Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 257
  1. #81
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by orbitz View Post
    I enjoyed watching MK very much, but to say that Irina was only better than Michelle's at spins is silly.
    Exactly. Michelle doing everything better (including spins) would apply instead to Kwan vs Butyrskaya which is why the Russian federation were not dumb enough to promote the overachieving gangly stork on ice Butyrskaya as their #1 to go up against Kwan rather than Slutskaya. What a dumb move that would have been. I bet Maria as the Russian #1 would end up posting only the same # of wins over Kwan as she has now- 2. And her only other real opportunities to do so- 2000 Worlds, 96-97 and 00-01 and 01-02 Grand Prix final, 94 Goodwill Games, would have ended up exactly the same way as they did with Maria as the Russian #2, with Maria choking in the long program (and sometime the short as well).

  2. #82
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Searching for Sergei Verbillo's lost stache
    Posts
    715
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by orbitz View Post
    You really don't think Irina's jumps were better than Michelle's? Irina's jumps had height, power and distance. Michelle's jumps were nice, but no one would label them as powerful. Don't forget also Irina's one foot straight line step sequence in her SP down the length of the rink.
    Slutskaya's straightline steps done on one foot in the SP was one of the rare times I thought she did something "wow" and interesting with her elements; at that event Kwan's step sequence lost speed near the end; so as i said, more reason to award Slutskaya in 1st. Strangely that was the only program i ever liked of hers, i always wanted her to skate to something more lyrical and delicate like this one, because it made her work hard at holding her moves better, minimizing poor posture, and just making herself look polished. Imo her powerful and robust programs she loved to skate highlighted her sloppyness even more.
    Quote Originally Posted by orbitz View Post
    Throw in flexibility also as an area where Irina triumped over Michelle's. I enjoyed watching MK very much, but to say that Irina was only better than Michelle's at spins is silly.
    Slutskaya was flexibile in the one sense that she can lift her foot backwards above her head and catch it. She could do a Biellmann and Kwan couldn't; but the quality of Biellmann was not great. She was unable to execute, much less, hold a decent looking arabesque during a change of edge spiral. Which is why by 2005 she cleverly took advantage of the sprial requirements and mostly did Biellmann's to hide her lack of stretch. Slutskaya was flexibile with her back, but her extension was nowhere near some of the other ladies.

  3. #83

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Canada baby!
    Age
    38
    Posts
    7,591
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3318
    Bourne & Kraatz vs Grishuk & Platov vs Krylova & Ovsiannikov. I admit in my naive days I thought B&K should beat K&O but no way in heck should they have ever beat them. (Even 1996 Grand Prix Final in Hamilton where they did win gold over K&O) Canadian Media/ Tracy Wilson really hyped them up to the point that Riverdance was supposed to be seen as better than Carmen and Memorial?? No way...

    Stojko- was UNDERMARKED in 1992 Olympics. He should have been higher in his final placement and possibly won bronze in Albertville. Barna (while I did like him very much) should have been 4th. Though I am going by memory more than sitting down and really rewatching their SP's and LP's.
    ~I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% how I react to it.~ (Charles R. Swindoll)

  4. #84
    Title-less
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    8,769
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6417
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    Well like I said either way B&S vs S&P wasnt a good rivalry. From my perspective and the perspective of many other serious skating fans B&S were a whole other league than S&P who were largely a myth. Yet on the other side competitively speaking S&P always beat B&S in the 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 seasons and in pro competitions for many years later, and were given the wins even when they missed jumps and made other mistakes. So depending your perspective it is either B&S >>> S&P or S&P >>> B&S but either way it wasnt a good rivalry of any kind.
    Pro-comps were going on decline after 2002, and they're more like cheesefests, so for that matter I don't see why they count. And I can count in one hand the pro comps "many years later" post-Salt Lake.

    During their amateur days the two pairs' competitive records are comparable. I don't see how you can use basic skating to argue the existence of rivalries since many very successful skaters aren't the very best in basics, ala Lipinski, Stojko, Goebel. Or even Lysacek, Sarah Hughes, Joubert and 2010 Plushenko (though their basics are good enough to compete at the top, kind of like S/P). Your one criterion would have rewritten skating history in many competitions and this discussion would have to be revamped.

    And I agree on Elvis's flaws. However I think his timing was perfect and that is why he dominated.
    You can use timing to explain the success of all skaters including S/P, Shen/Zhao and T/M (who no longer had to compete against B/S and S/P post-02).

  5. #85
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    473
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    Exactly. Michelle doing everything better (including spins) would apply instead to Kwan vs Butyrskaya which is why the Russian federation were not dumb enough to promote the overachieving gangly stork on ice Butyrskaya as their #1 to go up against Kwan rather than Slutskaya. What a dumb move that would have been. I bet Maria as the Russian #1 would end up posting only the same # of wins over Kwan as she has now- 2. And her only other real opportunities to do so- 2000 Worlds, 96-97 and 00-01 and 01-02 Grand Prix final, 94 Goodwill Games, would have ended up exactly the same way as they did with Maria as the Russian #2, with Maria choking in the long program (and sometime the short as well).
    Butyrskaya may have her weaknesses, but I would never say she has no advantages over Kwan, and no advantages over Slutskaya apart from artistry. Her jumps may be stiff at times, but she does have great jump technique and generally fully rotates them. She also has an amazing lutz. Her posture and polish tend to be better than Slutskaya, and she is a comparable spinner to Kwan (she was better in the early days than in 2001-2002 though).

  6. #86
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by shady82 View Post
    Butyrskaya may have her weaknesses, but I would never say she has no advantages over Kwan, and no advantages over Slutskaya apart from artistry. Her jumps may be stiff at times, but she does have great jump technique and generally fully rotates them. She also has an amazing lutz. Her posture and polish tend to be better than Slutskaya, and she is a comparable spinner to Kwan (she was better in the early days than in 2001-2002 though).
    Would you say her jumps are better than either Irina or Michelle though even when she lands them? I agree her polish and posture are better than Slutskaya, but that along with maturity are the only things she is better in. You say she is a comparable spinner to Kwan, is she comparable or better in anything else?

    Either way my point is Michelle was clearly a better skater technically, artistically, and in terms of consistency. Irina was a far superior skater technically with much better jumps, spins, footwork, and even better spirals than Maria, and her overall skating had more power and command than Maria. So why would the Russian federation have ever made her their #1 over Irina. Maria clearly wasnt good enough to beat Kwan and like her skating or not Irina was good enough to challenge or beat Kwan.

    Maria's strength was her artistry but she never had the artistry of Kwan, Chen, and Cohen because she was too jerky, stiff, and lacking in emotion. And her technical abilities were always inferior to many of the other top women. I would say she did well to win a World title. The amazing thing is she could have won again in 2000 which would have truly made her the biggest overachiever in history had she pulled that off.

  7. #87
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    672
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    sasha might have been higher than michelle at worlds but how can you count it a rivalry if they cheated,
    and overlook her (sasha mistakes and was told to look out for michelles')

    rivalries aren't what they aren't if they are allowed to cheat, using drugs, special suits,help them monitor their system so they now when their drugs won't show up in drug test)basically track and field, judges overlooking their mistakes and told to look for another skaters mistakes.
    look that their sponsors, dow chemical-who nows what kind of chemical/they will give athletes and say they are clean.
    sorry i have given up on clean -healthy and fair competition in the olympics, rivalries aren't there when one gets away with mistakes that includes less amount of deduction for one and most amount of deduction for same mistakes.
    it is called cheating and lying. sorry-to me that is what this sport is all about

  8. #88

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    19516
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    Maria's strength was her artistry but she never had the artistry of Kwan, Chen, and Cohen because she was too jerky, stiff, and lacking in emotion.
    I disagree. Maria's artistry was very avante guarde sophisticated, not jerky, not stiff, and surely not lacking in emotion, which many "don't get". Maria's artistry, although not presentation, reminded me very much of Kira Ivanova, which I enjoy but also know I am in the minority. Of course this is fitting, as they were the last major Russian ladies developed in the Soviet Era, and they tended to "think different" although not being known to be the sharpest tools in the shed, which often got them into trouble with authorities.

    ___________

    I love this SP. Note the 2A entrance.

    1993 EUROPEANS : MARIA BUTYRSKAYA SP

    Here is also a smoking LP she used to beat Josee Chouinard and Tonya Harding at Skate Canada 1992.

    Maria Butryskaya (RUS) - 1992 Skate Canada International, Ladies' Free Skate

    And yes, to most the costumes are weird and music choices are strange to many.
    Last edited by bardtoob; 08-07-2010 at 07:27 PM.

  9. #89
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Missing Matsutake
    Posts
    2,737
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bardtoob View Post
    I disagree. Maria's artistry was very avante guarde sophisticated, not jerky, not stiff, and surely not lacking in emotion, which many "don't get". Maria's artistry, although not presentation, reminded me very much of Kira Ivanova, which I enjoy but also know I am in the minority.
    Here is also a smoking LP she used to beat Josee Chouinard and Tonya Harding at Skate Canada 1992.

    Maria Butryskaya (RUS) - 1992 Skate Canada International, Ladies' Free Skate

    And yes, to most the costumes are weird and music choices are strange to many.
    I love Kira Ivanova too!


    Also, I always crack up at this video with Mishin barking orders to Butryskaya from the board midway through the program and I presume ordering her to attempt the 3toe again after doubling it the first time.

    I always felt Maria was under marked and low balled by the federation. Especially in 1996 she was more polished than Slutskaya and should have been on the World podium with bronze over Slutskaya who fell and had her typically sloppy presentation.

  10. #90
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I agree that Maria deserved the bronze at the 96 Worlds. Irina had been having an excellent season though with better results than Maria so she was viewed as a much stronger contender going into Worlds that year than was Maria.

    The Russian federation decided from the moment Slutskaya emerged that she had more talent and potential than Maria, more potential to win major events (which in hindsight is pretty much irrefutable) and thus backed her as their #1 over Maria from that point forward. I am not sure if Maria was ever really the Russian #1, Olga Markova was favored over by the Russian federation in 94 and 95 as well.

    The proof is in the pudding though. Irina as Russian #1 won Worlds twice, but was in real contention to win Worlds as many as 4 or 5 times, won atleast silver at Worlds 5 times, won 2 Olympic medals and was in real contention to win both, won 4 Grand Prix finals, won 13 regular grand prix events, won a Goodwill Games title, won a record 7 European titles, and beat Michelle atleast 10 times excluding the silly cheesefests which I dont keep track of (but which would probably add atleast another 3 times). Now would Maria as the Russian federation #1 have attained the same success. Anyone.

    Maria as probably the Russian #1 in 1998 and 1999 when Irina was struggling couldnt even beat a past her prime and technically weak Chen for an Olympic medal, and couldnt even beat an overweight and slumping Slutskaya for the World silver and 98. She also couldnt even beat Tatiana Malinina to win the Grand Prix final, Tanya Szewcenko to win NHK, an off form Kwan to win Skate Canada, or Elena Sokolova to win Cup of Russia. Her greatest shining moment was winning Europeans back to back, and a World title where Kwan struggled and no skaters who had or would ever manage more than a bronze medal at Worlds apart from 13 year old Hughes were in the field.
    Last edited by judgejudy27; 08-07-2010 at 08:13 PM.

  11. #91

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,792
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    19516
    Maria Butryskaya will ALWAYS BE THE FIRST FEMALE RUSSIAN WORLD CHAMPION.

  12. #92

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    7,397
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    4361
    Quote Originally Posted by bardtoob View Post
    Maria Butryskaya will ALWAYS BE THE FIRST FEMALE RUSSIAN WORLD CHAMPION.
    Isn't she also the oldest ever to win a world title in the ladies event? If so, she has an excellent chance of remaining in that spot, since so many are coming up so young ... and the technical changes will probably prevent them from having careers that last more than a decade.

  13. #93
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,264
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Yes, at 26, iirc. The ultimate late bloomer.

    Quote Originally Posted by shady82
    Butyrskaya may have her weaknesses, but I would never say she has no advantages over Kwan, and no advantages over Slutskaya apart from artistry.
    I agree. She may not have dominated any one set of skills, but there were individual elements in which she was better. Aside from that awful layback, her spins were generally strong (one of the best camel spins in the business, and a better sitspin than Irina). She also had a great loop and lutz with a deep outside edge. As far spirals, hers may not have had the speed of Irina's, but they had better extension and no where near the sloppiness.

  14. #94

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Gwyneth Paltrow Fan Club headquarters
    Posts
    17,295
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    31302
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    From my perspective and the perspective of many other serious skating fans B&S were a whole other league than S&P who were largely a myth. Yet on the other side competitively speaking S&P always beat B&S in the 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 seasons and in pro competitions for many years later, and were given the wins even when they missed jumps and made other mistakes.
    And many other serious skating fans feel exactly the opposite. Please. You are not convincing anyone that your perspective is correct by simply stating it over and over again.
    You should never write words with numbers. Unless you're seven. Or your name is Prince. - "Weird Al" Yankovic, "Word Crimes"

  15. #95
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,125
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    My opinion on B/S and S/P.

    B/S had the better basics, sublime really, and because of this the smaller and greater errors that were always creeping into their programs were more jarring than they might be in lesser pairs' skating. Also, their choreography tended toward gilding the lily, I often remember wishing they'd just tone it down a little and concentrate on skating clean rather than finding a new way to disguise their resting spots (I blame Moskvina for that, she was too enraptured by their potential to ever let them really achieve it).

    S/P had somewhat lesser basics (though still very impressive) but concentrated more actually skating programs they could do well and cleanly (why they dumped the B/S-ish Orchid). They came closer to skating to their full potential than B/S did. They also had the elusive X factor of being able to make their programs seem like more than the sum of its parts.

  16. #96
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    473
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I agree about the B/S vs. S/P opinion. S/P's presentation was endearing, warm, and relatable to the audience, but B/S's artistic skills and program construction were on a higher "plane" of achievement. But the gap between these two teams has been way too exagerrated on this board. An almost-clean B/S and a clean S/P should be comparable - I don't think that B/S are so far ahead that they have that room for error.

    And regarding Butyrskaya, I do agree on her stiffness and other negative aspects. I find her artistry to be a bit more contained, but with this subtle inner drama and a grandness that comes with age, which you don't see in the younger or middle-aged skaters. You can see this with "Seventeen Moments of Spring" or "Tale of Travel", even though the latter wasn't that great of a program.

    I wouldn't call her a great overachiever for her abilities, though. She actually is a very proficient skater (but not as talented as other top skaters, that's true), and many people who have observed her practice performances do note that they are very, very strong. She gets nervous during competitions, which hinders the smoothness of her skating. She didn't get lucky with her achievements, either, since she was often judged unfairly to begin with. Her SP/FP performances at the 1999 Worlds would have been good enough to win at the 2000 Worlds. It was even enough to win Olympic gold in 2002, since there was no way her SP would rate lower than 4th, and her FP will obviously be ranked 1st. Sarah Hughes, for example, is definitely a larger overachiever than Butyrskaya.

  17. #97

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    being a grumpy penguin
    Age
    31
    Posts
    2,909
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    5587
    Quote Originally Posted by Mafke View Post
    My opinion on B/S and S/P.

    B/S had the better basics, sublime really, and because of this the smaller and greater errors that were always creeping into their programs were more jarring than they might be in lesser pairs' skating. Also, their choreography tended toward gilding the lily, I often remember wishing they'd just tone it down a little and concentrate on skating clean rather than finding a new way to disguise their resting spots (I blame Moskvina for that, she was too enraptured by their potential to ever let them really achieve it).

    S/P had somewhat lesser basics (though still very impressive) but concentrated more actually skating programs they could do well and cleanly (why they dumped the B/S-ish Orchid). They came closer to skating to their full potential than B/S did. They also had the elusive X factor of being able to make their programs seem like more than the sum of its parts.
    I disagree completely . In 2000-2001 and 2001-2002, S&P were doing more complicated programs and would consistently make small errors (I can't recall any clean performances of either Orchid or T&I) , but were receiving the benefit of the doubt from the judges because they really tried to push their limits. Meanwhile, B&S' 2000-2001 LP probably had the least number of connecting moves and the least actual skating content of all of their LPs, yet it was atheir most consistent , and had some of their cleanest and most memorable performances(2001 Worlds, 2001 COR) .
    Personally, I thought B&S' Chaplin presented a far more cohesive and trenchant theme than S&P's T&I, but the judges wanted to reward the difficult construction and composition,and thus gave it the nod that year. I have always felt, that when they dumped Orchid to do Love Story, that they really missed the point that the judges were driving home the season and a half leading into SLC. It made perfect sense to me that a clean LS wouldn't win.

    I also never really got the whole X factor thing with S&P, they were cute and audience friendly ,but that's about it.
    Last edited by escaflowne9282; 08-08-2010 at 07:57 AM.

  18. #98
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by overedge View Post
    And many other serious skating fans feel exactly the opposite. Please. You are not convincing anyone that your perspective is correct by simply stating it over and over again.
    and I really dont give a rats ass what you think and you are not convincing me of anything by continually responding to me and simply stating it over and over again in this thread.

  19. #99
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by shady82 View Post
    I agree about the B/S vs. S/P opinion. S/P's presentation was endearing, warm, and relatable to the audience, but B/S's artistic skills and program construction were on a higher "plane" of achievement. But the gap between these two teams has been way too exagerrated on this board. An almost-clean B/S and a clean S/P should be comparable - I don't think that B/S are so far ahead that they have that room for error.
    You are forgetting it is S/P who were given (given being the operative word) wins repeatedly in the 2000-2001 season even with missed jumps.


    I wouldn't call her a great overachiever for her abilities, though. She actually is a very proficient skater (but not as talented as other top skaters, that's true), and many people who have observed her practice performances do note that they are very, very strong. She gets nervous during competitions, which hinders the smoothness of her skating. She didn't get lucky with her achievements, either, since she was often judged unfairly to begin with. Her SP/FP performances at the 1999 Worlds would have been good enough to win at the 2000 Worlds. It was even enough to win Olympic gold in 2002, since there was no way her SP would rate lower than 4th, and her FP will obviously be ranked 1st. Sarah Hughes, for example, is definitely a larger overachiever than Butyrskaya.
    I agree she could have won other major events with her performances at the 99 Worlds, but here is the thing, that is the only time she skated two back to back programs at that level. Her short program at the 2000 Worlds was even better than 99, but never before or after did she skate 2 programs at that level.

  20. #100
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by escaflowne9282 View Post
    I disagree completely . In 2000-2001 and 2001-2002, S&P were doing more complicated programs and would consistently make small errors (I can't recall any clean performances of either Orchid or T&I) ... I also never really got the whole X factor thing with S&P, they were cute and audience friendly ,but that's about it.
    I was a huge fan of both teams, more of S&P than B&S during their actual rivalry but I have a lot of respect and admiration for the latter. Tristan & Isolde was performed cleanly at 4cc of that year, and in fact, S&P never made a mistake in their elements in either of their competitions (4cc & Olympics) @ SLC. I think that B&S were potentially the superior team (better basics, speed, posture, line, complex choreography in '02) but S&P get flamed so much because they were "whiners" during and after the SLC choreography off the ice. But if you look at both teams, they are both strong and S&P were deservedly contenders because they had great qualities of their own. B&S did the ethereal choreography so well (Lady Caliph, Meditation, Colatura program, Waltz program) but that was because Elena was pretty much a blank canvas when she skated and didn't really relate to Anton as much (he was pretty expressive, especially in Chaplin). S&P did "Romance" a lot but they did vary it up a bit (flirty in their tangox2 and Come Rain & Shine sp, cute in Love Story, dramatic in T&I). And they proved that they didn't need to be lovey dovey in Orchid which was a lovely and complex program and which I do think they could have executed well if not for the pushing of people. She singled a double axel in Skate Canada but was otherwise clean if I remember correctly. But unfortunately it was double LP @ grand prix and they performed Orchid poorly and Love Story beautifully @ the GFP and then were uncharacteristically bad @ nationals. S&P also had their strengths versus S&P. Their lifts were more complex and better executed than BS (who had beautiful but simple lifts, and S&P covered the ice so well). When done beautifully, B&S had a great twist but often times resulted in a bump. Jaime was always caught well, even though she may not have been thrown as high or had as good an extension. B&S did not have as strong a death spiral and only actually did the more simple one well (which was also a weakness for another Moskvina team of K&D), whereas S&P did all three well and did two in their LPs always. Lastly, S&P's throw consistency was vastly superior to B&S although my favourite throw was the latter when done well.

Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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