Discussion in 'Great Skate Debate' started by maureenfarone, Jan 26, 2013.
Thanks.....I never noticed that before!
Maybe I remember incorrectly, but I believe I recall seeing a photograph with all four on the podium. Will see if I can find one.
I don't think Rachael would be putting herself through what she has if she didn't think she could make a good showing. I won't be overly surprised if she gets the bronze medal.
Even if Agnes, Gao or some of the other top skaters bomb at Nationals skaters like Wang, Edmunds and Cain and even Hannah Miller would easily surpass Flatt.
Yes they could and no one is denying it. But Then again they might not. That's what makes figure skating a sport. There are two sides to each argument, no? But it appears that only one side of this argument is respecting the other side, instead of tossing around insults because someone disagrees with them.
Oh yeah, there was a tie between Radionova and Kostner. I didn't check up on how it turned out. Problem is, I like Radionova too.
Only if the definition of angry is "doesn't agree with you".
To get back to Rachael, as much as I would love to see her on the "podium", her scores at Coupe of Nice and Coasts make that highly unlikely. I'm kind of sad about it because when she came out at that summer comp and had such a good showing in the SP, I was just sure that was the beginning of great things and by the end of the summer she'd be posting competitive scores in the LP as well and might actually be a threat for the podium if everything went her way and a few of the other contenders faltered.
But if you looks Sylvia's score tracker and compare Flatt's scores at Regionals and Sectionals to the scores her competitors at Nationals have been posting all summer and fall, there are just too many Ladies competitors who can beat her on any given day. I counted something like 14 Regionals scores above hers and that was just a quick count. If I made a spreadsheet with every Ladies competitor at Nationals and their best, worst and average score this season, I think it would just be too depressing and make my hope for a Top 10 finish unrealistic enough.
I know from reading her posts that MacMadame really likes Rachael. She is just being realistic.
Gorgeous post, thanks for supplying it, Sylvia!
Glad to read Rachael (aka today's Haley Mills) had a great Thanksgiving with family, friends, and dogs (yep, can't forget those angels, I know). And is rehabbing her back and enjoying the holidays. Love the part wherein Rachael mentions the Christmas lights, ITA, ITA! Nothing like it. In fact a tradition of my famiily since I was small is/was to go out sightseeing and count how many houses have lights on them. This year I got up early on Black Friday to get that one-of-a-kind life size Santa for half the price.
GOOD LUCK AT NATIONALS, RACH, I KNOW YOU'LL DO GOOD AS ALWAYS!
Realistic is fine. Calling someone stupid and an idiot because you don't agree with them is childish.
Well, I killed a couple hours putting together a spreadsheet with MacMadame's criteria and Rachael didn't end up on the podium no matter which scenario I ran. But best of luck to her at Nats. She earned her spot and if just competing at Nationals one more time makes her happy, more power to her. If she's been following skating at all, I'm sure she already has some idea where she will place. I hope that Rachael can post a score of 150+ and finish in the top twelve.
ETA: The hypothetical podiums:
Everyone Skates to Her Best Score
1. Wagner 194.37
2. Gold 186.75
3. Nagasu 175.37
4. Miller 174.80
Everyone Skates to Her Average Score
1. Wagner 194.09
2. Gold 176.41
3. Miller 174.80
4. Hicks 166.74
Everyone Skates to Her Worst Score
1. Wagner 193.81
2. Miller 174.80
3. Gold 164.68
4. Cain 162.39
Yes, Rachael is a sentimental favorite. But I'm an engineer and I can't make myself say stuff which is blatantly untrue just because I like someone. I'd probably get farther in my career if I could.
Anyway, I was bored so I also made a spreadsheet. I put in all the Ladies who qualified for Nats with their best summer/fall comp score based on Sylvia's Unseen Skater site and then I looked up their Regionals and Sectionals scores and any JGP or SGP scores. I found a few Senior B scores on Sylvia's site as well that I also threw in. I didn't make any adjustments for the fact that Junior comps have different tech requirements which *could* cause lower scores just because I tried to make all possible biases be in Flatt's favor and also any adjustment was bound to be controversial. Based on my spreadsheet:
There are 21 skaters going to Nationals this year in Senior Ladies according to the latest announcement on the USFS website. Of those skaters:
7 have never posted a score lower than Rachael's highest score
19 have scored better than Flatt's best score this season at least once
6 have also scored lower than her lowest score and 12 have scored lower than her highest score
2 have never outscored her highest score (but both of those skaters have outscored her lowest score and those same two skaters have a lower average score than she does)
0 have never outscored her lowest (another way to put it is that every single one has outscored her lowest score at least once this season)
Make of that what you will
I make of it that a top 6 finish would be a miracle and that means Jammers is correct. Even a top 10 finish will be very hard. I think believing that is possible (which I do, I really do) probably makes me a Flatt uber because her average score put her in 19th. :
My spreadsheet has different results. Are you sure you got all the JGPs as I have Edmunds posting higher scores than you do. Here's what I got:
Everyone Skates to Her Best Score
Everyone Skates to Her Average Score
Everyone Skates to Her Worst Score
There are many more skaters competing other than Gao, Hicks and Zawadzki. Flatt's SB would place her outside top 10.
It's your responses to MacMadame in this thread that seem angry and disproportionate. She had an opinion that was different to yours but none of her posts read to me as confrontational or aggressive.
This whole debate over the pewter medals is kind of unnecessary. Just ask any skater or look at pics in Skating magazine.
I was a USFS skater and I got several pewter medals. We stand beside the podium and 4th is rarely marked like 1st, 2nd, 3rd. Period. Those are the facts.
4th is OFF the podium.
I must have misread your criteria. I only used senior comp scores. Even so, a Wagner-Gold 1-2 outcome seems likely, and if Flatt skates really well, all things given, top 12 is at least possible, although on my spreadsheet, 17th was her best "finish".
Thanks for piping in. I have not personally insulted her, either on this thread or in a PM. But if you wouldn't bat an eyelash to someone calling you stupid or an idiot because they disagreed with your opinion, then more power to you.
Back to Rachael, I wish her luck at nationals but not too much luck. My dream team is Wagner, Gold and Gao, with Cain as the alternate.
This assumes Rachael was skating her best at the qualifying rounds rather than just doing enough to move to the next level. I doubt very much she will show up at Nationals if she can only do doubles. I don't think Rachael has a realistic shot at the podium because the competition is too stiff. But I also expect to see her do better than she did at Regionals and Sectionals.
This. So much hoopla is made every year about the hierarchy of skaters at sectionals. It's a big waste of time to be analyzing things too much, imo. The last 2 pewter medalists at US nationals were women who finished second at their respective sectionals. That's only what I can remember at the top of my head. I'm sure there are many, many more similar examples if we were to go back and start looking at results. It's a fresh sheet of ice at nationals.
It is optimistic on the part of fans to expect a top 10 finish from Flatt. Based on what I've seen from her, 12th to 18th is the most likely range. The only way I see her moving up is if some of the newcomers completely fold in the FS, allowing Flatt to move up with a strong performance.
Having said that, top 10 is within reach IF she makes dramatic improvements in the next month. But (it seems) top 4 will remain out of reach for her no matter what she does.
I wasn't asuming that at all. I was going strictly by this season's scores in senior comps. My hope that she scores over 150 (be it 155, 160, 165, whatever) allows for the possibility that she can in fact add more difficulty to her programs by Nationals.
Rachel's score at Sectionals was her highest all season. Her score at Regionals was higher than her Coup de Nice score (which was her lowest all season). She did not do "only doubles" at either event and did a 3Z+2T in her long at Sectionals IIRC.
This idea that she's doing the bare minimum to qualify is nice but isn't really born out by the evidence. On top of that, the gals who are a threat for the podium are posting scores in the 170-195 range and have been all season, not the 130-148 range.
Personally I think it does skaters we are a fan of a disservice to act like they are going to come to Nationals and suddenly post scores dramatically higher than they have been. It risks a situation where, if they do have the skate of their lives and place respectively, it will be seen as failure because they didn't pull off the impossible their supposed fans were predicting for them instead of the amazing feat that it actually was.
P.S. to Nomad… it wasn't really criteria. I was just thinking out loud Anyway, I had her as high as 15th in the 'everyone skates their worst' list so that's good, right? I mean if you're a Flatt fan. The reason I think she can do better is that she has more experience than a lot of the gals who have been ahead of her all Fall and also she has a history of doing well at Nationals while some of them have a history of not putting their best performance out at that comp.
You recall incorrectly.
She's got finals at Stanford this month and I don't think she is taking basket weaving classes. Translation: Rachael is pre-med and is supposedly taking science courses with labs which are nothing to sneeze at anywhere, let alone Stanford. Translation: how much time is she going to have for the drastic changes? I am guessing not much.
Why is Rachael rehabbing her back? Did she have a specific injury, or just a nagging soreness. Didn't she have a major back problem at some point?
I hope she doesn't try to skate injured.
Not to mention that 4th place anywhere is nothing to sneeze it. It's still a great accomplishment, especially at the elite level.
Yes she did have an injury in her back some years ago. Another poster can give details on what it was, I can't remember. When she was a novice, she had a spectacular layback, but since her injury her flexibility is very limited. Her back problems seem to flare up once in a while.
It seemed as good a way as any to play with the numbers. Maybe she'll stay in the 130-148 range next month, maybe not. I don't know the extent of her back problems or how much training time she'll have. I'm not really expecting her to post a significantly higher score next month, but it would be nice to see her land five triples in the LP and finish higher than my numbers game predicted.
Rachael has bulging discs in her back. I've had this problem from time to time and it can be quite painful.
Found a photo on Flatt's FB page, composite photo she posted on Nov 13th...lower right hand corner...Flatt's layback from Novice season (2004/2005):
Her back was parallel to the ice in her layback.
IIRC, she injured her back at the start of the 06/07 season, and missed her JGP season, but did go thru the qualifying events (reg/sec at the Sr level in the US) and finished 5th at her first year at the US Championship level. And, from some of the interviews over the years, I belive Flatt has 3 discs that are bulging. The daily grind of training....ouch!!!!!
Hard to see these kids deal with chronic/long term injury issues. :-(
^^^ thanks for the information. Gorgeous picture of Rachael's layback.
I saw her Regionals LP and she did a lot of doubles. Alissa did the same thing at her early competition, as I recall. Rachael won't do that at Nationals unless she makes a mistake. And in my opinion, no one is hurt or done a disservice if a skater does better at Nationals than at Regionals. Few fans even watch the qualifying rounds or know how skaters do in them. A great skate is a great skate, no matter what came before.
I think MacMadame was talking about fans expecting a skater to bring all of these dramatic improvements to nationals and then being disappointed when they don't. And on the flip side, no one should completely dismiss a skater based on a past performance or slow start to the season. It's all about having realistic (but not negative) expectations.
Wagner and Gold will probably be 1-2 at Nationals
The fight for that last spot to Sochi will be between Nagasu, Gao and Hicks. Zawadzki will be in contention after the SP but fold in the LP.
So I kind of have a crazy hope that Mirai gets the 3rd spot. Since no one else seems to want it...
That's not how I read it, but I'll admit I had trouble understanding the point.
You are right. It was Regionals that Flatt did the 3Z+2T. And also Coupe de Nice. As Sylvia says:
Which begs the question: if she was doing the minimum at Regionals and Sectionals to get by, why do 3z+2T at Regionals? It was completely unnecessary there. The fact that she did it at Regionals and then soon after at Coupe de Nice suggests the opposite -- that she is going for all her content every time and landing it as often as she can.
Oh and at Sectionals she did 4 triples, 2 in combination, including a 3Lo+2T. Again, doesn't really support the "do the bare minimum to get by" strategy.
And good for her! IMO, this is her best strategy because of missing 2012 due to injury and not being on the GP this Fall. She needs the practice going for things in a pressure situation before the big show. Doing the bare minimum to get by wouldn't give her that experience. Not to mention, this is not a strategy that skaters regularly employ as it does not help them in the long run. This is a strategy you use in extraordinary circumstances, such as skating through a major injury where qualifying at all is in serious jeopardy.
Here's a recent short interview from NBC; sounds like she's in better form. http://www.nbcbayarea.com/video/#!/...l-Flatt-Ready-for-an-Olympic-Repeat/235823941
Thank you. The headline says: Stanford's Rachael Flatt Ready for an Olympic Repeat
However, Rachael herself does not mention the Olympics.
I think Rachael has only skated bare bone programs so far, so her low scores are understandable. I think many are underestimating where she is at now. Look forward to seeing her skate and would like to see her do well after all she is putting herself through to do that.
Separate names with a comma.