Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 55
  1. #21
    Fetalized since 1998
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Waving my Adam banner
    Posts
    2,586
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    33733
    Quote Originally Posted by Triple Butz View Post
    As I said earlier, NOT a Kerrigan fan, but there is a lot of misinformation in this thread.
    1) Oksana two-footed TWO jumps (a toe and a flip). She doubled the first attempt at the 3toe, and threw one in at the end, causing her to end late with a sloppy 2a/2t as her only combination.

    2)Nancy skated with good speed, and did NOT under-rotate a triple lutz, she landed a clean one in the back half of the program.

    3)Oksana had good speed?? The "program" has three resting spots where she "dances" at center ice at a whopping 0mph. Oksana definitely had more artistic potential than Nancy, but her skills were not apparent in that horrid LP that should have had spin and step deductions.
    I'm out of reps for you, but "thanks", well said..

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    13,493
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42165
    Quote Originally Posted by kwanette View Post
    I'm out of reps for you, but "thanks", well said..
    Rep delivered - for both of us.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Canada baby!
    Age
    38
    Posts
    7,591
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3317
    Ironically, looking back, I thought Lu Chen wuzrobbed in 1994. Nancy and Oksana both had less technical content than her.

    Oksana Baiul would have been cool to have around for those 4 extra years too if she hadn't have won. I really believe it would have been better for her in the long run...
    ~I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% how I react to it.~ (Charles R. Swindoll)

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    53
    Posts
    10,451
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    20970
    Quote Originally Posted by Triple Butz View Post
    As I said earlier, NOT a Kerrigan fan, but there is a lot of misinformation in this thread.
    1) Oksana two-footed TWO jumps (a toe and a flip). She doubled the first attempt at the 3toe, and threw one in at the end, causing her to end late with a sloppy 2a/2t as her only combination.

    2)Nancy skated with good speed, and did NOT under-rotate a triple lutz, she landed a clean one in the back half of the program.
    As far as I recall, both of the above statements are true.

    3)Oksana had good speed?? The "program" has three resting spots where she "dances" at center ice at a whopping 0mph.
    Well, obviously you can't count the posing sections in the skating, especially regarding speed. If you average out the ice speed over the 4 minutes of the program, more time spent not skating would lead to a lower average.

    But when someone says a skater had good speed, that refers primarily to the time spent actually skating. And Baiul did skate with good speed when she was skating. I watched the short program at the 94 Olympics live and I can say with firsthand authority that Baiul was fast and exciting in the SP. I had returned home from Norway by the day of the long program and watched on TV, so I can only infer that her speed was good that day, but I think it's more likely than not that it was.

    (Also, when I saw her live at Champions on Ice about 6 years later when she was well past her prime, she was faster than both Kwan and Slutskaya, for whatever that's worth. Again, doubtless more simple crossovers to achieve that speed, but the actual speed was outstanding.)

    Of course it helps if much of that time spent skating is spent specifically doing crossovers, which are the most efficient way to gain speed. But that kind of speed is one thing that is rewarded. So is getting from a standstill up to full speed in just a few strokes, e.g., efficiency in "going from 0 to 60" as is said about cars.

    So speed is one area of technique where Baiul was especially strong, other weaknesses aside.

    Oksana definitely had more artistic potential than Nancy, but her skills were not apparent in that horrid LP that should have had spin and step deductions.
    Remember in 1994 there were no well-balanced program requirements as we know them now or even in the late 90s/early 2000s. There were limits on repeating jumps and rules about jump combinations or sequences that could incur deductions if violated, but at the time there were no requirements for spins and steps in the free program and therefore no deductions to be taken. The number or absence of those elements and their quality, good or bad, would factor into the technical merit mark in a wholistic sense, but it was up to each judge individually to decide how to reward or penalize.

    Deductions were primarily a short program concept.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Singleville aka 7th Circle of Hell
    Age
    34
    Posts
    12,382
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    9520
    Most of the time when I re-watch a competition, my opinion changes from wuzrobbed to different opinions. One exception where every time I see it, my wuzrobbed opinion grows stronger is Winkler/Lohse. I can't imagine how they finished higher than tenth in the LP portion.

    I think the most recent example of different opinion when I first saw it was this year's men's bronze medalist, but I think that's usually the case for singles. In a typical competition, usually you can justify 3-7 getting the third spot.
    "The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practicing sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play." –Olympic Charter

  6. #26
    Kostner Softie
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    5,534
    vCash
    1017077
    Rep Power
    1319
    Wuzrobbed: Slutskaya over Kwan in 01-02 GPF. I don't think I'll ever get what was going through the judges' heads.

    Different Opinions: Kerrigan over Ito at 91 worlds. I could kind of see what some judges might have thought, but I just can't agree with it (could... some... might have... boy am I in denial )

  7. #27
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    State of frustration
    Posts
    560
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I would put Oksana/Nancy in the differing opinions spot. Oksana had "IT" to the max. She took the ice and commanded it. She was faster than Kerrigan could ever hope to be in just a few strokes. Her spins were faster and more interesting. Her lutz was a thing of beauty, so huge. Nancy was very workmanlike in her approach, but just didn't have charisma IMO. Nancy was like an interchangable Tonia Kwiatkowski back then. Sure most of the time made the jumps, always a mistake, choreo and music bleh, but hair perfectly in place with a prettied up spangly dress.

    You really just had to see them skate side by side to get the difference between Oksana and Nancy. Oksana screamed superstar and was entrancing. Nancy was the hard working understudy IMO. Sometimes the star has a REALLY off day and the Understudy does a better job. But when the star of the show is still very very good, the understudy really has to knock it out of the park. Opening up on her first jump is what cost Nancy. And her lutz did look a bit ur'd but back then it didn't seem to matter. But Nancy didn't knock it out of the park. JMO.

  8. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,507
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Louise View Post
    I would put Oksana/Nancy in the differing opinions spot. Oksana had "IT" to the max. She took the ice and commanded it. She was faster than Kerrigan could ever hope to be in just a few strokes. Her spins were faster and more interesting. Her lutz was a thing of beauty, so huge. Nancy was very workmanlike in her approach, but just didn't have charisma IMO. Nancy was like an interchangable Tonia Kwiatkowski back then. Sure most of the time made the jumps, always a mistake, choreo and music bleh, but hair perfectly in place with a prettied up spangly dress.

    You really just had to see them skate side by side to get the difference between Oksana and Nancy. Oksana screamed superstar and was entrancing. Nancy was the hard working understudy IMO. Sometimes the star has a REALLY off day and the Understudy does a better job. But when the star of the show is still very very good, the understudy really has to knock it out of the park. Opening up on her first jump is what cost Nancy. And her lutz did look a bit ur'd but back then it didn't seem to matter. But Nancy didn't knock it out of the park. JMO.
    I guess that's what makes the sport fun...I believe the exact opposite on every point.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Partying with Oda
    Posts
    4,222
    vCash
    1799
    Rep Power
    33132
    Quote Originally Posted by Triple Butz View Post
    As I said earlier, NOT a Kerrigan fan, but there is a lot of misinformation in this thread.
    1) Oksana two-footed TWO jumps (a toe and a flip). She doubled the first attempt at the 3toe, and threw one in at the end, causing her to end late with a sloppy 2a/2t as her only combination.

    2)Nancy skated with good speed, and did NOT under-rotate a triple lutz, she landed a clean one in the back half of the program.

    3)Oksana had good speed?? The "program" has three resting spots where she "dances" at center ice at a whopping 0mph. Oksana definitely had more artistic potential than Nancy, but her skills were not apparent in that horrid LP that should have had spin and step deductions.
    Whoa there. I too think Nancy deserved the win.

    Totally agree with you on the first point.

    Nancy's speed: take it up with the judges who claimed that Nancy looked slow in comparison to Oksana. As for the lutz, there was definitely some turning on the ice. Her other triples were clean as a whistle. As others have noted here, Oksana was a VERY speedy skater (when not posing). No misinformation there.

    As for Oksana's posing, I actually don't mind posing here and there. Nancy did a bit of it herself.
    Last edited by skateboy; 07-13-2011 at 09:47 AM.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,176
    vCash
    400
    Rep Power
    32148
    Quote Originally Posted by sk8er1964 View Post
    If we are talking about my favorite skater, than it's wuzrobbed. If it's yours, then we can have different opinions.
    Agreed. Except Euros 2002! Abt wuzrobbed by Yags (my favourite skater!).

  11. #31
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    With Daisuke-san
    Age
    37
    Posts
    1,714
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by antmanb View Post
    Agreed. Except Euros 2002! Abt wuzrobbed by Yags (my favourite skater!).
    I was going to mention that!! Sasha was sooooooo robbed! and I adored both skaters to death!

    Sasha clearly skated better that night, I was there live, and not only did he skate brilliantly in the FS, both his QR and the SP was flawless too. I remember Yags trying several times to complete his 3l, without any luck...mostly doubles IIRC

  12. #32
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,775
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Let me clarify that when I say "good speed" I am more or less referring to continuous speed and flow throughout a program. Not, "let me zoom from one end of the rink to the other for a two-footed jump, then rest for 30 seconds in the middle so I can do it again."

    I also agree that Oksana was a super star with tremendous dance ability and charisma. If only she had been able to perform those skills while skating...

  13. #33
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,775
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by antmanb View Post
    Agreed. Except Euros 2002! Abt wuzrobbed by Yags (my favourite skater!).
    Even Yags, himself, basically admitted that this result was wrong in an interview where he said (paraphrasing) "In a few years, no one will remember the competition, just that I was the 2002 European champion."

  14. #34

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,176
    vCash
    400
    Rep Power
    32148
    Quote Originally Posted by Triple Butz View Post
    Let me clarify that when I say "good speed" I am more or less referring to continuous speed and flow throughout a program. Not, "let me zoom from one end of the rink to the other for a two-footed jump, then rest for 30 seconds in the middle so I can do it again."
    It's good to clarify what you mean by good speed, but I think the judging system in place at the time referred to skating speed, by reference to changes in speed being important (to match the music), speeding up quickly and effortlessly etc ice coverage. Most 90s 6.0 programmes had the "slow section" in the middle to allow skaters to show this off.

  15. #35
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,775
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by antmanb View Post
    It's good to clarify what you mean by good speed, but I think the judging system in place at the time referred to skating speed, by reference to changes in speed being important (to match the music), speeding up quickly and effortlessly etc ice coverage. Most 90s 6.0 programmes had the "slow section" in the middle to allow skaters to show this off.
    Yes, ONE slow section, not THREE. Also, during their rest spots, the other skaters were still moving and demonstrating edge qualities and skating skills.

  16. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    13,493
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42165
    Quote Originally Posted by Triple Butz View Post
    Let me clarify that when I say "good speed" I am more or less referring to continuous speed and flow throughout a program. Not, "let me zoom from one end of the rink to the other for a two-footed jump, then rest for 30 seconds in the middle so I can do it again."

    I also agree that Oksana was a super star with tremendous dance ability and charisma. If only she had been able to perform those skills while skating...
    Entire post:

  17. #37
    Vacant
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Here and there
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,761
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    7828
    Quote Originally Posted by Louise View Post
    I would put Oksana/Nancy in the differing opinions spot. Oksana had "IT" to the max. She took the ice and commanded it. She was faster than Kerrigan could ever hope to be in just a few strokes. Her spins were faster and more interesting. Her lutz was a thing of beauty, so huge. Nancy was very workmanlike in her approach, but just didn't have charisma IMO. Nancy was like an interchangable Tonia Kwiatkowski back then. Sure most of the time made the jumps, always a mistake, choreo and music bleh, but hair perfectly in place with a prettied up spangly dress.

    You really just had to see them skate side by side to get the difference between Oksana and Nancy. Oksana screamed superstar and was entrancing. Nancy was the hard working understudy IMO. Sometimes the star has a REALLY off day and the Understudy does a better job. But when the star of the show is still very very good, the understudy really has to knock it out of the park. Opening up on her first jump is what cost Nancy. And her lutz did look a bit ur'd but back then it didn't seem to matter. But Nancy didn't knock it out of the park. JMO.
    While in general I agree with much of this analysis, when it came time to skate the LP in Lillehammer Nancy absolutely had IT in spades! The whole attack at Nationals and the ensuing media hyperbole made her - along with Harding - possibly one of the most recognised women on the planet at that time. She was somehow elevated from this workmanlike status to instant superstar and then she went out and skated pretty much the best LP of her career under phenomenal pressure with a star quality she had not possessed up until that point.

    Of course this has been flogged to death and clearly will continue to be debated until time immemorial however, your assessment of Kerrigan as opposed to Baiul does not really apply at that time when they came to skate the LP in 1994 due to the preceding events.

    I was never a fan of either (although when they worked, Kerrigan's jumps really were beautiful), but on that night in that arena Kerrigan skated better. End of. Whatever the reasons for her placement - the doubled flip, the meltdown in Prague a year earlier, the scandal even - she was better than Baiul when it mattered but the judges did not recognise this.

    I remember a great documentary about Olga Korbut where a journalist who was present assessed that while she may have not been the most gifted athlete competing, a series of events conspired to make her a star and she performed beyond her own abilities for however brief a moment. I kind of think the same when it comes to Nancy in Lillehammer.

  18. #38

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    13,493
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42165
    ^^^
    You spoke for me, floskate.

  19. #39
    Fetalized since 1998
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Waving my Adam banner
    Posts
    2,586
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    33733
    Quote Originally Posted by skatesindreams View Post
    ^^^
    You spoke for me, floskate.
    Me, too.

  20. #40
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,824
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    me three. Funny...when I saw this thread yesterday I had my reply all typed out-and I used Nancy/Tonya as "wuzrobbed" and I had "Kwan/Lipinski" as difference of opinion...but I never hit send because my 4 month old started crying. Ahhh infants! Keeping me from all my message board fun.

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
  •