Well he skates first in the last group, so maybe what happened to Rachael at the Olympics will happen to him - get high, well-deserved PCS but get issued a few bogus downgrades to keep him down incase the favorites bomb?
Originally Posted by jennylovskt
I think Jeremy is one of the skaters who don't get enough PCS in the international competitions. Cross my fingers.
Originally Posted by silverlake22
Edited to Add:
I have just re-watched Jeremy's today's SP. His 3A was clean, he only had a bit lean over his upper body when he landed it.
Last edited by jennylovskt; 03-25-2010 at 12:28 AM.
Does anyone else find Joubert's landing positions atrocious? Yes, he gets great height, but his inability - or refusal - to hold a landing edge and extend his free leg and arms bugs me to no end. His Triple Lutz fist-pump was so distracting. I would have had him in 6th, just ahead of Rippon. Sorry, Vlad. First place? No way.
Pretty European bonus...
Originally Posted by doug_log
For me Joubert really should get higher score in intrepretation,he really sell his program,so enjoyable to watch.
I'm glad that he seems to really enjoy his skating and skate happily.
Dreaming and dancing
Where did Joubert lose points other than PCS? Chan and Dai caught up with Joubert not only through PCS, but also through TES.
Perhaps so, however, he should also be given with more approriate transition marks too. 7.7 for his effort vs. 7.2 for Abbott, if I were the referee, those judges have some very good explaining to do... I get the impression that this predominantly eastern European judges on this men's panel needs a crush course on what transition means. Times to times, we will get a panel like this, usually at the Worlds, where judges are drawn from all available ISU member nations whereas the Olympic for instance, is only drawn from countries with qualified skaters and tend to get more experienced judges as a result. Consistency in the quality of judges become an issue when you have too many ISU member nations. Some countries have only 1 ISU judge and he/she is literarly running a one man show and the nation has absolutely no skating program like USFS or Skate Canada or even Japan or Russia has. At last year's Worlds in LA where I was in attendance, similar issues were raised re: men's judging. You addressed those with the judges involved, they get it and become better next time. But the problem is it seems with the big ISU membership, this year, similar problem happens again, with 9 new people. Looking at the names, those judges seem relatively new compared to some of the more veteran judges. In comparison, the Olympic men's panel is a lot more experienced and which is also why Plushenko got only 6 something for his transition in his SP. If you accept Joubert's transition = Plushenko's as he claimed, then there is no reason why the World panel should give Joubert one full point higher on his transition compared to Plushenko in Vancouver. No matter what angle you look at this, Joubert's PCS mark was wrong on so many levels but it's not the skater's fault.
Originally Posted by treeloving
Last edited by wallylutz; 03-25-2010 at 01:36 AM.
In the step sequence for instance, both Chan and Dai had one Level 4 circular step sequence, which gives them a huge boost in terms of GOE and about 0.6 higher in BV. The diffrence there is likely worth between 1.5~2 points on that element alone. You do the math, it's no wonder Joubert was left with not much of advantage in TES after everything is counted.
Originally Posted by Bennett
I am waiting for triple transitions into single jumps. Now you have transitions into triples being more respected than quadruples. Crazy. Can't wait for announcers to start saying "will so and so pull out their quadruple transition?" LOL LOL Joubert was robbed.
Exactly - and that's the problem. Joubert should have been much higher in TES compared to Chan and Dai. He did a 4-3.
Originally Posted by Bennett
The quad needs to be given a couple extra points in value so that those who land it successfully are rewarded so that they place higher in relation to those like Chan who don't even bother to attempt it.
Takahashi should have received at least an ! for his flutz.
He got ! at Olys FS and what do the tech panel do with the same jump here? A +1 point GOE.
Takahashi should be in 3rd behind Chan and Joubert, without his 1point GOE and at least 1 point mandatory deduction with an !.
I will be really ticked off if he pulls out his flutz twice in the FS like he did in the Olys FS and gets away without getting dinged, as it would mean favoritism on part of ISU technical panel and audacity on part of Takahashi.
Last edited by RumbleFish; 03-25-2010 at 04:40 AM.
Didn't think Dai's lutz was that bad here in the SP, it's usually late in the LP when he gets tired the edge sometimes gets to him.
Anyone can see this sport and its judging have changed, just based on the comments above, but also on the last couple of years of competition results. In my view, not for the better. I think there should be a lot more points between Dai - (giving him more room on top) and Chan. The subject of their programs is comparable, but the execution - the fiery performance that Dai showcased as compared to Chan is worth more of a separation between the two. This system is totally wack and painful. At the same time, it's not objective either (complete with certain favorites), which was supposedly its reason for inception. While in men's skating, quad is now seemingly less important and transitions and "overall" quality, in pairs we have K/S getting credit for 4 despite falling, and in general placing third in spite of two falls... Oh wait - the same thing happened in Olympics - people with beautifully executed clean programs (Weir) were placed below those who fell. I think many casual viewers would agree that watching this sport has become less enjoyable and less "fair" in their eyes. The decline in audiences will only continue if this goes on. What I really don't get is why more of an adjustment to "skating skills" or interpretation/choreography is not given when someone actually hits the ice in an awkward way, breaking the whole perception of the program. Those should go down, in my view.
Both Tara Lipinski and Johnny Weir said Brian Joubert should place higher. Tara said he not only did a 4-3, but REALLY SOLD the program. Tara was really impressed. She said she understood why Plushenko lost to Evan because even though he did the quad, the rest of the program was not there. He didn't sell it. Joubert sold it like the girl scouts selling their cookies. You have to give him perfect performance and execution points. His PCS was lower than it should be.
Johnny and Tara said the base value for the quad should increase to match the difficulty. Johnny said the risk for doing the quad is so much more and even though he's not a quad skater, he still thinks a quad is very important. He said doing the quad in practice is very hard, doing it and landing it in competition is extremely difficult.
Personally, after watching it, I thought Brian Joubert would go into the lead with 92+. His SP is a lot better than Plushenko SP at the Olympics.
One thing I agree with Johnny is he mentioned both Brian and Dai really connect to the audience. Chan connected his elements, like the Zhangs. =).
Where does Tara and Johnny commentate? TIA.