It was poor word choice, they should have used youngster or something similar.
You're such an ageist!
It was poor word choice, they should have used youngster or something similar.
^ This.
Big ado over nothing.
Mountain out of a molehill...
You're such an ageist!
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.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.
*gasp* Are you saying Michelle was not young?? *indignant*It was poor word choice, they should have used youngster or something similar.
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.Hughes Good as Gold
American beats out Kwan, Slutzkaya
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.Yes, I can just make a case of Tara winning purely on the basis of her tech.
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)
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.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.
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.................................................................................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)
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.
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.
bwahahaha.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
I did not said FS is a sports about going forward.
:disapp:I think all sports should be about going forward.
Yeah...if anyone else wants to address this jumble of slop, feel free. Ohhh wait, dorispulaski did, but rtureck is overwhelmed, I guess.
The view of the triple loop as desperately difficult is a new one.
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 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.
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.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 US judge said Michelle was just as good at her tech, and better on presentation.
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?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.
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.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.