Rank and Rate the top 5 Men's Long Programs of the 1994 Olympics. | Page 4 | Golden Skate

Rank and Rate the top 5 Men's Long Programs of the 1994 Olympics.

blue_idealist

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
I hate how this turned from ranking and rating 1994 Olympics programs to debating AGAIN about Lysacek vs. Plushenko and the quad vs. transitions. I came back to see what other people thought of the 1994 performances.. but no luck here I guess *sigh*
 

gmyers

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Agreed. Jumps have gone backwards. Agreed, I want it all. I do. How awesome would Takahashi's program been if he had landed a fully rotated quad flip? BUT I still think you're being too reductive here.

I can be reductive but I am only trying to understand the past three seasons of mens skating.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Okay, I'll try to swing things back to 1994. Ride with me on this one, folks.

Can anyone remember, was that the only year that eligible skaters were welcomed back into the Olympics? It's interesting to compare the results of the returning male pros with those of other disciplines. Of course the pairs did best, with G and G finishing in gold. Ice dance had one medal, with Torvill and Dean nabbing bronze. (And they wuzrobbed!) The returning men--Boitano and Petrenko--didn't win anything. Women had what the French call a succes d'estime, a metaphorical victory, as Witt, with no chance to medal, closed out the competition with "Where Have All the Flowers Gone," which she performed in tribute to the beleaguered city of Sarajevo.
 

gmyers

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
1994 was the first year where pro - skaters who only participated in ISU apporved events could compete at the Olympics. Ever since 1994 it has been allowed.
 

Jaana

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Country
Finland
I can be reductive but I am only trying to understand the past three seasons of mens skating.

I think that the matter is rather simple: Skaters get points from all elements they are doing on the ice and the guys with successful quad (which is one element) just happened not to be good enough in some other elements in those competitions. One must specifically remember that it was in technical elements that Buttle in WC and Lysacek in WC and Olympics won over the quys with a quad.
 
Last edited:

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll
Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2003
1994 was the first year where pro - skaters who only participated in ISU apporved events could compete at the Olympics. Ever since 1994 it has been allowed.

iirc that was repealled. They still have olympic elligible vs pro. Probably due to the negative feedback.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Thanks for the update, Tonichelle. That sounds right. After all, I can't recollect any pro skaters returning for later Games. I also suspect that Kwan might have joined some pro productions (individual televised affairs, not necessarily a long tour such as SOI) somewhere in there if she'd been allowed to keep competing at the same time.
 

gmyers

Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
I think that the matter is rather simple: Skaters get points from all elements they are doing on the ice and the guys with successful quad (which is one element) just happened not to be good enough in some other elements in those competitions. One must specifically remember that it was in technical elements that Buttle in WC and Lysacek in WC and Olympics won over the quys with a quad.

It's the same thing with Takahashi as well. So am I really supposed to believe skaters with quads aren't good enough to win competitions anymore and only skaters who don't do quads are good enough to win competitions. That was not the case from 1997 to 2007 so maybe it how the scoring system is being used right now by the judges who are saying don't do quads anymore to skaters. For the 2010/2011 season I wont predict anyone who has a quad to win a major competition.

Also about the pros in competition-that makes sense. Shows why I couldn't think of any returning pros after 1994 just repeat amateurs.
 
Last edited:

pangtongfan

Match Penalty
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Like I said the skaters who have quads who are good enough to win competitions keep screwing up in big events. Takahashi's history speaks for himself, but his performance from Worlds would have probably been good enough to win the Olympics even though it wasnt perfect. Joubert's recent history speaks for itself as well, and he has poorly thought out jump layouts, some lower level elements, and has let his presentation slide since leaving Browning. Abbott and Verner are king headcases. And Plushenko really is way way past his prime and a weak skater outside of the jumps these days and he still would have won the Olympics with his quad if he had just done one of his many shaky jumps that night a bit better or changed one thing about his COP-unfriendly jump layout.

One cant blame the judges.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
So far, only 2 people have properly responded to my thread...which was to rate and rank the 5 performances I linked from the 1994 Olympics. There are several posters who have stated their favorite performance of the night, but I can't count those since they didn't rank all 5. As such, here are the results so far from the three of us who have voted:

1. Stojko (1st, 1st, 5th)
2. Browning (2nd, 2nd, 4th)
3. Urmanov (1st, 4th, 4th)
4. Candeloro (2nd, 3rd, 5th)
5. Petrenko (3rd, 3rd, 5th)

EDIT - BTW, thank you very much for your thoughts on the first couple pages, Spun Silver, Olympia, and pangtongfan, although you didn't actually write a ranking of the 5 Men, so I don't want to assume your exact placements.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Hey, I did so rank. :scowl: I wrote:

Still, I'd agree with your rankings except that I'd put Urmanov on the bottom.

IOW:
1. Stojko
2. Browning
3. Candeloro
4. Petrenko
5. Urmanov

Oh-kay? Oh-kay. :yay:
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Very well, Blades, if you insist. I apologize for not committing to a real ranking earlier. I always second-guess myself on these things.

Your analysis and descriptions are so wonderful and clear, and I referred to them as I went back and reviewed the tapes. I'll agree with your rankings, except I'll put Browning above Stojko. It's only partially out of bias. (But what's wrong with bias?) Browning did the most to wed movement to music--there's one bit in there, for example, where he stroked exactly to the music, and it seemed completely natural and part of the flow. The split jump from nothing, the spreadeagles, and other moves gave such visual variety to the pictures he created. Besides, his skating skills are to die for. I know he completely flubbed that non-triple Axel, and I suppose I should take off for the absence of a lutz, but the jumps he did execute turn like superfast corkscrews in the air, and--well, I'm not a judge, and the medals have already been handed out, and he's just such a riveting skater to watch. As for the others, Stojko did a fine job and actually did one or two of the nicer spins. Candeloro has a unique, loose-limbed athleticism; he practically seems to be striding across the ice. He builds a character, takes control and pulls us in, and also does those huge jumps. I didn't move Urmanov up because that spin was a debacle, though I'm fine with the fact that the real judges gave him the gold that night. Petrenko didn't do anything to make me want to lift him above any of the others, though you can see his meticulous positions and smooth skating.

So:
Browning
Stojko
Candeloro
Urmanov
Petrenko
 

pangtongfan

Match Penalty
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
My exact rankings of the long programs of the 94 Olympics are:

1. Petrenko. 5.8 technical, 5.8 presentation. Overall probably the best performance. He did all the jumps strongly though he was missing a triple-triple, good spins, and good overall program, choreography, and line, even if the program was a bit zzzz and typical Petrenko.

2. Stojko. 5.9 technical, 5.7 presentation. I hate giving him the Olympic Gold medal in retrospect considering he shows he is such a jaded and narrow minded person with a terrible attitude towards the sport. However overall his performance was the best. Very strong technical all around- triple axel-triple toe, 2 triple axels, very good spins, very good footwork. A good program and pretty well delivered too.

3. Candelero. 5.6 technical, 5.9 presentation. If he had landed the 2nd triple axel I would have given him the gold. As it was that was a big mistake. The rest of the jumps were impressive, some of them huge and dynamic. His jumping technique is not as clean or precise as either Elvis or Urmanov though, even though the jumps are still often huge. His spins were not that strong. I found his program genius and he carried it off so wonderfully.

4. Urmanov. 5.7 technical, 5.8 presentation. His jumps were strong but he didnt do a triple-triple and he had trouble landing that triple flip. The spins were not very good. The program showed his nice classical lines and nice interpretation but was bland and had too many posing sections. He also didnt seem that fast, albeit neither was Stojko. I dont really think he was technically stronger than Candelero, but I wanted to put him ahead of Browning overall and Candelero behind Stojko overall in the long.

5. Browning. 5.5 technical, 5.9 presentation. The best program of the event and overall very well delivered. Jumps wise it wasnt strong enough. The 2nd triple axel attempt was a mess, he didnt even try a triple lutz, and the triple flip looked 2 footed.

6. Boitano. 5.5 technical, 5.6 presentation. Solid other than 1 or 2 mistakes but boring. His jumps dont stand out in amateurs like they do in pros either. I see why every judge agreed on him being 6th in the long. I dont think he would have been a huge factor at these Games even skating cleanly to be honest. In pro competitions he was king, atleast until Browning came into his own, but in amateur competition he was a bit too old and dated. He couldnt even do all the triples anymore either (no triple loop). I

7. Millot. 5.3 technical, 5.7 presentation. Lots of unclean landings and not even a decent triple axel try.
Very interesting program, great musical sense for the tango, pretty difficult choreography too.

8. Cousins. 5.3 technical, 5.6 presentation. Pretty good skate. Shame about the triple axel try miss. Love that music.

9. Britten. 5.2 technical, 5.6 presentation. Great program and skating, no triple axel tries, and not even all his jumps clean that he did do.

10. Davis- 5.1 technical, 5.3 presentation. What a hot mess and with the mistakes the program was a bore.

20. Tatarov- 4.3 technical, 3.9 presentation. I didnt see all the others to know where he should place but this was painful to watch. It looked like a program from the 1700s with a costume and music to fit that era too, but with some poor attempts of 1990s jumps which almost all missed badly, and his sit spins look like an elderly trying to take a dump. How he even got the semi decent marks he did or even made the final flight even with his best skate I will never know.
 
Last edited:

mskater93

Record Breaker
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
With regard to Boitano, if I remember, he was struggling with back pain that season and so had to forgo the 3Lo and struggled with some of his other jumps (which were also smaller to reduce the pain in his back from landings)

My rankings for the LP:
Stojko
Petrenko
Candeloro
Browning
Urmanov
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
PangTong Fan, wonderful analysis.

Isn't it interesting how many of us have praised Elvis in terms of quality of his moves. He didn't just do lots of jumps. He did lots of kinds of jumps, and his spins were good as well. I was shocked (in a good way) to see how nice his spins looked in comparison to Urmanov's, who was supposed to be the embodiment of classical style. I always enjoyed Elvis--he had his own style and a kind of rough grace, like the martial artist he is. I don't prefer that style, but I admire it, and also his on-ice confidence and consistency.

But you all understand why I put Browning first. When else do I get the chance to do that?
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Updated ranking:

1. Stojko (1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 5th)
2. Candeloro (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 5th)
3. Browning (1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 4th, 4th, 4th, 5th)
4. Petrenko (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 5th, 5th)
5. Urmanov (1st, 2nd, 4th, 4th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 5th)

All 5 skaters have both #1 and #5 rankings from people, which is very interesting. Senorita should chime in now! It also sounded like goldenpleasures had an intriguing pro-Urmanov stance.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
Interesting to see the tabulations so far.

On the face of it, it looks as if many of us North Americans are biased against Russian/Slavic skating. But I don't think that's so. Just by coincidence, Petrenko and Urmanov are probably the least interesting of the Eastern European Olympians. (This classification takes into account that Petrenko is ex-Soviet bloc but not Russian.) Many of us, if not most of us, would change our tune drastically if some ranking of the subsequent years of Olympic skaters was attempted. I personally would place Kulik over Stojko at that point because Kulik's jumps were so magnificent. Many, if not most, of us would put Yagudin at or near the top of any list we cared to set up, including greatest all-time men's singles skaters. And even those of us who are not particularly Plushy fans would agree that he deserved all the golds he got at various Worlds and Olympics. These three guys didn't just have correct skating style; they had command. They had, in their various ways, electricity. And they had quads! So at that point, Elvis's main strength was no longer enough to rank him above any of them.
 
Top