What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Hmm, LOL, I don´t think anyone said that World´s gold is nothing special. It just is not quite the same as the Olympic gold, in my opinion. And a gold at GP Finals I see almost as important as the one at Worlds in the sense that normally ALL top guys are competing at the GP Finals, and those are the same top guys the skater is competing against in the Worlds also.

I´m sorry to say but I don´t get the connection of the second paragraph, is it refering to a posting which I seem to have missed? Neither was I able to see it as a summary of this thread? Anyway, I would say that in the freeskate the matters were more easy for Sarah as after the short programme she was on 4th place. There was not the same pressure for her as for those who were leading. On the other hand skaters have been leading in the Olympics after the short programme and won the freeskate as well, and of course the same happens at Worlds. The pressure is though much harder in the Olympics because it IS the Olympics, a huge event, and especially because one has to wait four years before one can give it a new try. If one loses the gold in Worlds, it is so soon one can try to win it again.

It is also very much the question of nerves, whose nerves will hold in a huge event, in a competition when it is about the Olympic gold medal. Also I would say that if a skater wíns e.g. at the Olympics both the short programme and the freeskate, that skater is very clearly the best skater of the event (no fluke). And generally speaking of competing, it is usual in competitions that the best skater of the event wins that specific competition, some skaters are more often the best skater in an event than some others. I would though say that Olympic winners normally have been best skaters in several events before they became an Olympic champion.

About being prepared to win at the Olympics, I have to say that Michelle´s position was not perhaps the best one in SLC as she was the only top skater without a coach in the Olympic season, wasn´t she?

BTW, I wondered at the time and still wonder about it sometimes, LOL, what did Irina´s coach tell her before she went to start her freeskate? What directions might she have given to her? Did she say that Irina did not need to go all out, perhaps? Is it possible that her coach missed what Sarah´s good performance might lead to?

Marjaana

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Joe - I have seen some atheletes and coaches saying the following about the olympics:

LESSON NO.#1 - the biggest mistake that an athelete can make is to go into the olympics thinking of *wining* the gold medal. It ain't gonna happen period. It is too much unnecessary pressure and the most common reason why some atheletes do not win the gold medal. How about aiming for the personal best and why not think of silver or bronze as beautiful metals as well.

LESSON NO#2 - the athelete should think of his/her past accomplishments (i.e. the GPFs, nationals and worlds) as equal to gold rather than losing sleep over a competition that comes every 4 years. The three years leading to the games are just as important and imo even more so.

will con't later.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Jaana - I think the gist of the discussion is about the Olys drive for gold and only gold. All other competitions pale to that rationale. Is the 10th of a point difference the definitive answer to who is the 'best'? While I understand the great desire for Oly gold, I could never consider Nancy Kerrigan, Lu Chen, Michelle Kwan, Irina Slutskaya, Sasha Cohen as failures.

Nor can I consider all other silver and bronze medalists as failures. Urmanov better than Stoyko? On that night, maybe but in general how would you consider?

Bleuchick - Excellent post.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Also I would say that if a skater wíns e.g. at the Olympics both the short programme and the freeskate, that skater is very clearly the best skater of the event (no fluke). [/quote]
Then shall we deduct from this that the formula used in World; with 3 phase QA, SP, LP; makes World a better measure of who is the best? And thus deduct to the Gold at world is no less than Oly Gold (except Olymipc year, since usually some top skaters would skip the world after the Oly)? And further decuct to that a real champion (to distinguish from the winner) is made of multiple wins of worlds and other competetions?

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Hmm, LOL, I don´t think anyone said that World´s gold is nothing special. It just is not quite the same as the Olympic gold, in my opinion. And a gold at GP Finals I see almost as important as the one at Worlds in the sense that normally ALL top guys are competing at the GP Finals, and those are the same top guys the skater is competing against in the Worlds also.[/quote]
Huh? You find the GPF to be "almost" equal in status as Worlds yet the Olympics is so much more prestigeous? What I see is that it's also the same guys and gals competiting at the Olympics as those that compete at Worlds. In fact, the difference in the # of competitors at Worlds and the Olys is actually much more similar than the difference between Worlds and GPF, where only 6 skaters/teams compete in each descipline. And also, at Worlds, most of the skaters have to skate one more LP than they do at the Olympics.
I guess this brings us back to the original questions, is the Olympics "not quite the same" as Worlds just because it comes around only every four years?

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Well, I do think that the olys have a special aura because they are every four years and include a large group of obscure sports that most people don't know about, but can appreciate then. However, I agree with Joesitz and Shine that the Worlds and Olympic FS Event are the same in # of contending competitors, with one more free skate at Worlds. The idea is, I suppose, that the skaters winning world medals over the previous three years should be able to go on and win an OGM or medal. Well, I can only say that the problem is the hype behind the olympics, especially for FS in the Winter Olympics. Yes it's a prestigious competition, but it is only one competiton. It would be better for the athletes if they could view it as such, but it's a little hard to when you know you're supposed to go out there and win the OGM or a medal at least.

It's easy to be a couch critic and say they should have this or should have that. No one can know what it's like to be an olympic or world GM or medal contender unless they experience it. So, I don't think that winning an OGM/medal is innately better than a World GM/medal, except that has been established as the top goal of most sports in our society. I can only think that going out there and winning a world championship or more (or medaling) over three years is a tough feat and that if one will have a mental break or make mistakes it's not strange (just unfortunate and perhaps, if you will, negligent) that it might actually come in the "important" year, sometimes. That's been true across all olympic sports. That the someone (or more than one) is considered a favorite and doesn't win OGM or sometimes not even a medal. It's just too much to me that one's greatest must be based in one competition every four years and not also on what one does those previous three years.

I can certainly admire those who have accomplished both world titles and OGMs, but I think that no matter how good you are, you will have an off night. It's not necessarily a "choke" situation either. It's split second timing on jumps and you can be physically and mentally as ready as you can be and still make a mistake. It's not an "excuse" for anyone, necessarily, but it's a statement of fact, simply because athletes are not superhuman. If you win an OGM, that is great, because you rose to the occasion of a prestigious competition. One competition. That fact doesn't either negate the OGM, silver, or bronze winners and certainly not those expected to "do better" than they did, but who have otherwise exemplary careers.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

IMHO, in terms of FS Olympics is a just BIG Worlds in an Oly year.

And given the facts that 1) With more and more jumps emphsised more luck/fluke would be involved in one win every 4 years. 2) More and more OGM not won by the best skaters during the seasons. 3) More and more memberized performance were given not at Oly but at Worlds. I think FS is in the transformation to the stage that World is valued more just like some other sports. People especially vintage fans may see worlds as professional competetion which dedicate to only FS. Not like Oly so many diff sports involved and media all over the world just hyper all over the places. Think about that which worth more when you buy a dress in department store like Macys or branded store like Fifth Avenu?

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

I've said this before, and I don't mind saying it again. The Olympic Gold Medal in figure skating is all about media hype. The public is made to think (due to mass press, endorsements, etc.) that this winner of this medal is in essence the "best" in his or her sport. This isn't always true (how about the short track skater who slid across the finish line because the pack in front of him landed on their behinds). He won the gold, but won not because he was the best, but because he got very lucky.

It is amazing to me that a skater would deem the OGM as the end of their amateur career. If you truly love what you do (and are able to) you keep going until you're no longer able. The best is often yet to come. How can anyone claim a medal given out in a contest every four years is the best? To me, consistency, a body of work, and contributions to the sport merit just as much accolade than a single medal.

Some of my favorite figure skaters, Janet Lynn, Paul Wylie, Kurt Browning, Michelle Kwan, Lloyd and Isabelle, never stood on top of the podium at the Olys, but they didn't have to. Skating fans know of their merits, longevity, and contribution to the sport........so does the media. The rest of the World....probably not.......they just believe what they read in the newspapers.......42

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Personally, I would like to see skaters like Irina and Michelle continue to compete (if that is what they enjoy doing) long after they can no longer win medals. As long as they put out a good program I am sure their fans would root for them to do their personal best.

I feel that once they feel they can no longer win they will bow out. How sad that will be for their fans. They don't need Gold anything, they have already proven themselves and there isn't much out there in the Professional end of skating.

I am sure they would both love to have Olympic Gold Medals but for me, I say "Who Cares". They are great with or without OGM.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Christopher Bowman once said "The Olympic Gold is the jewel in the crown, but the World title IS the crown". I always liked that analogy

I share in the feeling that the Olympics is just a version of Worlds that happens to come along every 4 years - a little glossier, and busier, because it's framed around a bunch of other sport competitions happening at the same time.

I wrote this in the other thread, and I heartily abide by this notion. Olympics are about TIMING. What if a skater doesn't hit their peak in an Olympic year, but a year later? What if a sensational skater has an injury in an Olympic year that hinders their performance? What if a skater just misses the age requirement, and then peaks 2 years later, but is past their prime 2 years after that when the Olympics come rolling around again? And so on.....

Do people honestly think that athletes that happen to hit that gold medal Olympic performance are BETTER than those athletes that get a gold medal at the their sport's equivalent of a World Championships during the interim years between Olympics?

For sports that don't have a unifying world championship every year, the Olympics are a big deal. Take the marathon. There are many prestigious marathons run throughout the World. But there isn't one annual marathon that ties it all together and names one as the champion marathoner for that particular year. That's what makes the Olympics so special to a marathon runner.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Great post Sandee! I love the analogy about the jewel and the crown!

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

>Skate Sandee
I share in the feeling that the Olympics is just a version of Worlds that happens to come along every 4 years - a little glossier, and busier, because it's framed around a bunch of other sport competitions happening at the same time.

I wrote this in the other thread, and I heartily abide by this notion. Olympics are about TIMING. What if a skater doesn't hit their peak in an Olympic year, but a year later? What if a sensational skater has an injury in an Olympic year that hinders their performance? What if a skater just misses the age requirement, and then peaks 2 years later, but is past their prime 2 years after that when the Olympics come rolling around again? And so on..... >

I don´t know about that if we are thinking of e.g. a great Worlds AND Olympics champion like Katharina Witt. She won 4 Worlds gold medals and 2 Olympic gold medals. I would say that all that is about something else than timing... More about like the nerves of steel, and the huge goal and will to be the best. The Olympics is a nervewrecking experience, and some handle it better than others. And some big favourites don´t get even one medal. It does not diminish the value of those skaters though. On the other hand if one of the very strongest contenders to win the gold in the Olympics, wins it and has not won a gold medal in e.g. at Worlds, it should not diminish the value of that skater´s achievement either.

And in my opinion those two Olympic golds are the two jewels in Witt´s crown, and as such the top highlights of her eligible career. Oh, and generally speaking about crowns, aren´t the jewels of the crown exactly the ones which make a crown so valuable, LOL?

Marjaana

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

I totally agree, Jaana. Katarina Witt is a great <em>Olympic</em> champion, and her two gold medals are the crowning jewels in <em>her</em> crown. This does not diminsh the accomplishments of other skaters, however.

Mathman

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

ITA with Skate Sandee that the Olympics is about timing, i.e. skaters peak in the right season at the right time. People can use Witt as a counter example but how many Witt(s) have we seen in the last 3 Olympics? None.

No offense but post like "Grand Prix is almost as important as Worlds and the Olympics is much more prestigious" reminded me once again how people form their opinion based on their favorite's competitive record.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Mathman, sorry, I edited my message above a lot... Unfortunately I posted it before it was totally ready.

>No offense but post like "Grand Prix is almost as important as Worlds and the Olympics is much more prestigious" reminded me once again how people form their opinion based on their favorite's competitive record.>

And on what are those opinions based that the Olympics gold is not so important, LOL? Surely (at least mostly) not on opinions of those whose favourite skater has won an Olympic gold...

I posted about Grand Prix gold vs. World Champions, and it was just put as a general remark, meaning that it IS a yearly competition where also all the top guys are competing (as in Worlds).

Marjaana

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Loved your post Sandee........ not to take away anything from Kat, she's been a great influence in the skating world for two decades........however, her two Olympic wins were not skates clearly above all others. Roz, the fav going in in 84, doubled some key jumps that let the door open for Kat. In 88, Debbi Thomas, again the fav going in, had a disastrous skate, which only required Kat to skate standing up to win. Nerve, steady skating were important, and Kat delivered, but "luck and timing on her part and not her competitors", gave her the gold"..........42

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Show42, don´t the wins mostly occur because some other skater(s) make one or more mistakes vs. the winner, leave something out of their programme or something like that? I mean that isn´t it rather rare to see for example all three skaters of the podium having done a totally perfect skate? Of course we have to also remember the results from short programme and possible qualification round nowadays...

Marjaana

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Good point, Jaana........Off the top of my head, I can remember Viktor, Paul, and Petra having solid skates in 92, and Lulu and Michelle were superb in 1996 Worlds. Tara and Michelle were both clean in Nagano (third place escapes me). Kat to me would be the exception, having skated successfully in two consecutive Olympics........I don't mean to diminish her Oly wins......she did stand up when the others were less than stellar and she was and still is utterly charming on the ice...42

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Are you speaking of the 1992 Olympics? Neither Viktor or Paul had a solid (if that means faultless) skate. And didn´t Tara win because her technical side was higher and because she really "attacked" in her Nagano freeskate?

Worlds 1996 mens can be seen as such that those three men on the podium did a faultless skate (I´m not sure about Galindo though). Eldredge though won because Ilia did not combine a triple flip with triple toe (his skate was though clean).

Marjaana

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Neither Viktor or Paul fell during their skate, perhaps doubled triples, but the skates were clean. Tara's win over Michelle, in my opinion, was not do to a fall by Michelle or a major program change. As compared to Sarah's win at SLC, Michelle had a major mistake when she fell, and Irina's skate (correct me if I'm wrong) had a program change that resulted in her being placed below Sarah's skate........Unfortunately, skates are judged by humans, and the placement of the skater in the line-up clearly can and does influence where the skater eventually ends up on the podium.......if it influcences how they skate, it influences how they are judged....42