Kwan feature in Sports Illustrated | Page 4 | Golden Skate

Kwan feature in Sports Illustrated

aftertherain

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
^ This.

Big ado over nothing.

Mountain out of a molehill...

I think it all depends how on how one perceives it. Some people might think there's nothing wrong with it, it's poorly worded, or just plain offensive.

I can understand the sentiments behind the last two; the former speaking for itself, but the latter is where it gets a little more complicated. The title can easily be interpreted as one that denies Michelle's American background and given the history of America towards Asian Americans, most Asians or other people like myself tend to get defensive. (And Asians are also are one of the smaller minorities in America.)

I'm sure the person who wrote the article didn't mean any harm. The title was just poorly worded.

Unlike a movie-that-shall-not-be-named-now that's come out recently ....

You're such an ageist!

LOL.
 
Last edited:

MKFSfan

Medalist
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Wasn't something similar written when Kristi won that set off a whole "racist headline!" too? Or maybe it was they worded it "Japanese-American" wins Gold?
 

prettykeys

Medalist
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Yes, yu-na's quite special for basically becoming the queen of skating in a country with a lackluster skating history. I would say Michelle's dominance is also special in that she became famous when skating was at its most popular in the United States after the Tonya/Nancy scandal, in a country with one of the greatest skating histories. If Korea fails to produce another champion after Yu-na leaves, skating in Korea will surely die a quick death. It means all the more that someone like Michelle is one of the most beloved of all time in a country with a long and illustrious history in skating.
You underestimate the impact YuNa has had on Korea. It's not so much that she became famous in a country that had a lackluster skating history, she literally kickstarted what looks to be a love affair with the sport. Even if another champion doesn't come along for an indefinite amount of time, YuNa's fairytale story, I think, will continue to inspire and motivate a ton of youngsters who can now dream of being like her. And they will probably have far more support than YuNa could have ever dreamed of when she first started out. So no, I disagree, Michelle's stardom is not "all the more", to me. It seems far easier to become a star in a sport that peaked in popularity and infamy back then in the US. It seems far easier to become a champion from a country that has a history of producing champions.

However, it seems that this kind of talk is missing the most important points. I'm not a huge of resumes and lists of medals. I think the manner of winning (or losing) is the most important. pangtongfan's post seemed like a tongue-in-cheek jab at those who want to trumpet people's careers over others'--there are lots of skaters with impressive careers. When Michelle lost, she still gave it her all and accepted it gracefully--in 1998 she was silver despite skating flawlessly (IMO). And when she won, she won gloriously, making casual fans take notice, adults cry, and kids cheer. The way she skated was special. There is no reason to put down others' achievements and claim they aren't that great. No one and nothing can take away from Michelle's talent, period.

It was poor word choice, they should have used youngster or something similar.
*gasp* Are you saying Michelle was not young?? *indignant* ;)

Hughes Good as Gold
American beats out Kwan, Slutzkaya
This kind of headline would have been perfect: Name of winner in the big headline, nationality in the second, smaller headline. Just a bare "American beats Kwan", while not particularly offensive to me, strikes me as a bit... :think: ...vague. Would I have been offended at a title that said, "Michelle beats Michelle"? (if it occurred) - nah, but it's not the same. "Chinese beats Kwan" would have been a bit odd, too. "Woman outskates Kwan", ditto.
 

ashdustannie

Spectator
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Sorry, I think my post came across a different way than I intended. There's a reason I said Michelle's dominance is "also" special, not more special. "All the more" doesn't mean "more than Yu-na", it means there is also something special in that there is significance to the fact that Michelle became popular in the sport during the time that the sport happened to be at its most popular in the United States, a country that already had a long history of greatness in the sport. It's a great thing for Michelle, if anything. Although Michelle never had the same kind of stress Yu-na had with an entire country's hopes upon her, Michelle still had her own different stresses which were much less than Yu-na's but still considerable, such as dealing with constant phenoms from her own country coming up and occasionally stealing her crown (which in a country with such a strong record as the US, throughout ten years, was a given)

You're right that trumpeting people's competitive histories doesn't mean much in the long run, Sonja Henie's competitive career would kick anyone's in the butt. I guess I just had a gut feeling that pangtongfan's post was not so "tongue-in-cheek", I've just heard similar shtick before, and I also think such "trumpeting" posts are to be expected in a thread dedicated to a certain skater. It's just the nature of fandoms. I accept there are fans of other skaters and I myself enjoyed Sarah and Tara's performances, but in his comparisons he bunched Kwan and Hughes together which I thought was laughable. Again it's all quite immature, meaningless stuff, forgive me for going over the top as I tend to do in my fan worship
 
Last edited:

demarinis5

Gold for the Winter Prince!
Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Thanks for posting this very well written article. The Kween looks fab in her red dress and love her shoes.
 

rtureck

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Yes, I can just make a case of Tara winning purely on the basis of her tech.
sure that is your opinion, but the judges made the case on both tech and presentation at Nagano. I stated that I agree with the judges. Then think about it Tara's tech was awesome at Nagano. She did 3 loop/3 loop. 8 years later the OGM attempted but did not complete a single triple loop at Turino. 12 years after Tara's win at Nagano, the OGM did not even attempt one triple loop. Talk about sports should go forward, the current OGM is loopless, and yes I do bow to Tara's superior tech skills.

And no, I don't care about your opinion and criteria, which I disagree with. Michelle's presentation in 1998 was better than Tara's for the kinds of reasons that MKFSfan and others have outlined (TO ME, duhhhHHH)

Oh duhh!!!! right back at you, the judges gave MK higher presentatin at nats. That was the point I was making that I agree with the judges. I never said kwan's prsentation was better at Nagano. (this is the lp we are talking about of course, at Nagano, Kwan's marks on both were higher in the sp)
 
Last edited:

prettykeys

Medalist
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
sure that is your opinion, but the judges made the case on both tech and presentation at Nagano. I stated that I agree with the judges. Then think about it Tara's tech was awesome at Nagano. She did 3 loop/3 loop. 8 years later the OGM attempted but did not complete a single triple loop at Turino. 12 years after Tara's win at Nagano, the OGM did not even attempt one triple loop. Talk about sports should go forward, the current OGM is loopless, and yes I do bow to Tara's superior tech skills.
And now we go off on a tangent that has relevance to the discussion in what obscure way? There is a difference between should and did; I am glad that you appear to know the difference...(not.) Also I do not believe that Figure Skating is a sport about "going forward". Some other posters adhere to this train of thought, but Figure Skating as I understand it is multidirectional in excellence. Hence, I could care less about your craptacular one-track-minded opinion, but thanks for sharing.

Oh duhh!!!! right back at you, the judges gave MK higher presentatin at nats. That was the point I was making that I agree with the judges. I never said kwan's prsentation was better at Nagano. (this is the lp we are talking about of course, at Nagano, Kwan's marks on both were higher in the sp)
Hiding behind the ol' scores. *Yawn* Because in 6.0, judges marked consistently from competition to competition; judges marked consistently between themselves in national and international competitions; because a 6.0 presentation in one performance means anything lesser than that deserves less than a 6.0 even if the same skater's "reserved" skating is still incredible; because skating order didn't have an impact................................................................................. :rolleye:

Nahh, I will agree with MKFSfan and the other posters who said that they'd give the tech at Nagano to Lipinski and the presentation to Kwan - but that I agree with the outcome regardless, because in my view Lipinski's presentation was pretty darn good as well and the tie-breaker in my mind should defer to the tech - it's more objective.

But uHHhh oH wait the judges gave the tech and presentation to Tara and that's how it was and I agree and that's my argument. Plus she did a triple loop, holy crap the triple loop. and a bit of a fluTz but who cares they judges still counted it so it counts as a real lutz, the judges r right. :rolleye:
 

dorispulaski

Wicked Yankee Girl
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Country
United-States
The view of the triple loop as desperately difficult is a new one.

The first triple jump ever landed was a triple loop, by Dick Button.

In the 1980's and 1990's, it was thought that the 3F and 3Lz were both significantly harder.
Were it not so, Midori Ito would have ruled the 1980's, but instead it was the era of Kat Witt, who mostly had only 3T and 3S and 2A. (Of course, figures had something to do with it...) Midori had both a double loop triple loop combination and a triple loop triple loop combination. Here's a video of her doing an assortment of both jumps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Orxxwvldw5A

BTW, Tara's 2A was not veryl good, and that should be mentioned along with the flutz, AFAIR.
It was always small, slightly underrotated and often quite iffy on the landing.

Here's her 2A in the long program at Nagano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hsxdjv-NGTc#t=0m40s

BTW, her flutz was not a slight flutz-the edge wobbled and then took off on a clear inside edge.
 
Last edited:

rtureck

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Also I do not believe that Figure Skating is a sport about "going forward". Some other posters adhere to this train of thought, but Figure Skating as I understand it is multidirectional in excellence. Hence, I could care less about your craptacular one-track-minded opinion, but thanks for sharing.

Oh duhh!!!, even track and field is multidirectional in excellence. I did not said FS is a sports just about going forward. I think all sports should be about going forward. So do not craptacularly misquote me

Nahh, I will agree with MKFSfan and the other posters who said that they'd give the tech at Nagano to Lipinski and the presentation to Kwan - but that I agree with the outcome regardless, because in my view Lipinski's presentation was pretty darn good as well and the tie-breaker in my mind should defer to the tech - it's more objective.

I couldn't care less that you think tech should be the tie breaker, . The rules in 1998 clearly gave the tie break to presentation for the lp. That is if skater A scores 6.0 tech and 5.9 presentation, and skater B scores 5.9 for tech and 6.0 for presentation the tie breaker is the presenation mark.

Oh duhh, didn't I said Tara won by both tech and presentation?

But uHHhh oH wait the judges gave the tech and presentation to Tara and that's how it was and I agree and that's my argument.

Oh, I thought you siad you can make the case of Tara wining just on tech alone.
Plus she did a triple loop, holy crap the triple loop. and a bit of a fluTz but who cares they judges still counted it so it counts as a real lutz, the judges r right. :rolleye:

What do you mean by she did "a triple loop". She did triple loop/triple loop combo. I mean nowadays triple loop is a rare thing among OGM just look at our or your looples OGM . Are you confused, because you hvaen't been seening too many triple loops, and took a triple loop/triple loop combo for a single triple loop
 
Last edited:

prettykeys

Medalist
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Oh duhh!!!, even track and field is multidirectional in excellence. I did not said FS is a sports about going forward. I think all sports should be about going forward. So do not craptacularly misquote me

Oh duhh, didn't I said Tara won by both tech and presentation?

Oh, I thought you siad you can make the case of Tara wining just on tech alone.

What do you mean by she did "a triple loop". She did triple loop/triple loop combo. I mean nowadays triple loop is a rare thing among OGM just look at our or your looples OGM . Are you confused, because you hvaen't been seening too many triple loops, and took a triple loop/triple loop combo for a single triple loop
bwahahaha.

Encore:

I did not said FS is a sports about going forward.

I think all sports should be about going forward.
:disapp: :laugh:

Yeah...if anyone else wants to address this jumble of slop, feel free. Ohhh wait, dorispulaski did, but rtureck is overwhelmed, I guess. ;)
 

rtureck

Final Flight
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Yeah...if anyone else wants to address this jumble of slop, feel free. Ohhh wait, dorispulaski did, but rtureck is overwhelmed, I guess. ;)

I guess Tara's triple loop/ triple loop combo is spectacularly overwhelming. But I am not overwhelmed to the point of minimizing her triple loop/ triple loop combo just "a triple loop". I still know what is the tie breaker for lp in 1998, it was the presentation mark not the tech mark.

Talk about Tara's double axel. I think her 2a techique is a bit unconventional, that does not mean her 2a was not good. She was a roller skater champ before she took on figure skating seriously , it seems like she was applying some of her roller skating technique to her axel
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
The view of the triple loop as desperately difficult is a new one.

Indeed. It is only now, for the 2010-2011 season, that the value of a triple loop has raised to 5.1 and the value of a triple flip lowered to 5.3.

Maybe the ISU, too, is wondering where the loop jump went and is trying to encourage more skaters to try it.

Another new rule change that might have the same effect (to encourage triple loop attempts) is the one that limits the number of double Axels to two.
 

prettykeys

Medalist
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
I guess Tara's triple loop/ triple loop combo is spectacularly overwhelming. But I am not overwhelmed to the point of minimizing her triple loop/ triple loop combo just "a triple loop". I still know what is the tie breaker for lp in 1998, it was the presentation mark not the tech mark.
First of all, I never said Tara's 3Lo-3Lo was "just a triple loop" - I was laughing at your comments on the 3Lo as if it's particularly special. That is why dorispulaski made the comment that "the 3Lo as desperately overwhelming is a new one." You are the only one suggesting it as such, and using as "supporting evidence" various Olympic gold medalists who did not do it recently--while ignoring the fact that many other medalists or off-podium finishers actually do successful 3Lo's, too. Your weak reasoning is further weakened by the fact that many OG medalists have lacked/missed various jumps for whatever reason. In 1992 Kristi didn't do a triple Salchow. In 1994 Oksana was missing a bunch of jumps I don't care to watch her performances to pick out. In 1998, Tara was missing a triple Lutz. In 2002, Sarah was missing a triple Lutz. In 2006, Shizuka did not do a triple toe loop as well as the triple loop. YuNa never planned the triple loop throughout the whole season--but if she did not win gold, then Mao would have won--with two brilliant triple axels but no triple Salchow or Lutz. Hence, I am desperately underwhelmed by this interpretation of the significance of the 3Lo.

I am well aware of Tara's 3Lo-3Lo, which I have commented on long ago in this forum, but I believe it was my original argument that Tara's technical performance was above and beyond what Michelle laid out (or could have laid out)--and that combination is one of the factors. :confused: So, it is not clear what bone you have to pick with me, and by your repeated post editing and increasingly sloppier spelling and writing, I would guess maybe I hit some kind of nerve with you? (Or perhaps you are just sloppy by nature.) 4/9 judges at Nagano gave Tara and Michelle a tie on presentation, 5/9 already gave Michelle a higher presentation score. Saying that Michelle's Nats performance would have pushed international judges at Nagano to give her yet higher presentation marks is a stretch and a speculation I do not engage in. There are Michelle fans and skating purists who even think that Michelle may even have been undercredited on her tech, because she put out all the standard 5 jumps in a technically clean manner (with the saved landing on the flip.) Regardless, the judges unanimously said Tara owned the technical that night. :p See? I can still make a case for Tara winning because of her tech, which continues to be impressive today--not just for the 3Lo-3Lo (omg omg omg 3Lo?? TWO OF THEM?? IN COMBINATION? so magical! 3Lo) but also because of the layout, the fact that she spreads her jumps out throughout the program, and doesn't even do her most difficult elements right at the beginning.

Indeed. It is only now, for the 2010-2011 season, that the value of a triple loop has raised to 5.1 and the value of a triple flip lowered to 5.3.

Maybe the ISU, too, is wondering where the loop jump went and is trying to encourage more skaters to try it.
The 3Lo didn't go anywhere. Mao Asada did it, Joannie Rochette did it, Laura Lepisto did it...Mirai Nagasu did it. All the top 5 finishers in Vancouver did it, except YuNa. I guess ISU didn't like her winning so dominantly without the 3Lo - but how cute that they raise it just enough that the 3F and the 3Lz are still worth more. I guess that's a sign - the 3Lo is desperately overwhelming, but the 3F and 3Lz are mission impossibles. :laugh:

ETA: The judges weren't unanimous about Tara's tech advantage over Michelle. The US judge said Michelle was just as good at her tech, and better on presentation. :cool:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
The US judge said Michelle was just as good at her tech, and better on presentation. :cool:

For what its worth :) , I agree with the U.S. judge. Michelle did 7 triples and a double Axel, despite not having her full repertoire to draw on (her 3T/3T) because of her broken foot. Tara did fine, too.

In presentation -- puh-lease. Michelle is Michelle, the other girls are not. :)

I think the reason that the triple loop comes in for so much discussion is because training it seems to lead to career-ending chronic injuries, disproportionately to the adverse effects of other elements. Tara compulsively did dozens of them non-stop in practice, and neither her coach nor her mother could make her stop.

When Michelle's hip situation forced her to omit the loop in her last couple of years of competition there was a certain amount of sentiment along the lines, "See, Michelle can win championships without a loop, so why should I do one and ruin my health, too?"

By the way, the U.S. judge in question was Joe Inman, right? Inman, a professional musician and music teacher, was known in those days as a dyed-in-the-wool Michelle judge. He liked superb musical interpretation and was not afraid to let his marks reflect his passion.

But in 2002 he put Michelle third. Booo. His flimsy excuse was, "Well, Michelle was the third best, after Sarah and Iriina."

So? Is that any reason to turn traitor? :biggrin:

(I guess Inman was only dyed-in-the-skein after all.)

----------------

Edited to add: Heh heh. I love it when my post accidentally becomes the first post at the top of a new page. That way, my opinion rules for the next fifteen posts (depending on how you have set your preferences).
 
Last edited:

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
What's so impressive about Tara's technical content is not just the 3Loop-3Loop but also the 3Toe-3Sal at THE VERY END OF THE PROGRAM.

That is ballsy as all get out and it also worked with the music. Part of why it was such a special performance that deserved to win Olympic Gold.
 

prettykeys

Medalist
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
What's so impressive about Tara's technical content is not just the 3Loop-3Loop but also the 3Toe-3Sal at THE VERY END OF THE PROGRAM.

That is ballsy as all get out and it also worked with the music. Part of why it was such a special performance that deserved to win Olympic Gold.
Absolutely ballsy and impressive that she mostly succeeded. Did Tara ever do an interview that asked her why the layout of her program was constructed like that? Typically, the most contrived aspect of even a technically and artistically superb program is how predictably the most difficult elements are put in the first couple of seconds. Did Tara do her program the way she did because she liked to ease into her program and "warm-up"? Or did she adhere to some sort of code of skating integrity that insisted she stick to her favourite interpretation?

For what its worth :) , I agree with the U.S. judge. Michelle did 7 triples and a double Axel, despite not having her full repertoire to draw on (her 3T/3T) because of her broken foot. Tara did fine, too.
I know. I thought it was cute that it was the U.S. judge that pulled for Michelle, and I wouldn't protest against that decision too hard, although I've explained my reasoning on why I think Tara truly deserved it, even if Michelle had given her best Lyra Angelica in Nagano. I've heard of some elite music competitions whose standards are so high than in some years they refuse to give out any winners, and on some very rare occasions, give titles to more than one outstanding individual. If Olympic figure skating was like that, I wish both Tara and Michelle had been given golds in 1998. Others have gotten golds with lesser performances.

As for the 3Loop, I remain steadfast in my assertion that it hasn't gone anywhere. Before I left for work, I didn't bother to edit my last post in saying that the top 8 ladies in the FS in Vancouver (after YuNa) performed it cleanly according to the protocols. I don't know how difficult it is relative to the other jumps, but most top ladies don't seem deterred at all. I shrug.
 

janetfan

Match Penalty
Joined
May 15, 2009
Here is an article written after Michelle's injury forced her out of the '06 Olympics.

http://www.slate.com/id/2136059

Although it is a somewhat brutal assessment of Michelle (and skating fans too) it made me think of what could have been - and even mm's "alternate universe."

Still, I think I prefer this universe and although Michelle may have missed out on winning the OGM her status as "legend" will forever dwarf the accomplishments of Tara and Sarah.

Skating is truly an unusual "sport" and to this day Oksana is still remembered for one magical moment, one SP where she dazzled us and the judges enough to go on and capture the OGM even with a subpar LP. Like Tara and Sarah who followed her it would be the last title Oksana would ever win.

Some like to talk about the "body of work" and others are quick to note that if Michelle had won Gold in '98 we might never have seen some of the glorious programs that followed both Nagano and SLC.

I wonder if Yuna and Mao are influenced by Michelle's legacy, which not only includes five WC's - but this wonderful "body of work." I think it is good that Mao is continuing and doubt that we have seen her best yet. I feel the same way about Yuna as well.

Only time will tell but OGM or not it feels to me as if Michelle is the Gold standard that today's greatest skaters look to. I don't think either Yuna or Mao wants to be remembered like Tara. I think they want to leave a body of work and a lasting legacy that equals or surpasses Michelle.

They want to become legends too.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2009
I'm with you on this one, Janetfan!

It's interesting that before the 1998 Olympics, Michelle said something like this: "In the future, when people are doing quintuple jumps and skating is all weird, I hope they still remember me." Rather prophetic of her.

When you think about it, there are a lot of people remembered for a gold medal--six people every Olympics, counting singles, pairs, and ice--but not a lot remembered just as themselves. Certainly the skater you named yourself after, Janet Lynn, is one of them. Michelle is another. That's not to say that everyone has to place these skaters at the top of their personal "best" lists. But there's a reason that Janet and Michelle are at the top of so many lists.
 
Top