Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43
  1. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    6,932
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptCrunch View Post
    Funny you should mention Watson/Lancon. Their LP in Saravejo is one of my all-time favorite LP's in pairs skating. Loved it. There was a romantic quality to their skating that is absent in almost all other pairs. Technically the program was very easy (the sbs jumps and only 1 throw) but from an artistic and presentation viewpoint I loved it. I was so disappointed that Burt quit after the 84 season. However, I did become a big fan of W/O over the next 4 years. They were a very glamorous couple.
    I think the reason I preferred W/L to W/O was the fact that they seemed to gel as a couple more. Perhaps it was the less height difference, but they just seemed to interact better. I loved the innovations, too.

  2. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,802
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    W/O had the beauty and the big tricks but you're right that they never really gelled as "two people skating as one." The big height difference, the unmatched body lines, and the mirrored jumping were distracting, imo.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    290
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    222
    Thanks for all the links, y'all!

    Here's the music that W&W skated to in that pro comp back in the 1990's: Pie Jesu.

    I wish there were video of the actual performance. It was quite lovely. If I remember correctly, Gillian was dressed extremely simply in a plain white dress, white tights and white skates while Todd was in all black. The program flowed beautifully.

  4. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,423
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Wachsman and Waggoner probably should have stayed 1 more year because I think the named skater rule would have sent all of them, Yamaguchi/Galindo and Seybold/Seybold to the 1989 World Championships.

    I think the key event that kind of skewered the judges favor was probably the 1987 US Nationals LP where Watson/Oppegard skated a great LP and Wachsman/Waggoner kind of made a mess of the LP.

    The United States were in retrospect quite fortunate to have 2 top 5 pairs teams at the same time.
    Last edited by Seerek; 03-06-2011 at 07:55 PM.

  5. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,191
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    W&W would have no problem beating both Y&G and S&S at the 89 Nationals IMO. Especialy the Seybolds who they never had problems beating before and who skated poorly at the 89 Nationals. So how many spots the U.S had for the 89 Worlds would be a moot point for them, they had nothing to worry about. And with how atrocious the field at the 89 Worlds was in pairs they would have won the silver if they just had a decent competition.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Gwyneth Paltrow Fan Club headquarters
    Posts
    17,265
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    29999
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptCrunch View Post
    W/W were a really inconsistent team. More often than not their performances were disappointing. They pretty much bombed at both 86 and 87 worlds before getting it together and skating well in 88. They should have won US Nationals in 1988. Their win in 86 was a big surprise. They really didn't skate much better than the favorites and defending champions Watson/Oppegard but for some reason, in a time when the favorites always got the benefit from the judges, W/O didn't that day and W/W ended up winning in an upset.
    IIRC this win was discussed in a book (I think it's Christine Brennan's first one) as an example of judges "holding up" skaters. I know there are a lot of flaws with this theory and it's pretty subjective, i.e. people tend to think that another skater has been "held up" if their own favourite loses, but in the competition which this book discusses, W/W fell quite a lot and still ended up winning.

    I have to say, looking at the videos that have been linked here, that pairs was a lot more impressive to watch when skaters didn't have to go through a gazillion moves in each element to get maximum points. There is something to be said for skaters holding a position long enough so that the viewer can appreciate the beautiful lines and the strength and skill it takes to do such difficult moves well.
    You should never write words with numbers. Unless you're seven. Or your name is Prince. - "Weird Al" Yankovic, "Word Crimes"

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    290
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    222
    Just found this on youtube: W&W's Exhibition at 1987 NHK Trophy. Their pro comp program was very similar to this program. (Some of the commentary is kind of gushy .)

  8. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    6,932
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    W&W would have no problem beating both Y&G and S&S at the 89 Nationals IMO. Especialy the Seybolds who they never had problems beating before and who skated poorly at the 89 Nationals. So how many spots the U.S had for the 89 Worlds would be a moot point for them, they had nothing to worry about. And with how atrocious the field at the 89 Worlds was in pairs they would have won the silver if they just had a decent competition.
    ...and who knows how much of an influence that would've had on them to stay until Albertville '92: There was a window of opportunity to be an undisputed top pair w/ Y/G splitting after '90 and the Seybolds disappearing [whatever happened to them]

  9. #29
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    He's fine! He sends his love!
    Posts
    2,039
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I think that W/W did not get along well personally, which might have contributed to their premature retirement.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Age
    48
    Posts
    17,933
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    33055
    This is a nice thread.

    I really like W&W's FS performance at 88 Worlds. I don't think they could have skated it better. And they did a great Malguena.
    When you are up to your arse in alligators it is difficult to remember you were only meant to be draining the swamp.

  11. #31

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Age
    29
    Posts
    3,365
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3454
    Quote Originally Posted by Maximillian View Post
    I think that W/W did not get along well personally, which might have contributed to their premature retirement.
    Yeah, this was also my impression.

  12. #32

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,438
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3398
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveRocks View Post
    I'd also be interested to know the reason why they retired.

    Olympic: they ended up fifth in Calgary. Thanks for posting the video.
    I remember how snippy David Santee was to them in the K&C (he was working for ABC interviewing the skaters) when he informed them that they had finished in 5th place.

  13. #33
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,802
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I think poor David Santee was really inexperienced as a TV journalist and was thrown into the big time without much of a safety net. He just wasn't very comfortable in front of the camera at that point.

  14. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,130
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by overedge View Post
    IIRC this win was discussed in a book (I think it's Christine Brennan's first one) as an example of judges "holding up" skaters. I know there are a lot of flaws with this theory and it's pretty subjective, i.e. people tend to think that another skater has been "held up" if their own favourite loses, but in the competition which this book discusses, W/W fell quite a lot and still ended up winning.


    I'm not sure I understand this. True that W/W did not skate all that great at 86 Nationals but W/O were the heavy favorites there. W/O were defending champions and had been 4th in their first worlds the year before. W/W had never even been to worlds before. At 85 Skate America W/O had won while W/W were 3rd. Was Brennan saying that W/W got held up and won?

  15. #35
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,038
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Seerek View Post
    Wachsman and Waggoner probably should have stayed 1 more year because I think the named skater rule would have sent all of them, Yamaguchi/Galindo and Seybold/Seybold to the 1989 World Championships.

    I think the key event that kind of skewered the judges favor was probably the 1987 US Nationals LP where Watson/Oppegard skated a great LP and Wachsman/Waggoner kind of made a mess of the LP.

    The United States were in retrospect quite fortunate to have 2 top 5 pairs teams at the same time.
    What's the named skater rule?

  16. #36

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    NC, USA
    Posts
    16,691
    vCash
    450
    Rep Power
    7993
    Am I hearing correctly that Gillian is pronounced with a hard "g" as in gorilla?

  17. #37
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Dashing Between Bennetton and Krispy Kreme
    Posts
    2,451
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Wachsmann and Waggoner make me weep for the current state of U.S. pair skating.

    Back in the 1980s, next to the Soviets, U.S. pairs were often the next best in the world.

  18. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,191
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    There is more depth in pairs today than there was in Calgary. Back around then the Soviets were head and shoulders above the rest. Valova & Vassiliev had their worst performance ever and still easily won the silver in Calgary.

    The U.S has had several pairs since Calgary that were similar level of conention to W&O and W&W. Meno & Sand, Ina & Dungen, Ina & Zimmerman.

  19. #39
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    9,802
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by essence_of_soy View Post

    Back in the 1980s, next to the Soviets, U.S. pairs were often the next best in the world.
    Huh? The only American team since the Kennedy brother and sister team won Worlds in the 50 that were considered a gold medal threat to the Soviet was Tai & Randy in 1980. That was a 30 years gap. After Tai & Randy no other American pairs even came close. The Carruthers winning silver in 84 was a total fluke .

  20. #40

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Gwyneth Paltrow Fan Club headquarters
    Posts
    17,265
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    29999
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    There is more depth in pairs today than there was in Calgary.
    Oh really?? Since the discipline has changed so much and the judging system is completely different, I don't even know if the two can be compared.
    You should never write words with numbers. Unless you're seven. Or your name is Prince. - "Weird Al" Yankovic, "Word Crimes"

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
  •