Johnny Weir article...o dear o dear

Mathman said:

That's a good question. Historically, Poland suffered the geographical misfortune of being located between Germany and Russia -- a rock and a hard place, indeed. I don't know how all that affected figure skating -- but I always found it suspicious that Polish judges favored Drobiazko and Vanagas, while Lithuanian judges went out of their way to help Zagorska and Suidik. Ingrained racial memories of the glory days of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1569-1795)?

(By the way, I just looked it up, and Zagorska and Suidik have the same number of national titles as Michelle Kwan -- nine. According to Wikipedia, Dobriaszko and Vanagas have 13. )

And that would be the East German judge. Four years earlier he cast the deciding vote for Oksana Baiul against Nancy Kerrigan.

Click to expand...

I don't know how to slice apart quotes. Your quote is in answer to several other quotes...but I wanted to get these sections in.

A friend of mine who was fluent in Polish once conversed with another friend who was fluent in Lithuanian. Each spoke his/her own language, but they both understood each other. Fascinating to watch. I gather there's a certain amount of sympatico between Poland and Lithuania culturally. For example, I think that both are Roman Catholic countries predominantly, rather than Eastern Orthodox as many other surrounding countries are. In any case, I can see them supporting one another's skaters for a host of reasons.

I can see why Drobiazko and Vanagas and the Siudeks would be national champions for so long. They really were the only world-class skaters in their respective countries during that time, much the way Julia Sebestyen was in Hungary. They kept their quality high and did well in world standings during most of that time, which was admirable. (D and V were undermarked quite frequently, I thought. But that's another fish to fry.) It's more unexpected that Michelle would win nine championships in the U.S. because the field was deeper here. Look at the people who almost knocked her off--Sasha, Naomi Nari Nam in that annus mirabilis of hers, Sarah Hughes. Yet Michelle prevailed.

The German judge was Jan Hoffman, himself a near-win in the 1980 Olympics. Wasn't he coached by Jutta Mueller, Witt's coach? He lost out to Robin Cousins, which I thought was a good outcome, since Cousins was one of the most elegant skaters ever plus a great jumper, though politics might have been part of it. Wasn't Carlo Fassi doing some kind of horse-trading for that win? In any case, I remember the commentary in '98 about Hoffman's having voted for Oksana in '94 and Kwan in '98. Whoever brought it up pointed out that Hoffman valued artistry both times, and I've always had a soft spot for him since then. I vaguely recall hearing that he's a decent chap and has been well-liked in the skating world since his own competitive days.

Blades of Passion said:

Johnny has said nothing about Evan that I find untruthful. His comment of "slore" was rather tame compared to what Evan had been saying; he could have been far harsher if he wanted too. Instead, he simply shrugged Evan off with a funny aside.

Click to expand...

Bottom line is that Johnny has taken part in this "fight" and is not some innocent victim who has done nothing wrong. He could have taken the high road - but he resorted to the mud slinging - which makes him no better than Evan.

Blades of Passion said:

Would you have preferred that he LIED in response to Chelsea's question (I'm guessing yes, since that's more "PC" with regards to the issue)?

Click to expand...

He simply could have nodded and said, "Yes, I roomed with Tanith." What's wrong with saying that and leaving the innuendo and suggestion out of it?

ETA: I just watched the interview again. Chelsea made comments towards Johnny being gay - which he did not respond to. She also asked whether he liked Russian men or women and he responded "Russian culture". If he was able to get around all of these suggestions - why couldn't he have done the same thing with the Tanith comment?

Blades of Passion said:

Also, note the statement "that's not what I meant" is different than completely changing your stance. Johnny of course would not want to specifically call anyone out, that's simply rude. He hinted and suggested but there was never a concrete statement. As such, saying "that's not what I meant" gets people off his back about the issue while not actually creating a lie. Because, indeed, Johnny never meant to directly call Evan out. You can be sure he would rather talk about 100,000 other issues rather than Evan's sexuality, so the "damage control" interview got it out of the way so he wouldn't have to waste his time with it any further. He didn't need to make that statement to somehow preserve his career.

Click to expand...

But if Johnny is so truthful, says what he wants, and doesn't care what people think....why did he even give the "that's not what I meant" interview? To me, that just shows that he absolutely does care what people think about his statement and himself in general.

Johnny is all about being the "outrageous one". IMO, he is just like Lady Gaga. Her "this is who I am" crap is practically laughable as she is all image and shock value.

As for Evan, you say you know him. What on earth did he do to you, for you to be spreading rumours and being so hateful towards him??

janetfan said:

And yet Johnny himself said Evan deserved to be on the podium......:think:

Click to expand...

That's nice, I don't agree. Johnny thinks Plushenko should have won (with himself and Evan in 2nd/3rd, either order) and I wouldn't put Plushenko on the podium either. For me, Takahashi and Kozuka clearly skated the best. With Johnny's mindset, he probably thinks those two should have been off the podium because they fell. He very much subscribes to the 6.0 "skating clean is uber-important" mentality.

Thank you Mathman for the information/observation.
From there, then, what can be discussed (of course other than that Johnny vs Evan)? And how?

If we simplify the variation of the possible attitudes toward what is underlying in the quotes of Johnny at the start of this thread :
A) Deny the existence of politicking. Be the scores surprisingly high or low, it's the consequence of judges' subjectivities.
B) Take politickings as a reality and leave it as they are. Necessary evil. No whinings.
C) Take politickings as unfaithful to the public and discuss the possibility to avoid them.

I personally choose C and think that such unfaithfulness will eventually kill the sport.
I know it won't disappear completely or immediately..
But the way things are leaves such confrontations among the skaters themselves and among the fans as you can see right here.

Come to think of it, doesn't the OAC get into these things?

i love to skate said:

Bottom line is that Johnny has taken part in this "fight" and is not some innocent victim who has done nothing wrong. He could have taken the high road - but he resorted to the mud slinging - which makes him no better than Evan.

Click to expand...

Johnny's comments were not bigoted and ridiculous, Evan's were. He could have taken the high road but I have no qualms with "slore", given that he is an entertainer and it was pretty funny.

i love to skate said:

ETA: I just watched the interview again. Chelsea made comments towards Johnny being gay - which he did not respond to. She also asked whether he liked Russian men or women and he responded "Russian culture". If he was able to get around all of these suggestions - why couldn't he have done the same thing with the Tanith comment?

Click to expand...

You'll have to tell me what the Tanith comment was because I'm not sure what you're talking about.

i love to skate said:

But if Johnny is so truthful, says what he wants, and doesn't care what people think....why did he even give the "that's not what I meant" interview? To me, that just shows that he absolutely does care what people think about his statement and himself in general.

Click to expand...

Everyone in the public eye has to maintain a certain level of amiability. But, as I said, Johnny doesn't want to deal with talking about Evan's sexuality and he got a bunch of mail and questions regarding it. Thus, he said "that's not what I meant" so people would shut up. He wasn't in danger of losing endorsements or skating invitations as a result of his wink.

i love to skate said:

Johnny is all about being the "outrageous one". IMO, he is just like Lady Gaga. Her "this is who I am" crap is practically laughable as she is all image and shock value.

Click to expand...

I find your readings to be very surface level. I'm not especially huge on Gaga, but this statement is rather philistine. Her lyrics and political statements extend FAR beyond simple shock value and the mere image of most pop stars.

People who find something like Lady Gaga to be "overly outrageous" tend be more closed minded in the first place, in my experience. Funny how many people in modern society are still scared of the unusual or the provocative. Those outdated puritanical religious values still have quite a grasp on mankind, it seems.

i love to skate said:

As for Evan, you say you know him. What on earth did he do to you, for you to be spreading rumours and being so hateful towards him??

Click to expand...

First of all, I don't hate anyone. Too strong of a word. I can maybe hate ideas or inanimate objects, but not people.

You make it seem like people need to specifically do something to you in order to dislike them, though. There are certainly MANY people in the World I have interacted with aside from just Evan (or that I don't need to interact with to form a further opinion, like George Bush *vomit*) and dislike solely because of who they are.

Furthermore, I don't really give a crap about who someone is off the ice when it comes to judging their performances ON the ice (although a person's personality is inextricably linked to the kind of performer they are, in some ways). I find Evan's skating to be artless, underwhelming and overmarked; that is the ONLY reason why I am upset about his placements at competitions. When lackluster films win Oscars I'm not pleased either. It doesn't mean I dislike the actual filmmakers as people (and vice versa - there are filmmakers who I don't particularly care for as people, but who have produced art that I admire).

Blades of Passion said:

You'll have to tell me what the Tanith comment was because I'm not sure what you're talking about.

Click to expand...

Huh? This is the whole issue we are talking about

Chelsea said, "You roomed with Evan's girlfriend - ex girlfriend Tanith Belbin"
Then Johnny did the wink, made the "friend" comment and followed that up with the insinuation. He simply could have said, "Yes, I roomed with Tanith,"

Blades of Passion said:

I find your readings to be very surface level. I'm not especially huge on Gaga, but this statement is rather philistine. Her lyrics and political statements extend FAR beyond simple shock value and the mere image of most pop stars.

People who find something like Lady Gaga to be "overly outrageous" tend be more closed minded in the first place, in my experience. Funny how many people in modern society are still scared of the unusual or the provocative. Those outdated puritanical religious values still have quite a grasp on mankind, it seems.

Click to expand...

As for Gaga, perhaps people simply find her annoying, not a very good singer, and find her songs repetitive and lacking substance. She is outrageous - she has said it many times herself that she loves "shock value". I don't think this means that people are close minded.

Exactly what lyrics of Gaga's are you talking about? The ground breaking lyrics of Just Dance, Poker Face, or Alejandro?

Blades of Passion said:

First of all, I don't hate anyone. Too strong of a word. I can maybe hate ideas or inanimate objects, but not people.

Furthermore, I don't really give a crap about who someone is off the ice when it comes to judging their performances ON the ice (although a person's personality is inextricably linked to the kind of performer they are, in some ways). I find Evan's skating to be artless, underwhelming and overmarked; that is the ONLY reason why I am upset about his placements at competitions.

Click to expand...

You called Evan a hateful, irritating, and boring person. To me that seems to be bordering on hate...

Can't we discuss the problems the judging system itself has? Not the problems Johnny or Evan or Lady Gaga has ....

Or should I start a new thread for it before the admins close this one again?

i love to skate said:

Huh? This is the whole issue we are talking about

Chelsea said, "You roomed with Evan's girlfriend - ex girlfriend Tanith Belbin"
Then Johnny did the wink, made the "friend" comment and followed that up with the insinuation. He simply could have said, "Yes, I roomed with Tanith,"

Click to expand...

Oh that's what you meant. I thought there was something else. Johnny could have just said "Yes, I roomed with Tanith" if he wanted to be completely boring and also ignore a lie. Chelsea specifically said "Evan's ex girlfriend", which is of course laughable. They were never together and Johnny pointed out the absurdity of it without specifically bringing Tanith and Evan into the talk.

i love to skate said:

Exactly what lyrics of Gaga's are you talking about?

Click to expand...

Many of her songs and the way she presents herself in general make bold statements about sexuality and self-identity. Compare that to someone like Beyonce, who is surely a great entertainer, but really says nothing other than the stock idea of "look at me, I'm a strong independent woman."

i love to skate said:

You called Evan a hateful, irritating, and boring person. To me that seems to be bordering on hate...

Click to expand...

Someone else being hateful doesn't cause me to hate them. Just calling it as I see it. There are a great many hateful people in the World and it wouldn't do any good to simply match their intolerance. That doesn't mean I shouldn't critique them or point out my dislike when it becomes the subject of discussion, though. I can only apply thoughtfulness and hope to maybe expand the viewpoints of others.

As much as I would have loved to see Johnny get on the podium in Vancouver, I don't think he deserved it. I probably would have had him fourth. IMO 2006 was the year he really had a good shot at a medal, but unfortunately he didn't skate to his full potential in his long program. Maybe if he hadn't had such a poor Nationals in 2009 and missed being on the world team he would have had more momentum going into 2010. It seemed like in 2010 he was playing it safe to make sure he even got a spot on the Olympic team.

The real issue here is Johnny's honesty.

Either A: a judge came to him and admitted he lost a medal due to politics or B: he made it up. If it's B, he is a disturbed young man and needs help. If it is A--good for him for discussing it.

Believing you weren't graded fairly in a subjective sport is one thing. Believing that you wouldn't have won a medal NO MATTER HOW WELL YOU SKATED due to some "deals" being made is another all together. Never mind if Johnny lost the good favor of the association through his own fault. The COP was supposed to eliminate this type of thing. If it hasn't, get rid of it and bring back the 6.0 grading system. A lot of people like it better, anyway.

Sorry guys, but all off-topic posts on this thread are about to disappear. (PM me if you wish to hold forth on the First Amendment. (I won't snswer, but PM me anyway -- I like getting PMs. ) )

Just in case anyone forgot, here is the topic of this thread, taken from the first post:

Johnny Weir, posted by Taan: “I felt going into the Olympics that I had very little support from my own country, from the U.S. Figure Skating federation. I went out there and I did everything I could possibly do, and I knew going into it that a medal wasn’t in my sights. It was political. In figure skating, there’s this thing, there’s a way that you can say, ‘Okay, if you help this skater, our skater, and promote him and push him to the top of the podium and help him get there, we will help yours."... There’s a lot of that that goes on, and America likes to try and stay away from that issue, but everyone does it. I skated great, Evan skated great, we probably both should have been on the podium somewhere, but you know, the team official came to me and said, ‘We didn’t know you were going to skate like that.’ ”

“It’s very hard, but you know, someone literally came to my coach while I was crying behind a curtain and said, ‘We wish we had known Johnny was going to skate that well, because we were pushing the two other Americans.’ "

Click to expand...

sorcerer said:

From there, then, what can be discussed...? And how?

If we simplify the variation of the possible attitudes toward what is underlying in the quotes of Johnny at the start of this thread:

A) Deny the existence of politicking. Be the scores surprisingly high or low, it's the consequence of judges' subjectivities.

B) Take politickings as a reality and leave it as they are. Necessary evil. No whinings.

C) Take politickings as unfaithful to the public and discuss the possibility to avoid them.

Click to expand...

Here is what I think about that. Of course we should fight will all might and main for fair and objective judging.

This, however, is a fight that we will never win and likewise never lose. 90% of the people in positions of influence in the skating world are 90% honest.

sorverer said:

I personally choose C and think that such unfaithfulness will eventually kill the sport.

Come to think of it, doesn't the OAC get into these things?

Click to expand...

Do you mean the IOC (International Olympic Committee)? This organization is more corrupt than the ISU ever thought of being. The real scandal of the 2002 Winter Games was not the figure skating pairs dust-up, but the revelations of how the Salt Lake City organizing committee out-bribed aoll the rival cities to win the bid in the first place.

Actually, I am not sure to what extent judging controversies are responsible for the decline in public interest in skating in the U.S. In common with all judged endeavors, in figure skating people have always believed that the whole thing is fixed. Still, we go out and cheer for our favorite to deliver such a knock-out blow that the bad guys have to slink back home with their tails between thier legs, deal or no deal.

Poodlepal said:

The real issue here is Johnny's honesty.

Either A: a judge came to him and admitted he lost a medal due to politics or B: he made it up. If it's B, he is a disturbed young man and needs help. If it is A--good for him for discussing it.

Believing you weren't graded fairly in a subjective sport is one thing. Believing that you wouldn't have won a medal NO MATTER HOW WELL YOU SKATED due to some "deals" being made is another all together. Never mind if Johnny lost the good favor of the association through his own fault. The COP was supposed to eliminate this type of thing. If it hasn't, get rid of it and bring back the 6.0 grading system. A lot of people like it better, anyway.

Click to expand...

I think there is a middle ground between A and B. It seems pretty clear to me that the spirit of what the USFSA official was trying to convey was something like this: Evan and Jeremy were setting the world on fire (comparatively speaking) for the two years leading up to the 2010 Olympics. Naturally the federation got out in front of the bandwagon to lead the cheers.

Then Johnny skated super at the Olympics, and the sentiment was, gee, Johnny wasn' t through after all. Maybe we should have done some extra-curricular lobbying for Johnny, too -- along the lines, "hey judges, don't forget our three-time champ Johnny!"

Mathman said:

Then Johnny skated super at the Olympics, and the sentiment was, gee, Johnny wasn' t through after all. Maybe we should have done some extra-curricular lobbying for Johnny, too -- along the lines, "hey judges, don't forget our three-time champ Johnny!"

Click to expand...

Sorry - I don't buy this at all. It is just another case of Johnny whining.
And why would a US skating official of any significance say anything to Galina of all people. She is not American and coaches the current Russian Ladies champion. Puh-leeze, I don't think for a second that Galina gets inside information from important US Skating officials.

If Johnny is accusing US Skating of supporting the reigning WC and reigning US Natl champion - I say that sounds proper and why in the world wouldn't US Skating support Evan and Jeremy?

To show how ridiculous this is - please define "support" in this case. Is Johnny suggesting US Skating paid money or used other forms of bribery to get the judges of the men's events to mark Evan and Jeremy higher than Johnny?

Any links or vids .....I didn't think so

But let's play along with this and try to imagine that US Skating decided they did not like Evan or Jeremy. Let's say they threw all of their support behind Johnny. Exactly what is this "support" and how would it take a "good skate" from Johnny and somehow get him on the podium?

Since Johnny says in the article Evan belonged on the podium and someone said Johnny thought Plushy won that leaves Dai.

Who in the world thought Johnny outskated Dai in Vancouver?

This whole thing sounds ridiculous to me. Johnny should not once again blame US Skating for his shortcomings. He did skate very well in Vancouver - but the other guys skated better. Well enough to keep him off the podium

If skating is political as Johnny claims - then he should be playing the game better if he wants better results internationally. FTR, Johnny has always done better at Natls than he has at Intl events. Seems to me he should be whining about the international judges who placed him 6th in Vancouver - and not his own federation.

Mathman said:

..... Do you mean the IOC (International Olympic Committee)? .....

Click to expand...

No, I meant the Officials Assessment Committee of the ISU.
But now that I read this
http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=1951
it seems the OAC can't censor out abnormality if the politicked are plural, say more than three, and looks normal.

So one can say that improvements can be started from this OAC.

about Johnny

I guess when Johnny wears a Russian jacket, brags about how much love he has for Russia, it turns Americans off and they in turn give their support to Evan, Jeremy, etc. Johnny also talked bad about a judge who sent letters to other judges about judging fairly Plushenk and Joubert for their lack of "transitions". A skater never talks about judges but Johnny did. I like Johnny's skating but watching his tv shows I feel that he sometimes blows off discipline. Especially with the coach he had before Galina.

As I've said before, I enjoy Johnny's skating, but no way was it better than two of the four of the skaters ahead of him at the Olympics. One of those skaters would have to have been either Plushy, Daisuke, or Evan. Not a chance. Plushy may not have been at the top of his game, but even partway off his game, he's better than almost anyone else in the world today--and he came within two points of the gold. Evan may not be an immortally gifted skater, but he did a tremendous job, which greater experts than I have explained element by element. And Daisuke...even with that fall, he's poetry in motion, everything a great skater should be. Even if Johnny had stronger support from his federation, he could not have leapfrogged over any of those guys with the program he did.

I read the article. He often speaks to shock. That's fine. In addition to being a skater, Johnny is a performance artist and a provocateur by trade. (I don't mean that as an insult but as a description.) He doesn't need any kind of medal to thrive in the milieu where such talents are welcomed. Heck, Kurt Browning didn't need any kind of medal to become one of the greatest skaters ever! But as for complaining that skating is not set up correctly because it didn't honor him with a medal...well, this isn't the year. Too many good skaters in line ahead of him. It's like Rachael Flatt complaining that she was neglected in the ladies' line-up. (Except she wouldn't be so ungracious as to complain.) Of course it's disappointing not to medal at the Olympics. But disappointing isn't the same as unfair or unjust.

I think it's not the question of whether Johnny deserved to get bronze or to get 4th place (like several here including me think) that determines the truth/lie in Johnny's quotes.
Proving Johnny didn't deserve to be on the podium doesn't prove at all that he lies about what (he claims) he was told by an official.

And his quotes doesn't specify that that "someone" who spoke to his coach was an American at all.

Mathman said:

Sorry guys, but all off-topic posts on this thread are about to disappear.

Click to expand...

Yes but that way I learnt the Tom Cruise example thing that was very educative and informative, but you can delete it now

Little on topic, September - October Johnny and Stephane will be the big skaters of Koi

sorcerer said:

No, I meant the Officials Assessment Committee of the ISU.

But now that I read this
http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=1951
it seems the OAC can't censor out abnormality if the politicked are plural, say more than three, and looks normal.

So one can say that improvements can be started from this OAC.

Click to expand...

Oh, sorry.

Yes, the only thing this committee can do is investigate cases where one judges scores are mathematically out of line with the scores of the majority of the panel.

In fact, this emphassis on "scoring the same as everyone else" can backfire. A judge might give marks in accordance with what he thinks the other judges are likely to do, rather than according to what he saw on the ice.

Olympia said:

As I've said before, I enjoy Johnny's skating, but no way was it better than two of the four of the skaters ahead of him at the Olympics. One of those skaters would have to have been either Plushy, Daisuke, or Evan. Not a chance. Plushy may not have been at the top of his game, but even partway off his game, he's better than almost anyone else in the world today--and he came within two points of the gold. Evan may not be an immortally gifted skater, but he did a tremendous job, which greater experts than I have explained element by element.

Click to expand...

Yeah, Johnny's skating wasn't better than 2 of the 4 people ahead of him (I think you actually meant 3 of 5, he was in 6th remember). It was better than 4 of the 5 people ahead of him.

Really can't agree with your assessment of Plushenko. His jumping may have still been at the top of the competitive field, but his spins were the weakest out of anyone in the top 9 and his footwork deserved +0 GOE across the board. His speed and edging were lacking in general and his SP was abhorrent in terms of musical interpretation.

Evan and "tremendous" do not go together (2007 Nationals being the one exception). He didn't do a tremendous job, he did a respectable job. Respectable is not the same as excellent or artistic. "Element by element", as you say, Evan was roundly overscored. No single element he did deserved more than a +1 GOE, except for maybe his circular footwork in the SP, and the majority of his elements deserve +0 GOE (especially those Triple Axels, and the second Triple Axel in his LP should have been -1 across the board). His footwork in the LP should not have been called as a Level 4 either.

"OMG reigning Olympic Champion, OMG reigning World Champion." Whatever. They were not paragons of skating excellence above the rest of the field. They both displayed terrible artistry (Plushenko in the SP, Lysacek in the LP) and neither of them were even much better technically than Takahashi/Kozuka/Weir either. In terms of the fundamental glide of the blade on the ice, both were inferior to those 3 as well. If you release your mind from the constraints of how the judges scored them and who was being talked up the most, it becomes so clear.

seniorita said:

Yes but that way I learnt the Tom Cruise example thing that was very educative and informative, but you can delete it now

Click to expand...

I know, I know! I also found out on this thread that Lady Gaga has artistic substance. I always figured she was all schtick.

The part of my post that I was afraid you would respond to was the part about not answering PMs. I will do better, I promise.