Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 86
  1. #61
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,333
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by muffinbiscuit View Post
    I think the judging of the SP was poor. The top two should have been Ito and Kadavy. Politics!
    Everything was political in the Ladies event in 1988.

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,950
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    91872
    Quote Originally Posted by attyfan View Post
    Not sure if Michelle is a good example, as I would think that her hip injury would have caused problems, if not ending her career, even if the judging system had not changed.
    IIRC at 2005 worlds she did not have a hip injury, yet she placed 4th, just behind Carolina. Her QR performance was the main culprit, IMO. I had not heard of any injury then. I only heard about it the following season. Considering that Michelle's main strengths were her jump consistency and her artistry/audience connection, I don't think she would have scored really high under the COP (e.g. no Biellman spin, or that ugly spiral sequence, not many transitions except for the footwork sequence, etc.), though definitely not very low. She would have gotten positive GOEs on her jumps and high PCS for execution.

  3. #63
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    State of frustration
    Posts
    560
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    I have to go back to how I felt at that time. I actually thought Boitano had the best chance of the three (BB, Browning, Viktor) because he was so consistent with the jumps.
    But BB wasn't that consistent the season he came back. Plus he omitted his loop, and his program wasn't much choreographically. It's been about 18 years ago, but what still stands out was how much time he spent doing spread eagles, almost to the point of parody. Cross-overs and spread eagles is all I can remember about the program.

    Viktor was my fave going into the Olympics. He won both Skate America and Nation's Cup. I still would have had him first in the LP.

  4. #64

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,950
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    91872
    Quote Originally Posted by Louise View Post
    Viktor was my fave going into the Olympics. He won both Skate America and Nation's Cup. I still would have had him first in the LP.
    Viktor was my fave too, and he was in a great position because he had won the OGM just 2 years earlier. Two mistakes in the SP (one of them serious- on th 3Lz) took him out of contention for a medal. His LP performance was great, but too little too late.

  5. #65
    I <3 Kozuka
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Vancouver/Seattle
    Posts
    19,202
    vCash
    730
    Rep Power
    43906
    Dmitriev gets special mention for winning OGM's with two different partners

    The Protopopovs were prevented from even trying for another medal by being dumped nationally, behind Rodnina/Ulanov and Moskvina/Mishin.

    In Ice Dance, the pattern for the Russian and Soviet teams from 1976-1992, until was "Win and Out". There were only two teams from 1976-1994 that ever surpassed another Russian/Soviet team in the hierarchy: Moiseeva/Minenkov (second to Pakhomova/Gorshkov in 1976, third behind Linichuk/Karposonov' gold in 1980), and Usova/Zhulin (second behind Gritshuk/Platov in 1994, although their silver was higher than the bronze they got in 1992).

    Not every third Russian team made it to the next Olympics (Volozhinskaya/Svinin in 1984, Annenko/Sretenski in 1988), and in 1994 Krylova was partnered with Federov before winning silver with Ovsiannikov in 1998.

    I wonder why there were athletes in other disciplines that were encouraged to try to repeat, but not so much in Ice Dance.
    "The team doesn't get automatic capacity because management is mad" -- Greg Smith, agile guy

  6. #66
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,333
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    IIRC at 2005 worlds she did not have a hip injury, yet she placed 4th, just behind Carolina. Her QR performance was the main culprit, IMO. I had not heard of any injury then. I only heard about it the following season. Considering that Michelle's main strengths were her jump consistency and her artistry/audience connection, I don't think she would have scored really high under the COP (e.g. no Biellman spin, or that ugly spiral sequence, not many transitions except for the footwork sequence, etc.), though definitely not very low. She would have gotten positive GOEs on her jumps and high PCS for execution.
    I have the feeling that Michelle didn't really want to adapt.
    Her spins in 2005 with change of edge were not that bad, her spiral sequence in 2005 was beautiful and could have been more adapted...
    But she didn't try it before 2005 US Nats...That was costly, IMO.

  7. #67

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    497
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I think that we only have one ice dancing couples with two OGMs just because most of the ice dancers finally won the Olympics very late in their careers.So it was natural that they'd retire after winning the Olympics.Linichuk/Karponosov tried to stay,but lost immediately after winning their olympic gold.Moiseeva/Minenkov had a very strange career.They won when Pakhomova/Gorshkov had basically retired,the latter came back for Olympics and then instead of moving ahead,were surpassed by Linichuk/Karponosov.
    I used to be angry abou it having read about how great M/M were and all that,until I saw their programs.They were beautiful skaters but they'd either have a wonderful program or a really atrocious one.I think they were a team that , at least for me, were very reminiscent of U/Z later on.
    Grischuk/Platov were very young when they won,and they were very lucky,with the Olympics being in the middle of the 4 year cycle.If the Olympics had taken place in 1996, they'd probably have only one olympic title.

  8. #68
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,333
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by zotza View Post
    Grischuk/Platov were very young when they won,and they were very lucky,with the Olympics being in the middle of the 4 year cycle.If the Olympics had taken place in 1996, they'd probably have only one olympic title.
    Probably, but they won in 1994, although they were not favorite.

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    497
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by briancoogaert View Post
    Probably, but they won in 1994, although they were not favorite.
    I know I'd have them on the podium even in 1992 if it was up to me

  10. #70
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    672
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    yes it is.
    i am wondering if was easier back then due to less media coverage, than it is now.
    i am not talking about jumps, back then they could train with minimium coverage by media and fans, nowadays not so "lucky"

  11. #71
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sending positive thoughts to Mirai..
    Posts
    3,719
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    Are you saying that the great skaters of the past won only because of the politics of their country?

    Are you suggesting that the quad combinations that Yagudin, Plushenko were landing was easier than what the skaters are doing now? Midori Ito and Tonya Harding were landing triple axel combinations. Do you think that was 'easier' than what the skaters are doing now? How many skaters are landing these consistently NOW?

    A sport develops over time, so what was state of the art in the past looks 'easy' now. The only real difference is that now the skaters get more credit for transitions, spins, footwork- something that was overlooked in the past, and jumps have relatively less emphasis.

    Witt won her 2nd OGM with only the 3t & 3s because- 1)Debie Thomas had a meltdown in her LP, 2)Manley was too far back in figures to catch up (Manley did win the LP), 3)Witt delivered when it counted. She used the kind of strategy Lysacek used in 2010- do only the jumps you are sure you can land, as long as the competitors are not doing much harder jumps. No one was doing flips so she took the 3f out. So it was a combination of factors.

    Again, that was over 20 years ago. It is only natural for a sport to change and develop.
    Well put. ALL athletes who were pioneers in their respective sports trained and competed under completely different conditions and usually with what would today be considered archaic equipment. Women in the early 20th century had to compete in long skirts down to their ankles for goodness sake! And the skates both men and women wore wouldn't hold up to today's monster jumps. One can't compare athletes and their 'greatness' from one era to another. It's just not possible. Different times, totally different conditions.

  12. #72
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Sending positive thoughts to Mirai..
    Posts
    3,719
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    [QUOTE=Mafke;3271471]It was more than just Trenary, there was a whole generation of ladies who'd spent years training for the sport as they knew it - figures and a few different triples (toe loop, salchow and a third triple usually a loop or flip) who were whacked in the knees (figuratively) by the ISU's decision to junk figures and the simultaneous pressure to develop a full set of five triples when most of them were too old to realistically try.

    Jill was the poster girl but there was also Cadavy, Holly Cook, Jerri Campbell, Patricia Neske and a lot more. I just hope that if any of them ever meet Sonia Bianchetti in person they'd throw a drink in her face.... (I certainly would).

    Ironically within a few years the ISU had ladies with shocking lacks in their basic skills (and who desperately needed the skills that figures could have given them) like Bonaly and Baiul on the podiums.[/QUOTE]

    Baiul's basics were superior to Bonaly. She may have been lacking in jump combinations-but that was NOT 'shocking' compared to Bonaly who I am sorry to say could not skate between her muscled jumps. I will never ever forget how one journalist (perhaps in Sports Illustrated?) put it years ago-he said that between the jumps Bonaly 'looks like she's skating on double runners'. The woman went into jumps even a lutz almost on a flat edge. It was downright impressive that she got them into the air and landed them fugly as they often looked. Her jumps had no flow, I remember Scott pointing out (as he did for the much better skater Irina Slutskaya) that Surya telegraphed her jumps 'she stops, brakes, THEN goes into her jumps'.

    In comparison Oksana had GORGEOUS flow and great speed across the ice especially on jumps like the lutz which was quite a strong one for her.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    Bonaly was lacking in edges, but Baiul had excellent basic skating skills; she flowed on the ice. She was one of the few ladies that did the lutz from the outside edge, and with speed. How can you put the two in the same brackett?

    BTW more recently there have been skaters that were caught between the 6.0 and COP system. The most glaring example- Michelle Kwan!
    ITA!!

  13. #73

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,950
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    91872
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha'sSpins View Post
    Well put. ALL athletes who were pioneers in their respective sports trained and competed under completely different conditions and usually with what would today be considered archaic equipment. Women in the early 20th century had to compete in long skirts down to their ankles for goodness sake! And the skates both men and women wore wouldn't hold up to today's monster jumps. One can't compare athletes and their 'greatness' from one era to another. It's just not possible. Different times, totally different conditions.


    I saw a few pictures of the skates they wore in the late 19th or early 20th century. I don't know how they were able to achieve precision in them. Impressive!

    More recently whenever I complained (and I am not a competition skater at all) about the ice being bad, my coach always told me that he had skated on much worse ice. :lol

  14. #74
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,125
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha'sSpins View Post
    Baiul's basics were superior to Bonaly.
    I basically agree, but there were real lacks in Baiul's skating (like anyone one foot turn besides a three) that she would never have been able to get away with in CoP. Great basic stroking (light years ahead of Bonaly) but, again, some real technical holes. Part of why she was able to get away with it (beyond being very cute) was that the judges just assumed she had skills that she didn't (or why else was she there).

    Bonaly decided to reinvent skating as a kind of running. From her point of view she was operating within the rules (and if the ISU really cared about technique why get rid of figures?) and probably didn't understand a lot of the criticism.

  15. #75

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,950
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    91872
    Quote Originally Posted by Mafke View Post
    I basically agree, but there were real lacks in Baiul's skating (like anyone one foot turn besides a three) that she would never have been able to get away with in CoP. Great basic stroking (light years ahead of Bonaly) but, again, some real technical holes. Part of why she was able to get away with it (beyond being very cute) was that the judges just assumed she had skills that she didn't (or why else was she there).

    Bonaly decided to reinvent skating as a kind of running. From her point of view she was operating within the rules (and if the ISU really cared about technique why get rid of figures?) and probably didn't understand a lot of the criticism.
    She was not skating under COP. She was skating under a different system that valued musicality, flow on the ice. You cannot apply rules of one era to another one. Skaters prepare for rules that are applied at their time, not at some futuristic times.

  16. #76
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,333
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    She was not skating under COP. She was skating under a different system that valued musicality, flow on the ice. You cannot apply rules of one era to another one. Skaters prepare for rules that are applied at their time, not at some futuristic times.
    In the best World, the best skater might win, no matter which scoring system is used. (the sentence is from Annick Dumont)

  17. #77
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,515
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    She was not skating under COP. She was skating under a different system that valued musicality, flow on the ice. You cannot apply rules of one era to another one. Skaters prepare for rules that are applied at their time, not at some futuristic times.
    ITA!

  18. #78
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    3,712
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I always wondered how Oksana would have fared if she had been born in a country with much better facilities and coaches then the Ukraine had. She certainly didn't have the advantages that someone like Nancy Kerrigan had for instance. The Ukraine was not exactly a rich country even when they were a part of the old Soviet Union as a republic of the old USSR. I think she had the potential to be great.
    Last edited by Jammers; 09-02-2011 at 12:23 AM.

  19. #79
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    State of frustration
    Posts
    560
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Baiul had wonderful flow and skills. She was a skater foremost, but also a dancer in the kindest sense. She could have picked up a bracket, choctaw, whatever in a few minutes, please.
    Bonaly was always a WTF to me. Okay, so she didn't have innate musicality, well, FAKE IT like every other junior princess does. I blame it on the French Fed, Didier Gailhaguet in particular who was either her coach or spokesperson or pimp, whatevs. But what disappointed me the most, was that she was an athlete, had full body awareness and was really world class no matter what sport she chose. I only wish she had used that OCD that landed her soooo many 3toes and 3sals to have learned how to use her edges. If she had edges and flow on her blade, she would have won numerous world titles, I'm sure. I'm not sure why the French Fed cannot see the lack of skating skills in their program. They seem to reward the awful 'skaters' but the weird ass performers. But then again, the international judges were smoking crack or just cowtowed to Didier when they always favored Phil Candeloro over a true skater like Eric Millot.
    Can anyone watch 1995 Birmingham and believe Phil was better than Eric? Well, the judges did. Total politik. It's just inherent in the corrupt system.

  20. #80
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,333
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Louise View Post
    Can anyone watch 1995 Birmingham and believe Phil was better than Eric? Well, the judges did. Total politik. It's just inherent in the corrupt system.
    How aggressive your post is.
    Anyway, could you believe Eric Millot winning his last french national title over Philippe Candeloro ?

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 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
  •