Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Staring at the ocean, anywhere anytime
    Posts
    9,657
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    4440
    In later year's performances, I think she did more revs. She could spin fast-she just didn't unless the music called for it. Yes, her positions were good, and centering good.

    Plus she had a change of edge camel in there, and that double flying sit spin that I've always gotten a kick out of.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    52
    Posts
    10,237
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    10899
    I think looking at each of the program components, and also at the degree of negative GOEs on spins as well as jumps, would explain a lot about why this LP earned more second-place ordinals than this one than just counting number of triples landed.

    We can't really say who "would have won" under IJS rules because the well-balanced program rules have changed enough just within the IJS era, let alone between 1991 and 2010, to even make it clear which elements should count or not count or which jumps should count as sequences.

  3. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    “It is far more important to have a good judge than a possible conflict of interest." - Ottavio Cinquanta
    Posts
    1,583
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Surya would've placed higher many times under COP

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,270
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42880
    Quote Originally Posted by aftershocks View Post

    In fact, there was not much that truly separated S&P and B&S, IMHO, in terms of skill level, technique and beauty on the ice. S&P were a classic demonstration of North American style, while B&S were a classic demonstration of Russian style.Many fans look at B&S's perfect Olympic 2002 SP and say they should have won -- they did win the sp (S&P opted for a cute, humorous sp, that didn't have the same depth and impact, but it did have technical difficulty). preference, and politics. Both teams, (and indeed, the third team S&Z) were all very close in ability, technique and artistry. Hands down S&P have had the better pro career. In any case, speaking of gorgeous pair skating, this is classic too:In the free program, although the choreography may have been simpler, S&P did also have technical difficulty, and they performed everything with perfection. Therefore, it is a matter of taste,

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELys8PkIjEM
    I have to disagree with you that B&S and S&P were same skill level, or that S&P had more difficulty in their LP. B&S were head and shoulders above any other pair at that time, when it came to skating skills, and I am not just talking about stroking. Their transitions, changing hand holds, lines, unison, posture, and speed were far superior to S&P's. It's easy to be consistent on jumps and throws when you don't worry about the entry, position, lines and posture,and skate slower. (and S&P were not even consistent on jumps, they landed their jumps but without great unison)

    When you talk about difficult choreography, S&P's Love Story was nowhere close to B&S's extremely difficult choreography, with each difficult move connecting another difficult move, with just a few cross overs between the moves, and achieving the speed needed to do the next move. S&P were just doing several cross overs before their moves - big difference. That's what made B&S so special. It was not just the beauty of their skating, and it was not just a cultural thing/different taste/style when you compare the two pairs. The North American media hyped up S&P before the Olympics to make people believe that they were as good as (or better than) B&S, who were the third rate Russians who were only winning by bribing the judges. Nothing was further from the truth.

    I saw the 2002 Olympics live in Salt Lake City (both SP & LP). I am not saying B&S should have won because they had a great SP but because they skated two great programs. One of them had a small mistake (a step out on a 2A). These days we are seeing skaters win with multiple falls and it's accepted. Even in 2006 Pang & Tong won the worlds with a fall in their LP, so you really can't make a big deal of Anton's small mistake, considering the level of difficulty of their program. No other pair at that time could skate a program that was so complex choreographically. Now the COP is kind of forcing skaters to increase the complexity.
    Last edited by Vash01; 12-06-2010 at 09:16 PM.

  5. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Narnia
    Age
    13
    Posts
    2,179
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    B/S would have won in Salt Lake with CoP hands down.

    However, though S/P were juniorish in terms of transition and program construction compare to the rest of the top 10, I feel they are very under appreciated on this board. Many posters here suggested that S/P didn't have the skills and only got anywhere close to B/S because of politiks and media hype (not directing this at you Vash, but many many others here), but they did have at least better lifts, twists, death spirals, and SBS spins than B/S.

    And I actually think S/P defined the term "unison" in pair skating this decade. S/P just moved as one and took my breath away the first time I saw them in 2002. They were made for each other as in their bodies were on the exact same wavelength. The only break of unison I could remember from S/P when they skated relatively well were their SBS jumps. Even my parents, who were not skating fans, remembered the unison and the "beauty" (though I don't agree ) of a Canadian pair years back but couldn't recall whoever else was competing with them, so I guess it really boiled down to the style thing.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,270
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42880
    Quote Originally Posted by DinDonShamu View Post
    B/S would have won in Salt Lake with CoP hands down.

    However, though S/P were juniorish in terms of transition and program construction compare to the rest of the top 10, I feel they are very under appreciated on this board. Many posters here suggested that S/P didn't have the skills and only got anywhere close to B/S because of politiks and media hype (not directing this at you Vash, but many many others here), but they did have at least better lifts, twists, death spirals, and SBS spins than B/S.

    And I actually think S/P defined the term "unison" in pair skating this decade. S/P just moved as one and took my breath away the first time I saw them in 2002. They were made for each other as in their bodies were on the exact same wavelength. The only break of unison I could remember from S/P when they skated relatively well were their SBS jumps. Even my parents, who were not skating fans, remembered the unison and the "beauty" (though I don't agree ) of a Canadian pair years back but couldn't recall whoever else was competing with them, so I guess it really boiled down to the style thing.

    I totally disagree about the unison part. S&P defined unison? How? Their sbs jumps were never in unison, while B&S had great unison on their jumps and spins. S&P did sbs bunny hops in great unison, or they skated sbs in unison- that's hardly an achievement. I am not sure why you think S&P had better spins. I don't see the positions or speed in their spins, and B&S definitely had better unison on the spins. As far as lifts are concerned, Canadian pairs have always had more complex lifts, but without the positions or lines the Russian pairs did, so I will give them the complexity part. S&P did have a better split 3 twist; no argument there. Some of the death spirals were done better by S&P (BIDS in particular), but when you talk about COP, the transitions- how the moves are connected- S&P were nowhere close to B&S, and yes, politics played a huge part in their meteoric rise to the top. Unlike other pairs/skaters they did not have to pay their dues. They were held up even with falls and mistakes. They did not have the speed and difficult choreography to overcome a fall; B&S did. It wasn't just a style difference; there was a difference in the skill levels, and with COP B&S would have won hands down.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,531
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    6730
    Surya would have had high TES base values under the IJS, but her GOEs and PCS would have been low. Early in her career:

    - She did not really use edges to enter jumps.
    - Her step sequences were not usually a sequence of skating steps or turns.
    - Until 1998, her skating skills were really behind most novice skaters.

    She had one program that would have done better under the IJS than 6.0.

    1998 Olympics Ladies SP Surya Bonaly

    Under the IJS, her 3T/3T would have scored better than the standard 3Lz/2T and her 3S would have scored better than the standard 3T. The overall program construction was the best of her career and, after skating at the Senior World level for 10 years, she finally had skating that looked like it.

    She certainly no longer looked like this skater

    Surya Bonaly (FRA) - 1989 World Figure Skating Championships, Ladies' Free Skate

    . . . which would have had a very high TES base values but lots of -3 GOEs and 3 in the PCS categories, I might add.
    Last edited by bardtoob; 12-06-2010 at 10:16 PM.

  8. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Narnia
    Age
    13
    Posts
    2,179
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    I totally disagree about the unison part. S&P defined unison? How? Their sbs jumps were never in unison, while B&S had great unison on their jumps and spins. S&P did sbs bunny hops in great unison, or they skated sbs in unison- that's hardly an achievement. I am not sure why you think S&P had better spins. I don't see the positions or speed in their spins, and B&S definitely had better unison on the spins. As far as lifts are concerned, Canadian pairs have always had more complex lifts, but without the positions or lines the Russian pairs did, so I will give them the complexity part. S&P did have a better split 3 twist; no argument there. Some of the death spirals were done better by S&P (BIDS in particular), but when you talk about COP, the transitions- how the moves are connected- S&P were nowhere close to B&S, and yes, politics played a huge part in their meteoric rise to the top. Unlike other pairs/skaters they did not have to pay their dues. They were held up even with falls and mistakes. They did not have the speed and difficult choreography to overcome a fall; B&S did. It wasn't just a style difference; there was a difference in the skill levels, and with COP B&S would have won hands down.
    Looking back at SLC, S/P did have wonderful sit and camel positions (though not as "stretched" as B/S), along with wonderful death drops in the free. In fact, their SBS spins were faster than B/S. I'm totally as to whether we have been watching the same performances.

    She also had very good positions on all their lifts. I'll look up what makes up good positions again but I think their star and lasso lifts were textbook, once again not as balletic and 'graceful' if you will as B/S's, but that's totally up to individual preference. As you can probably tell by now I don't find balletic lines essential in pairs.

    But I do agree S/P would have been (or should have been) completely hosed in CoP. Their transition scores worthed nor more than 2. And the so-called "footworks"

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    3,831
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    1098
    Quote Originally Posted by casken View Post
    A lot of the french ladies were doing CoP-ish style spins back under 6.0.

    Gusmeroli and Bonaly would do all sorts of catch foot combo spins, and Gusmeroli and Hubert would do reverse entry combination spins and camel spins with changes of edge.
    I think this is a really interesting point.

    On the other hand, all three of them would have lost points elsewhere under CoP (especially Bonaly). I say that as a huge fan of both Hubert and Gusmeroli. And some of their spins were not that good, e.g., Hubert's layback. However Hubert and Gusmeroli would have (or at least, should have) gotten much higher SS scores than Bonaly.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Age
    43
    Posts
    8,788
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    2672
    Quote Originally Posted by aftershocks View Post
    Thanks also Libertango for those postings of Elena and Anton. Gorgeous skating. I always enjoyed watching them, but at times I felt they were held up when they didn't perform well. At that time, although I really liked Elena and Anton, Sale & Pelletier were my favorites, and Shen and Zhao were also amazing, but never talked about in the same breath (though their time would come). Whenever fans speak of how exquisite Anton and Elena were at 2002 Olympics, I do agree, especially in the sp, but there was the small mistake by Anton in lp, and Jamie Sale's jump landings were smooth, steady and textbook perfect vs. Elena's that while landed well, were not as steady. IMO, those were the only differences -- everything else was preference and politics, and dealmaking amongst the judges (business as usual in fs) -- only this time the the dealmaking was uncovered and became a scandal. In fact, there was not much that truly separated S&P and B&S, IMHO, in terms of skill level, technique and beauty on the ice. S&P were a classic demonstration of North American style, while B&S were a classic demonstration of Russian style.

    Many fans look at B&S's perfect Olympic 2002 SP and say they should have won -- they did win the sp (S&P opted for a cute, humorous sp, that didn't have the same depth and impact, but it did have technical difficulty). In the free program, although the choreography may have been simpler, S&P did also have technical difficulty, and they performed everything with perfection. Therefore, it is a matter of taste, preference, and politics. Both teams, (and indeed, the third team S&Z) were all very close in ability, technique and artistry. Hands down S&P have had the better pro career. In any case, speaking of gorgeous pair skating, this is classic too:
    This is the debate of the debates.

    I personally think it was no contest. B/S were faster, both programs were more difficult, better skating skills than S/P. B/S is maybe the fastest pairs team ever, EVER.

    I understand that B/S made a mistake on the LP, but overall the program has held up. The program has incredible transitions and CH. I do think the judges took into the account the S/P skated a very comfortable program for them(nothing new or different). B/S took the chance, I've always said B/S should have countered and skated their City Lights. If they did, we wouldn't have this conversation.

    Also, Anton Sikharulidze is better skater than David P.
    "“My bronze feels like gold,” said the bronze medalist Carolina Kostner

  11. #31
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    236
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    There are lots of skaters who would have excelled under CoP with the programs they used under 6.0, but had they skated under CoP I somehow doubt they would have skated to the same brilliance. IMO, CoP stifles creativity and freedom and favors mechanical, cut-and-pasted control over inspiration. Not EVERY program under CoP, but that's just how it seems to me. Michelle Kwan, Johnny Weir, and Kurt Browning would never have been done justice. I believe Alexei Yagudin is one of the true exceptions who may have done equally well under CoP as he did under 6.0.

    I had this discussion here a few weeks ago (sorry for the thorniness, Ziggy!)
    http://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/show...t=75754&page=2

    Quote Originally Posted by cailuj365 View Post
    I agree. Johnny used to be the poster boy for CoP in 2004, and he was favorable to it himself before he got disillusioned with it (and the judges with him).

    Thanks for posting those links. Sometimes, I'm so disappointed in how Johnny never managed to adapt to the points-gathering strategy that I forgot how lovely and refreshing his style actually was in skating when he first burst onto the scene.

    I think the best example of Johnny's pre-COP skating was his 2003-04 Valse Triste SP.
    Yes!!! And boo-urns to that one judge who gave Johnny the 4.9 and 5.0. He/she would never be able to justify that under CoP.

    This CoP program of Johnny's, I always thought, was constructed beautifully.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW9XqGT4rJI

    Quote Originally Posted by bardtoob View Post
    Wow...Kay Thomson. Never heard of her or seen her before, but that's one heck of a program.

    Great picks of Harding and Ito for strong CoP candidates, too.

  12. #32
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,101
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Irina Slutskaya's short programs in the late 90s and early 00s would have scored well under COP.

    Her 1998 short program was a delight, with a huge death drop, 2A with arm over the head, and a great footwork sequence.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJKs2kaJlyc

    Her rarely seen 1999 short program was even better, with one-footed turns into a 3F+2T, running threes into 3Lo, a butterfly flying camel with layover position, 2A with arm over the head, COP-worthy spirals, and her trademark combination spin.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpOKM8P_Msc

    Her 2000 short featured a better-positioned flying camel and a sideways-to-back layback.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qP6J...eature=related

    Many know her excellent, athletic Spheeris program. Great catch-foot layback (sometimes with acceleration), and a one-foot footwork sequence.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAeqq...eature=related
    Last edited by all_empty; 12-07-2010 at 06:30 AM.

  13. #33
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    11,067
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Many of Surya's 3/3s and all of her attempted quads would have been downgraded.

  14. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Right behind you
    Posts
    196
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Definitely most of Berezhnaya/Sikharulidze's programs.

    Also, I've always thought that Sasha Abt's Rachmaninoff LP (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86g-lZbNauU) would have scored quite well under CoP.

  15. #35
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    4,281
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    How about this?
    It placed 11th at the 2002 Worlds.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w872zjNfzY

  16. #36
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,249
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by leafygreens View Post
    Surya would've placed higher many times under COP
    And Philippe Candeloro would have placed lower many times under CoP

  17. #37
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,402
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by shine View Post
    How about this?
    It placed 11th at the 2002 Worlds.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w872zjNfzY
    I get the feeling though that he wouldn't have received the component scores he deserved considering he was skating only in the 2nd out of 4 groups.

  18. #38

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Age
    34
    Posts
    12,714
    vCash
    2634
    Rep Power
    29418
    Quote Originally Posted by shine View Post
    How about this?
    It placed 11th at the 2002 Worlds.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w872zjNfzY
    I think Matt Savoie is so underrated. I don't think he ever got the points he deserved in PCS, so I don't know if he would have necessarily done better in COP with this program. I think he and Buttle were in a class by themselves in terms of transitions, which I don't think either really ever got high enough components scores for.
    Logic is in the eye of the logician --Gloria Steinem

  19. #39

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    3,831
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    1098
    Quote Originally Posted by Allen View Post
    I think Matt Savoie is so underrated. I don't think he ever got the points he deserved in PCS, so I don't know if he would have necessarily done better in COP with this program. I think he and Buttle were in a class by themselves in terms of transitions, which I don't think either really ever got high enough components scores for.
    I agree with all of this about Savoie. But I do wonder what would have happened if he had emerged a few years later under CoP rather than going through the change from 6.0 to CoP. By the time CoP came along, Matt had sort of been pegged already as being in the "second tier" of U.S. men's skaters. So, no, he never got the PCS marks he deserved under CoP (though things did improve in his last season). And it didn't help that he was not always consistent. But I'll bet he would have gotten better PCS marks under CoP if he hadn't been pegged already. His skating was made for CoP in so many ways, particularly the transitions but not only that.

    ETA: And that 2002 Worlds performance was wonderful!
    Last edited by ks1227; 12-08-2010 at 01:40 AM.

  20. #40
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,520
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I love how the British Eurosport announcers call him Matthew Sav-WHAH. I used to call him that before I learned better.

    The Men's LP at 2002 Worlds would be a good one for another FSU Judging Game, if we ever have one.

    The Top Eleven were:

    Yagudin
    Goebel
    Honda
    Abt
    Li
    Weiss
    Liu
    Zhang
    Vlascenko
    Dambier
    Savoie

    Quad or no quad, I think Savoie would beat at least half (maybe even seven or eight) of the men above him under current (or 2009-10) COP judging.
    Last edited by Squibble; 12-08-2010 at 03:34 PM. Reason: Honda was the bronze medalist, and Plushenko didn't compete

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •