Is A Quad Really Necessary for the Men?

slutskayafan21 said:

Yes he did seem to be immersed in the celebrity aspect of his non-medal performance.

Click to expand...

Errm, how exactly?! You realize that after his non-medal performance, most people have been trashing him and making fun of him, and I didn't see any celebrity activities that he has been immersed in.

Also, I love how everyone is re-writing history and saying Johnny blew a medal at the olympics, like he was a favourite or something. He was in a downward spiral way before the Olympics, in fact, things have been going pretty much downhill after the 2005 worlds. His messed up free skate should have come as no surprise because he has been messing up free skates all season long. He was third in FS at the US nationals that year, what the hell did you expect at the Olympics!?

Also, it's easy to sit behind a computer and spout insults at people about things you have absolutely no idea about, but I would like to point out that none of us experienced what it's like to skate under olympic pressure. You weren't there, you can't really say who blew it and who didn't. Even the most experinced and strong competitiors have skated less than their best at the Olympics: Kwan, Slutskaya, Browning, Plushenko etc. Johnny Weir struggled with nerves his whole career, so I don't know what the hell anyone expected out of him in Torino. It seems it wasn't him who bought into the hype and celebrity, but the fans who actually thought he was a medal favourite. Yes, he could have possibly won a medal, but so could have 5 other guys, and just because there are only 3 spots on the podium, it doesn't mean everyone else blew it because they are attention-seeking famewhores, and "stick a fork in him, he's done" cries seem premature to me.

psycho said:

Errm, how exactly?! You realize that after his non-medal performance, most people have been trashing him and making fun of him, and I didn't see any celebrity activities that he has been immersed in.

Also, I love how everyone is re-writing history and saying Johnny blew a medal at the olympics, like he was a favourite or something. He was in a downward spiral way before the Olympics, in fact, things have been going pretty much downhill after the 2005 worlds. His messed up free skate should have come as no surprise because he has been messing up free skates all season long. He was third in FS at the US nationals that year, what the hell did you expect at the Olympics!?

Also, it's easy to sit behind a computer and spout insults at people about things you have absolutely no idea about, but I would like to point out that none of us experienced what it's like to skate under olympic pressure. You weren't there, you can't really say who blew it and who didn't. Even the most experinced and strong competitiors have skated less than their best at the Olympics: Kwan, Slutskaya, Browning, Plushenko etc. Johnny Weir struggled with nerves his whole career, so I don't know what the hell anyone expected out of him in Torino. It seems it wasn't him who bought into the hype and celebrity, but the fans who actually thought he was a medal favourite. Yes, he could have possibly won a medal, but so could have 5 other guys, and just because there are only 3 spots on the podium, it doesn't mean everyone else blew it because they are attention-seeking famewhores, and "stick a fork in him, he's done" cries seem premature to me.

Click to expand...

I dont honestly think Weir was a medal favorite at the Olympics. Neither was Lysacek. Their medal chances were greatly exagerrated by the U.S mass media to try to garner viewers. If you look back at my posting history you will see I was saying that before the Olympics. Plushenko, Lambiel, Joubert, Buttle, even Takahashi, I would have rated as stronger bets for medals then either Weir or Lysacek, I think most in the know would have. Both were still possible threats for a medal, but were more outsiders, and probably needed the big guns to make mistakes.

However the way the Olympics played out was Plushenko and Weir were the only contenders to do clean short programs. Lambiel, Joubert, Takahashi all stumbled in the short a bit. Buttle and Lysacek truly slipped in the short. This put Weir in good position. Then in the free skate Lambiel and Buttle had their problems, while Joubert and Takhashi really had rough outings. The opportunity was there for him and he did not take it. Even had he skated a very strong free skate performance, like he did in the short program, and still just missed a medal, there likely would not have been as much criticsm, however people were very dissapointed he did not deliver at that opportunity. Johnny had been near the top awhile and it was time for him to step up at a major event, and that was his biggest chance to date, since the previos years Worlds he was hurt by an unfortunate injury. We are a year and a half later, he still hasnt stepped up at a major event, and the window is closing on him. The mens field has never had a deeper talent pool, and in that people arent going to wait on you to get it together forever, no matter how talented you are.

As for getting wrapped up in his celebrity, it is all these quotes people hear from him, all the controversy he seems to surround himself in by the very strange and peculiar comments he makes, the magazine shoots he seems to be in. Of course it natural to think an underachieving skater who seems to crave attention in the strange forms is wrapped up in their celebrity. Even many of his own strongest fans have said this.

You say it is easy to criticize behind a computer. Well if we take that attitude we wouldnt have these forums. We are hear giving our opinions of various skaters, competitions, what is going on, what we think. Of course it isnt easy, but it is what they choose to do, so they shouldnt expect everyone to evaluate them with kid gloves. Of course they are doing incredible things none of us do, it doesnt mean we arent free to criticize, compare, analyze. So I dont see what you are getting at. It is not like any of us were given the god given talent to be a contender for a medal at the World level at anything to begin with. If we were who know how much better or worse we might have handled it anyway.

psycho said:

Also, I love how everyone is re-writing history and saying Johnny blew a medal at the olympics, like he was a favourite or something. He was in a downward spiral way before the Olympics, in fact, things have been going pretty much downhill after the 2005 worlds. His messed up free skate should have come as no surprise because he has been messing up free skates all season long. He was third in FS at the US nationals that year, what the hell did you expect at the Olympics!?

Click to expand...

Actually, his FS at Nationals was VERY strong in terms of the jumping. He was only 3rd in the FS because he did too many combinations and unfairly lost all credit for his Triple Flip.

slutskayafan21 said:

As for getting wrapped up in his celebrity, it is all these quotes people hear from him, all the controversy he seems to surround himself in by the very strange and peculiar comments he makes, the magazine shoots he seems to be in. Of course it natural to think an underachieving skater who seems to crave attention in the strange forms is wrapped up in their celebrity. Even many of his own strongest fans have said this.

Click to expand...

The "quotes" that people have been hearing from him have been there throughout his whole career, even when no one knew who he was. There was only one magazine shoot that I can remember. In a whole year. He surrounds himself with controversy? How exactly? It's not his fault some people make a big deal out of everything he and other skaters do. Mao sneezed-let's start a thread. What does this mean for her olympic hopes?!
Also, no, just because someone is "underachieving" it does not naturally mean they are wrapped up in their celebrity. That's some faulty logic with more holes than in Swiss cheese. Just because you do not know what is wrong with someone, that does not allow you to make stuff up about them as an explanation for yourself.

You say it is easy to criticize behind a computer. Well if we take that attitude we wouldnt have these forums. We are hear giving our opinions of various skaters, competitions, what is going on, what we think. Of course it isnt easy, but it is what they choose to do, so they shouldnt expect everyone to evaluate them with kid gloves. Of course they are doing incredible things none of us do, it doesnt mean we arent free to criticize, compare, analyze. So I dont see what you are getting at. It is not like any of us were given the god given talent to be a contender for a medal at the World level at anything to begin with. If we were who know how much better or worse we might have handled it anyway.

Click to expand...

Discussion does not equal attacks on their character, non-stop crticism, and making up things about them. Just because you can't do what they can, does not mean you should criticize and speculate what their performances say about their character, motivation and etc. They are not there just for your amusement, they are people too, and many here often forget that.

GoldMedalist said:

Actually, his FS at Nationals was VERY strong in terms of the jumping. He was only 3rd in the FS because he did too many combinations and unfairly lost all credit for his Triple Flip.

Click to expand...

I am not saying that Johnny is not a strong skater. I think he is one of the best in the world. All I am saying that for someone who has been known to stuggle with his free skate ( and at the Olympics he brought back a different FS than at nationals too) to expect him to deliver in the most high-pressure even of his career was unfair. Also, no one really delivered that night. Even Plushy, with his jumps was very lackluster in presentation, and he has what are arguably nerves of steel. EVERYONE made technical mistakes(except Plushy), some mistakes were just less COP costly than others.

Slutskayafan21 hits the nail on the head re Weir. I have been following Johnny's career since my first Nationals in Dallas where he skated a beautiful SP & then fell apart during the LP & withdrew. He is extremely talented. I have always thought that if he would get down to business he could certainly medal--if not win-at Olympics. I've always thought he should have made the quad a priorty from 2004, on. Intsead he began tortting over for short-term advice/coaching from Tarasova to improve his artistry--which he had plenty off. Why not instead get that final jump in hand--the quad, any quad first!

Flash forward to 2006 Olympics.....still no successful quad in competition, BUT there were reports all over the boards that he was performing them (in combo, no less) in Torino practices! That the judges were willing to award him for his very special skating talents was evident after the short program with no quad. Pressure, for sure! No one knows the pressures unless one has been in that situation, but it was a major disappointment that he could not rise to the occasion in the LP.

But the celebrations did follow. Johnny was on this runway, at that celebrity event, etc. He chronicled many of these post activities in his journal, so most of us were simply taking him at his word. There were also rumors that training was not consistent. And we all know his promises/apologies after failures that this would be taken care of for sure by the next competition. I attended Nationals at St Louis as well as Spokane, and Johnny was much courted by the press at both venues. But Spokane really showed the results of a bad post-Olympic year for him. I post my observations from having followed this sport avidly for years. I'm not always right, but I am convinced that Johnny has the physical talent to achieve much more than he has. I'm just not quite as convinced that he has the discipline and mental toughness to match his skating talent. At the start of the Spokane Nationals, one of the press remarked to me that Johnny was so done with amateur competition. As he took the ice for his LP, I sensed this might be the beginning of the end for him. Worlds did not shake that ominous notion. I sincerely hope this coaching change signals a new outlook for him. If not, I fear that his best years are behind him, competition-wise.

I don't think people were mad that Johnny didn't perform his best at the Olympics. I think people WERE mad that he made irresponsible mistakes. The biggest offender being that he left out an entire jumping pass in his LP.

(btw, Plusky did make a tech mistake too -- doubled out on his Flip)

Eddie Lee said:

But the celebrations did follow. Johnny was on this runway, at that celebrity event, etc. I post my observations from having followed this sport avidly for years. I'm not always right, but I am convinced that Johnny has the physical talent to achieve much more than he has. I'm just not quite as convinced that he has the discipline and mental toughness to match his skating talent. At the start of the Spokane Nationals, one of the press remarked to me that Johnny was so done with amateur competition. As he took the ice for his LP, I sensed this might be the beginning of the end for him. Worlds did not shake that ominous notion. I sincerely hope this coaching change signals a new outlook for him. If not, I fear that his best years are behind him, competition-wise.

Click to expand...

First of all, Johnny did two runway shows in a year, which did not take away from his training time, and one oscar party. Let's not exagerrate his "celebration" activities. Many other skaters have extra-curricular activities, they don't all train 24h a day.

Second of all, if you had been following skating avidly, you would know that many skaters have up and down careers. Recent examples being Miki Ando, Brian Joubert, etc. Not everyone is at the top all the time. Comments like "his best years are behind him" and "he has no discipline and mental toughness" are unfair. He's only 23, he can still accomplish a lot in skating, and if he really was so undisciplined would he be able to accomplish as much as he has? He has been skating for only 11 years and he has been a World Junior champion, won several Grand Prix events and been a 3-time US champion. Let's not write people off before they actually retire. Yes, there might be some issue with his ability to figure out how to deal with competition nerves, but he is by far not alone here. Everyone has had struggles with their mental game in competition from Joubert to Buttle to Takahashi. Even Plushy bombed 2000 worlds.

There is a difference between a great skater and a great competitor. I think many fans fail to see this. The results of many Nationals, Worlds, and Olympics show this distinction.

Kurt Browning is a great skater despite his non Olympic gold. Arguably the best!

Johnny Weir, despite his international results is still a very unique skater who happens to be great as what he does!!

There have been a number of recent gold medalists at the Olys who do not move me as being great skaters, but I do agree they are great competitors.

Joe

GoldMedalist said:

I don't think people were mad that Johnny didn't perform his best at the Olympics. I think people WERE mad that he made irresponsible mistakes. The biggest offender being that he left out an entire jumping pass in his LP.

(btw, Plusky did make a tech mistake too -- doubled out on his Flip)

Click to expand...

Why are some mistakes okay while others are "irresponsible"? Mistakes are mistakes. Some people fall, some double jumps, some leave out jumping passes. It happens.

In review of the remarks in this thread re Weir, I think all of us believe that.......

1) He has an immense skating talent

2) He is an undisputable skating artist

3) For some reason, he has not not been able to medal at the big ones--namely Worlds and Olympics.

The dispute seems not to be a lack of skating talent, but rather whether it is competitive nerves; lack of consistent, intensive training; or celebrity distraction. I happen to believe it is a combination of all of the above. I think any of us would be happy indeed, if he shook any/all hindrances and reached his full potential--and the sooner the better!

Joesitz said:

Kurt Browning is a great skater despite his non Olympic gold. Arguably the best!

Johnny Weir, despite his international results is still a very unique skater who happens to be great as what he does!!

Joe

Click to expand...

Kurt Browning wouldn't be probably considered so great if he didn't win so many gold medals at worlds. Long term, great potential, a la Johnny Weir, which isn't followed by medals, isn't that impressive.
History is merciless. The great competitors will always be remembered for their achievements while the ones with great potential, but no medal, will be forgotten.
Sasha Abt was considered by some more talented than Yagudin and Plushenko. Who will remember him in 50 years time? Sandhu used to be a gorgeus skater. Will he be remembered as a great skater (he used to be a great skater but not a great competitor...)?

Joesitz said:

I would hardly describe it as careful. From my view of reading posters' opinions, the posters who wait for the judges protocols feel safe to follow along. Keeps life in the conservative mood.

Joe

Click to expand...

I'd have to disagree with this statement. How can you form a well reasoned argument against the COP or against the judging of an event if you don't take some time to read through the protocols? If you don't read the protocols then how can you say that the caller was simply when he downgraded lambiels triple axel to a double and then point out that a majority of judges gave the jump 0 or +GOEs (and not the -GOE that should have been given for an underrotated jump). Without the protocols it is very difficult to make a convincing argument against the system.

Ant

antmanb said:

I'd have to disagree with this statement. How can you form a well reasoned argument against the COP or against the judging of an event if you don't take some time to read through the protocols? If you don't read the protocols then how can you say that the caller was simply when he downgraded lambiels triple axel to a double and then point out that a majority of judges gave the jump 0 or +GOEs (and not the -GOE that should have been given for an underrotated jump). Without the protocols it is very difficult to make a convincing argument against the system.Ant

Click to expand...

In my opinion, some people are afraid to make risky comments and keep a tight lid on their personna. The thought of erring frightens them so. Wait for the judges so one can safely have an opinion.

In the case of Lambiel's downgrading in Calgary, no one who saw it LIVE thought that it was landed improperly. However, those waiting for the protocols had something to say about the jump.after the fact - not risky before. Those people will not comment till they get the blessings of the judges. So who needs their opinions when we already have the judges, the Caller and the protocols. We can just close down forums. There's nothing to discuss. Views that do not agree with the judges scores will be considered gospel and no further discussion should take place.

Joe

Joesitz said:

In the case of Lambiel's downgrading in Calgary, no one who saw it LIVE thought that it was landed improperly.

Click to expand...

As is the case with many underrotated jumps, you can't really tell unless you've got a close look at the blades (ie. only those with instant replay technology in front of them can see).

GoldMedalist said:

As is the case with many underrotated jumps, you can't really tell unless you've got a close look at the blades (ie. only those with instant replay technology in front of them can see).

Click to expand...

totally agree. I've seen instant replays in 4 different views with, imo, 4 different results. I'm hoping what the judges have in front of them is the correct frame for judging landings.

Joe