The Dance Hall 10: The Saitama Samba 2022-2023

Status
Not open for further replies.
Misogynistically oriented criticism of female ice dancers in favor of their male partners is 100% a thing. It's a consistent feature in the ice dance world. There are isolated instances of male partner criticism as well, but those are more the exceptions, not the norm.

But my head is exploding right now at the comment that Tessa Virtue was always the lesser partner in skating skills to Scott Moir. This criticism was honestly new to me. :eek: To hear that about someone at the level that Virtue was at, especially toward the end of her career, is ... interesting. (Especially since, regardless of anything else, Virtue was, at the end of her career, possibly the best pure performer and dancer I've ever seen among women skaters, IMO.) No matter how good you are as a woman in this sport, it's never quite enough.
 
Misogynistically oriented criticism of female ice dancers in favor of their male partners is 100% a thing. It's a consistent feature in the ice dance world. There are isolated instances of male partner criticism as well, but those are more the exceptions, not the norm.

But my head is exploding right now at the comment that Tessa Virtue was always the lesser partner in skating skills to Scott Moir. This criticism was honestly new to me. :eek: To hear that about someone at the level that Virtue was at, especially toward the end of her career, is ... interesting. (Especially since, regardless of anything else, Virtue was, at the end of her career, possibly the best pure performer and dancer I've ever seen among women skaters, IMO.) No matter how good you are as a woman in this sport, it's never quite enough.

I once had someone who had a stronger background in ice dance technique than I do tell me that Virtue had lost her skating skills after her major surgery and wasn't as strong as she used to be. I believed them for a while because I figured they knew better than I did, and then after a few other comments, I realized they just didn't like the idea of a woman skating with power.
 
But my head is exploding right now at the comment that Tessa Virtue was always the lesser partner in skating skills to Scott Moir. This criticism was honestly new to me. :eek:
Yes, I don't remember comments about Virtue being inferior to Moir? They were both excellent and well-matched.

But then look at what's said about skaters like Davis, Chock, Fear, etc. They're never considered very good in terms of skating skills comparatively. Women in ice dance can never win with this sexism. If you've got great skating skills, you're probably going to be denigrated for your size (Madison Hubbel, Kaitlyn Hawayek, etc), and if you're small, you're not considered great with the blade.
This is a very interesting observation. Just from a physics standpoint, it's a lot harder to make an impression in the ice if you're smaller so a woman with good skills could come across as not as good at the bladework as her taller and heavier partner. Hmm. Which is just another reason that the rules favoring large size differences (because of the lifts!) is really doing no favors to having partners appear equally-matched.
 
Yes, I don't remember comments about Virtue being inferior to Moir? They were both excellent and well-matched.
IIRC, alot of that criticism came around the end of their Zoueva era when Tessa was dealing with chronic injuries. She was making more mistakes, especially in twizzles, and then was being criticized by both fandoms (V&M fandoms and D&W fandoms).

I don't recall these same criticisms occurring when they came back in the 2016-17 season. I actually thought Tessa was the stronger, more reliable of the two post comeback.
 
Last edited:
Misogynistically oriented criticism of female ice dancers in favor of their male partners is 100% a thing. It's a consistent feature in the ice dance world. There are isolated instances of male partner criticism as well, but those are more the exceptions, not the norm.

But my head is exploding right now at the comment that Tessa Virtue was always the lesser partner in skating skills to Scott Moir. This criticism was honestly new to me. :eek: To hear that about someone at the level that Virtue was at, especially toward the end of her career, is ... interesting. (Especially since, regardless of anything else, Virtue was, at the end of her career, possibly the best pure performer and dancer I've ever seen among women skaters, IMO.) No matter how good you are as a woman in this sport, it's never quite enough.
Hmm interesting concept. This probably is true to some extent but honestly I do think most times the female partner is more criticized they are atleast the slightly weaker partner. Like in Fear & Gibson, Stepanova & Bukin, Chock & Bates, Gilles & Poirier. I do think teams where the male is the weaker partner like Fourner Beaudry & Sorensen, Fusar Poli & Margalio (the single biggest example in history probably), Weaver & Poje, Hubbell & Donohue, the male is more nitpicked than the female.

I agree on Virtue & Moir 100% though. I think a lot of that is how incredible he is, but honestly, she was so amazing that if anything she seemed the standout on that team almost to me, particularly by the end as you say. They are one of the only teams I can think of where I feel that the women seems that strongly shortchanged in public opinion though. Maybe Papadakis & Cizeron to some extent too, she is underrated, partly since he is so exceptional, but she still sometimes does not get her just due.
 
I apologize about the length of this following post. I've tried to make it as short as I could.

From reading the last few posts, I think there are related, but ultimately two distinct issues.

One is regarding the treatment of women in figure skating. Women being seen as more disposable and thus mistreated and not being fully appreciated for their skills is a major problem in both ice dance and pairs. Men being treated as hotter or rarer commodities and treated much better (or like stars of the rink) because of it. Women are damned if they are and damned if they're not with regard to body and weight and are often compare to one another unfairly. These are very important issues we need to deal with.

The second is the idea that is misogynistic to criticize any female ice dancer. I think there can be a prevailing misogyny because why are there more female ice dancers who are seen as weaker than their male counterparts? Whether or not there's something to that critique, it's strange. Maybe it's the fact that we fans are not truly appreciating ALL aspects of ice dance and overly celebrate the great qualities that men bring but not the great qualities that women bring to ice dance. (Actually, even thinking that men bring certain qualities and women bring other specific qualities is sexist).

For the first issue, that will require changing the way we treat female skaters in general and requires a cultural rethinking, and explicitly, will require us to change the way we express our opinions. This will be a long-term commitment and will require time and generational shifts in positions of authority to ensure there is institutional support all across the spectrum and hierarchy. We all need to do our part.

As for the second issue,

I think the following counter is important point to consider: This is a sport with specific scores in specific categories. If "objectively" weaker skaters in terms of skating skills (depth of edge, speed, ability to do clean turns, etc.) are scoring higher than other skaters in that specific category, then people should be able to comment on it without being accused of being sexist. This is also a sport where teams compete against one another, so comparing athletes who are competing against one another and being scored in the same category is not only fair, but it's exactly what the competition of this sport is designed to do.

My question is, with the point and counterpoint both in mind, what can fans do when discussing a competition and when comparing scores in skating skills and other aspects of each ice dance team while being more considerate and stopping behaviors that are destructive to women?

As I said before, the first thing we fans can do is make less blanket statements that ultimately don't mean anything or tell us anything but are effective at simply putting that specific partner down. This sort of expression is also leading many to observe that many people who are doing that are focusing or putting so much focus on the female partner.

I think a very simple solution to solve these issues is to just focus on the elements and execution, and aim your comments and critiques at that (like we do for singles skating and pairs skating). Not only is it informative, but it makes it less of a personal attack on the skater.

For example, I've seen people argue that Hawayek/Baker deserved much more for their one-foot sequence over Gilles/Poirier, and everybody else. As an ice dance fan, that sounds very simple and almost as much of a blanket statement as saying so-and-so has bad skating skills. However, just for this specific discussion of reframing how we say things, it's enough and I think it's fair we ask for that bare minimum.

This can even be adapted to more performance/choreographic-oriented criticisms too because there's reasons why you feel someone is a better performer than the other or why you think someone's program is stronger than another, and, likewise, we can adopt that into arguing specific GOEs of elements and PCSs using the bullet points and whatnot. This may expand our minds somewhat into seeing how some judges are evaluating skating skills and GOE to explain some scores that don't make sense to us upon first impression.

One thing I do see happening is when one female partner does start off with somewhat of ability gap to their partner, people not only observe that, but then adopt it and never let go of that sort of thinking. First, I also think we need to stop being married to ideas or judgments, as if skaters are in a state of permanence rather than transient in terms of skaters have the ability to improve, especially when we're talking about periods of four-eight-twelve-whatever years. Second, I do believe that if we keep it focused on the person's actions and execution of elements, and stop framing things against the person itself, it may also open our eyes a bit as well and help us see that skater's current abilities actually are as opposed to us being clouded by prejudicial thinking heavily informing us of what that skater's abilities are.

I also think if keep it focused on the skating itself and not the skater, that'll also help in treating the first issue.
 
I apologize about the length of this following post. I've tried to make it as short as I could.

From reading the last few posts, I think there are related, but ultimately two distinct issues.

One is regarding the treatment of women in figure skating. Women being seen as more disposable and thus mistreated and not being fully appreciated for their skills is a major problem in both ice dance and pairs. Men being treated as hotter or rarer commodities and treated much better (or like stars of the rink) because of it. Women are damned if they are and damned if they're not with regard to body and weight and are often compare to one another unfairly. These are very important issues we need to deal with.

The second is the idea that is misogynistic to criticize any female ice dancer. I think there can be a prevailing misogyny because why are there more female ice dancers who are seen as weaker than their male counterparts? Whether or not there's something to that critique, it's strange. Maybe it's the fact that we fans are not truly appreciating ALL aspects of ice dance and overly celebrate the great qualities that men bring but not the great qualities that women bring to ice dance. (Actually, even thinking that men bring certain qualities and women bring other specific qualities is sexist).

For the first issue, that will require changing the way we treat female skaters in general and requires a cultural rethinking, and explicitly, will require us to change the way we express our opinions. This will be a long-term commitment and will require time and generational shifts in positions of authority to ensure there is institutional support all across the spectrum and hierarchy. We all need to do our part.

As for the second issue,

I think the following counter is important point to consider: This is a sport with specific scores in specific categories. If "objectively" weaker skaters in terms of skating skills (depth of edge, speed, ability to do clean turns, etc.) are scoring higher than other skaters in that specific category, then people should be able to comment on it without being accused of being sexist. This is also a sport where teams compete against one another, so comparing athletes who are competing against one another and being scored in the same category is not only fair, but it's exactly what the competition of this sport is designed to do.

My question is, with the point and counterpoint both in mind, what can fans do when discussing a competition and when comparing scores in skating skills and other aspects of each ice dance team while being more considerate and stopping behaviors that are destructive to women?

As I said before, the first thing we fans can do is make less blanket statements that ultimately don't mean anything or tell us anything but are effective at simply putting that specific partner down. This sort of expression is also leading many to observe that many people who are doing that are focusing or putting so much focus on the female partner.

I think a very simple solution to solve these issues is to just focus on the elements and execution, and aim your comments and critiques at that (like we do for singles skating and pairs skating). Not only is it informative, but it makes it less of a personal attack on the skater.

For example, I've seen people argue that Hawayek/Baker deserved much more for their one-foot sequence over Gilles/Poirier, and everybody else. As an ice dance fan, that sounds very simple and almost as much of a blanket statement as saying so-and-so has bad skating skills. However, just for this specific discussion of reframing how we say things, it's enough and I think it's fair we ask for that bare minimum.

This can even be adapted to more performance/choreographic-oriented criticisms too because there's reasons why you feel someone is a better performer than the other or why you think someone's program is stronger than another, and, likewise, we can adopt that into arguing specific GOEs of elements and PCSs using the bullet points and whatnot. This may expand our minds somewhat into seeing how some judges are evaluating skating skills and GOE to explain some scores that don't make sense to us upon first impression.

One thing I do see happening is when one female partner does start off with somewhat of ability gap to their partner, people not only observe that, but then adopt it and never let go of that sort of thinking. First, I also think we need to stop being married to ideas or judgments, as if skaters are in a state of permanence rather than transient in terms of skaters have the ability to improve, especially when we're talking about periods of four-eight-twelve-whatever years. Second, I do believe that if we keep it focused on the person's actions and execution of elements, and stop framing things against the person itself, it may also open our eyes a bit as well and help us see that skater's current abilities actually are as opposed to us being clouded by prejudicial thinking heavily informing us of what that skater's abilities are.

I also think if keep it focused on the skating itself and not the skater, that'll also help in treating the first issue.
I bolded this part of your post because I think it so incredibly accurate. I've grown tired of the Piper doesn't have good skating skills over the years. It's simply not true. I wouldn't argue she is the best in skating skills of all the women currently competing, but I also don't think she is as far off as people like to post here.

How can a team get a new pattern named after them and a spin rule changed if they have terrible skating skills. I know that she is part of a team, but Paul didn't skate that pattern by himself or create that spin.

Piper has very much improved her skating skills, especially over the last quad. So Has Lilah Fear for that matter. I personally think Lilah's main issue is her confidence. I think she doesn't quite trust herself yet and it sometimes makes her tight.

As for skating on flats, well the system doesn't acknowledge it as important anymore or closed holds.

I doubt very many people here could accurately determine levels.

I agree, GOE's and PCS are where we can challenge.

And while skating skills are an inherent element of pretty much all the elements at least in some capacity, it's not all what determines levels. And also Skating Skills are one component of PCS.
 
I think people also kind of...overstate how much a skating skills gap actually matters? I saw this a lot with P/C, implying that Gabi was an actively weak skater instead of just not quite as strong as her extremely talented partner. If the man is a 10 on skating skills, and the woman starts out as say... an 8.5, there's a noticeable difference but she's hardly being dragged around the rink. Whereas if both partners start out as being around 8.5, they tend to be regarded to be regarded as a team with pretty good skating skills with a solid female partner who will steadily develop well instead of desperately needing to catch up. Just because one partner is exceptional doesn't necessarily mean that the other one sucks.

Also I agree that people tend to stick to the narrative of one skater being weak and not ever questioning it or updating their assumptions over a decade of skating. Maybe Piper or Madi Chock or whoeve may never be exceptional but they're better every year. People don't have much appreciation for steady improvement, the few times I've seen reevaluation of skaters have been like Victoria Sinitsina or Christina Carreira who made huge, obvious improvements between seasons, with few appreciating the steady progress they'd made every year until that big breakthrough.
 
Misogynistically oriented criticism of female ice dancers in favor of their male partners is 100% a thing. It's a consistent feature in the ice dance world. There are isolated instances of male partner criticism as well, but those are more the exceptions, not the norm.

But my head is exploding right now at the comment that Tessa Virtue was always the lesser partner in skating skills to Scott Moir. This criticism was honestly new to me. :eek: To hear that about someone at the level that Virtue was at, especially toward the end of her career, is ... interesting. (Especially since, regardless of anything else, Virtue was, at the end of her career, possibly the best pure performer and dancer I've ever seen among women skaters, IMO.) No matter how good you are as a woman in this sport, it's never quite enough.

The main crux with V&M is that Tessa was an incredibly talented skater in her own right, but Scott was simply THAT good from a young age. So while Virtue may have been a talented skater compared to the field even as a kid, she had the same issue as Gabriella: her partner was a ridiculously talented prodigy. Scott wasn't as tall and graceful as Cizeron innately is, but he wasn't far behind in control of the blade/glide. And it's not that the gap between Virtue and Moir was dramatic, either, but Tessa's injuries certainly threw a wrench in their development from at least the 2008-2009 season, and dogged them on and off until they returned in 2017.

Tessa was definitely AHEAD of Scott in various ways: performance ability, dance body movement/straight up dancing, etc. But I'd say she's most notable for her ability to catch up when healthy. My memory might be hazy, but I believe they had to change how they "pushed" in their stroking after Vancouver, in order to help with her shins. They became more powerful skaters in the run up to Sochi, didn't face the same prohibitive injury challenges, but certainly Tessa struggled with consistency. When they came back, it was Scott who would biff twizzles, so I don't think it was a reflection of their talent, or who was ahead of the other. By 2017, if they weren't evenly matched, their respective strengths and weaknesses certainly worked together.

I think any team that battles persistent injuries winds up with more unique challenges to improvement than those who don't. Christina & Anthony made the best of it, which is ideal, but some teams lose steam in critical years, like the Danadians. V&M seemed to do both. :lol:

I think people also kind of...overstate how much a skating skills gap actually matters? I saw this a lot with P/C, implying that Gabi was an actively weak skater instead of just not quite as strong as her extremely talented partner. If the man is a 10 on skating skills, and the woman starts out as say... an 8.5, there's a noticeable difference but she's hardly being dragged around the rink. Whereas if both partners start out as being around 8.5, they tend to be regarded to be regarded as a team with pretty good skating skills with a solid female partner who will steadily develop well instead of desperately needing to catch up. Just because one partner is exceptional doesn't necessarily mean that the other one sucks.

Also I agree that people tend to stick to the narrative of one skater being weak and not ever questioning it or updating their assumptions over a decade of skating.

Bold mine - 100% exactly.
 
What's confusing for me in these threads is that there are so many self-proclaimed zero-technique fans of the sport that suddenly have a bunch of opinions about the quality of elements, the required edges, the required criteria to hit levels, etc. I know talking about it isn't going to make people go back and read rulebooks and study brackets and counters, but what exactly are people going on and on about when it comes to how Skater A is so bad or has improved 'so much' or etc? Their crossovers? The levels in ice dance are so meticulous to hit sometimes, so hitting a level 3 or 2 especially in steps can't be used as an example to say the skater has regressed or doesn't have good skating skills- all it takes is a slight balance check, wobble, or shaky edge sometimes.

The women may have a harder time of it in these FSU threads, but I think over history we've seen quite the opposite in some cases. Certainly Fusar-Poli/Margaglio who were night and day, even Grishuk/Platov to a certain extent even before his injuries were creeping up. Grushina/Gonharov, as well. A recent example is Kana Muramoto, as Takahashi is nowhere near her level even aside from lifts. There's almost always one partner who is clearly better than the other.

I also :slinkaway don't believe that most skaters take the effort to drastically improve year after year. There are skaters competing at the top levels who have seen increases in PCS, including skating skills (especially after the Olympic cycle ended) who have not really changed all that much and choreographically they are doing more of the same, if not less intricacy. Skating to better music and more engaging programs? Yes, and it goes a long way with the psychological game of skating.

So many times in these fan arguments, people seem to resort to 'well the judges think so' as their evidence but then in the same breath we see the judges, who once again I will remind are trained and have to spend X amount of hours to get to the top levels, handing certain teams crazy-high PCS that almost everyone can see isn't deserved. They've been phoning it in since the dawn of time and there's no change in sight.
 
What's confusing for me in these threads is that there are so many self-proclaimed zero-technique fans of the sport that suddenly have a bunch of opinions about the quality of elements, the required edges, the required criteria to hit levels, etc. I know talking about it isn't going to make people go back and read rulebooks and study brackets and counters, but what exactly are people going on and on about when it comes to how Skater A is so bad or has improved 'so much' or etc? Their crossovers? The levels in ice dance are so meticulous to hit sometimes, so hitting a level 3 or 2 especially in steps can't be used as an example to say the skater has regressed or doesn't have good skating skills- all it takes is a slight balance check, wobble, or shaky edge sometimes.

The women may have a harder time of it in these FSU threads, but I think over history we've seen quite the opposite in some cases. Certainly Fusar-Poli/Margaglio who were night and day, even Grishuk/Platov to a certain extent even before his injuries were creeping up. Grushina/Gonharov, as well. A recent example is Kana Muramoto, as Takahashi is nowhere near her level even aside from lifts. There's almost always one partner who is clearly better than the other.

I also :slinkaway don't believe that most skaters take the effort to drastically improve year after year. There are skaters competing at the top levels who have seen increases in PCS, including skating skills (especially after the Olympic cycle ended) who have not really changed all that much and choreographically they are doing more of the same, if not less intricacy. Skating to better music and more engaging programs? Yes, and it goes a long way with the psychological game of skating.

So many times in these fan arguments, people seem to resort to 'well the judges think so' as their evidence but then in the same breath we see the judges, who once again I will remind are trained and have to spend X amount of hours to get to the top levels, handing certain teams crazy-high PCS that almost everyone can see isn't deserved. They've been phoning it in since the dawn of time and there's no change in sight.
Not to disagree with you because you made a lot of the same points I did. It’s just that outside of some posters who I know who have been around FSU for as long as I have, or it seems that way, I wonder if this is part of a larger argument outside of this forum (which I am not privy to) and if it is, then I really do think there’s a great proportion of fans who think there’s a major gender bias existing now apart from what happened with the skaters you listed who haven’t competed in 16-24 years and maybe who weren’t alive back then or were watching skating then. But even if there were, right now, rightly or wrongly, the critiques do seem lopsided, and it seems it’s been that way for a while in the post-Torino era and one Kana Muramoto in a special case where she partnered with Daisuke Takahashi, a former singles champion who took up ice dancing at the age of 34 doesn’t do much to balance things out.
 
As soon as I saw Zingas/Kolesnik on video, I thought a) what potential they have! And 2) kudos to her for changing to dance and succeeding so well, but it will be a while for her to catch her extremely talented partner. KanaDai in reverse.

All these years and I still misidentify jumps; seeing a shaky or wrong edge is much harder. It’s a struggle not to exceed in my posts what I can actually see or know but damn, I have such strong opinions. :drama:
 
As soon as I saw Zingas/Kolesnik on video, I thought a) what potential they have! And 2) kudos to her for changing to dance and succeeding so well, but it will be a while for her to catch her extremely talented partner. KanaDai in reverse.

All these years and I still misidentify jumps; seeing a shaky or wrong edge is much harder. It’s a struggle not to exceed in my posts what I can actually see or know but damn, I have such strong opinions. :drama:
He is a star. I found her and their programs rather generic but I love him.

I wish Emmy Bronsard could find a Kolesnik. My god what a dream team that would have been.
 
Not to disagree with you because you made a lot of the same points I did. It’s just that outside of some posters who I know who have been around FSU for as long as I have, or it seems that way, I wonder if this is part of a larger argument outside of this forum (which I am not privy to) and if it is, then I really do think there’s a great proportion of fans who think there’s a major gender bias existing now apart from what happened with the skaters you listed who haven’t competed in 16-24 years and maybe who weren’t alive back then or were watching skating then. But even if there were, right now, rightly or wrongly, the critiques do seem lopsided, and it seems it’s been that way for a while in the post-Torino era and one Kana Muramoto in a special case where she partnered with Daisuke Takahashi, a former singles champion who took up ice dancing at the age of 34 doesn’t do much to balance things out.
I do think there is a gender bias. We can see this most obviously in quotes from certain Russian coaches that focus on criticizing the female almost exclusively, and blame her for any mistakes.

However, I also agree with Tony that there seems to be a very large amount of fans (both on FSU and outside) who have no real understanding of skating yet discuss skating skills, weaknesses, etc., as if they do. This leads to even more biases...and I would say biases in both directions.

These discussions about Tessa being worse or better than Scott, or Gabi being worse or better than Guillaume is just not how ice dance works. VM and PC worked together as a team to improve and find complementary ways of working together to win as a team. While partner swapping is a fun exercise that can also help sharpen partnering skills and awareness, it won't replace the years spent developing a partnership to win. I don't think fans really focus on this aspect when discussing partnerships, because they are typically focused on one partner or the other.
 
Last edited:
I thought Virtue was clearly better than Moir, whom I found overrated :p It's twitter, yeah yeah, but I'm still stunned the consensus on there is that HE is the best ice dancer ever, or the man with the best skating skills ever.
Not saying that this is the case for you, but a lot of people dismiss Scott because they don't like him. But he is sublime. A generational talent.
(Tessa is too, in my view).
 
Not saying that this is the case for you, but a lot of people dismiss Scott because they don't like him. But he is sublime. A generational talent.
OK, it's not the case for me. I thought his performance ability was overrated, and he ranks well behind skaters like Cizeron in terms of pure skating.

I don't consume social/media for American and Canadian skaters all that much, so I have no opinion on their personalities most of the time.
 
I would have loved it if Scott was my ice dancer partner, but I think my dream partner would have been Sergei Ponomarenko.
 
I feel like both Tessa and Scott had room to grow wrt performance ability, and I had hoped to see it. Maybe if something like the old professional skating competition circuit still existed today, we could have seen that growth. Or maybe not, if they chose not to join.
 
I thought Virtue was clearly better than Moir, whom I found overrated :p It's twitter, yeah yeah, but I'm still stunned the consensus on there is that HE is the best ice dancer ever, or the man with the best skating skills ever.
IMO Cizeron is actually better than Moir. And there might be others, but atleast 1 so he isn't even the very best male dancer, as great as he is.

While I can't think of any female better than Tessa for sure, atleast not in anything surrounding their time, possibly ever.

Based on that alone yeah probably Tessa > Scott if we are going to go there. :p
 
I do think teams where the male is the weaker partner like Fourner Beaudry & Sorensen, Fusar Poli & Margalio (the single biggest example in history probably), Weaver & Poje, Hubbell & Donohue, the male is more nitpicked than the female.
When they started, IMO Poje was miles ahead of Weaver, despite them having similar results prior to teaming up (he was 2005 Canadian junior bronze medallist, she was 4th in juniors at the 2006 US nationals).
However, as she improved, he began to struggle, especially on the twizzles. She was also more of a 'performer' than he was, which I think also helped. And his darn twizzles affected their results more than once, meaning he was definitely critiqued.
 
When they started, IMO Poje was miles ahead of Weaver, despite them having similar results prior to teaming up (he was 2005 Canadian junior bronze medallist, she was 4th in juniors at the 2006 US nationals).
However, as she improved, he began to struggle, especially on the twizzles. She was also more of a 'performer' than he was, which I think also helped. And his darn twizzles affected their results more than once, meaning he was definitely critiqued.
I agree with that, but I do think by the end of their career she was clearly the stronger one, despite starting off the visibly weaker one when he was more experienced than she was at the start of their partnership. Mainly due to his glaring twizzle issues, probably the most important technical element, that she did not have. Plus that she was the more natural performer too, he was very good in some roles mind you, but she was a more versatile performer than he was.
 
Klimova & Ponomarenko would have won the Golden Waltz against any team in history I think (hope). Whether that be Torvill & Dean, Virtue & Moir, Papdadakis & Cizeron, whoever. It is their dance, they owned it. It is amazing to think they would turn probably the hardest and most challenging original dance in the world, by one of the best technical teams of all time, in only 87 to a compulsory dance just 10 years later. No wonder so many teams had trouble with it, for lower ranked teams with limited skills or skating skills, it must have really been a nightmare.

Perhaps someone on this board created this side by side video of the Golden Waltz?

1987 vs 2010 - take your pick!

 
Last edited:
I am no where near as knowledgeable as those of you who have already commented, but I did see Weaver and Poje a number of times as competitors and then I have seen them perform in ice shows. I feel they were born for ice shows and without the twizzles and the technical elements, they are just mesmerizing. Really "as smooth as Tennessee whiskey".
 
Perhaps someone on this board created this side by side video of the Golden Waltz?

Virtue/Moir certainly have a more modern look with the added flair and performance, but Klimova/Ponomarenko just had the closeness, the intricacy, and the moves. They were just so exact and yet so organic that it looked so natural...like this particular dance was just an extension of themselves.
 
Perhaps someone on this board created this side by side video of the Golden Waltz?

1987 vs 2010 - take your pick!

That's a weird comparison, because the Golden Waltz CD and the original OSP are not the same.
 
Virtue/Moir certainly have a more modern look with the added flair and performance, but Klimova/Ponomarenko just had the closeness, the intricacy, and the moves. They were just so exact and yet so organic that it looked so natural...like this particular dance was just an extension of themselves.
This particular dance should look like that, because they choreographed it to fit this music exactly.

In my memory, it was rare when a CD was skated so well that it looked like the dancers specifically chose the generic CD backing track they randomly got for their dance. Some memorable ones for me were Usova/Zhulin's Ravensburger Waltz and Delobel/Schoenfelder's Yankee Polka.

ETA: looking forward to those who remember great CD performances to post a few in the thread! I know I’ve forgotten a lot of them over time. :)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information