What is most interesting to me is how the interviewer brings up the comments that Joe Inman made before the Olympic Games. Last time I checked, the original source of the drama came from the same website AND interviewer (from Absolute Skating) when Plushenko himself said the following:
It just doesn't make much sense to me that the same interviewer this time would askLike in Tallinn, Brian Joubert got more points for his transitions than me, although we did exactly the same transitions on the ice. In fact, we don’t have any transitions because we focus on our jumps.
I dunno, maybe I lack comprehension, but I still think it was Plushenko basically telling the world that he didn't have any transitions and dragged Joubert into that mess himself. If there was a translation error or mis-wording on the part of the interviewer originally, it still wouldn't necessarily be Inman's fault for copying and pasting the comment, right? The interviewer seems to have told or suggested to Joubert that Inman basically came out of nowhere talking trash about Plushenko and Joubert, when in reality Inman was using her own article as an example! She should have really clarified that it was a copied comment made by Evgeny.What do you think about the “e-mail scandal” before the Olympics, when an American judge, Joe Inman, sent messages to his colleagues to watch out for your and Plushenko’s transitions?
I also don't know how Joubert can go on to say
Sorry, but if he's admitting right before this that he hasn't even seen the programs, then his opinion becomes silly. I know he's all about the quad, but there's so much more to a program even if someone does land the quad. Brian knows that....I don’t want to watch Evan Lysacek, the Olympic champion, without a quad. I still don’t understand it. He is a very good skater, but I’m a little bit disappointed about somebody winning without a quad.
Anyways, I still always find myself rooting for Joubert even if I know he lacks some of the strengths in components that some of the others have.
Last edited by Tony Wheeler; 07-28-2010 at 01:17 AM. Reason: Noticed the interviewer was the same for both Plushenko and Joubert's articles.
It still makes me that judges need Joe Inman or Plushenko or anybody else to tell them something that is very clearly visible to everyone.
The piece is seventy-five minutes long...[l]ong enough for an idea to be developed, but not so long that one starts to measure the number of seats to the exits with desperation if the thing doesn’t work" -- Marina Harss
Good interview, I love how you can sense that all these disappointments make him more mature. And I completely agree with him that a 4-2 in the sp needs to have a much higher value than a 3-3. As he said having a quad in the SP changes EVERYTHING, including your approach, your pacing, your train of thought, and your nerves.
And I also think transitions and choreography need to be more representative of what the skaters actually do on the ice
The critera for what a transition is totally open for interpretation. You can read the criteria and it doesn't seem to require anything at all be done with skates. Everyone thinks only spread eagles and ina bauers and knee bends are transitions-well the criteria doesn't say those are the only transitions.
For a skater like Joubert who has worked so hard to do a quad because he felt it was necessary to win events to know of a skater not land a quad in their Olympic program and win in 2010 I am sure it is totally baffling and dispiriting. From 1997 to 2007 all world champs had a quad and the Olympic champions of 1998, 2002, and 2006 had one. It was seen as necessary to TRY IT! If you failed you lost-If you did a quad and did everything else you won. To do everything else but not a quad meant you lost!
And most people would probably agree that at the senior elite international level, straight stroking, crossovers, and maybe the occasional 3-turn or mohawk is not enough transitions, or not difficult enough transitions, to gain legitimate high marks. Which is the issue with your boy Plushenko, who (as stated above) says he doesn't do transitions.
Stale pastry is hollow succour to a man who is bereft of ostrich. - Sheldon Cooper, The Big Bang Theory
The article is interesting. He did mention that he tried doing his SP with a 3-3 and it was much easier for him to do. I tend to agree with him on this point because if it weren't so, more skaters would be attempting 4-3 combo. They should find a better method of rewarding the different combinations.
You left out a variable - what if you have a quad, but not much else?
You beat on this dead horse so much, and yet you haven't made anyone agree with you buy those few who already did. Do you think you're going to change anyone's opinion? Or do you just enjoy hitting that horse so much?
From the ISU Components Criteria:
Variety, difficulty, and intricacy wouldn't exactly include stroking and three-turns. It even says in the rules, minimum use of cross-cuts, which I suppose you missed. Also, three-turns were something everyone can do in the first few months of skating. I'd hardly consider them to be difficult or intricate or showing variety when the Sal, toe loop, and flip already have three-turns into their entrances. I also don't think a bunch of arm flailing while skating around on two feet and doing crossovers into everything is showing variety, difficulty, or intricacy; then again, maybe some find it difficult to have arm and head movements while doing crossovers in the same way that some people can't rub their stomachs and tap their heads at the same time.Definition:
The varied and/or intricate footwork, positions, movements, and holds that link all elements. In singles, pairs, and synchronize skating this also includes the entrances and exits of technical elements.
Quality (including unison in Pair Skating and Ice Dancing)
Balance of workload between partners (Pair Skating and Ice Dancing)
Variety of Dance holds (not excessive side by side and hand in hand – Ice Dancing)
Transitions can be short or long, including the use of blade, body, head, arms, legs as dictated by the music. (Minimum use of cross-cuts)
That's why skaters who:
a) control the position of their arms and head all the time (so they are nicely aligned and not just dangling)
b) are able to move them to the music whilst skating
Should be getting higher PCS (this will reflect both under Transitions and Interpretation - provided it's performed to the music - there is a lot of crossover like that with PCS where certain things come under criteria of two or more components).
And Joubert really lacks this kind of detail.
So what is your point again?
Last edited by Ziggy; 07-28-2010 at 02:25 AM.
Also, I personally disagree that 4/2 should be worth much more than 3/3.
Getting a 3 jump off another jump is very hard because you don't have the preparation time and speed you would normally get.
What if a certain skater has a quad, but has an injury (Evan)?
It is wise to leave it out rather than risk a fall, or further injury.
That said, I still have a little soft spot for Joubert - Plushenko? Not so much.
Okay. I still maintain that Evan was the rightful champion that night. He DID have a foot injury at Worlds 2009. It was still (Frankly ) wise to leave it out in order to skate cleanly, and have a well balanced program.
Plushenko apparently knows the COP rules, as evidenced by his remark about transitions. He didn't maximize the 2nd half of his program. He seemed to ignore the rules...
If the quad was EVERYTHING, then Kevin Van der Pants and Timothy The Tree Goebel would be World Champs.
Should they be equal? I struggle with this question.Getting a 3 jump off another jump is very hard because you don't have the preparation time and speed you would normally get.