Retrospective: The 1980 Olympics

Discussion in 'The Trash Can' started by Maofan7, Sep 28, 2011.

  1. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    7,086
    I disagree. She was excellent in the SP and I don't recall a single mistake, hitting every jump and nonjump element. She was incoming world champ and she did the hardest combo [3sal-2loop] the cleanest [Lisa Marie Allen's was squicky] along with a big 2x, fast centered spins, etc. But, as you can see by my last post, this is just about fantasy and what it would've taken to win.

    And I honestly think Anett's marks were too high in the SP. You can see by her reactions in the K & C that even she was expecting worse [the near tears giving way to a smile of relief].
     
  2. orbitz

    orbitz Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Messages:
    9,944
    The GOLD MEDAL. DUH ! :p

    The marks were supposed to act as place holders anyway. If Linda had skated last in either the SP or LP then perhaps the judges would have thrown some 5.9s her way. I don't think of Linda as a 5.9 skater when compared to skaters like Hamill, Fleming, etc., but she was probably a 5.9./5.8-ish skater for the 77-80 period, which I think many considered was a weak era in women's figure skating. The men - Cousins, Tickner - had so much better choreography and skating during that time. I wonder why no one on the women side gave them the same challenging programs.
     
  3. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,426
    It was a matter of image, I believe.

    Ladies were expected to be pretty/feminine.
    If power and athleticism entered the equation, it was expected to be very well "disguised".

    That changed (somewhat) later.
     
  4. Belinda

    Belinda Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    66
    The early 80's were the golden age of British figure skating, with Robin Cousins winning the OGM, Torvil & Dean coming up, eventually to win the gold in '84, as well as Nicky Slater (now British Eurosport commentator) & Karen Barber, British No 2 ice dancers in top 5 or 6 AND Betty Callaway, coach of the Hungarian couple, later of T&D, then afterwards commentator on BBC, eloquently narrating Bestemianova & Bukin performances!! BBC was full of figure skating and I loved it.
    I also remember the rise of Tai & Randy, and it was such a fresh change, from Rodnina & Co. Can someone tell me who first did throw jumps in competitions? Rodnina did twists only, Tai did both throws & twists, but I don't know if she was the first ever.
     
  5. gkelly

    gkelly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,738
  6. Maofan7

    Maofan7 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2011
    Messages:
    5,988
  7. Belinda

    Belinda Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    66
    gkelly, thank you.
     
  8. floskate

    floskate Vacant

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,808
    Throw jumps were around in the mid 1960's - throw axels - but like gkelly I would need to do some research to be sure. BTW Rodnina did do throw axels in the late 60's and early 70's, particularly in exhibitions.
     
  9. Belinda

    Belinda Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    66
    Thank you, Floskate. I will view them on youtube.
     
  10. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,426
    Here's one EX - Irina Rodnina / Alexei Ulanov - Kalinka (1969)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwenyjU6w9E

    Wonderful to see this in such HQ.
    Forgive me, if I've "hijacked" the thread!
     
  11. floskate

    floskate Vacant

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,808
    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.
     
    gkelly and (deleted member) like this.
  12. bardtoob

    bardtoob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,142
    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.
     
  13. judgejudy27

    judgejudy27 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    13,576
    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: Oct 2, 2011
  14. floskate

    floskate Vacant

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,808
    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.
     
  15. bardtoob

    bardtoob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,142
    Frequently :lol: ... :rofl:

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

    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: Oct 2, 2011
  16. judgejudy27

    judgejudy27 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    13,576
    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.
     
  17. Mafke

    Mafke New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,125
    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)
     
  18. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    7,086
    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
     
  19. floskate

    floskate Vacant

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,808
    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.
     
  20. Belinda

    Belinda Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2011
    Messages:
    66
    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!!
     
  21. Seerek

    Seerek Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2002
    Messages:
    3,507
    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
     
  22. floskate

    floskate Vacant

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,808
    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.
     
  23. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    7,086
    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.
     
  24. floskate

    floskate Vacant

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,808
    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.
     
  25. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    7,086
    6.2? Shouldn't they have been working off of 6.0? Or were there some bonus back then a la Gymnastics
     
  26. floskate

    floskate Vacant

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2003
    Messages:
    8,808
    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 :confused:

    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!!
     
  27. skatesindreams

    skatesindreams Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    14,426
    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: Oct 3, 2011
  28. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    7,086
    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
     
  29. Maximillian

    Maximillian You can't unfry things.

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,788
     
  30. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    7,086
    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: Oct 3, 2011