Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 61
  1. #41
    Vacant
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Here and there
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,763
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8264
    Still off topic but since it was asked. The first ever pairs throw was a throw waltz jump and it was introduced into the sport by Frances Dafoe and Norris Bowden. I just got this information straight from Frances herself. She also told me they were the first ever pair to perform a twist lift from a loop entrance at Worlds in 1955!

    The first throw axel was by the US team of Pieter Kollen & Patti Gustafson at the 1963 Worlds. It was invented by their coach Ron Ludington. Still don't know for sure if the first throw double axel was by the Militano's or Gross & Kagelmann. Both landed it in the 1972 season. I do know that the Militano's were only doing throw axels in 1971 but I have no footage of Gross & Kagelmann from 1971 so it's still unclear who was first.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,785
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    19516
    Geez, for somebody that actually WON figures out right at 1977 Worlds, Linda sure is surrounded by a misconception that she was somehow lacking in that area . . . as if she is Janet Lynn.

  3. #43
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,204
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bardtoob View Post
    Geez, for somebody that actually WON figures out right at 1977 Worlds, Linda sure is surrounded by a misconception that she was somehow lacking in that area . . . as if she is Janet Lynn.
    If she was weak enough in figures to frequently lose to an unspectacular and inconsistent free skater like Annett Poetzsch, and even once place below a eyesore of a free skater who never wins figures like Dagmar Lurz, it is little wonder some have that perception. Anyway is Fratianne really any better than Lynn at figures. Fratianne regularly placed only 3rd in figures, Lynn regularly placed 4th or 5th. However the compulsory figures leaders of Lynn's era were much better than Fratianne's. Schuba, Holmes, Seyfert, and Magnussen at figures vs Poetzsch and Lurz, seems pretty clear the former group is by far stronger. If Fratianne had her prime in Lynn's era she probably would have done no better than Lynn did in figures. Lynn by contrast was unlucky she didnt skate in an era where many of the top contenders had figures like Watanabe, Biellmann, Marie Allen, Voderezova, and where the dominant figures skater of the era most times couldnt even reach a 4.5.
    Last edited by judgejudy27; 10-02-2011 at 09:47 AM.

  4. #44
    Vacant
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Here and there
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,763
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8264
    With regard to Linda being beaten by Lurz at 1980 Worlds, you have to remember Linda was injured the whole week and almost withdrew with an ankle injury. That had to have affected her figures. Anett did the best figures of her career in Dortmund according to those who witnessed them and Lurz did a clean short where Linda and Anett did not, as well as a triple loop in the LP. She also had the hometown advantage. Linda, having bombed the warm up before the free, went out and laid down one of the best LP's of her career but it was never going to be enough.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Some place competitive and athletic, but ultimately more like an audition than anything else.
    Posts
    7,785
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    19516
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    If she was weak enough in figures to frequently lose to an unspectacular and inconsistent free skater like Annett Poetzsch, and even once place below a eyesore of a free skater who never wins figures like Dagmar Lurz, it is little wonder some have that perception.
    Frequently ...

    In what world did they meet "frequently", let alone did Linda lose frequently

    They met, I think, three times prior to the 1980 Olympics as the front runners and Linda won twice.

    BTW, Lynn would be behind in figures on the local to National level while Linda would win.
    Last edited by bardtoob; 10-02-2011 at 09:54 PM.

  6. #46
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,204
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Lynn was competing against Julie Lynn Holmes who was regularly 2nd to the compulsory figures GOAT Schuba at the World level. Fratianne was competing against poor compulsory figures performer Lisa Marie Allen at home. Little wonder Fratianne was the one winning figures at Nationals.

    Poetzsch won 5 of her 7 meetings with Fratianne from 76-80 despite never beating Fratianne in a single short or long program after 76 ever, and the only two times she lost she had to blow both the short and long program to lose her big figures lead. I would call that frequently.

    BTW Fratianne was 4th in figures at the 1977 Worlds, not 1st.

  7. #47
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,125
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by olympic View Post
    In the women's event, my only quibble was that I thought that Anett's marks were a little high in the SP w/ a 2-2 only and an off-axis 2x, skating to Jutta Mueller's choreography. That may have made the difference between gold and silver.
    I've been away a few days and haven't read this whole thread, but a few years ago somebody did the math substituting Anett's fourth place mark with the sixth place marks (as low as she could realistically be placed) and moving up the fifth and sixth place finishers to 4th and 5th. It didn't change the final ordinals enough.

    Basically the math was such that Anett had a big enough lead after figures with enough judges that she had to melt down in the LP to lose and her 3rd place marks in the LP (perfectly justified) meant she won comfortably.

    People look at the final point totals and think it was closer than it was, but in the ordinals what mattered was the skater's point totals by judge.

    Anett's ordinals - 7 first place, 2 second place = 11

    Linda's ordinals - 2 first place, 7 second place = 16

    A more realistic finish for Anett in the SP would still have her winning (just by fewer judges, either 6-3 or 5-4)

    Overall the 'best' podium IMHO would have used factored placements (which began the following year). The same marks with factored placements gives:

    1. Fratianne 1.8 + .4 +2.0 = 4.2
    2. Poetzsch .6 +1.6 + 3.0 = 5.2
    3. Biellmann 7.2 + .8 + 1.0 = 9.0

    4. Lurz 1.2 + 2.0 + 6.0 = 9.2


    (please correct my math if there are mistakes)

  8. #48
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    6,934
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Mafke View Post
    I've been away a few days and haven't read this whole thread, but a few years ago somebody did the math substituting Anett's fourth place mark with the sixth place marks (as low as she could realistically be placed) and moving up the fifth and sixth place finishers to 4th and 5th. It didn't change the final ordinals enough.

    Basically the math was such that Anett had a big enough lead after figures with enough judges that she had to melt down in the LP to lose and her 3rd place marks in the LP (perfectly justified) meant she won comfortably.

    People look at the final point totals and think it was closer than it was, but in the ordinals what mattered was the skater's point totals by judge.

    Anett's ordinals - 7 first place, 2 second place = 11

    Linda's ordinals - 2 first place, 7 second place = 16

    A more realistic finish for Anett in the SP would still have her winning (just by fewer judges, either 6-3 or 5-4)

    Overall the 'best' podium IMHO would have used factored placements (which began the following year). The same marks with factored placements gives:

    1. Fratianne 1.8 + .4 +2.0 = 4.2
    2. Poetzsch .6 +1.6 + 3.0 = 5.2
    3. Biellmann 7.2 + .8 + 1.0 = 9.0

    4. Lurz 1.2 + 2.0 + 6.0 = 9.2


    (please correct my math if there are mistakes)
    I believe that was Floskate a few years ago! one of the biggest brains on the board!

    Check out my post # 29. I used different methodology. I didn't substitute other skaters' scores like Floskate. I just increased / decreased SP scores by 0.1, and it did flip a few of the judges final scores / resultant ordinals even with that tiny increase / decrease

  9. #49
    Vacant
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Here and there
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,763
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8264
    Quote Originally Posted by olympic View Post
    I believe that was Floskate a few years ago! one of the biggest brains on the board!

    Check out my post # 29. I used different methodology. I didn't substitute other skaters' scores like Floskate. I just increased / decreased SP scores by 0.1, and it did flip a few of the judges final scores / resultant ordinals even with that tiny increase / decrease
    Why thank you!! But I certainly don't have a brain for math, just history. I actually struggled with that exercise and could never have been a judge back then. You really did need to be a mathematician to figure out exactly what you were doing. Your exercise delivered pretty much the same result as mine - swung a few judges towards Fratianne but Anett still comes out on top. ITA with Mafke, the factored placements podium would have been the best outcome for this competition all things considered.

  10. #50
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    63
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0

    Pairs - throws & twists

    Quote Originally Posted by floskate View Post
    Still off topic but since it was asked. The first ever pairs throw was a throw waltz jump and it was introduced into the sport by Frances Dafoe and Norris Bowden. I just got this information straight from Frances herself. She also told me they were the first ever pair to perform a twist lift from a loop entrance at Worlds in 1955!

    The first throw axel was by the US team of Pieter Kollen & Patti Gustafson at the 1963 Worlds. It was invented by their coach Ron Ludington. Still don't know for sure if the first throw double axel was by the Militano's or Gross & Kagelmann. Both landed it in the 1972 season. I do know that the Militano's were only doing throw axels in 1971 but I have no footage of Gross & Kagelmann from 1971 so it's still unclear who was first.
    Floskate, thank you very much indeed!! I've been trying to find this out for some time. The collective knowledge on this site is amasing!!

  11. #51
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,423
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by floskate View Post
    Why thank you!! But I certainly don't have a brain for math, just history. I actually struggled with that exercise and could never have been a judge back then. You really did need to be a mathematician to figure out exactly what you were doing. Your exercise delivered pretty much the same result as mine - swung a few judges towards Fratianne but Anett still comes out on top. ITA with Mafke, the factored placements podium would have been the best outcome for this competition all things considered.
    For ladies perhaps.

    For the men, Jan Hoffmann squeaks past Robin Cousins using factored placements:

    Hoffmann 1-2-2 = 0.6+0.8+2.0 = 3.4
    Cousins 4-1-1 = 2.4+0.4+1.0 = 3.8

  12. #52
    Vacant
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Here and there
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,763
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8264
    Quote Originally Posted by Seerek View Post
    For ladies perhaps.

    For the men, Jan Hoffmann squeaks past Robin Cousins using factored placements:

    Hoffmann 1-2-2 = 0.6+0.8+2.0 = 3.4
    Cousins 4-1-1 = 2.4+0.4+1.0 = 3.8
    Well Jan was way more consistent over the three phases of competition than Robin ever was. Plus Jan totally outskated Robin technically in the freeskate. I actually find this result waaay more interesting politically than the ladies.

  13. #53
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    6,934
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Speaking of the men, has anyone done an analysis of what would've been had Charlie Tickner skated a clean SP? I believe he lost 0.4 - 0.5 pts. on each judge's tech card in the SP [or supposed to]. I don't have scores in front of me, but would it have screwed with the podium? He was a good, talented skater and was 2d after the figures, 2 places in front of Cousins

    I may do the analysis myself, but at work right now ..... will have to be later.

  14. #54
    Vacant
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Here and there
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,763
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8264
    Three judges placed Charlie 3rd in the SP despite the botched combo and going by the required deductions they were working off a 6.2 basemark if everything else was perfect! I would be interested to know if it had any effect on the outcome if he had gone clean or if those three judges had scored him appropriately in the first place.

  15. #55
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    6,934
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by floskate View Post
    Three judges placed Charlie 3rd in the SP despite the botched combo and going by the required deductions they were working off a 6.2 basemark if everything else was perfect! I would be interested to know if it had any effect on the outcome if he had gone clean or if those three judges had scored him appropriately in the first place.
    6.2? Shouldn't they have been working off of 6.0? Or were there some bonus back then a la Gymnastics

  16. #56
    Vacant
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Here and there
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,763
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8264
    Quote Originally Posted by olympic View Post
    6.2? Shouldn't they have been working off of 6.0? Or were there some bonus back then a la Gymnastics
    Exactly - as in, they didn't take the required deduction. Two 5.7's and the Canadian actually had him at 5.8 for required elements. Uhhhh ok

    The judges had no hesitation in burying Emi Watanabe for a similar error on her SP combo so, while the rest of his program was excellent, there was no excuse for giving Charlie a 5.7 or 5.8!!

  17. #57

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    13,502
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    42165
    The judges may have decided that they didn't want him to finish any lower than third' and they did what was neceaaary to make it happen.
    Not the first -or the last time - for that.
    Last edited by skatesindreams; 10-03-2011 at 07:39 PM.

  18. #58
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    6,934
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I did watch Charlie's SP out of curiosity over the weekend: That was one weird landing on the 3t-2l. He was way off-axis and in his timing. Then, it looked like he landed frontwards on the 2l [ << ] but kept his other foot off the ice, swinging it around and was able to give it a ta-da backwards position. I got the 0.4 - 0.5 deduction from DB's commentary

  19. #59
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    He's fine! He sends his love!
    Posts
    2,039
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    [QUOTE=bardtoob;3306005]Umm, I saw lots of 3T- double combos until after the 1990-91 season, not much different than in 1980. The notable exceptions were Ito, Harding, Yamaguchi, and Trenary QUOTE]

    I would argue that the ladies field at the '80 Olympics was a stronger freeskating field with far more depth. Beyond Ito, Yamaguchi, Trenary (Harding did not compete at Worlds that year), there were no other strong freeskaters unless you want to count a radically inconsistent Evelyn Grossman and the dubious skills of a young Bonaly, the rest of the field was pretty dismal and their horrendous skating skills made a Trenary 5th place SP without a triple spot on.

    I think Biellman, Watanabe, Allen, Lenz, along with Poetzch and Fratianne with the more dubious abilities of the likes of Kristofics-Binder, Wegellius, Ivanova, and Dubrovic far more competetive and made Poetzch's placement in the SP far more questionable.

  20. #60
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Miami, FL, USA
    Posts
    6,934
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    OK, for the men.

    If Charlie had skated a squeaky clean combo in the SP, how would it have influenced the podium?

    The GDR, Soviet and Canadian Judges didn't appear to take a deduction. Since Charlie hypothetically does a clean combo, I believe it still would've caused a tiny increase in the tech score [0.1 - 0.2] for those 3 judges, since it went from wonky to clean. I otherwise increased the SP tech score by 0.4 - 0.5 for the remaining judges.

    Very interesting, yet messy results. Charlie wouldn't have moved up, but:

    Charlie would've actually been able to steal two 1st place ordinals from the Swedish and Japanese judges from Robin Cousins, but they also would've pushed Hoffmann down one spot, from 2d to 3d.

    Charlie would've pushed himself into 2d between Hoffmann [1st] and Cousins [3d] with the GDR and US judges.

    He also would've come within a point of Hoffman and Cousins in raw totals.

    Hoffman after the LP would've had 4 1st place ordinals.
    Cousins would've had 3 1st place ordinals.
    Tickner would've had 2 1st place ordinals.

    However, I think since Robin was placed ahead of Jan on 5 of 9 judges cards, he still would've won, despite Jan having more 1st places that weren't a majority?

    Cousins 17/189.48
    Hoffman 17/189.72
    Tickner 23/188.42

    Figures skating judging was messy back in the day!
    Last edited by olympic; 10-03-2011 at 10:24 PM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •