your way of thinking, show me a guy who can do a Biellman? And what would you say if Pat Chan comes out this year with a quad and his exquisite skating skills. See, I can roll my eyes too I'm not even an Evan fan yet he deserved the gold over Plush's abortion of a program and Baboo's meltdown. I love a good quad, but not at the expense of everything else.
Look, Inman didn't say ANYTHING about his own opinion. He quoted what Plushenko himself said. Would he have said anything had A) Plushenko not said anything? and B) the interviewer not published that comment? Probably not. Plushenko is to blame in this situation no matter who you are or are not a fan of, and he dragged Joubert down with him in the process.
Then again Ziggy has it right that the judges should be able to realize whether skaters have transitions without anyone (including a skater HIMSELF) saying they don't.
And another thought. Seems that most everyone that had an issue with Inman's quoting Plushenko never once tried to argue that Plushenko had transitions, at least not from what I've seen. They've all just went on about how there was a North American bloc going on, etc, or how everyone just must hate Evgeny.
Exactly, so what is the point of singling out Inman by anyone?
To be honest, what's the obsession with the 4-3 combo? If you can do a quad, but not a reliable 4-3, do your quad as the solo jump in the SP, add the 3A and a 3-3, and max out the points that way. Yes, technically the solo jump needs to be "out of steps" but we know that criteria is ignored by the judges anyway.
Your conclusion is really brilliant. Who once said " the quad was EVERYTHING", Brian or Plushenko? Technically speaking, can the quad be measured in the same way as the transitions, the step sequences, or whatever?
No one is bashing the quad. No one. I have not once seen anyone bash the quad.
What people are 'bashing' is the mentality that the quad is the end-all-be-all of men's figure skating and trumps absolutely everything else by its mere presence - that it eradicates everything else a skater can and cannot do. I don't think anyone on this site would argue that it's an easy element - though, personally, I think the actual hardest men's singles element is level 4 footwork, which has been accomplished by significantly fewer men than the quad (Lysacek being one of those very few men). And even then the quad is certainly the second hardest. I simply don't think that Evgeni or Brian's ability to land a quad means they should automatically win anything when the rest of their skating doesn't measure up.
Agreed with ^ that level 4 footwork in singles is the most difficult thing of all; I believe only three women (Kostner, Asada, and Suzuki IIRC) have achieved it, and among the men only Buttle, Chan, Takahashi, Lysacek and a few others I can't remember right now.
A Beillman is probably not a good counter example, because there have been more men in the past that have done successful Biellman than there have been women (0) landing quad.
Evan was the deserving Olympic champion. Joubert and Plushy can complain about it all they want but at the end of the day it's Evan that gets to take a shower while wearing the gold medal .
Miki landed that one quad back in like 2002 at the JGPF. It's the only time it's happened.
(Can't Plushenko do a biellmann? )
"level 4 footwork in singles is the most difficult thing of all":
In other words, the ladies are capable of competing against the mens like Buttle, Chan, Takahashi and Lysacek at the same event, right? If so, why not get the ladies' discipline and the mens' merged in the near future? LOL
However Inman was one of the judges who was involved in the development of the PCS part of the COP. And is probably one of the most qualified people out there to give guidance and instruction to other judges on transitions. So they are his opinions, but when he talks he is someone worth listening to and he can quite easily back up his arguments with examples and information.
Which is something that all judges have to do every time they judge a competition.
I think everyone stood up and took notice when he was hammering skaters on PCS during the US Nationals, particularly Weir. Most people seemed pretty happy about that.
This doesn't sound like he disapproves of Lysacek as the rightful winner - since he never watched. He was just upset someone won without a quad. It wasn't personal against Lysacek, nor was he saying Plushenko should have won.
I love it when people take the easy way out in the argument by using hyperbole. It shows such an ability to think.
Not only is he upset that someone won without a quad but that to him that person is not even worth watcihng. It's like he couldn't learn anything from a quadless skate so its just totally irrelevent to him and not only that it should be irrelevent to skating!
Honestly I don't know why Plushenko and Joubert were/ are complaining. They get their points for the quads and get way gifted on the TR and CH scores already.
Suppose the quad gets more base value but in exchange, all judges apply the rules and criteria correctly. Their reduction in PCS would likely be way more than whatever increase in value their quad could bring.
And it really isn't about old system vs new either. Lambiel and Buttle were in the same era as Joubert and they transitioned to COP just fine (or brilliantly, rather) - because their skating had more than just jumps to offer.
I wonder if Plushenko could just let go and accept the fact that he wasn't good enough (and was already way gifted with silver). That way his blind fans can finally go to sleep and stop with those silly arguments.
I mean, at least in the Yuna - Mao fan war, both are great skaters.
I think that the Olympics was a great time of dissappointment for Brian, and I could understand if just in general he doesn't particularly want to see the winning skate anyways.
Separate names with a comma.