Discussion in 'Great Skate Debate' started by Ninchen, Jul 27, 2010.
But ad hominem attacks demonstrate a keen mental acuity.
Yes. If everything was fair, all elements would be judged by the same measure. If one doesn't have a quad, they are able to make up for it in other areas. Wasn't the purpose of COP to have a BALANCED program?
Lambiel has been able to do it w/out a 3 Axel...
Since he was so involved in trasnition formulation he is responsible for making criteria so vague. This whole discussion would not exist if there was a list of tranisitons skaters had to do and you get a higher score the more of these transitions you do. Everything in the criteria is vague. His threes for Weir at US Nationals shows that he has a list of what a transition is and can't get a lot of others to agree with him on his definitions. At the Olympics two judges gave Plushenko fives in the short program. 2 out of 9 followed Inamans orders or agreed with him.
I believe that everyone who Inman sent the email to knew who Inman was and his opinions and why he would send such an email before the Olympics. He singled himself out by sending the email. The email doesn't even tell the whole story because obviously he is in the judging community all the time and talks to judges.
Balanced should include doing all of the available triples (potentially minus 3A for women).
Amen. Who doesn't love a good quad? There's nothing more thrilling in figure skating for me. However, the quad is one (1) element out of thirteen scored elements in the men's free skate. It is completely ridiculous of Brian to deem Evan undeserving of the OGM for not having one, even after claiming to not have seen the program.
Jeremy Abbott landed a quad toe in his free skate at US Nationals, in addition to 12 other exquisite elements, including a triple axel. Not to mention, fantastic skating skills, seamless transitions, and masterful choreography. The quad was amazing, but it was one element among one of the best programs in memorable history, in my opinion. Personally, I have no doubt that if Jeremy had skated his two programs from Nationals at the Olympics, he would have been the champion. His programs are the ones rewarded under COP, and rightfully so. Plushenko and Joubert just don't seem to get it.
Oh, really? IMHO, you are no less a blind observer than we are, the devoted fans of Evgeni Plushenko's, who will go down in history as one of the greatest mens skaters for all time! Believe it or not, the revered Mr. President of the International Skating Union made a similar statement in Moscow just a few days ago.
Perhaps, one of the greatest, but also, without a doubt, one of the most (if not numero uno) controversial skaters as well.
His hissy fit after the Olympics was pathetic and juvenile. He ruined his reputation around the world. Instead of accepting the OSM with grace (as it is still a fantastic achievement) he "jokingly" stepped onto the top step of the podium and whined to the media about how he was robbed of gold. Then, he was banned from competing in ISU sanctioned competition ever again. These past few months have not exactly been Plushenko's moments in the sun.
Not to pick on you, but I always read this. Who said anything about "the expense of everything else"? Joubert is a great skater. Whether or not you enjoy his style, there's no denying that when he's on, he has great skating skills, great performance qualities, great presentation and excution of his elements, a solid spinner, does great footwork, and great speed and flow across the ice. He's also someone who contineously improves, his footwork and edging is now top notch, but that wasn't always the case. He's spent a couple of years experimenting and improving his choreography, seeked help from the likes of Browning and DenStas, his spins have gotten much better, and he relates more to the audience. His transitions within a program are nowhere near the level of Chan or Takahashi, but he's hardly a skater who's only about the quad.
What is the one word that combines unsportsmanlike, self-absorbed and overrated?
He is a good overall skater, and has the edge with a great quad, but his non-quad elements, while still good, always suffer in comparison to other top skaters. Sometimes he doesn't get the levels on them and doesn't maximise his jumping plans.
He is a great basic skater with powerful strokes and clean edges, but he is just that. Skaters like Chan and Takahashi have been able to demonstrate more than just that with effortless strokes, more skating on one foot and frequent changes in direction.
His programs are empty choreographically and he mostly just skates from one element to the next. Chan and Abbott for example have been able to demonstrate that they can link all elements together, thus further increasing in their difficulty. Abbott in particular can also link his elements and choreography to the music/ tone of the program.
He is surely a very crowd pleasing skater but he does not demonstrate thorough and sophisticated understanding of the musical rythym and style like Takahashi and Lambiel.
Overall his competitive programs are very much alike. The only real performance I love from Joubert was his exhibition from last year's Worlds when he skated to Allelujah. That was some wonderful skating that showed off his strengths as a clean, solid basic skater.
Perhaps his focus on the quad is why he is relatively lacking in these areas compared to other skaters, but this is precisely what is meant when some people said "I love a good quad, but not at the expense of everything else". And in this case I think he deserved all the credit for the quad, but he also deserved lower PCS than other skaters who were able to demonstrate more variety, quality and difficulty in their PCS components with or without the quad.
Abbott did one triple axel. He did two triple lutzs - one was in a two jump combo and another was in a three jump combo. Plushenko did a quad triple and two triple axels and Joubert when he was on at 2010 worlds did two quads and triple axel.
"in addition to 12 other exquisite elements"...
I agree that Abbott was phenomenal and great but his last spin was a level two because he ended with the classic but low level scratch spin. Of course he got great GOE because he did it GREAT!!! But many could be like "a level 2 spin?? Terrible."
Fair enough. However, Jeremy's 3 jump combo was a 3-3-2 and in the second half of the program. In fact 5 of Jeremy's 8 clean triples were in the second half of the program. At the Olympics, only 2 of Evgeni's 7 "clean triples" were in the second half, a tactical error by his entire team. At worlds, 3 of Brian's 5 clean triples were in the second half. He fell on an attempted 6th triple, the lutz. Again, this shows a clear lack of COP knowledge. Front loaded programs do not maximize points technically, quad or not. If you have errors in these front loaded programs, forget it.
Not to mention the fact that the components in either of the aforementioned performances do not even come close to the level of Abbott at US Nationals. If I began to discuss this aspect, I might be at the keyboard for well over 20 minutes..
actually Plushenko and then Takahashi were the first to have level 4 footwork long ago, and in general with the way levels are given sometimes, it doesnt say much. There is miles difference between 4 level high kicks and i pick the flowers from the ice moves and takahashi's 4 level steps for example.
from all the things he said , I m pretty sure his whine was not about how he was robbed from gold, but i really wouldnt be less bothered to bring the quotes. i thought we agreed ban for life -that his fans used-was not a right word and also from the little I ve seen the last months europe, korea and japan must have missed the note.
Btw, while talking about blind fans, i think the silly argument of the user you quoted with the above was a resume of what Joubert said in the interview-not Plushenko.
on topic,nice interview by Brian, it must have been difficult to bounce back from Olys sad feelings.
What kind of crack are you smoking?
Inman was *involved* in transition formulation. He did not singlehandedly write the rules. So to say he is "responsible for making criteria so vague" is absurd. Maybe he wrote a more detailed list and it got overturned or watered down at some point. And Inman did not issue "orders" to anyone - he sent out an email describing what he saw as a misapplication of the standards, based on what Plushenko himself said (that he and Joubert had no transitions because they were focused on the jumps). He had no power to order anyone to do anything; he was simply pointing out that he saw marks being awarded that were way out of line with what the skater is actually doing. What he himself saw or didn't see in his own judging is irrelevant.
And yes, there is a list of transitions that skaters can do. Every skater learns them in skating lessons - stroking, crossovers, 3-turns, mohawks, choctaws, brackets, toepick runs, half-turn jumps, etc. etc. The point which was made earlier, and which you have selectively ignored, is that an Olympic-level skater should be able to do more than basic 3-turns, crossovers, and mohawks, and should be rewarded with more points if s/he does more than those.
In his own judging? Do you mean official judging? Because obviously he was watching programs and saying "this is worth nothing when it comes to transitions" and made it his mission to get other judges to score transitions as he saw them? That is why he sent the email? His whole basis of sending the email was to get judges to score Plushenko lower as well as other skaters who he thought was being marked too high?
My point was that nowhere in the criteria does it say that doing basic things can't be worth a lot in the transition mark. The rules don't indicate that if a skater does brackets and choctaws that that skater should only get 3 or 4 and if they do spread eagles they get a 8 or 9. Maybe that is what Inman is going around saying the standards should be but that's not in the rules.
This must be the millionth discussion after the same old pattern:
Someone (from the Quad Bloc) says they like to see a Quad and prefer having winners with a Quad.
The Transition Quad enters the discussion, saying that transitions, choreo yadayada are more important overall (wahhhh - COP-friendly - wahhhh)
The Quad Bloc says they still like the Quad and the Quad makes it more difficult to have complicated transitions etc. (wahhh Quad needs to be worth more wahhh)
The Transition Quad accuses the Quad Bloc of being satisfied with a skater coming out on the ice and just doing a Quad-stroke-Triple etc. And of course everyone who is a member of the Quad Bloc is automatically a Plushybot.
Then the Quad Bloc accuses the Transition Bloc of being even satisfied with a skater just doing doubles, if there is enough yadayadayada. Oh, sometimes it also cites the argument that single's skating is looking like single ice dance these days.
But you know what: The Transition Bloc won!!! Evan-freaking-Lysacek is the freaking Olympic Champ! Patrick Chan can win competitions and medals with junior/ladies jump content. Why do you keep arguing about something that has already been decided in your favour? Since you won the whole thing, how about pitying the Quad Bloc or at least ignoring it?
As a member of the Quad Bloc - we are like relicts from an ancient time! We are like these old grandmas, reminiscing about the good old times. And we just enjoy to mope and to complain about the current quadless skates. Once in a while other relicts throw us a bone - like Joubert in this interview - and we just enjoy it, and of course start moping. Can you people just let us mope without rubbing in our faces that in fact the dispute is already over and that we were / are wrong about everything?
But how often pray tell do Chan and Abbott actually go clean? And I'm not sure I'd call Chan a great jumper @ this point. Abbott at times does go clean and when he does should truly be rewarded but in a lot of other times he's a mess.
That is frankly my issue with the whole transition/choregraphy thing. Is that we can get some very very messy programs and these transition guys with 2 sometimes 3 falls still get huge PCS. I don't particularly think that's good for the sport. I'd actually rather see Chan and Abbott do a little less and also fall less.
Not to mention that not only is the Quad going but more and more are becoming inconsistent with the 3axel. Jumps have always been historically a huge part of singles, and I kind of don't blame Joubert who spent all of his time working to get the jumps consistent to have to react as the sport suddenly switched. And he has a point about a transition in between a quad, not being really possible, which is why I'd like to see the transition mark in PCS frankly go. And transitions be rewarded in choregraphy and a factor in GOE.
It also goes in with the whole Lepisto World medal. Surely the sport can have a balance between making it only jumps but not writing of jump difficulty as frankly unimportant. To me the real balanced skater has both jumps and spins, footwork etc. I'm tired of great jumps not being called part of the package they are.
I didn't know quads and triple axels were performed by Junior Ladies these days. Good to know.
And we will see how often Chan's consistent with it. And frankly it didn't look like much steps at all.
First of all - I wrote about Chan; how many Quads did the guy land in ISU competitions? Yeah. Moving on.
And second - I wrote: junior/ladies jump content. The "/" in this case meaning "or" or "and". If I meant junior ladies, I would have written that. And yes, there are ladies out there who do a Triple Axel. And junior men who have the same jump content as, well, every man these days.
Also, at what point did my post come over as a very serious analysis of anything? It was a joke, for heaven's sake!
(not the most intricate steps, but still...)
Because you are actually referring to skating skills. However skating skills are not just crossovers but also involve multi-directional skating. And then also reflecting the quality of what the skater is doing.
Watching lots and lots of crossovers, no matter how well done they are, does nothing to make the program interesting and that should be reflected in the mark.
Inman is not the only one responsible for the criteria. However I don't have a problem with the criteria and find it quite useful.
Well seeing you obviously have a clear idea about what transitions are, would you care to educate the rest of us? Because it seems you know more about it than a judge of many years experience. Or maybe you could become a judge and teach the rest of us a thing or two about it because heavens know we need a lot more judges involved in the sport (you don't get paid of course).
Yes he could before he got married...
lets watch the ubers go rabid over this one.
Agree with you but, why does Brian keep harping on about the quad. I mean he's like the Plush ubers who keep repeating that he will go down in history as one of the greatest skaters of all time. DUH, we already know that, and if his programs at Olympics were clean, with his quad he would have won. They weren't clean, he had wonky landings therefore he got silver.
Back to Brian... IMHO he is a great jumper, a good (not great) spinner, his footwork and edge quality I would say is only average, and his speed is great. His choreographic style is not too much to my liking but it beats blowing kisses at the judges, gyrating his hips and gesturing that he is number 1 (while skating like number two's). Brian will go down as one of the best there has been, as will Plush.
Chan never attempted a 4T in ISU competition. He has landed several triple axels.
How condescending of you to feel the need to link me to a dictionary.
I am a native english speaker, and, yes, I know the meaning of "and/or."
You wrote "junior/ladies," which, I suppose can be taken in a number of different ways. It could mean juniors (men and ladies) or ladies (senior and junior). You need to clarify your posts before scolding others for misinterpreting them.
I like Joubert, but I don't really feel like we'll see him grow as a skater if all he does is focus on the quad. Maybe if he did a little less, he might actually loosen up about it and land a few more. :shrug:
Joubert understood perfectly the purpose of that mail: to create a conflict between him and Plushenko and to make fun of Plushenko. But Joubert is not stupid, he knew that certain persons were trying to attack Plushenko no matter how and he didn´t fall into the trap. Next time Mr. Inman should try something smarter!
Joubert said he didn't want to watch Lysacek's performance after the fact. He didn't watch anyone live:
So it's like he couldn't learn anything from quad-ful or quad-less skating.
Except for the part of the criteria that requires variety, difficulty, and intricacy.
Jesus! Evan won but Takahashi could win as well, Plushenko too, etc. Just because Evan won without a quad doesn´t mean that all the skaters until the end of time will win without quads.
Who can predict how many quads, triples, spins, etc, will have the 2014 Olympic Champion, or the 2018 Olympic Champion or the 2022 Olympic Champion, etc,etc,etc. Did Yagudin decide in 2002 that the next Oly Champ. will win with two quads, or Plushenko in 2006 that the next will win with a 4+3+2 combo? I don´t understand why is Evan so special. FS is changing constanly! But your story was funny, even very silly.
Congrats to the interview, Titi! Good one!
I still think he want batshit crazy there. His scores for Weir were not justified. Weir sure had much less transitions than other top skaters, but still not some that would be only woth 3-4s. That was insane.
Have to agree there. If someone with Lepisto's jump content wins a world medal, something is just not right in this world.
Exactly! That´s the point! The debate quad vs. transitions is a false problem, Jeremy proved it! Personally I don´t get it!
For the first time or for the second time?
"Perhaps,...," pardon me, Ms.. "one of the most (if not numero uno) controversial skaters as well" Are you sure? Right here on FSU, it might be the truth, but elsewhere, I don't know. Anyway, for any personality in any circles, being able to attract world's attention at any time is already a big achievement in another sense. We, the superfans of Evgeni Plushenko's, do not mind at all the controversy here on a daily basis, and neither does Evgeni, I firmly believe. My only regret is that the newly crowned Olympic champion might feel lonely as well as hurt, for most people' attention is still focused on the silver medalist instead of on the deserved gold medalist.
As for Evgeni' s behavior after the Vancouver Games, he said/did nothing wrong about the indisputable fact: the quadless Olympic champion in mens singles skating is a big slap in the face of the corrupted COP system as well as a permanent standing joke in the figure skating history. Like every poster speaking your mind here every day, Evgeni Plushenko is entitled to express his heartfelt views on the figure skating and its scoring system, for he has been into his beloved profession for more than 20 years. He did not disgrace his name but simply tell the truth that his rivals/haters find hard to swallow. To demand a false gentlemanly statement from Plushenko on the figure skating is always hard.
BTW, it is not Plushenko but a Canadian pairs who "whined to the media about how they were robbed of the gold medals" after the competitions in Salt Lake City.
Wow, you are pretty amazing. All I can say is that I'm glad we have people like coaches, choreographers, skaters and some judges in the sport that know the figure skating more than you do, and don't need to be told that doing cross-overs and 3 turns are not really considered "transitions".
I seriously have no idea what you are trying to get at. Did you miss the point that even Plushenko himself knows and admits that he doesn't have transitions? Why are you trying to defend him against that?? Are you trying to tell us that a skater of Plushenko's level doesn't do transitions because they truly don't know what transitions are, since the criteria don't spell it out clearly enough for them, and therefore they should not be criticized or marked low. Like, seriously?
that was the best argument of this thread. And really it is true, i never thought marriage would damage the romance AND a bielman!
What reputation? Plushenko never had the best reputation, everybody knows that he can´t restrain himself when he has something to say. Let´s ask Evan how angry is he about what Plushenko said? Is he crying all the time, did he fell into a depression? I bet he is LHAO reading FSU and so is Plushenko!
I remember that a few years ago some of Joubert´s fans were complainng that Plushenko treats so bad poor Bjou and Bjou was suffering, etc, etc. Joubert seems very angry with Plushenko indeed, that´s why he never performed in Plushenko´s shows and never said that Plushenko was a nice guy!!!! FUUUUU!!!
Separate names with a comma.