Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 89
  1. #41
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    22
    Posts
    12,933
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    So I was right and judges were initially suspended for placing G&P too high. Frankly I think that is absurd, as G&P were atleast the 2nd best team of the event by far. I actually liked their 93 work much more than their 94 work, even if nobody else apparently did. What on earth would be the controversy about their OD placing, there was no borderline illegal moves or controversial moves in that like the FD. I think the suspensions if any should have been for the two judges who ridiculously placed Krylova & Fedorov FIRST in the FD over U&Z (and G&P). I wouldnt have even had them on the podium at that event, they were way overrated, and it was proven a year later with their huge drop in the rankings.

  2. #42
    Blergh
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I Want to Go to There
    Posts
    9,275
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16981
    I don't get how Krylova/Fedorov places so high. Their FD was straight out of 1980 and why did they reuse that FD in 1994? Ice Dance is the one discipline where it's never ok to repeat programs.

  3. #43
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,240
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    So I was right and judges were initially suspended for placing G&P too high. Frankly I think that is absurd, as G&P were at least the 2nd best team of the event by far.
    I agree. They surely looked like second best to me. What is especially bizarre is that they deemed the majority of the panel to be out of line, which kind of contradicts the whole "majority rules" premise of the ordinal scoring system. It wasn't unusual in those days for the second best team in Russia to also be the second best team in the world, so there was nothing obviously out of whack here.

    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    I think the suspensions if any should have been for the two judges who ridiculously placed Krylova & Fedorov FIRST in the FD over U&Z (and G&P). I wouldn't have even had them on the podium at that event, they were way overrated, and it was proven a year later with their huge drop in the rankings.
    I had always heard that judges were suspended for the bronze medal placing of Krilova/Fedorov in their first Worlds. It is interesting learn after all these years that it was really about Grushuk & Platov. IMO, it looks like a case of stogy old school taking revenge on judges with a different vision of ice dance. I didn't always like their dances, but G&P were amazingly strong technical skaters.

    I think there was also a school of thought that Rahkamo-Kokko were regularly undermarked in 93 & 94. Their programs always were very appealing so I suppose they had their advocates among judges and officials as well. But I can totally see why the suspensions were overturned. I mean, in a subjectively judged sport, it is hard to argue that 6 out of 9 judges got it so wrong they should be suspended. Usually their criteria for questioning judges involves being out of line with the majority, not agreeing with the majority. I wonder if maybe there was some unmentioned information about vote-rigging that really motivated this.
    Last edited by Susan M; 04-28-2013 at 06:55 PM.

  4. #44
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    22
    Posts
    12,933
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    The 2 judges who had K&F 1st in the FD were among the 3 who had G&P 4th in the FD (the 3 who were never suspended and supposably judged correctly via the ISU), so the suspensions were obviously not based around K&Fs placement, although they probably should have been!

    Rahkammo & Kokko did lack difficulty unfortunately but their performances were still easily good enough for the bronze at the 93 Worlds IMO. In 1994 I thought they were undermarked in some places. In the FD at Europeans they finished 4th overall but 5th in that portion behind Moniotte & Lavanchy who fell and had another big trip. Yet at the Olympics it was them who fell and finished above a flawless M&L in the FD and overall. Talk about mixed signals. I thought they should have been 3rd in the Starlight Waltz at the Olympics over Torvill & Dean, 3rd in the Rhumba over Gritschuk & Platov. At Worlds I thought they definitely deserved higher than the bronze.

  5. #45
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    france
    Posts
    553
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by VIETgrlTerifa View Post
    I don't get how Krylova/Fedorov places so high. Their FD was straight out of 1980 and why did they reuse that FD in 1994? Ice Dance is the one discipline where it's never ok to repeat programs.
    They had a Rock'n'Roll medley until Euros where they placed a disapointing 6th (compare to the previous year) and then switched back to their 93 FD. Krylova latter said Grishuk stole her idea of a Rock'n'Roll FD because G/P had another theme planned at first.

    The suspension was cancelled because of the rules violations by the IDTC. Sadly, I dont have the whole footage of the 1993 OD, it would be nice to have all the marks given. I remember being unimpressed with the OD that year, G/P and others. The OD from 1993 Euros is available at FSVIDS.net.

  6. #46
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    22
    Posts
    12,933
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    One thing I also dont understand is why in 92-93 Usova & Zhulin were getting much higher technical marks than Gritschuk & Platov, often .2 average per judge even. The OD and FD (especialy FD) programs of G&P were generally much harder, and they executed them very well, and they also skated with more speed. They should have had atleast equal tech. marks, if not higher, everytime. The judges could have still used the presentation mark to put Usova & Zhulin in front if they wanted to, they didnt have to have higher tech. marks, which IMO were not warranted by that point.

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Quadland
    Posts
    6,157
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    1604
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    So I was right and judges were initially suspended for placing G&P too high. Frankly I think that is absurd, as G&P were atleast the 2nd best team of the event by far. I actually liked their 93 work much more than their 94 work, even if nobody else apparently did. What on earth would be the controversy about their OD placing, there was no borderline illegal moves or controversial moves in that like the FD. I think the suspensions if any should have been for the two judges who ridiculously placed Krylova & Fedorov FIRST in the FD over U&Z (and G&P). I wouldnt have even had them on the podium at that event, they were way overrated, and it was proven a year later with their huge drop in the rankings.
    It was 5/4/24. I can't find that fd to see what happened that they could drop so much!

  8. #48
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,592
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    So I was right and judges were initially suspended for placing G&P too high. Frankly I think that is absurd, as G&P were atleast the 2nd best team of the event by far. I actually liked their 93 work much more than their 94 work, even if nobody else apparently did. What on earth would be the controversy about their OD placing, there was no borderline illegal moves or controversial moves in that like the FD. I think the suspensions if any should have been for the two judges who ridiculously placed Krylova & Fedorov FIRST in the FD over U&Z (and G&P). I wouldnt have even had them on the podium at that event, they were way overrated, and it was proven a year later with their huge drop in the rankings.
    Glad to hear others liked G/P's Blues FD. I'm fine with U/Z winning, but I'm still taken by the tone and difficulty of St. James' Infirmary.

  9. #49
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Entitiled
    Posts
    5,615
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Proustable View Post
    Glad to hear others liked G/P's Blues FD. I'm fine with U/Z winning, but I'm still taken by the tone and difficulty of St. James' Infirmary.
    I loved both programs. I have no problem with U&Z winning, and I'm glad they got a world title, but I can see the argument for G&P being in first because of the difficulty of the dance.
    I also preferred St. James Infirmary to G&P's 1994 Rock n Roll FD. I also much preferred U&Z's Blues for Klook to their 1994 FD.

  10. #50
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    577
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    One thing I also dont understand is why in 92-93 Usova & Zhulin were getting much higher technical marks than Gritschuk & Platov, often .2 average per judge even. The OD and FD (especialy FD) programs of G&P were generally much harder, and they executed them very well, and they also skated with more speed. They should have had atleast equal tech. marks, if not higher, everytime. The judges could have still used the presentation mark to put Usova & Zhulin in front if they wanted to, they didnt have to have higher tech. marks, which IMO were not warranted by that point.
    The judges seemed to be giving them the thumbs down on their material that year. I wonder if the negative publicity surrounding the affair between Grishuk and Zhulin hurt their reputation. Maybe, maybe not. Either way, the judges were in their corner the following year.

  11. #51
    YEAH!
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Worshipping Grebenkina...
    Posts
    13,671
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    5868
    Quote Originally Posted by caseyedwards View Post
    It was 5/4/24. I can't find that fd to see what happened that they could drop so much!
    What do you mean 5/4/24? They were 24th in a segment?

    Quote Originally Posted by gk_891 View Post
    The judges seemed to be giving them the thumbs down on their material that year. I wonder if the negative publicity surrounding the affair between Grishuk and Zhulin hurt their reputation. Maybe, maybe not. Either way, the judges were in their corner the following year.
    Wouldn't that be typical, to place the blame on the young woman, and not the MARRIED man engaging in the affair, sigh.

    As much as I love the FD from G&P, and would've placed it first (I would give U&Z the 1991 title), it did have connotations of domestic violence, and the ISU may have been hesitant to reward anything controversial in a pre-Olympic year, so as not to start a trend (see also, V&M's Carmen FD).

  12. #52
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Entitiled
    Posts
    5,615
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Cherub721 View Post
    What do you mean 5/4/24? They were 24th in a segment?



    Wouldn't that be typical, to place the blame on the young woman, and not the MARRIED man engaging in the affair, sigh.

    As much as I love the FD from G&P, and would've placed it first (I would give U&Z the 1991 title), it did have connotations of domestic violence, and the ISU may have been hesitant to reward anything controversial in a pre-Olympic year, so as not to start a trend (see also, V&M's Carmen FD).
    What did people find controversial about V&M's Carmen?

  13. #53

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Reserving a parking spot for Mao.
    Age
    32
    Posts
    22,664
    vCash
    83943
    Rep Power
    39427
    Quote Originally Posted by Cherub721 View Post
    What do you mean 5/4/24? They were 24th in a segment?
    It appears that they finished 24th in the original dance at 1994 Worlds and then withdrew.

  14. #54
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,240
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by lulu View Post
    What did people find controversial about V&M's Carmen?
    Seriously? You didn't notice pseudo-humping on ice and wonder why anyone thought that was a good idea?

  15. #55
    Blergh
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I Want to Go to There
    Posts
    9,275
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16981
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    One thing I also dont understand is why in 92-93 Usova & Zhulin were getting much higher technical marks than Gritschuk & Platov, often .2 average per judge even. The OD and FD (especialy FD) programs of G&P were generally much harder, and they executed them very well, and they also skated with more speed. They should have had atleast equal tech. marks, if not higher, everytime. The judges could have still used the presentation mark to put Usova & Zhulin in front if they wanted to, they didnt have to have higher tech. marks, which IMO were not warranted by that point.
    I wonder if it was because their 1993 FD had long periods of separation which garnered a few deductions. There were more separations in St. James Infirmary than in their 1994 Rock n' Roll number (they were also longer).

  16. #56
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    6,264
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Nours View Post
    That's true... for three months. I always hear this story as a fact even though it was only a political plot which didn't last long. I have the officials publications made by ISU from the IOC archives.
    Thank you so much for the info. I have been hearing this story for years, but could never heard any details beyond just the suspension.

    I could never understand why anyone could be suspended for G&P's placement, especially when K&F's seemed far more suspect, but from what it reads it just seems like there was some sort of anti G&P crusade going on behind the scenes.

    Wasn't this right after G&P left Dubova for Linichuk?
    Last edited by casken; 04-29-2013 at 02:37 AM.

  17. #57
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    22
    Posts
    12,933
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Another thing I often wondered, lost in the buzz about Torvill and Deans return and everyone following how they did, whether they won or not, was how after falling (or always being) way behind U&Z in the judges eyes until the 92-93 season were able to fly past them in the critical 93-94 Olympic season, denying them both the European and Olympic titles. Yes I know at Europeans that T&D won, then G&P and then U&Z, but U&Z were over T&D before G&P skated but G&P won the FD easily, but were too far behind to win themselves, but also switched the ordinals between U&Z and T&D and dropped U&Z down from 1st to 3rd. Then they denied them the Olympic Gold by 1 judge. I always wondered what made this possible. Was it:

    1. G&P really improved that much in just one season.
    2. The judges finally clued into G&P and their superior technical abilities vs U&Z and rewarded them, after seemingly being oblivious to it for 2 years. I would like to believe this, but I am too aware of all that went into ice dance judging at the time to believe this was the most likely reality.
    3. Oksana Gritschuk changed her look a huge amount in 1994, changing her hair totally, her whole on ice demeanor, and they suddenly just seemed more adulty and potential champion like as a result.
    4. Something happened in Russia that made U&Z lose their status as Russian #1 to G&P. Something the U&Z camp did that really pissed off some of the higher ups, or something else.
    5. U&Z were on such a massive decline with their marital spat and coaching problems and other issues, that they lost some of the very things that made them special in the first place (especialy their previously sensual on ice chemistry, and captivating programs, which they were still able to produce somewhat in 93, but almost none in 94) and made them vurnerable to being passed from behind.

    It is just super unusual due to politiks for a team that it was supposed to be the turn of to lose their #1 status to a younger and lower ranked Russian team out of nowhere, especialy in an Olympic year. Also I would have thought the Russians would prefer G&P to not win that year, so they would be certain to return for Nagano. U&Z were retiring anyway, so I figured the Russians would just try and get them the gold, and then send them off. As it was they initially retired after the 95 season, and then renegaded and came back, but they could have not had them for Nagano, while they would have been certain to have them had they not won.
    Last edited by judgejudy27; 04-29-2013 at 03:09 AM.

  18. #58
    YEAH!
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Worshipping Grebenkina...
    Posts
    13,671
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    5868
    Quote Originally Posted by lulu View Post
    What did people find controversial about V&M's Carmen?
    Well, the other poster who answered you has the idea, though I would put it more delicately.

    Quote Originally Posted by falling_dance View Post
    It appears that they finished 24th in the original dance at 1994 Worlds and then withdrew.
    Oh wow. I always thought they just didn't send a third team.

    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    A
    3. Oksana Gritschuk changed her look a huge amount in 1994, changing her hair totally, her whole on ice demeanor, and they suddenly just seemed more adulty and potential champion like as a result.
    IMO, their 1993 programs and skating were far more mature. I just think the 94 FD stood out so well in comparison to the other two FDs, being faster, trickier, fresher (T&D had recycled some moves)... they had reasons to mark them down (separations etc) too, but overall, it was probably some combination of a weak year, technique, and political considerations.

  19. #59
    Blergh
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I Want to Go to There
    Posts
    9,275
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    16981
    I remember showing my sister the top 3 1994 Dance teams and asking her who she liked the best without telling her who actually won. This was after I had explained the backstory behind Oksana Grishuk v. Zhulin and Maya Usova. Before I showed her the videos, she did not want Oksana Grishuk to win at all (even though I asked her why she didn't have as much animosity against Zhulin, and she said she did, but I noticed the difference in tone. This was possibly due to Maya Usova was the jilted wife and my sister didn't want to see her suffer). She also liked the story behind Torvill/Dean's comeback. However, after viewing all three, she grudgingly said that she thought Grishuk/Platov were way better than both U/Z and T/D. I guess the judges could've been in the same boat.

  20. #60
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    577
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    One thing about Grishuk & Platov in 93-94 was that they showed up to the European Chps looking extremely fit and ready to compete. I remember British commentators were saying how fantastic they looked in practice and I'm sure judges were at those practices. And although their material that year was technically inferior to their programs in prior years, they looked really youthful, exuberant, and jazzy. Usova & Zhulin came up with material that was not well suited to them but I will say that their content greatly improved that year. That was probably the biggest reason why their speed and flow really seemed to cut down as they looked much slower relative to previous years. That was my biggest problem with both U/Z and T/D that year, their free dances made them look almost geriatric. That being said, i also had major issues with Grishuk & Platov's programs that year too. Their compulsories looked better than ever but the rhumba was dance that was not well suited to them and although their FD had moments of brilliance, those moments were not weaved together very well as there were too many open spots in the choreography. That's probably my biggest problem with Linichuk's choreography as she tends to emphasize parts or segments rather than the whole.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 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
  •