Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 75 of 75
  1. #61
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ciocioworld
    Posts
    578
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by unicorn View Post
    I am sorry, but actually Yagudin won when they skated equally clean, such as 2000 sp, and he even won over Plushenko with more mistakes such as 2002 gpf (2nd lp). And Yagudin Zayaked in his first lp, Plushenko skated much cleaner, but still he only lost one judge's vote. That's not how you think they would rank in the judges' eyes, it's already a fact. Yagudin obviously had better edge quality than Plushenko and his footwork was more rhythmic and musical, his body movement was more fluid while Plushenko barely used his upper body when he's moving, that's a sign of superior technique. Yagudin's a more naturally talented skater, and he's talented at everything. Plushenko got lots of reward for his focus on jumps, when Yagudin started working more on jumps after 2001 worlds too, Plushenko's advantage just lost. Yagudin's 4-3-2, the rhythm of the three jumps, the height, the position in the air, the flow out of the last jump. The quality was better than any of Plushenko's 4-3-2, and his coach was Tarasova, not Mishin by the time, and you talk about natural gift. Plushenko is just an extremely ambitious and hard working skater, when Morosov and Tarasova had a chance to see him training, they were all impressed by his discipline. And his maniac like energy is his asset.
    No, no and no.

  2. #62
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,520
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ciocio View Post
    No, no and no.
    That was a famous speech I gave in parliament in 1990. I admire you for being obstructionist, but the Plushenko-Yagudin war is mostly settled now. I think it cannot be re-fought in a global way. Plushenko went on to become a greater power in other battles, but in the war with Yagudin he did not triumph.

  3. #63
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ciocioworld
    Posts
    578
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by TheIronLady View Post
    That was a famous speech I gave in parliament in 1990. I admire you for being obstructionist, but the Plushenko-Yagudin war is mostly settled now. I think it cannot be re-fought in a global way. Plushenko went on to become a greater power in other battles, but in the war with Yagudin he did not triumph.
    What war? There were a couple of 1 to 1 battles.

  4. #64
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    232
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    Dance: 1. Fusar Poli, 2. Duchensays, 3. Anissina & Peizerat (love them but I see them really struggling under COP for some reason, although considering the teams of their era it might not have hurt them and even helped them when they actually competed per say), 4. Bestiamanova & Bukin, 5. Lobacheva & Averbuhk
    I have to strongly disagree here, especially about A/P and Averbukh. (not sur about Fusar-Poli, she looked much stronger than Margaglio, but she still didn't look to me so good comapared to the 3 I named previously). I think the couples from 1998-2002 era in reality went through the biggest changes in the system. From the completely free free dances (and original dances in 1998) to complulsory elements. In 1999 the spin and step sequnces were introduced I think, than in 2000 the not touching step sequences and twizzles,...I know for exemple A/P had often problems at the begining of the season, but I'd like to point out their programs were already very difficult. I'd even say much more difficult than what they needed and it was actually one of their problems in 2001. The Beethowen program was incredibly difficult, so many years latter and I still can't believe they lost to the Italians.
    I remember in 2006, Czech TV showed their Liberta during the zambony time and our olympic judge from SLC was amazed by it. She said with some little modifications, most of their elements would be level 4 or 3 in 2006.

  5. #65

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Age
    53
    Posts
    10,469
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    21476
    Quote Originally Posted by dorianhotel View Post
    Kulik would not be a strong COP skater. Not only were his spin weak but his footwork was nothing to write home about, and his choreography consistested of alot of posing and rest periods.
    I agree with Marco. Kulik's spins were indeed weak. But his skating skills, transitions, and content in the step sequence were excellent compared to most of his competitors at the time. There's a reason why he sometimes placed ahead of skaters with more successful jumps. I would argue choreography as well. No, his programs then couldn't keep up with the top guys in those areas now, but those programs would do better than others' from the same era. Had all those guys trained under IJS rules and expectations, I have no doubt Kulik would have been among the leaders.

    But the premise of this thread -- domination -- is hard to take seriously. If we take all the most talented skaters from different eras and put them in the same training context under the same rules, many of them will do well and no single skater is likely to dominate. Part of the reason some of them were able to dominate was that there weren't as many skaters of the same talent level competing at the same time.

  6. #66

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    4,317
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by unicorn View Post
    I am sorry, but actually Yagudin won when they skated equally clean, such as 2000 sp, and he even won over Plushenko with more mistakes such as 2002 gpf (2nd lp). And Yagudin Zayaked in his first lp, Plushenko skated much cleaner, but still he only lost one judge's vote. That's not how you think they would rank in the judges' eyes, it's already a fact.[/b] Yagudin obviously had better edge quality than Plushenko and his footwork was more rhythmic and musical, his body movement was more fluid while Plushenko barely used his upper body when he's moving, that's a sign of superior technique. Yagudin's a more naturally talented skater, and he's talented at everything. Plushenko got lots of reward for his focus on jumps, when Yagudin started working more on jumps after 2001 worlds too, Plushenko's advantage just lost. Yagudin's 4-3-2, the rhythm of the three jumps, the height, the position in the air, the flow out of the last jump. The quality was better than any of Plushenko's 4-3-2, and his coach was Tarasova, not Mishin by the time, and you talk about natural gift. Plushenko is just an extremely ambitious and hard working skater, when Morosov and Tarasova had a chance to see him training, they were all impressed by his discipline. And his maniac like energy is his asset.
    I said if they had an equally clean competition. But it was just my vague feeling from back then anyway, I never claimed that it was absolutely true. But I do wonder how you figured that Yagudin "obviously" had better edge quality than Plushenko? You mean you saw that when he was skating on two feet? Yagudin skated with a hunched back for his entire career as well. As for the rest, I don't even care for Plushenko's skating and hence this debate doesn't really interest me or deserve my time, so you can be an uber and believe Yagudin was absolutely better/more talented at everything all you want.
    Last edited by shine; 06-03-2013 at 06:56 PM.

  7. #67
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,259
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Anissina and Peizerat were not that strong in twizzles, and often made mistakes or unision breaks on them, even though they werent doing the hardest ones. Even the overrated Fusar Poli was superior at the twizzles IMO, and while I totally disagreed with the 2001 Worlds gold medal choice by the judges, all the same I think the twizzles was a part of the final decision. That is the biggest reasons I think they would have struggled under COP. Twizzles are very difficult and very demanding under this new code. Their skating was also alot more about highlight moves and great lifts and inventive elements than complicated footwork. Granted they still did some of the most difficult footwork of all the teams near the end of their career, and generally fairly well done; but I dont think they would have been entirely comfortable with that as the cornerstone of their program and to the levels demanded today. Who knows, they are one of my favorite teams so I would hope I was wrong of course.

  8. #68
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    473
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    During their time, A/P will probably still come on top because they do have the most difficult content and generally seem most capable of handling it. However, it's true their twizzles aren't the best, I think B/K and D/V have the edge there. A/P also didn't have the best spins, this will probably go to D/V. I doubt FP/M will do better than A/P - their twizzles and spins weren't much better either. It seems D/V would do better under IJS, but then again FP/M were consistently scored higher in TOrino than D/V.

  9. #69
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    233
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by shine View Post
    I said if they had an equally clean competition. But it was just my vague feeling from back then anyway, I never claimed that it was absolutely true. But I do wonder how you figured that Yagudin "obviously" had better edge quality than Plushenko? You mean you saw that when he was skating on two feet? Yagudin skated with a hunched back for his entire career as well. As for the rest, I don't even care for Plushenko's skating and hence this debate doesn't really interest me or deserve my time, so you can be an uber and believe Yagudin was absolutely better/more talented at everything all you want.

    Only one foot skating needs to be skated on edges? Those steps such as Choctaws and Mohawks, lots of moves such as spread eagle or spirals don't need to be skated on edges? But no surprise, when I saw that post, I knew I saw a big mouth again.

  10. #70
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    233
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I agree with some of the posts, you can't apply different rules to the skaters from different eras. But if you apply it to the same skaters competed at the same time, the results might still be the same. If you put today's skaters to late 90s, they could have skated to less demanding programs, but then they would have to face the difficulties of conquering the Quad.

    Here's a Yagudin's EX program from 2000 for those who might be interested. It's no harm to review those long, flowing edges, easy accelerations. Just love that spread eagle at 1:57, the guy really knows how to open his body nicely. Please neglect the jumps. Oh no, I saw some one foot skating, lol.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BIlp...eature=related

  11. #71
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    11,186
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gkelly View Post
    I agree with Marco. Kulik's spins were indeed weak. But his skating skills, transitions, and content in the step sequence were excellent compared to most of his competitors at the time. There's a reason why he sometimes placed ahead of skaters with more successful jumps. I would argue choreography as well. No, his programs then couldn't keep up with the top guys in those areas now, but those programs would do better than others' from the same era. Had all those guys trained under IJS rules and expectations, I have no doubt Kulik would have been among the leaders.
    Yes it's because he was a freaking brilliant skater.

    By the way, I think his R&J program (choreographed by Tarasova) back in 1997 definitely can match most programs by the top guys today in terms of program construction. Of course the spins and footwork weren't tailored but the complexity is obvious. And that's why he wasn't consistently delivering with it.

  12. #72
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Age
    33
    Posts
    2,022
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by shady82 View Post
    During their time, A/P will probably still come on top because they do have the most difficult content and generally seem most capable of handling it. However, it's true their twizzles aren't the best, I think B/K and D/V have the edge there. A/P also didn't have the best spins, this will probably go to D/V. I doubt FP/M will do better than A/P - their twizzles and spins weren't much better either. It seems D/V would do better under IJS, but then again FP/M were consistently scored higher in TOrino than D/V.

    FP/M lost the FD to D/V, though.
    I think D/V scored higher in the technical elements but the judges prefered the Italians in the PCS (which I disagreed with).
    Last edited by David21; 06-04-2013 at 11:50 PM. Reason: spelling mistake

  13. #73
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    473
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by David21 View Post
    FP/M lost the FD to D/V, though.
    I think D/V scored higher in the technical elements but the judges prefered the Italians in the PCS (which I disagreed with).
    Oops my bad. That is more like it. I think the Italians had the edge in the CD, but otherwise D/W were better.

  14. #74
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    23
    Posts
    13,259
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Drobiazko & Vanagas very easily beat Fusar Poli & Margalio in both the OD (where both fell, so no difference) and FD in Turin. Only the ridiculous CD score of Fusar Poli barely kept them in front by the end anyway, and had the Olympics not been in Italy while Fusar Poli may have still beaten the Lithunians in the CD they would have been nowhere near 1st that phase and easily behind the Lithunians overall. The CD also not a factor today as there are no more CDs.

  15. #75
    I <3 Kozuka
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Vancouver/Seattle
    Posts
    19,203
    vCash
    730
    Rep Power
    43906
    Quote Originally Posted by judgejudy27 View Post
    Yes but all under 6.0. Once COP came into play he was finished.
    I don't think that was the system: I think that was a combination of injury, boot issues, and being unhappy. His 2005 FS by Tarasova was terrific, but he wasn't able to skate it to close to its potential.

    Without Ladies doing quads and quad combinations, under 6.0 there seemed to be much more pressure to do all of the triples, except 3A. On the other hand, incorrect edges and under-rotations weren't called the way they are now. Skaters who don't have the full jump arsenal but who can rotate their jumps, do proper-edge take-offs, and compensate (or at least stay competitive) with high spin and footwork levels should get better results under CoP on average. Ladies who could land the full set of triples less 3A wouldn't have to worry so much about taking off from proper edges or landing fully rotated jumps, especially the 3Lo at the end of a combination.

    I agree that, properly scored, Valova/Vasiliev could have done very, very well under CoP.
    "The team doesn't get automatic capacity because management is mad" -- Greg Smith, agile guy

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •