Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Interview with Jean-Christophe Simond

  1. #1
    Custom Title NatachaHatawa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Paris
    Posts
    724

    Interview with Jean-Christophe Simond

    [URL="http://www.passion-patinage.com/spip.php?article422"]http://www.passion-patinage.com/spip.php?article422[/URL]

    I don't have time to translate all of it, but JCS says a couple of interesting things:
    1) The change of program had already been anticipated
    2) He was in Poitiers for more than four months a year
    3) Didier Gailhaguet had suggested to Brian to go and work with Brian Orser

  2. #2
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    good place in the middle
    Posts
    150
    Thanks for the link!
    Seems much more toned down on his part (comparing to the post-worlds interviews/quotes).
    It's been said many times here: Brian needs a good choreographer for a new LP and learn to stick to the layout.

  3. #3
    Keeper of Bab's Death Stare... nubka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    850
    I wish I could read French...

  4. #4
    Custom Title Joesitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    20,185
    There are two sides to every "blame" story.

    If Brian needs to change coaches, then he should decide to whom he thinks will be the best. After all it's not like Brian has never seen samples of other coaches.

  5. #5
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    310
    Anyone who coaches Joubert will have to move to Poitiers, which probably narrows Brian's options considerably.

  6. #6
    Off the ice Buttercup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Left field
    Posts
    3,426
    Thanks for the link, Natacha. Between my high school French and the Google translator, I think I got most of it.

    What I don't get is, if the change in the LP layout had been decided, why have Brian practice quad Salchows in LA? And why change the layout to begin with? What that program needed was not tinkering with the jumps - it needed tinkering with the non-jump parts. Why even have two different programs as options as late as the last training session before the LP (as JCS states there were)? The only option should have been skate to win, and they should have learned that from past events.

    I'm not sure I understood Simond's calculation regarding the 2A and the two spins at the end, though most likely that's because my French is not good. Had Brian done a 3S he would have had time to get the spin levels up? Well, had he done a clean 2A he also would have had time for it, too, because at Euros he ended his LP with a 2A followed by a level 4 and level 3 spin. Ending an LP with three spins, like Joubert did at the WTT, is indeed strange, though.

    I still get the feeling that neither Brian nor JCS have a good grasp of CoP. For instance, why did the LP have only 2 combinations both at Euros and at Worlds? Was the last combination planned on the final jump? Is that really smart tactically? I hope that for next season Brian finds someone who understands the judging system well and can work with him on maximizing points. My understanding is that he's keeping the SP and will have Tarasova do his LP, so now the question is whether the temporary arrangement with Depouilly will become more of a long-term thing.

    Anyway, I'm glad JCS had the opportunity to give his take on things after everyone's tempers had cooled down a bit.
    Last edited by Buttercup; 04-23-2009 at 02:25 AM.

  7. #7
    Custom Title NatachaHatawa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Paris
    Posts
    724
    Quote Originally Posted by Buttercup View Post
    Thanks for the link, Natacha. Between my high school French and the Google translator, I think I got most of it.

    What I don't get is, if the change in the LP layout had been decided, why have Brian practice quad Salchows in LA? And why change the layout to begin with? What that program needed was not tinkering with the jumps - it needed tinkering with the non-jump parts. Why even have two different programs as options as late as the last training session before the LP (as JCS states there were)? The only option should have been skate to win, and they should have learned that from past events.

    I'm not sure I understood Simond's calculation regarding the 2A and the two spins at the end, though most likely that's because my French is not good. Had Brian done a 3S he would have had time to get the spin levels up? Well, had he done a clean 2A he also would have had time for it, too, because at Euros he ended his LP with a 2A followed by a level 4 and level 3 spin. Ending an LP with three spins, like Joubert did at the WTT, is indeed strange, though.

    I still get the feeling that neither Brian nor JCS have a good grasp of CoP. For instance, why did the LP have only 2 combinations both at Euros and at Worlds? Was the last combination planned on the final jump? Is that really smart tactically? I hope that for next season Brian finds someone who understands the judging system well and can work with him on maximizing points. My understanding is that he's keeping the SP and will have Tarasova do his LP, so now the question is whether the temporary arrangement with Depouilly will become more of a long-term thing.

    Anyway, I'm glad JCS had the opportunity to give his take on things after everyone's tempers had cooled down a bit.
    To answer your first question, JCS said that he and Brian had thought up three layout possibilities before going to LA, depending on how the competition went.

    I completely agree with your analysis on how Brian should have skated and your scepticism of JCS's calculation. I believe that even if the program would have gone to plan and Brian would have won, it still would have been a huge mistake. Calculating a win by less than a point just isn't enough, it doesn't give the skater a margin of errror, it's either skate perfectly clean or lose. I also think that in order for Brian to be glorious and not just victorious, he needs to take the kind of risks he used to take (only now his technique is much more solid, so it isn't a wreckless idea). If Brian wants to be the guy that the judges want to give the gold medal to in Vancouver, he's got to prove during big competitions that he can do what he can do.

    Brian really doesn't understand the CoP; he went from one extreme (taking loads of risks despite it not being favoured by the new system) to another (calculating too much and so either not winning because of a bad calculation or winning but without a champion's performance). Brian needs somebody who understands the system.
    Brian refuses to leave Poitiers, and I can understand that, but maybe he should consider working with a coach that he goes to see once or twice a month and for the rest of the time working with one of the coaches assistants in Poitiers, the way mao does with TaT. I believe that Brian Orser would have been the perefct choice for him, but I can understand that with all that's happended and the games being in Vancouver that he isn't sure he'll be able to trust a North American, even less a Canadian.
    I'm not sure Laurent Depouilly is a good choice; those two separated the first time around because of personnality problems.

  8. #8
    Off the ice Buttercup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Left field
    Posts
    3,426
    Quote Originally Posted by NatachaHatawa View Post
    Brian refuses to leave Poitiers, and I can understand that, but maybe he should consider working with a coach that he goes to see once or twice a month and for the rest of the time working with one of the coaches assistants in Poitiers, the way mao does with TaT.
    I thought that was more or less the plan - to go to TaT on a part-time basis and have Depouilly or someone else oversee day-to-day training in Poitiers. It'll certainly be easier for him to travel to Moscow on occasion than it is for Mao. I'm not sure it's completely settled with Tarasova, though.

  9. #9
    Custom Title antmanb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    UK - Manchester
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by NatachaHatawa View Post
    To answer your first question, JCS said that he and Brian had thought up three layout possibilities before going to LA, depending on how the competition went.

    I completely agree with your analysis on how Brian should have skated and your scepticism of JCS's calculation. I believe that even if the program would have gone to plan and Brian would have won, it still would have been a huge mistake. Calculating a win by less than a point just isn't enough, it doesn't give the skater a margin of errror, it's either skate perfectly clean or lose. I also think that in order for Brian to be glorious and not just victorious, he needs to take the kind of risks he used to take (only now his technique is much more solid, so it isn't a wreckless idea). If Brian wants to be the guy that the judges want to give the gold medal to in Vancouver, he's got to prove during big competitions that he can do what he can do.

    Brian really doesn't understand the CoP; he went from one extreme (taking loads of risks despite it not being favoured by the new system) to another (calculating too much and so either not winning because of a bad calculation or winning but without a champion's performance). Brian needs somebody who understands the system.
    Brian refuses to leave Poitiers, and I can understand that, but maybe he should consider working with a coach that he goes to see once or twice a month and for the rest of the time working with one of the coaches assistants in Poitiers, the way mao does with TaT. I believe that Brian Orser would have been the perefct choice for him, but I can understand that with all that's happended and the games being in Vancouver that he isn't sure he'll be able to trust a North American, even less a Canadian.
    I'm not sure Laurent Depouilly is a good choice; those two separated the first time around because of personnality problems.
    Add me to the lst of people scratching his head about JCS's comments about the final double axel. The problem was clearly the fall. I've only just gotten around to watching the mens LP from worlds just last night and it really did look like Brian was lost in the middle of his program. The final double axel was just one of those things. A lapse in concentration and fall that takes a while to recover from because it is so unexpected.

    Brian nearly always rushes his final two spins and as a result misses the positions/changes required for the higher levels, maybe he should move the spins to earlier in the program to ensure he does them as planned with high levels.

    In terms of program construction Joubert needs not 3, 4, or 5 different program plans, he needs 2 and only2. Plan A being the best case scenario with the quad toe and quad salchow opening the program. Plan B should be about adding any missed combos and a maximum of one jump type change e.g. if the quad salchow gets popped to a triple - finish with a double axel. If the quad works finish with a triple salchow. Anything else is just suicide. Having a ripple effect of jumps contingent on certain factors just can't work especially with the different set ups to the jumps.

    He should have plan A and plan B solid in his mind for the entire season. Back to back runthroughs of plan A followed by plan B. This is the only way he can be sure that he will hit all of the elements required.

    Ant

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •