Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28
  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    773
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0

    christina gao writes article for harvard crimson


  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    473
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    The article seems pretty politically slanted to me. The argument that Sotnikova won because of technical strengths and Kim of artistry is a huge oversimplification and one only more novice skating fans make.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    215
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0

    Waste of time article. Nothing significant said.


  4. #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Quadland
    Posts
    6,285
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    3358
    It's by someone who tried really hard to get to sochi so its interesting! The technical merit of sotnikova was far beyond Yuna but she also mentions Yuna was far more artistic in her program. She says sotnikova win makes her have major reservations about IJS! But the technical merit is on sotnikovas side. She is pro Yuna but isn't into saying every jump of adelina was actually flawed but not called flawed! She knows as a competitor a judge can think a jump is ur or wrong edge and take goe off.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    “It is far more important to have a good judge than a possible conflict of interest." - Ottavio Cinquanta
    Posts
    1,635
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by shady82 View Post
    The article seems pretty politically slanted to me. The argument that Sotnikova won because of technical strengths and Kim of artistry is a huge oversimplification and one only more novice skating fans make.
    I reject that premise in the first place because it is leading people to accept Adelina's win as legitimate. Present the case that "One skater had better jumps, one skater had better artistry," and of course people will accept the "jumper" because skating is a sport. In actuality, Yuna (three 3Lzs) was as athletic as Adelina. People are just oversimplifying that if you don't win on jumps then you must be an "artist." That mindset belittles what Yuna actually is and Adelina is not: An athlete AND and artist.

  6. #6
    Port de bras!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ravenclaw
    Posts
    30,120
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34026
    But Sotnikova WAS more athletic than Kim with the 7 triples, including the 3loop that Kim lacks. Sotnikova also demonstrated more difficult spin positions and footwork, which have a significant athletic component, the former flexibility and the latter stamina. Kim's program was also pretty front loaded. So no, while it could be argued that Kim was more artistic, finished and polished, Sotnikova's athletic superiority is pretty clear.
    "Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."

    from Speedy Death

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    639
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    This^

    For every fan and great skater that supports Yuna there are just as many fans and great skaters who think Adelina won.

    If Yuna's friends like Christina and Michelle support her that is fine.

    Yagudin and Tat supporting Adelina is fine.

    I am happy that Carolina has an Olympic medal, I am happy that Yuna has two Olympic medals and I am happy for Adelina.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    473
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Let's not forget that Adelina did a 3toe-3toe in the short, had a visible error in the free, and otherwise has less quality in the elements.

    Even people who think Adelina should have won can form better arguments than the technician-artist comparison simply because Adelina had 7 triples to Yu-na's 6.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    73
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    The BV difference between the two is less than 2 points (SP+FS). "More technical contents" is a stretch.

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    639
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by usethis2 View Post
    The BV difference between the two is less than 2 points (SP+FS). "More technical contents" is a stretch.
    Yuna's only hope was for Adelina to mess up her LP. Adelina had a points advantage on the layback and step levels besides having a more difficult jump layout and the best overall spins. Adelina absolutely showed more in the second half than either Yuna or Caro so she won the bonus and left the stronger image in the judges minds.

    I don't see why this result is so surprising to skating fans.

    Go back and see Tara won with more tech in'98. Sarah won with more tech. Shizuka won with more/cleaner tech.
    In Sochi Adelina won with more tech.

    It actually feels more like the trend than a "shocking upset."

    I don't think we will ever see the more "artistic skater" win the OGM under the current system because the odds are stacked against them.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,441
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    For a Harvard student, I expected better writing skills. It's not a bad piece, but it's not good either. I do love how Gao twice refers to Lipnitskaya as a "girl." I see what you're doing there, Christina.

  12. #12
    Prick Admin
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Having a kiki
    Posts
    42,386
    vCash
    506
    Rep Power
    25256
    Well she's a better skater than she is a writer.
    To think that fun is simple fun, while earnest things are earnest, proves all too plain that neither one thou truthfully discernest.

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    639
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Didn't Christina score a perfect 800 on her math boards?

    That is scary smart to me

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    11,012
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MrLucky View Post
    Didn't Christina score a perfect 800 on her math boards?

    That is scary smart to me
    It is indeed rare to get a perfect score, but the SAT doesn't really cover any high level math.

  15. #15
    Port de bras!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Ravenclaw
    Posts
    30,120
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    34026
    Quote Originally Posted by shady82 View Post
    Let's not forget that Adelina did a 3toe-3toe in the short, had a visible error in the free, and otherwise has less quality in the elements.
    Lets take spins, for example, did Yuna really have better quality spins? Objectively, if you consider the requirements for levels, it is clear that she did not. Subjectively, you can argue that you prefer Yuna's spin positions but I can argue right back, in detail why they are not good aesthetic quality. I don't particularly like Adelina's spins and don't find tem aesthetically pleasing either, but again, they are a lot more challenging, innovative and interesting than Yuna's. This is from someone who is decidedly not a fan of Adelina's skating.
    Quote Originally Posted by shady82 View Post
    Even people who think Adelina should have won can form better arguments than the technician-artist comparison simply because Adelina had 7 triples to Yu-na's 6.
    And they do. But not having a 3loop really did matter for Yuna. You cannot discard this argument as unsubstantial. However, Christina's article is poorly argued and her arguments are unsupported--that's disappointing.
    "Nature is a damp, inconvenient sort of place where birds and animals wander about uncooked."

    from Speedy Death

  16. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    73
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MrLucky View Post
    Yuna's only hope was for Adelina to mess up her LP. Adelina had a points advantage on the layback and step levels besides having a more difficult jump layout and the best overall spins. Adelina absolutely showed more in the second half than either Yuna or Caro so she won the bonus and left the stronger image in the judges minds.

    I don't see why this result is so surprising to skating fans.

    Go back and see Tara won with more tech in'98. Sarah won with more tech. Shizuka won with more/cleaner tech.
    In Sochi Adelina won with more tech.

    It actually feels more like the trend than a "shocking upset."

    I don't think we will ever see the more "artistic skater" win the OGM under the current system because the odds are stacked against them.
    More on Women's Controversy
    Figure Skating Reference: Evaluating Step Sequences


  17. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,707
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by allezfred View Post
    Well she's a better skater than she is a writer.
    Ouch, I'm not a big fan of the skating.

    What is she majoring in? Some people think you can have the science down without solid language skills, but I disagree.

    ETA

    A full understanding of the judging system requires a lot of time and experience with the sport. The ISU believed the new system would make it impossible for judges to swing scores in the favor of any particular skater. And, for the first few years after its implementation, it was probably somewhat successful. Over the course of the past few years, however, it’s become more and more obvious that competitions have been rigged.
    I agree that it is very possible to fix results even with this JS, and that of course it would have become easier and easier the better it was mastered by panels.


    But it’s interesting to consider a hypothetical scenario—what if the Olympics had been held in Japan? Would Nagoya native Mao Asada, who placed sixth in Sochi, have medaled? She had a stellar free skate, but dropped like a rock in the standings after the short program–would sympathetic judges have been more forgiving?
    Japan, I believe, is one of the worse examples one could bring up for this argument.
    Last edited by loulou; 02-28-2014 at 11:42 PM.

  18. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    773
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by loulou View Post
    Ouch, I'm not a big fan of the skating.

    What is she majoring in? Some people think you can have the science down without solid language skills, but I disagree.
    I've met countless med, pharm, and dental students with terrible grammar and spelling. Some of them are immigrants who may excel in math/science. Good language skills make you sound articulate but they don't necessarily determine someone's intelligence.

    Anyway, I've re-read the article and while it's not Pulitzer-caliber, aren't you all being a bit hypercritical? It's a fluff skating piece, and it's not that bad.
    Last edited by iarispiralllyof; 02-28-2014 at 11:54 PM.

  19. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    639
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Good articles which I had already read. But ISU and IOC say the results were fair.
    There are posters here, some that are former judges who will tell you the IJS is infallible.

    Adelina really skated great as did Yuna and Carolina.
    Last edited by MrLucky; 03-01-2014 at 10:54 AM.

  20. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,707
    vCash
    500
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by iarispiralllyof View Post
    Anyway, I've re-read the article and while it's not Pulitzer-caliber, aren't you all being a bit hypercritical? It's a fluff skating piece, and it's not that bad.
    First of all, I'd like to clarify that I only read the article after I wrote the sentence you quoted: I was commenting another post, not passing judgment on Gao's writing skills. Which I wouldn't have done anyway, because I'm in no position to.


    Quote Originally Posted by iarispiralllyof View Post
    I've met countless med, pharm, and dental students with terrible grammar. Good language skills make you sound articulate but they don't necessarily determine someone's intelligence.
    I never said language skills determine someone's intelligence. To be honest, life is so complicated I have yet to understand what intelligence is.

    Nor I said that many science people don't have good language skills, I know for a fact that the opposite is true.

    But, I believe any kind of studying or reasearch builds on language.
    Science, in order to be understood has to be layed out in best possible way.
    It's crucial that problems are well worded and presented, for them to ever be solved: you're much more likely to see what comes next if the people that preceeded you made it clear what the essence of the matter was, what the corollaries were, wrote simply, sharply, efficiently.
    Scientist Fermi, who was part of the Los Alamos team, was known for his abilities in presenting problems, that allowed him and anyone who worked with him to see solutions.
    Computer science, that is changing our lives, is simply the challenge to translate human life complications into strings of zeros and ones. You can imagine how relevant language would be in that process.

    Language is key, and Harvard is supposedly excellence.
    Last edited by loulou; 03-01-2014 at 12:09 AM.

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
  •