Shishkova-Naumov: the unluckiest pair?

Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by Vash01, Jul 5, 2011.

  1. Vash01

    Vash01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    25,229
    In the true sense the unluckiest pair would be one that had a career ending injury (Paul Binnebose, for example), or missed a golden opportunity due to an injury, like Tai & Randy. However, I want to talk about a pair that did not have an injury, and yet they turned out to be very unlucky.

    I was watching some of my old tapes this weekend and I happened to watch Shishkova-Naumov's LP (skated to Schubert's Unfinished Symphony) at the 1995 worlds. It was loaded with technical difficulty, and they delivered it. The only flaw was they finished a couple of seconds behind the music. Sandra Bezic's comment was (why do I even take her seriously?) - the audience isn't moved; technically it was flawless. I believed then, and I believe now that S&N should have won over Kovarikova-Novotny (I liked them too) who had a mistake on a sbs jump, and technically their program was not as demanding. It was close, but not in terms of the judges marks. S&N were really held down to leave room for K&N.

    I noticed them for the first time at the 1992 Olympics. Loved their SP skated to 'Take Five'. I thought 1994 would be their year, but the pros returned- G&G and M&D. So S&N were pushed down. They lost a close decision for the bronze to Brasseur & Eisler because B&E were the reigning world champions (JMO- why they lost), so they did not even win an Olympic medal. That was very unlucky. They should have been contending for the OGM in 1994.

    I used to like S&N. They were not comparable with other great Russian pairs like G&G, M&D, B&S (R&Z and P&P were another generation, IMO), but they were a very good pair. Shishkova had beautiful positions and pointed toes on the lifts, spirals and everything she did. Their jumps and throws were not always solid, but they were not horribly inconsistent either.

    They were also unlucky in terms of ice time. During that time Russia did not have that many skating rinks, I think, and their practice time was limited to 2 hours a day.

    IIRC after the 1996 worlds where they did not even medal, they turned pro. It looked like their fed was not supporting them. Even as pros it seemed like no matter how well they skated, they never got good marks from the judges.

    I wish Shishkova-Naumov had had more success than they did. They did win a world championship, and a world silver, but they were good enough to win more.
  2. arakwafan2006

    arakwafan2006 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    Messages:
    696
    OH, I remember when their training time was reduced and they just didnt have the time in Russia to really prepare. I loved this pair. This is one of those just flat out, last sould survivor really RUSSIAN looking pairs. You could see the hours of balet and years of perfecting of their technique.

    not to be a debby downer but i hated how some of the russian pairs wore those ugle white boot covers. yuck LOL
  3. Aussie Willy

    Aussie Willy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    18,028
    I found them technically very good but they just didn't have any charisma. For me they were one of those teams that if I was rewatching events I would just fast forward through.
  4. nlyoung

    nlyoung Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Messages:
    524
    I seem to recall that they were pretty slow compared to the other Russians as well, but I might be misremembering...
  5. Loves_Shizuka

    Loves_Shizuka Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    Messages:
    12,285
    I really liked these two for soem reason. I seem to remember them getting some majorly dodgy marks/ordinals at the 96 worlds LP....
  6. judgejudy27

    judgejudy27 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    13,349
    Kovarikova & Novotny's World title in 95 was payback for them undeservedly losing the European title with a much better performance to home country favorites Woetzel & Steuer a month earlier. Shishkova & Naumov had also been 3rd at those Europeans and 3rd in the short program at Worlds so the judges were probably not even seriously considering them for the gold, but looking at those other 2 teams (W&S ended up bombing their LP at Worlds skating right after K&N and dropping from 2nd to 5th).
  7. Sedge

    Sedge Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    837
    That is how I remembered it as well...a 'late' medal I call it.
    I was pleased that they were able to win World gold in 1994.

    A dance team I loved but that couldn't crack the World 'top 3' were Annenko and Sretenski. They were 7th/4th/4th/4th at Worlds.
    Nice for her to be currently involved with the successful dance program in Detroit.
    She was married to Peter Tchernyshev, IIRC
  8. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    6,970
    They were promising in '91 Worlds and '92 Olympics, placing exactly where you'd expect a very good #3 Soviet / Russian Pair to place - Fifth. Perhaps they were being primed by the Russian Fed. to take over as #1, but Mishkutenok / Dmitriev and Gordeyeva / Grinkov decided to return for Lillehamer which kept them as #3 and off the Olympic podium.

    IIRC, the ordinals were very close between S/N and B/E for the Bronze. I think it was 5-4 in the LP. I would bet had one or both of M/D and/or G/G had stayed retired, Olympic judges would've placed S/N above B/E for Gold or Silver. But as #3, the judges wouldn't have a Russian sweep of the podium.

    They were '94 World Champs. But as explained above, they were surprisingly kept behind Kovarcikova / Novotny at '95 Worlds [who were retiring]. I do wonder about the politik that would keep a flawed Czech team behind a clean #1 Russian pair. Could Rodnina have been politiking hard for the Czechs?? The Czechs with this swan song were gifted the gold??

    And to be left off the podium in favor of Eltsova / Bushkov and even an American Pair like Meno / Sand at '96 Worlds was a big message to them. The Russian Fed obviously favored one pair over the other and that feeling trickled down to the all-important panel at '96 Worlds. Interestingly, IMO they had a wide-open shot at battling for the title of #1 Russian pair on paper at least- Eltsova / Bushkov were not THAT strong, Berezhnaya / Sikharulidze and Kazakova / Dmitriev were either non-entities or only in the infancies of their partnerships. So, the cards must've been stacked high against them, cuz they got the point and decided to retire.
  9. taf2002

    taf2002 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    13,838
    I think hindsight & nostalgia is affecting some of you. I agree that her toe point & positions were exquisite. But they were also very inconsistant & very slow, & more often than not, very boring.

    I disagree that they "deserved" the 94 Oly bronze. Other things being equal, I think B&E's ability to keep you awake during their programs had to be worth something. B&E were not as polished but they were exciting & innovative. Isabelle was injured for the 94 Worlds or else S&N may not have been able to beat them. And even so, their win was controversial at the time.

    They were better (and more watchable) than Elksova & Buskov, but both teams were IMO workmanlike & extremely lucky to ever have a World title.
    Habs and (deleted member) like this.
  10. Vash01

    Vash01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    25,229
    I LOVED Annenko & Sretenski. I could not understand why they turned pro after placing 4th at the 1988 Olympics. With the retirement of B&B and W&M, they would have moved into at least the 3rd place. Usova-Zhulin were the surprise in 1990, with their talent, but A&S could have established themselves one year earlier and the two pairs could have fought out for the 2nd & 3rd places. Of course each would have to contend with the Dushenays at that point.

    In any case, A&S had an excellent pro career. I still remember their 'Thanksgiving' program- one of the most beautiful ice dance programs ever.
  11. Vash01

    Vash01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    25,229

    It's not true that they were "very slow". I saw them skate live at Skate America in Dallas and they were head and shoulders above the rest of the field (sorry, can't remember what the field was). Compared to B&S or G&G they were slow and they did not display the command of the ice the way the top Russian pairs did, but in 94, they were the top Russian eligible pair that did not get the support of their fed.

    I don't remember S&N's win at worlds in 94 as being controversial. B&E were slower and very limited by Isabelle's injury. The only exciting thing about B&E was their daring lifts. S&N were clearly the better pair of the two, with their finer points. Neither pair was particularly consistent. The entire pairs field was weak from 94 to 97, so it was not surprising that Yeltsova-Bushkov(96), Woetzel-Steuyer(97), and Kovarikova-Novotny (95) won the world championships. I never considered Meno & Sand a top pair and they were lucky to get the silver in 98 (K&D and I&D were both out due to sickness)S&N were no worse than these pairs, but they always seemed to get the short end of the stick. Worlds in 96 was one of the worst results I have seen.

    However, I think their worst luck really was at the 94 Olympics. That was the only time the pros were allowed to skate in the Olympics and that would have been S&N's best opportunity to win an Olympic gold or silver in a relatively weak field (B&E, M&S, K&N were their competition). In Katia's book 'My Sergei' she mentioned that Vadim was bitter about it. Who can blame him?
  12. Braulio

    Braulio Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,073
    Totmianina and Marinin came to my mind, very similar ┬┤style┬┤
  13. Vash01

    Vash01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    25,229
    T&M were very different from S&N. T&M were very consistent, and she had beautiful edges on her landings of the throws- one of the best I have seen. Except for the lifts, T&M were a very strong pair. S&N were not as consistent technically. They did have more feeling in their skating than T&M. Actually I liked both pairs for what they did well. I am not focusing on what they didn't do well. I liked T&M more than I did S&N. Part of the reason why S&N lacked the command or charisma may have been that nobody with authority (like their fed or the judges) gave them a vote of confidence and they probably did not feel very confident. I loved some of their performances though. At Skate America they were very good, and around 1995-96 they had a SP skated to Ave Maria that was lovely. There was a lightness about them.
  14. briancoogaert

    briancoogaert Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    12,397
    Of course, compared to G&G or even Mishkutienok&Dmitriev, anyone else looked slow. :p
    But not compared to Eltsova&Bushkov, IIRC.
  15. Erin

    Erin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2001
    Messages:
    4,922
    I always struggle with this result - K&N really did have a much more intricate program, better-choreographed, and skated with more speed & power. There's an argument that they should have started with a much higher base mark than S&N and that the mistakes weren't enough to pull K&N below S&N. But I also just really wanted K&N to win, partly because of their highway robbery at Euros that year, and partly just because they really had the nicest programs. I also felt like over the two programs, they were the best pair (under COP, they could have had a fairly significant lead after the short) so on the whole, I just can't get too upset about S&N not winning Worlds in 95.

    They actually stuck around for two more years, but didn't make the Russian team in either 97 or 98, once Berezhnaya & Sikharulidze came on to the scene. Between B&S, Elstova & Bushkov (as the most successful Russian team at 96 and 97 Worlds) and Kazakova & Dmitriev, it was tough to get on the Russian team.

    Annenko & Sretenski did stick around for the 1988-89 season, but they got passed by Usova & Zhulin at 89 Euros before not showing up at Worlds. U&Z were actually the surprise of 89, not 90 (debuting in 2nd at 89 Worlds before dropping to 3rd behind the Duchesnays in 90). I don't know the details on why A&S didn't go to 89 Worlds, whether they were injured or if they saw the writing on the wall after Euros. There was some controversy around their programs that season (at Skate Canada, there was discussion of whether their Charleston was really a Charleston or more of a ragtime number) and the Duchesnays weren't at Euros, so maybe they decided there wasn't much point in going to Worlds to finish 4th again.
  16. Vash01

    Vash01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    25,229
    Yes, it was 1989- thanks for the correction. In Sun Valley, where I frequently went to those outdoor FS shows, I remember that after the 1988 Olympics, one night they have Klimova-Ponomarenko (Olympic silver medallists at that time) and an unknown pair named Usova-Zhulin who were announced as the next 'stars'. They truly were wonderful even then. It was not a surprise that they won the silver at the 1989 worlds with their 'Mars-Chopin-Mars' free skate. I still think if A&S had stuck around, they had a realistic chance of winning the world bronze. Their resume is lacking in a world medal.
  17. judgejudy27

    judgejudy27 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    13,349
    A&S probably would have won silver at the 89 Worlds had they stayed around. The heirarchy in the Soviet Union (remember this is dance pre COP) would have kept them over Usova & Zhulin for a couple years, deservedly or not. Granted I didnt see Europeans in 89 so not sure how they skated there, if they skated well and still lost then maybe the torch had passed already.
    In 1990 they would have dropped below the Duchensays too if still around.
  18. judgejudy27

    judgejudy27 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    13,349
    Shishkova & Naumov actually dominated the 95-96 season until Worlds, not losing an event. It was shocking that when all the top pairs made mistakes in the free skate they got no benefit of doubt from many of the judges. Eltsova & Bushkov were the only top pair to not fall, their errors were a hand down on a throw and a small step out on a simple double jump. What surprised me most was Woetzel & Steuer winning silver with a sliding fall on a throw double axel, singling their only side by side double axel tries, and possibly a two footed throw. They were majorly held up (they pretty much always were overrated though)

    I think they lost at the 95 Worlds since many pairs- Kovarikova & Novotny, Woetzel & Steuer, Eltsova & Bushkov, even Meno & Sand, had better seasons going into Worlds.They had alot of problems throughout the season and nobody saw them as the top pair going in as a result. They were probably already dethroned in the judges minds before the event even began, despite that they put it all together at Worlds. To win this year they would have needed both the Czechs and Germans to bomb for the judges to give it to them (skated as badly as Woetzel & Steuer did at the 95 Worlds, not just be a bit off like K&N were). Not saying this is right of course but the result didnt surprise me even after seeing how the pairs skated. It would have been a big upset for S&N to win after the season they had going into Worlds. They also skated 1st in the final flight of 4 with K&N, W&S, and E&B yet to come. As they werent seen as the frontrunners at that point the judges were leaving room for potentially all 3 pairs to beat them if they also skated cleanly, making getting the winning marks nearly impossible even when they ended up being the only of the final 4 to skate cleanly.


    The worst thing for Shishkova & Naumov is 1994 was when they really hit their peak. And it was the only year the pro reinstatement was allowed. It did bring extra excitement to the whole sport, and of all the events the pairs was the most improved by it. Still it was unfair to the skaters in a large sense and rotten luck for a team like Shishkova & Naumov. They probably would have been Olympic and World Champions in 1994 had it not been for the reinstated pros and might have retired on the spot in that case and had a lucratrive pro career.

    By 97-98 they were past their prime so staying or making it back to the top would have been nearly impossible. Ironically their only real hope of getting on the World and Olympic teams was not knock off Kazahkova & Dmitriev who ended up winning the 98 Olympics. Eltsova & Bushkov actually won Nationals in both 97 and 98, so must have been highly in favor by the federation at the time of the 98 Nationals, but fallen completely out of it by the time of the 98 Games (where their scores were low even for how they skated). Berezhnaya & Sikharulidze were 2nd at Nationals both years and were not only the most talented pair of the whole group, but obviously the future as these others were all nearing the end of their amateur careers.
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2011
  19. eurodance2001

    eurodance2001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2007
    Messages:
    736
    You are right about this.. They got 4 first place ordinals, 2 4th places and the rest second and third and somehow dropped down, so this was ordinal flips at it's finest. Their Don Quixote program that year was entertaining so no idea why they didn't get more benefit of the doubt..
  20. orbitz

    orbitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    9,822
    Usually the guy in the pair team has lousy extensions, but Naumov's extensions was every bit as good as his wife's. I don't think they were the most dynamic team on the ice, but I rather watch them than B&E though.
  21. nro

    nro New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2010
    Messages:
    60
    I also prefer watching S/N over Brasseur/truck driver and Eltsova/Bushkov. This is Shishkova/Naumov's Ave Maria, love the softness of their step sequence and their superb lines:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxVrFEGDasw
    It's a shame they weren't a bit more consistent.
  22. liv

    liv Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2001
    Messages:
    1,656
    These two were average, imo, especially compared to other great Russian pairs, but were better than Eltsova/Bushkov. They came up with a great performance in 1994 and should have won the bronze, but a Russian sweep would've been intolerable.

    I can understand their bitterness over not medalling in those Olympics, especially since they actually skated very well. But, in the grand scheme of things, the best pairs in the world were at that competition, and that made it the most accurate in my view.
  23. orbitz

    orbitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    9,822
    Yes, but the best skated pair at LiliHammer was not awarded the gold ;)
  24. blue_idealist

    blue_idealist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,110
    You mean M/D, right? ;)
  25. casken

    casken Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    6,324
    96 Worlds was just bizarre. Four first place ordinals, but the other judges all had them off the podium. They skated before K&D, and I'm wondering if those judges were expecting K&D to come through like they did at Euros and wanted to prevent a Russian sweep.

    What hurt them (minus any behind the scenes stuff) was using the same dull, poorly constructed "Don Quixote" LP for three years. Their skating is beautiful, but the program makes it chore to watch. I understand injury prevented them from coming up with something new for the Olympics in 98 though.

    Odd to think Eltsova/Bushkov were the National Champions going into the 98 Olympics and K&D just barely made the team with a performance that was superior to the one they gave at the Olympics.
  26. judgejudy27

    judgejudy27 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    13,349
    I never saw the 98 Russian Nationals but I heard the top 4 all skated cleanly and the results were Eltsova & Bushkov 1st, Berezhnaya & Sikharulidze 2nd, Kazahkova & Dmitriev 3rd, and Shishkova & Naumov 4th. Is this true.
  27. casken

    casken Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    6,324
    That's the order, although not all were completely clean.

    Buskhov singled the double axe.
    Sikharulidze fell on the triple toe.
    Dmitriev singled the second double axel, although they did a first set cleanly before that so not a huge omission. (same as the Olympics)
    S&N were the only ones to go completely "clean", though the landings of the triple toes were iffy.

    All the vids are on the fsvids site in the "98 Russian Nationals" thread to download if you want to see.

    I thought K&D skated with more confidence at Nationals than they did at the Olympics, and they did the shoulder to shoulder lift they awkwardly left out at the Olympics as well. The Olympic performance felt like a cautious and nervy "Just don't fall and we'll win." type performance.

    And what were E&B thinking (as well as the Russian judges who gave them 5.9s for presentation) with that S&M themed LOTD program? Did they really envision themselves winning the Olympics with that? It actually has some interesting transitions and stuff, but the overall effect is just weird and not in a good way.
  28. Vash01

    Vash01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    25,229
    The only thing I remember about Yeltsova-Bushkov's Olympic LP is their costume(s). They looked very strange. They did not skate well either. S&N would have done better, but how could the Russian fed not select its national champions to the Olympic team? Thank goodness K&D were selected.
  29. essence_of_soy

    essence_of_soy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,515
    I was at 96 Worlds in person, and Eltsova and Bushkov were the skating equivalent of Nembutal.

    Nobody in the top five skated cleanly (in the combined short and long), but Shishkova and Naumov should have made the podium.

    What sticks in my memory the most was when Artur Dmitriev went off axis in the side by side spin and almost chopped Oksana Kazakova in half.
  30. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    6,970
    ^ The results between '98 Russian Nats and Nagano are amazing. :eek:

    What happened in between at '98 Euros? Anything of note that may have shaken up the results going into Nagano from Russian Nats??
  31. Erin

    Erin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2001
    Messages:
    4,922
    Re: 96 Worlds

    I would agree - I almost posted earlier that Shishkova & Naumov's results of 96 Worlds bothered me a lot more than at 95 Worlds. The long program at that event was absolutely craptastic. I would have had Meno & Sand first in the free, then Eltsova & Bushkov and Shishkova & Naumov second and third in some order. Under this scenario, the podium is either E&B/M&S/S&N or M&S/S&N/E&B. I can't decide which result is the right one...really, the event was so bad that no one deserved to be World champion out of it.

    Pairs judging in the mid-90s was a little bit weird and always seemed to be about either rewarding a pair for their program's choreography (regardless of how well it was skated) or judging to make up for a previous result. Take 97 Worlds, where Eltsova & Bushkov skated way better in both the short and long than they had at 96 Worlds and even had a bit of personality in the SP (their Sixteen Tons program, probably the best they've ever done) but lost to a shaky Woetzel & Steuer, who messed up the spins in the short and had a couple mistakes in the free, on top of being SO tight. I kind of felt like because W&S finally had a well-choreographed free program that suited them and E&B had already had their World title the year before, that W&S got the nod. I don't think that there was any conspiracy or fix in, just that some of these things may have played a subconscious role in how the event was judged.
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2011
  32. Vash01

    Vash01 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2001
    Messages:
    25,229
    I agree with you Erin. The 95 result was a close one, but there was no justification in denying the podium to S&N in 96. That probably cost them a spot on the Olympic team in 98, as they were no longer a factor. The pairs field was weak in the mid-90s compared to the era of the great Russian pairs. The judging, particularly for the gold in the mid-90s was like the Oscars- make up for previous denials of deserved medals. W&S should not have won in 97, IMO. Y&B were actually better. Again, all these pairs were just OK, not great. It wasn't until 98 that the field became stronger with the development of B&S and K&D. In the mid 90's S&N should have been among the top pairs- it was hard to pick just one at that time, but for some reason they were not.
  33. judgejudy27

    judgejudy27 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    13,349
    I agree Eltsova & Bushkov should have won the 97 Worlds. Kazahkova & Dmitriev should have won the LP and possibly silver overall over Woetzel & Steuer who did not deserve to win either the SP (spins were way out of sync) or LP. They were rewarded since they had the best season and were held up even though they didnt deliver at Worlds. And being rewarded for having their best programs ever, even though they didnt skate them that well at Worlds.

    I agree about the 96 Worlds too. Meno & Sand deserved to win the LP, even if mainly by default. They were the only top pair who really delivered. S&N and E&B should have been 2nd or 3rd in the LP in some order, and the overall podium been some combination of those three. Woetzel & Steuer blew their performance with a sliding fall on a throw double axel, singles double axels, and some other minor stumbles, and were ridiculously held up still to win silver.

    Both the judging and skating during this period was erratic.

    Woetzel & Steuer also undeservedly won the 95 European title which should have gone to Kovarikova & Novotny, who skated much better than they did at Worlds and still lost. Which led to the questionable Worlds result as payback.

    On the whole one thing that is consistent is that Woetzel & Steuer were the most gifted pair of that period. They arent that strong even when they skate cleanly, and in major events they almost always made huge errors and were most times still held up (except for 95 Worlds thank goodness, but that was even worse than usual for them). It was almost a fitting climax to their careers to lose the Oly silver to a 3 major error Berezhnaya & Sikharulidze (IMO justifiable too given the huge gulf in quality between the pairs and that W&S were injured and sluggish anyway) and if that seemed an injustice to some, it was the ultimate irony as well after all the gifts they had gotten previously that quad.
  34. BigB08822

    BigB08822 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    20,747
    This thread got me watching some pairs programs from 1995 and then from other seasons. 1995 Worlds was probably my favorite Worlds, I must have watched my tape a million times. Anyway, I just realized that Meno and Sand won world medals 3 times with the SAME long program. :lol: Has anyone else done that? They even had their best result the 3rd time around, haha
  35. blue_idealist

    blue_idealist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,110
    Woetzel and Steuer were gifted a few times, I guess (I didn't follow skating that closely during those years), but they really deserved the '93 silver medal they got. I just recently watched that performance, and they were ON.
  36. Sedge

    Sedge Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    837
    I believe Victor Petrenko won 3 medals with the same FP program...in 90/91/92. ( or 89/90/91) When his music used to come up in practice..the other skaters would do the opening poses , such was the familiarity with the program.I believe he wore the same costume..black pants and muted gold top each time

    I thought it might be an idea to deduct for the use of the same program for 3 years in a row when he was in contention for gold all 3 times.
  37. Louise

    Louise Banned Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2003
    Messages:
    560
    Oh yeah, god that opening to VP's FS. The snivvle at the judges, the head bob. ba-da-ba-da-bump-ba-da, repeat. uggh.

    Paul Wylie I think used 89/90/91 programs but he was never in contention.

    And Surya seemed to have done her Four Seasons for at least that.
  38. Louis

    Louis Tinami 2012

    Joined:
    May 10, 2001
    Messages:
    11,472
    Woetzel and Steuer, in their prime, were very fast and explosive. Their elements had great speed in and out, and many (but not all of them) had amplitude.

    They actually lost a lot of this by 1997, but still seemed to be marked as if they had it. By 1998, I think the judges had caught on that they were skating much more slowly (partially due to injury, partially due to strategy), and some of their big elements like the throw double axel had become smaller and were done with less speed in order to improve consistency.

    I'm probably the only person who agrees with the result at 1995 Europeans :shuffle:. I think their "Island" free skate is one of the great untold skating masterpieces. Skating to ambient music has never really been done before or since by a high level eligible skater, and they did it tremendously well IMO. I love them, but from 1996 until they turned pro, they went on a downward slide into genericism with simpler choreography.

    As for Shishkova and Naumov, Evgenia was always under-powered for a female pairs skater. Beautiful lines, but shallow stroking and teeny-tiny underrotated jumps so small that Naumov would need to take off a noticeable half-second earlier. I think she was seriously 70 lb. in their prime. (Mandy Woetzel was 80-something pounds, so 70 seems right for Evgenia, who is a visibly smaller build.) They skated slowly and they moved slowly on top of it. To me, their programs always felt seven minutes long. In a ballet competition, they wins hands down. In a skating competition, IMO they were the weakest of their peers and had to rely on errors from others or Soviet-loaded panels, both of which happened frequently in those days.

    At 1995 Worlds, I think the judges marked what they wanted to see with Kovarikova and Novotny, but I was OK with that. They were a gorgeous pair who could've been one of the all-time greats had they really put it together, stuck around longer (there was a huge age difference), etc. Forget 1995 Europeans, the medal they were truly robbed of was the 1992 Olympic bronze. An eventual World title was a fair trade for that travesty.

    At 1996 Worlds, Shishkova missed all of her difficult side-by-side jumps. Totally blew the triple toe in both programs, making about 1.5 rotations each time, and then eked out a flawed (maybe two-footed), underrotated, mistimed double axel in the free. You can't have a World Champion pair who doesn't land a clean side-by-side jump -- and the wimpy axel-double salchow sequence doesn't count for much. The pairs on the podium all demonstrated some mastery of each type of element, while having errors on other, often easier elements. S/N's errors all came in the same area, and I think that hurt more in those days.

    At 1997 Worlds, I think it rightly or wrongly came down to the fact that Woetzel and Steuer were the only team (other than I/D) to do clean side-by-side triple toes in the short program and free skate. All of the favorites' triple toes -- Bushkov, Dmitriev, and Sand -- went MIA that week. (Well, Sand's was always MIA.) W&S did an element very well that (almost) none of the other top teams did, and when all else is sort-of equal, that tends (or tended) to win. That and the program was gorgeous, if kind of generic. And it was their turn.

    Those are my theories at least. Judging was so much fun prior to COP. Fun trip down memory lane. :smokin:
  39. Erin

    Erin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2001
    Messages:
    4,922
    Although oddly, Sand did end up landing the triple toe in the SP at Worlds that year. I actually would have had Meno & Sand first in the SP in 97, with Berezhnaya & Sikharulidze second, Eltsova & Bushkov third, and Woetzel & Steuer fourth (so basically the top 4 all in the reverse order). Since M&S and B&S both bombed the free, it wouldn't have made any difference in the end, so I've never gotten too worked up about it. The 97 pairs results was a bit like 95 where I could see the arguments why it was wrong, but I didn't really care. I was never a huge fan of W&S, but they were one of the better pairs in the mid-90s when they were on and I was happy they got a World title. Plus, the thought of Eltsova & Bushkov as two-time World champs was probably a bit much.

    (And agree 100% that Kovarikova & Novotny missing the bronze medal in Albertville was highway robbery.)
  40. blue_idealist

    blue_idealist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,110
    Evgenia Shishkova.. 70 lbs? really? And Mandy W. 80 lbs? I thought all those pairs ladies were around 95 lbs..