Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 55 of 55
  1. #41
    Title-less
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    8,768
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6417
    The "Look at what other skaters got" argument is what I have an issue with Hersh about.

    He said he has an issue with criteria--fine. Then tell us what is wrong with them--which criterion is wrong and how wrong it is? Then he can cite examples. Is it that nationals was weighed too heavily, or that the highest-ranked skater at worlds should get top tier funding? He never addressed any of this.

    Instead he wrapped his argument around the "why didn't Mirai get more funding than Skater x-y-z" line of reasoning, which is weak and doesn't translate into solid arguments against any criterion. Nor did it help fix what he thinks needs fixing.

  2. #42
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,511
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    If USFSA wants to do all their funding by National results that is their prerogative. They choose a little of it and a lot about major international competition. Which ended by being not as good for Phill Hersh's (and my) top lady. I personally think Mirai and Rachael had a very similar season and should be in the same tier but pre year rules state otherwise. Rather we think Rachael should be national champion or not she is. The USFSA was harsh on Mirai's triples at nationals and I think that's a good thing because she has the potential to be a great so force to her to be. The Olympics was a fluke event concerning downgrade calls.

    The USFSA could say the top 2 or 3 at nationals are in the top tier of funding (which would have placed Mirai in the top tier) but what if all 3 national medalist are too young for Worlds and the 4th or 5th US lady ends up winning worlds? I personally think they should just say the top 2 or 3 at nationals are in the top tier without qualifiers. They could say anyone top 3 at nationals, worlds and Olympics are top tier. There has to be some cutting off point because money is not unlimited. If someone bombs at nationals but was great at last years nationals or won the GPF or medaled at 4cc's then the lower tiers can be from that plus national results. But the rules are the rules set before the season.

    Rachael shouldn't have been bought into this conversation. If this was any previous season the national champion automatically got top funding because they won nationals. It was the top US Event and was place as a priority. It still should be in my book because this is USFSA funding after all.

    I do think Sasha shouldn't have funding because she didn't have any other national or international event this quad.

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    near Chicago
    Posts
    2,039
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    259
    Quote Originally Posted by Marco View Post
    It's so silly to heavily favour Nationals given how ridiculously political the judging has been since 2007.
    The judging has always been ridiculously political!!

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Gwyneth Paltrow Fan Club headquarters
    Posts
    17,274
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    30411
    Quote Originally Posted by geod2 View Post
    Rather than any desire to attack Rachel, Phil's "downhill" comment was based on the evidence (that FSUers saw too) that Rachel peaked at Nationals and to an increasing degree did not quite skate up to her own standards after that....therefore downhill compared to what we saw at Nationals. Protocols would seem to confirm it.
    Maybe the phrase "not as well after she peaked at Nationals" would be less offensive than "downhill'.
    Not to belabor the point further, but I really don't care what FSU's opinion was. We're talking about Hersh's comments and opinions.
    If Rachael didn't skate up to her own standards, I'd like to hear Rachael say that.

  5. #45
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,467
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Well, Phil, if you feel so strongly about it, why not make up the difference?---it's only a few thousand dollars. lol

  6. #46
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    with my Sestra Helena plotting how to ravish Hot Paul and delicious Cal
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,256
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by barbk View Post
    I'm a little irate at the notion that, somehow, Rachael had an unsuccessful season.
    -- She won Nationals, showing tremendous consistency at a time when many others melted.
    -- She made the Olympic team
    -- She competed very, very well at what turned out to be one of the most competitive Olympic ladies events we've seen in years. I still think that her LP scores were a little jobbed to make good and sure that Rochette, who was yet to skate, made the podium.
    -- She was a little flatter at Worlds, but still ended in the top 10.

    And she did all this while still managing to complete a full high school course load packed with four or five AP classes, including Calc BC and one of the Physics courses.

    She has a lot to be proud of this year. Exactly how did Jeremy do at Olympics and Worlds? Taking what kind of courseload?
    You think Rachael and her under-rotated jumps were better than Joannie? REALLY??? x a million
    If anything, Flatt was over-marked in the Olympic SP and should never have been in that final LP group, IMO.

    Also, what do Rachael's results have to do with how Jeremy performed at Olympics and Worlds? x a million
    You say he wasn't taking any kind of course load as if he had no obstacles to deal with this season, but I'd say switching to a brand new coach, using a new choreographer for both his SP and LP, and moving out on his own for the first time in a new, big city that is about 1160 miles from home to be a challenge in itself. Flatt's results certainly aren't any better than Abbott's this season. Sure, they both would have liked to have done better at Olympics and Worlds, but their seasons weren't a complete bust.
    Last edited by museksk8r; 05-14-2010 at 01:17 AM.

  7. #47
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,033
    vCash
    600
    Rep Power
    1456
    Quote Originally Posted by The Fly On The Wall View Post
    Didn't Phil go back & forth with respect/disrespect toward Kwan?
    Yes.
    "In no way do I think I stopped commanding a spotlight. I think I travel with one." -- Johnny Weir

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    5,962
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    7850
    Quote Originally Posted by museksk8r View Post
    You think Rachael and her under-rotated jumps were better than Joannie? REALLY??? x a million
    If anything, Flatt was over-marked in the Olympic SP and should never have been in that final LP group, IMO.
    That's not what I said. Joannie has tremendous jumps, and there are quite often several where I wish she'd get +2s.. But there was a whole lot of sympathy for what she was going through at the Olympics, and I happen to believe that Rachael suddenly getting underrotation calls in the LP had more to do with sympathy for Joannie than Rachael's skating that night. Rochette still delivered enough to solidly win the bronze medal, but since Rachael skated before Joannie the caller couldn't know that. As it was, Joannie's LP was marred by several landing issues. I think that there was a real attempt to ensure that even if she took a tumble that she'd still leave with a medal.

    Quote Originally Posted by museksk8r View Post
    Also, what do Rachael's results have to do with how Jeremy performed at Olympics and Worlds? x a million
    You say he wasn't taking any kind of course load as if he had no obstacles to deal with this season, but I'd say switching to a brand new coach, using a new choreographer for both his SP and LP, and moving out on his own for the first time in a new, big city that is about 1160 miles from home to be a challenge in itself. Flatt's results certainly aren't any better than Abbott's this season. Sure, they both would have liked to have done better at Olympics and Worlds, but their seasons weren't a complete bust.
    I was suggesting that if Hersh has a bone to pick with someone whose results ought to cause a skater to reconsider continuing on after next year that Abbott was a more appropriate target than Flatt. He's the two-time US champion who still hasn't managed to bring it to either Worlds or the Olympics, overshadowed both times by stellar performances from the skater who didn't win a Nationals. But you don't see Hersh using Abbott in the comparison -- instead he picks on Flatt, who has been the most consistent ladies skater the US has had in the past three years.

    Personally I'm not a fan of suggesting that any skater should leave -- as long as they want to skate, skate. But the comment was one Phil made, and that's what I was responding to.

  9. #49
    Title-less
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    8,768
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6417
    Quote Originally Posted by barbk View Post
    and I happen to believe that Rachael suddenly getting underrotation calls in the LP had more to do with sympathy for Joannie than Rachael's skating that night. Rochette still delivered enough to solidly win the bronze medal, but since Rachael skated before Joannie the caller couldn't know that. As it was, Joannie's LP was marred by several landing issues. I think that there was a real attempt to ensure that even if she took a tumble that she'd still leave with a medal.
    Rachael got a little lucky with the short, despite slightly underrotating. I actually thought the judges "made it up" by dinging her in the free.

    Joannie rocked the short on home ice and at that point, it was her medal to lose.


    But you don't see Hersh using Abbott in the comparison -- instead he picks on Flatt, who has been the most consistent ladies skater the US has had in the past three years.
    Because he's already picked on Abbott recently and it's now Rachael's turn?
    Last edited by jlai; 05-14-2010 at 02:55 AM.

  10. #50
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    with my Sestra Helena plotting how to ravish Hot Paul and delicious Cal
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,256
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by barbk View Post
    That's not what I said. Joannie has tremendous jumps, and there are quite often several where I wish she'd get +2s.. But there was a whole lot of sympathy for what she was going through at the Olympics, and I happen to believe that Rachael suddenly getting underrotation calls in the LP had more to do with sympathy for Joannie than Rachael's skating that night. Rochette still delivered enough to solidly win the bronze medal, but since Rachael skated before Joannie the caller couldn't know that. As it was, Joannie's LP was marred by several landing issues. I think that there was a real attempt to ensure that even if she took a tumble that she'd still leave with a medal.
    Still . For me, comparing Joannie and Rachael, every aspect of Rochette's skating is better to me than Flatt's skating, so yes, to me and I believe to the judges as well, JoRo would have to skate a meltdown to lose to Rachael. On the contrary, Rochette skated the SP of her life at the Olympics only rivaled IMO by her SP at the 2008 4CC where she landed the 3flip+3toe, which was DG'ed by the tech panel. Flatt, on the other hand, was clearly struggling to land her jumps in the Olympic SP. The tech panel was VERY generous to not DG her 3Lutz attempt. Let's not forget, Rochette rotated 7 triples in her LP, and the only mistakes were a step-out of her 3flip and a slight turn-out of her 2Axel. She skated a GREAT LP considering all the pressure she was under!

  11. #51

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    7,390
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    4361
    Quote Originally Posted by The Fly On The Wall View Post
    Didn't Phil go back & forth with respect/disrespect toward Kwan?
    Didn't Phil go back and forth, respecting/disrespecting Sasha, also? As a matter of fact, are there any skaters who Phil has not gone back and forth, respecting and disrespecting?

  12. #52

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    17,017
    vCash
    1561
    Rep Power
    4990
    The thing is that in the end the USFSA really has to set a criteria before the season starts and sticks with it. Because if everything is "case by case" basis that can really open up a huge can of worms. If an exception is made for Mirai, what about Evora and her partner who beat Denny/Barrett at the Olympics (and finished pretty close to them at worlds even if behind. Can we truly say Denny/Barrett are really on "another tier")

  13. #53
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    On the sofa in front of the computer
    Posts
    847
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by attyfan View Post
    Didn't Phil go back and forth, respecting/disrespecting Sasha, also? As a matter of fact, are there any skaters who Phil has not gone back and forth, respecting and disrespecting?
    So why are we all getting so worked up about this article then? If Mirai loses a competition or two next year, he'll be right back to telling her to move on.

  14. #54
    Port de bras!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ravenclaw
    Posts
    30,120
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34026
    I think Phil understands very well what attracts readership and that's controversy. He knew Kwan had a loyal fan base and anything he said about her, especially anything negative would attract attention and bring on those clicks on his article. Same goes for Cohen.

    It is now the off season and quiet but he still manages to stir things up and get us to read. Kudos, I guess.

    Anyway, I happen to agree with him on occasion and this is one of them, at least partially.
    "Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."

    from Speedy Death

  15. #55
    I <3 Kozuka
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Vancouver/Seattle
    Posts
    19,182
    vCash
    730
    Rep Power
    43796
    Both of Flatt's flips were downgraded; the judges gave her +.60 GOE on the 3/3 and -.06 GOE on the 3/2/2. They gave her 0 on the 3Lz and Change Foot Upright Spin, and +GOE on the other eight elements. I don't see much Rachael hate from the judges.

    I just watched the iTunes/NBC coverage of the Ladies FS today for the first time. (Karademir, Pfaneuf, Lee, Gedevanishvili, and the final group.) Bezic and Hamilton noted how strict the caller was before the final group began. After Flatt's performance, they also called her Olympic FS the best performance of her season and the skate of a lifetime at the Olympics. I know this was Bezic and Hamilton, but even taking it down about three notches, she looked better to me here as she had at Nationals, but I rarely see under-rotations real-time.

    It came down to the technical team for Flatt: Technical Specialist, Myriam Loriol-Oberwiler (Switzerland), Technical Controller Alexander Lakernik (Russia), and Assistant Technical Specialist Zuzana Zackova (Slovakia).

    According to the rules and the judgment of the technical panel, Flatt finished behind Nagasu. But it wasn't as if she went out and bombed at the Olympics, and she didn't fall out of top 10 in the FS after being in medal contention at Worlds.
    "The team doesn't get automatic capacity because management is mad" -- Greg Smith, agile guy

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •