| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
loveskating
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Posts: 680
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:22 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
If people are going to criticize skaters for failing to deliver "two clean back to back programs" whether they win or not, then turn around and claim skaters who failed to do so like Tara Lipinski close to half the time were "consistent" I find that difficult to accept logically is all.
However, Tara's programs were the maximum technically at the time, no one had more technically difficult programs than she did, so I would not expect a high risk skater to be as consistent as a very conservative one,
Similarly with Stojko -- he was setting the technical bar for a few years there so if he traveled on his spins or whatever, so what?
Of course, there are no marks for "clean" or "clean back to back" programs are there???
Frankly, I'd like to see the words "consistent" and "clean" dropped from the language myself. I care nothing for them, and also find that often these words exalt skaters with very little accomplishment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dragonlady
Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 3670
Location: Edge of reason
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loveskating wrote: | | Frankly, I'd like to see the words "consistent" and "clean" dropped from the language myself. I care nothing for them, and also find that often these words exalt skaters with very little accomplishment. |
Well as Sasha Cohen's biggest fan on this board, I can well understand why you would consider consistent and clean to be unimportant attributes in a skater. But you're also a Plushenko fan, so on what other basis do you think Evgeny won all of those medals? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eladola
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Posts: 612
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dragonlady wrote: | | loveskating wrote: | | Frankly, I'd like to see the words "consistent" and "clean" dropped from the language myself. I care nothing for them, and also find that often these words exalt skaters with very little accomplishment. |
Well as Sasha Cohen's biggest fan on this board, I can well understand why you would consider consistent and clean to be unimportant attributes in a skater. But you're also a Plushenko fan, so on what other basis do you think Evgeny won all of those medals? |
Now i know you don't truly believe yourself here ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Culturegeek
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 487
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| loveskating wrote: |
Frankly, I'd like to see the words "consistent" and "clean" dropped from the language myself. I care nothing for them, and also find that often these words exalt skaters with very little accomplishment. |
How so? "Consistent" describes great competitors with a degree of mental toughness that overcomes other weaknesses. Stoijko, Plushenko, and Witt have earned that title.
Eladola, what do you mean? You don't think Plushenko's consistency helped him earn the reputation he did? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nowthen
Joined: 27 Feb 2010
Posts: 86
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I am confused because Plushenko was very conistent and clean at almost all his competitions but I guess the thought of many is that technical savvy shouldn't have been enough to win but that it inflated his PCS which then caused him to win. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loveskating
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Posts: 680
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Culturegeek wrote: | | loveskating wrote: |
Frankly, I'd like to see the words "consistent" and "clean" dropped from the language myself. I care nothing for them, and also find that often these words exalt skaters with very little accomplishment. |
How so? "Consistent" describes great competitors with a degree of mental toughness that overcomes other weaknesses. Stoijko, Plushenko, and Witt have earned that title.
Eladola, what do you mean? You don't think Plushenko's consistency helped him earn the reputation he did? |
Well, that is just my point, there is no "title" for "consistency" -- its folklore. There are no marks for it. Since you can, and many have, won medals, including gold medals, with several splats, consistency is not any real indication of whether you will win or not.
It seems to me that anyone who wants to claim that Plushenko won due to "consistency" would have to say the same about Kwan, Slutskaya and Yagudin because NONE of them had much by way of transitions. So then you would be left with "choreography" to distinguish them, and not all their programs were great choreographically, I think everyone would admit.
Stojko, for instance, was technically more accomplished for a long time than anyone else, and that is why he won even with his shortcomings! The same goes for the others in a given period of time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragonlady
Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 3670
Location: Edge of reason
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, all of those skaters were consistent and that is most definitely a factor in the number of titles they won.
But to suggest that Yagudin or Kwan had few transitions would be incorrect, at least while Kwan was working with Lori Nichol. After she was injured and changed choreographers, I would agree she had few transitions, but while she was with Nichol, every beat of the music had choreography. I think that these two skaters, and possibly Kurt Browning, were the template from which the designers of CoP decided what sort of skating they wanted to reward. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
becool
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I am confused because Plushenko was very conistent and clean at almost all his competitions but I guess the thought of many is that technical savvy shouldn't have been enough to win but that it inflated his PCS which then caused him to win.
|
Huh? The rest of the men were an absolute mess with all kinds of major errors. I don't think Plushenko's win is even up for debate. Yes his scores for choregraphy and transitions were too high, back then though his skating skills, speed and power were first rate. So its only on two marks that should have reflected this. I mean take a look at who got 2nd. I adore Lambiel but he had no triple axel in either the short or the long, a fall on a jump, and another extreme messy landing on another. And that got second overall. Jeff had a fall and a hand down on the triple axel, and I believe a major error in the short. Evan had a great skate in the free but was an absolute mess in the short. To suggest any of those men deserved to be Olympic champ over Plushenko is completely ridiculous.
I will say this while I like that this system rewards choregraphy and transitions, I'm frankly getting tired of seeing people getting rewarded with huge PCS for extremely messy programs. Its really bad for this sport. I'd much rather see less transitions and a less messy performance. There's something to be said for a clean performance without any visible errors, and it needs to be rewarded more. There's got to be a balance. Which is why as I mentioned Plushenko losing the OGM would have been wrong. Just as I felt Mao Asada losing the long program to Kim was wrong. I didn't love Mao's program last year, but Mao gave a much better performance and Yu-na was quite messy. These things need to be reflected in the marks. I can personally handle one mistake but when you start delivering multiple errors it gets to much for me. Talk about encouraging difficulty for the sake of difficulty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eladola
Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Posts: 612
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| becool wrote: | | Quote: |
I am confused because Plushenko was very conistent and clean at almost all his competitions but I guess the thought of many is that technical savvy shouldn't have been enough to win but that it inflated his PCS which then caused him to win.
|
Huh? The rest of the men were an absolute mess with all kinds of major errors. I don't think Plushenko's win is even up for debate. Yes his scores for choregraphy and transitions were too high, back then though his skating skills, speed and power were first rate. So its only on two marks that should have reflected this. I mean take a look at who got 2nd. I adore Lambiel but he had no triple axel in either the short or the long, a fall on a jump, and another extreme messy landing on another. And that got second overall. Jeff had a fall and a hand down on the triple axel, and I believe a major error in the short. Evan had a great skate in the free but was an absolute mess in the short. To suggest any of those men deserved to be Olympic champ over Plushenko is completely ridiculous.
I will say this while I like that this system rewards choregraphy and transitions, I'm frankly getting tired of seeing people getting rewarded with huge PCS for extremely messy programs. Its really bad for this sport. I'd much rather see less transitions and a less messy performance. There's something to be said for a clean performance without any visible errors, and it needs to be rewarded more. There's got to be a balance. Which is why as I mentioned Plushenko losing the OGM would have been wrong. Just as I felt Mao Asada losing the long program to Kim was wrong. I didn't love Mao's program last year, but Mao gave a much better performance and Yu-na was quite messy. These things need to be reflected in the marks. I can personally handle one mistake but when you start delivering multiple errors it gets to much for me. Talk about encouraging difficulty for the sake of difficulty. |
Yes . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
becool
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I forget Buttle did a double loop and had a fall and a hand down in the short. Watching Buttle I must admit that I do adore his skating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nowthen
Joined: 27 Feb 2010
Posts: 86
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
I wasn't going to use the PCS abbreviation - originally I was going to use Artistic score to incorporate 6.0 skating but I just thought I would just go with PCS like it could be used interchangebly for the artistic mark in both 6.0 and IJS. But I still think that when I read other peoples post in this thread they were definitely saying that a tehnically consistent skater would be given bonuses in the artisitc mark under 6.0 or PCS under IJS.
Plushenko was totally great in 2006 but the system was more like 6.0 then what IJS was in the 2010 Olympics. Lysacek was only like 1 point behind Plushenkos winning score in 2006 with no quads. The system was just changed so radically! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lambielfan26
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 3492
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Scores have escalated at a rapid rate since the introduction of COP and not accurately in line with the standard of skating. For example does anyone think Pang & Tong from Vancouver would have won the 2006 gold over Totmianina & Marinin by about 10 points with the same performance, LOL!
I am pretty sure the Plushenko of 2006 would have destroyed the Lysacek of 2010 by a good 20 point margin (combining the two programs) or more. In the mens event there are also the upgrades to the value of the triple axels to consider. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragonlady
Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 3670
Location: Edge of reason
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lambielfan26 wrote: | | Scores have escalated at a rapid rate since the introduction of COP and not accurately in line with the standard of skating. For example does anyone think Pang & Tong from Vancouver would have won the 2006 gold over Totmianina & Marinin by about 10 points with the same performance, LOL! |
That not quite true. In the first year of CoP, PCS scores were outrageous. Sasha Cohen received 9's for PCS for her Skate Canada performance and set a scoring record which stood until Yu-Na Kim trashed that record over the past couple of years.
I was at Skate Canada that year. Sasha was certainly deserving of her score for the SP. She could not have skated Malaguena any better. Yes, she wobbled into her flutz and flip but everything else was beautifully done. She quite deservedly received a standing ovation for that skate.
The LP was a whole other story. She was slow - very, very slow throughout the whole program. There was absolutely no "ease of movement" in that skate. She stumbled out of her first lutz attempted and nearly fell on the second lutz attempt. There was no combo at all. The whole skate was slow, tenantive and sloppy. And for this she got 9's and outscored Arakawa who skated a beautiful 7-triple program (her combos were not downgraded), with speed, power, sureness of movement and not major mistakes.
After the first season of CoP, the ISU Technical Committee instructed the judges to make more PCS deductions, and instituted the 1 point deduction for falls. After the first season, no skaters were getting 9's for PCS. High 8's were the best an elite skater could get which is why the scores from Turin 2006 were so low compared to this season's scores.
That wasn't realistic either. IMO the very best skaters should be getting 9's but only when they really deliver a performance and over the past couple of seasons that has been happening. That was reflected in the scores from Vancouver and is the reason why the scores from 2006 were so similar to 2010.
As for Lambiel's complaint that Plushenko's score from 2006 was too low. It should be low. Plushenko's knees were shot and he had surgery right after the games. This was possibly the worst big event skate of Plushenko's career. His Vancouver program was much better. So yes, I think Evan's 2010 skate should probably have beaten Plushenko in 2006 too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
becool
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
As for Lambiel's complaint that Plushenko's score from 2006 was too low. It should be low. Plushenko's knees were shot and he had surgery right after the games. This was possibly the worst big event skate of Plushenko's career. His Vancouver program was much better. So yes, I think Evan's 2010 skate should probably have beaten Plushenko in 2006 too. |
I don't know. I think the quality of Plushenko's jumps were much better in 2006 than they were in 2010 and probably the other elements as well. I wouldn't be surprised if he had more power in his skating as well in 2006. And the jumps would have resulted (rightfully!) in high GOE. His jumps in 2006 were kind of shaky. In contrast to be quite frank I thought some of Evan's jumps looked kind of murky not necessarily fair that Dai got a combo downgraded but Evan didn't. Although Plushenko got gifted on PCS, so I'm not going to say Plush should have won in 2010.
I do wish though when people are ripe to criticize Plushenko for his 2006 performance that they would remember that the man was coming off a major injury and adapting to a whole new system as well, and cut the guy just a little bit of a break. Not a huge fan, but really I felt kind of bad for him in 2006. It can't be fun to have been raised in one system your entire career and to be dominating that system, and have it changed on you like that, while also having to deal with some major injuries. Even Lambiel someone you'd think would have been thrilled with the new system talked about how the new rules on spins so frustrated him.
I agree as a performance when it comes to interacting with the crowd 2010 was better. And really I didn't think that Evan's performance for 2010 was all that sparkling either. There's the reason Daisuke and Lambiel got the highest PCS even with their mistakes.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragonlady
Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 3670
Location: Edge of reason
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Plushenko wasn't "coming off a major injury", he was still very much injured. He had the first of his knee surgeries right after Turin having postponed this surgery for a couple of seasons prior to Turin. It's because of the limitations on his training that he downgraded his technical content, skated slowly, and only did enough to ensure a win.
Plushenko's dominance of Men's skating during the Turin quadrennial was due to two factors: his technical brilliance, and the weakness of the rest of the field. There really wasn't anybody who could challenge him technically. Those who could jump (Joubert, Van der Perren), couldn't skate well enough to challenge him. Those who could skate well, couldn't jump consistently (Buttle, Takahashi, Lambiel). Plushenko was truly in a league of his own.
By 2010 Plushenko was not the jumper he once was, but the rest of the field had also mastered CoP and improved immensely in their basic skating, in part because of the blade control needed to manage the requirements of higher level footwork.
No one is begrudging Plushenko his wins, but his score in Turin was outrageously inflated given how poorly he skated. Both his LP in SLC and Vancouver were better, in terms of his performance. It is sad that his OGM came from his poorest skate but even his poorest performance ever was better than anybody else's, at the time. The same would not be true today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
becool
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
No one is begrudging Plushenko his wins, but his score in Turin was outrageously inflated given how poorly he skated. Both his LP in SLC and Vancouver were better, in terms of his performance. It is sad that his OGM came from his poorest skate but even his poorest performance ever was better than anybody else's, at the time. The same would not be true today. |
Well a poster did kind of begrude it a few posts ago. I actually agree that his score was inflated. I'm not sure if the judges wanted to give him the gold because they felt he deserved it or what was going on. But he really didn't need them inflating his scores.
However, I'm not so sure that 2010 was a better skate. It was definetly a better performance. But I stand by the fact that the quality of his jumps were a lot better in 2006....Oh well.
As for major injury maybe not major but anything that requires surgery and a skater to take off of Worlds in your home country (He may have dropped out because he knew he'd lose but he was still in not shape) well its pretty major. Not Daisuke's injury major but a pretty big injury. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nowthen
Joined: 27 Feb 2010
Posts: 86
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I didn't want to begrudge Plushenkos win in 2006-he was the only skater there that had the big jumps. He did the triple axels and quad triple double and quad triple in the short. Plushenko has said over and over that jumps are the most important thing to him and it should be the most important thing in mens skating. All he did was double a planned triple flip! That was his bigggest mistake. In 2002 he fell on the quad in the short and in 2010 he had those tilts and may have changed a quad triple double to a quad triple in the free skate thereby not doing a three jump combo. There is no checklist of things to do to get a high PCS score so when it comes to that who can say why judges scored him the way they did.
When you isolate 2006 all by itself Plushenko was deserving but if you judge him by the way that IJS has evolved then it is not clear if he would won at all not just by the margin he did!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lambielfan26
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
Posts: 3492
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Plushenko's LP in Vancouver was more like his worst ever. His performance in Turin as artistially uninspiring as it was, was still far better, the jumps especialy were on another level altogether from his shaky and slow Vancouver performances. He would have won easily in Vancouver with his Turin performances given how the event in Vancouver was skated. And his performances in SLC were certainly not his best either, he fell on the quad in the short and his LP had alot of mistakes. His best skating was never in the Olympics but Turin was by far the best of the 3 nonetheless. He has never done skating in the Olympics to beat Yagudin of SLC however. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragonlady
Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 3670
Location: Edge of reason
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Plushenko had an injury in 2001/2002 too. It wasn't so severe that it caused him to pull out of any competitions but it hampered his training and may have been the cause of that fall in the SP at SLC.
At the GPF in Kitchener that season, he struggled with his jumps and couldn't land a quad in practice despite numerous attempts. The introduction of his much anticipated "Art of Man" program was a complete disaster. I was said that he was coming back from an early season injury and not at 100% yet. The only way you would have noticed was his jumps. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
netartemisa
Joined: 05 Nov 2005
Posts: 144
Location: Albacete (SPAIN)
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Didn't Plushenko pull out of 2002 Euros? Was it because of that same injury or for another reason? (I'm not actually commenting on the debate you have here, it is just a doubt that came to my mind when I read you)
_________________
Puedo pensar sin que sepan que pienso y mucho menos qué pienso // I can think while nobody knows I'm thinking or what I'm thinking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
