Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27
  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    138
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0

    Womens short program judging at 92 Olympics- Bonaly, Ito, Hubert, Sato, Harding

    I dont understand the short program scoring of the 92 Olympics. To me it looks like Ito and Hubert and maybe Bonaly were really overmarked and overplaced compared to Harding and Sato.

    Harding did the triple axel combo and fell and Ito did the triple lutz combo and fell. Scott Hamilton said Harding should have been higher since she tried the much harder combo and I agree. Why would Ito be ahead when she missed the much easier combo. The rest of their skating as far as jumps, spins, and overall skating is of similar level too.

    Sato was absolutely beautiful and a wonderful short program. Hubert was very good too. However Sato did the same jump combination and the overall quality of her skating is so far superior to Hubert. Hubert's biggest greatness is huge speed, but Sato also has amazing speed and even matches her there. So how could Hubert ever come ahead, let alone 2 spots.

    How was Harding a gold medal threat coming in just missing a triple axel combination placed lower than young immature Hubert with only a triple loop combo even with Harding's fall.

    Bonaly also looks overscored. I know she stood up and tried a triple lutz combo but she was really quite a horrible skater at the time. Top 3 sems questionable even with the others falls and easier combos.

    I thought the placements of these 5 skaters was way off.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,325
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    47516
    Unlike the COP, the 6.0 system was very tough on any mistakes in the SP. In singles there was a mandatory deduction of 0.4-0.5 for a fall in the SP (no mandatory deduction in the LP, and only 0.3 deduction in pairs for a fall in the SP). I would say Midori was held up a bit over Harding, because she had been phenomenal in practices. The judges didn't get to watch Harding much before the competition (she arrived quite late) and that may have hurt her.

    About Bonaly- the 3Lz-2t combination was highly regarded under 6.0, compared to easy combinations like 3t-2t or 3R-2t, so the easy combination hurt Sato even though her basic skating skills were obvious. Hubert may have gotten some home field advantage, and she skated very late which also helped her placement.

    Under the 6.0, the skaters had base marks based on- what they had planned, reputation, how they skated in practice, etc. In the SP they deducted from the base marks. That explains some of the relatively high marks for Midori and Surya.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    138
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Harding claims the USFSA made her stay home longer since they were considering not sending her. I don't understand that though since even though she did poorly at Nationals she was still an Olympic Gold contender along with Ito and Yamaguchi. Anyway even if she bombed they lost nothing by sending her. The next option was Lisa Ervin. Ervin was a boring artistic skater who could do nothing harder than a triple loop. She would be lucky to be top 10 in Albertville if she skated her best. Why put Harding under additional stress and jeapordize her still very real Olympic medal chances just since they were worried she might not skate well in Albertville. There was no other option for the team, the big 3 U.S skaters were far above the others then, and they only hurt her chances more making her stay home longer.

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    138
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    I had forgotten the draw. Didn't Sato and Harding skate very early and Ito, Hubert, and Bonaly all near the end? That probably affected the scoring and results too.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    The rankings are mainly due to 6.0 system.
    Judges' rankings were very special that day. For example, Joanne Conway had places from 7th to 22nd (she finished 17th in the SP).
    Surya Bonaly had places from 2nd to 8th...
    Tonya Harding 4th to 11th !

    http://winter-olympic-memories.com/h...igure_w_ex.htm

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    3,404
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    British Judge Vanessa Riley had it in the original program:

    Yamaguchi
    Kerrigan
    Hubert
    Sato
    Rachkova
    Torp-Lind
    Ito
    Bonaly
    Chen
    Chouinard
    Harding
    Conway

    quite the order compared to the rest of the panel

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    3,178
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8235
    Quote Originally Posted by kwanoverrated View Post
    Harding claims the USFSA made her stay home longer since they were considering not sending her. I don't understand that though since even though she did poorly at Nationals she was still an Olympic Gold contender along with Ito and Yamaguchi. Anyway even if she bombed they lost nothing by sending her. The next option was Lisa Ervin. Ervin was a boring artistic skater who could do nothing harder than a triple loop. She would be lucky to be top 10 in Albertville if she skated her best. Why put Harding under additional stress and jeapordize her still very real Olympic medal chances just since they were worried she might not skate well in Albertville. There was no other option for the team, the big 3 U.S skaters were far above the others then, and they only hurt her chances more making her stay home longer.
    The USFS not wanting to send her - when did this supposedly occur???? The story that has always been out there was that she stayed at home longer claiming she never got jet lag only to arrive in Albertville very late and sure enough, get nailed by jet lag. Or is this yet just another "typical Tonya" story to shift the blame to anyone but herself for her poor short program or are you mixing it up with the USFSA's desire to keep her off the team in 1994 because of the Kerrigan attack?
    "Once you've skated together long enough, and you're really good friends, you can close your eyes, put your hand out and she's right there." Joe Dolkiewicz, 2011 US Novice Pairs Bronze Medalist

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    3,178
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    8235
    Oops, duplicate post, sorry
    "Once you've skated together long enough, and you're really good friends, you can close your eyes, put your hand out and she's right there." Joe Dolkiewicz, 2011 US Novice Pairs Bronze Medalist

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    138
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Yazmeen View Post
    The USFS not wanting to send her - when did this supposedly occur????
    Her former coach Diane Rawlinson talks about some point it in this profile:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asB_rf2UCmA

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,325
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    47516
    Quote Originally Posted by kwanoverrated View Post
    Her former coach Diane Rawlinson talks about some point it in this profile:


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asB_rf2UCmA
    May be Diane was looking for an excuse for Tonya underperforming in the 92 Olympics? I seriously doubt that the USFSA would leave out the 92 world silver medallist off the Olympic team, when Harding was the only skater in the world that could challenge Ito technically.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    356
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Yeah I dont think Harding was anywhere near danger being off that team. That said she and her team may have felt USFSA was no longer in her corner as they had been the previous year. They could have placed/held her up over Kerrigan at 92 US nats but instead put her third (remember too at this point Harding had been consistently beating Kerrigan at most competitions)
    As far as the Olympics are concerned, yes Ito was for sure held up. Harding should have been ahead of her and Hubert. Bonaly deserved her placement since she went clean on a very difficult combo, and that was huge in the SP during the 6.0 era. Ito is/was an incredible skater but that was one of her worst SP's ever. I'd have her 5th, since Huberts overall skating isn't anywhere near as good, even for Ito on a bad day.

  12. #12
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Age
    32
    Posts
    2,003
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Having just watched the five skates in question, I disagree that Harding was in any way undermarked. Other than the fall on the jump combo, all of her spins travelled, she had lots of crossovers in her spiral sequence and the program was not really what I'd call "artistic". Hubert's program OTOH was fast, exciting, her jumps and footwork were great, and even her layback was not as bad as usual. Interestingly, the British judge had her 3rd in the SP and 20th in the FS
    I see no reason for Sato being that low, though. I guess she really got unlucky with the skate order. I probably would have had it:

    3. Bonaly (based on the difficult jump combo and difficult spins)
    4. Hubert (based on speed and footwork)
    5. Sato
    6. Ito
    7. Harding

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    356
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Sato definitely was undermarked, but I can't see them placing her higher considering she was Japan # 2, had an easier combo, AND went up early in the lineup. Just too much to overcome there.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Lnt175 View Post
    Sato definitely was undermarked, but I can't see them placing her higher considering she was Japan # 2, had an easier combo, AND went up early in the lineup. Just too much to overcome there.
    And Yuka didn't have the jumps content to challenge the others in the LP. And I've always had the feeling that judges consider it while judging the SP.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,325
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    47516
    Quote Originally Posted by Lnt175 View Post
    Sato definitely was undermarked, but I can't see them placing her higher considering she was Japan # 2, had an easier combo, AND went up early in the lineup. Just too much to overcome there.
    She was not undermarked. Her base marks were low because she had an easier jump combination. That's how the 6.0 worked. Midori benefitted from having a more difficult (3Lz-2t) combination even though she did not land it. The rest of her skating was as planned. Midori had fast spins. Her only weakness was the spiral sequence. That, combined with how awesome she had been in practices pushed her over some of the other skaters who skated clean. If you remember, G&G in 94 were awarded high marks despite their subpar skating in the LP, compared to M&D's because M&D had struggled in practices while G&G had been stellar. Again, this was the 6.0 system. You can't compare it with the IJS.

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    12,257
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    She was not undermarked. Her base marks were low because she had an easier jump combination. That's how the 6.0 worked. Midori benefitted from having a more difficult (3Lz-2t) combination even though she did not land it. The rest of her skating was as planned. Midori had fast spins. Her only weakness was the spiral sequence. That, combined with how awesome she had been in practices pushed her over some of the other skaters who skated clean. If you remember, G&G in 94 were awarded high marks despite their subpar skating in the LP, compared to M&D's because M&D had struggled in practices while G&G had been stellar. Again, this was the 6.0 system. You can't compare it with the IJS.
    It is still exactly the same under IJS.
    PCS and GOE depend on reputation, practices, jumps content...

  17. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Age
    32
    Posts
    2,003
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    She was not undermarked. Her base marks were low because she had an easier jump combination. That's how the 6.0 worked. Midori benefitted from having a more difficult (3Lz-2t) combination even though she did not land it. The rest of her skating was as planned. Midori had fast spins. Her only weakness was the spiral sequence. That, combined with how awesome she had been in practices pushed her over some of the other skaters who skated clean. If you remember, G&G in 94 were awarded high marks despite their subpar skating in the LP, compared to M&D's because M&D had struggled in practices while G&G had been stellar. Again, this was the 6.0 system. You can't compare it with the IJS.

    So you are saying she wasn't undermarked because judges considered the practices? You think that is fair to judge the practices instead of the actual skate during the competition?
    Your argumentation also doesn't explain why Hubert, who had the same "easier jump combination" as Sato, was at least placed ahead of Harding while Sato was not.

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Age
    22
    Posts
    12,996
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Seerek View Post
    British Judge Vanessa Riley had it in the original program:

    Yamaguchi
    Kerrigan
    Hubert
    Sato
    Rachkova
    Torp-Lind
    Ito
    Bonaly
    Chen
    Chouinard
    Harding
    Conway

    quite the order compared to the rest of the panel

    Wowsers! Those are something. I didnt always agree with Riley's marks but I admire she was willing to score based on what she felt she saw on the ice and was in no way swayed by staying in line or what protocal of the skaters were.

    Who is Rachkova? What did she do. Wasnt she something like 16th in the short.


    On another note I wonder what Riley thought about Bonaly's temper tantrum at the 94 Worlds when losing to Sato. Riley LOVED Sato's skating. Here in Albertville she not only had her an astonishing 2nd in the LP over Ito (with nothing harder than a triple loop and she even popped the 2nd of those to a single), but a higher technical mark than Ito and anyone besides Yamaguchi (she gave Sato 5.7, 5.7 in the LP, Ito 5.6 technical and 5.5, Chen who had 2 triple lutzes and 6 triples 5.4 for both technical and presentation, Kerrigan and Harding 5.3s technically). Riley HATED Bonaly's skating and would have her 10th or 12th if she had a good skate, out of the top 20 if she had a bad one. Based on how she views the two skaters, Riley probably thought Sato at the 94 Worlds should have beaten Bonaly by something like 1.2 points if she were scoring, and she must have had a heart attack seeing Bonaly protest the result, lol!

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,325
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    47516
    Quote Originally Posted by David21 View Post
    So you are saying she wasn't undermarked because judges considered the practices? You think that is fair to judge the practices instead of the actual skate during the competition?
    Your argumentation also doesn't explain why Hubert, who had the same "easier jump combination" as Sato, was at least placed ahead of Harding while Sato was not.
    I never said it's fair to consider the practices, but judges do that. It's a well known fact. I even gave the example of G&G. Why are you surprised by the judges marking the practices? They have always done that. I am not saying it's fair but it's something very familiar.

    Other things that mattered more under 6.0 were- skating order (big factor, IMO), where the competition takes place, reputation (Hubert equal to Sato in that regard, but homecrowd influences the marks- haven't we seen this before?)

    I am surprised that you are surprised. Why are you looking for logic where judging is concerned? IJS has been a small improvement, but not by much. At least in the tech marks there is some logic involved under IJS.

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Germany
    Age
    32
    Posts
    2,003
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vash01 View Post
    I never said it's fair to consider the practices, but judges do that. It's a well known fact. I even gave the example of G&G. Why are you surprised by the judges marking the practices? They have always done that. I am not saying it's fair but it's something very familiar.

    I'm not surprised that the judges marked the practices. I'm surprised by your "She wasn't undermarked"-comment because that means to me that you agree with the way the judges marked the competition including not judging the competition and marking the practices instead of the actual skating during the program.

    Of course if we want to find out the reasons for the placements then your comments about the practices, nationalities etc. are relevant, but not when we are trying to find out who was undermarked and who was not, then it isn't.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •