Michelle Kwan's 1998 Olympic Long Program

doubleflutz · Oct 31, 2010

pangtongfan said:
Another fail. Kristi beat Michelle in artistic scores when they met at the Ultimate Four in 97 when Kwan was already in her prime and had some of her best programs (people might say they were even better than 98 had she actually skated them cleanly more), an even which Michelle won only after Kristi imploded on her jumps in the 2nd round after leading. Kristi was given a perfect 6.0 and almost all 5.9s for presentation in the short program by ISU judges who were probably biased to the amateurs before Michelle even skated. If Tara managed to tie Kwan in presentation by half the judges in the long program, it is silly to just say with certainty Kwan would easily get higher 2nd marks than Kristi.

Kristi improved her artistry immensely over her time as a pro. I loved her as both an eligible and a pro skater, she is probably my second favorite lady of all time, but the difference between competitive Kristi and pro Kristi is night and day. I don't even really like Lyra Angelica (I'm sure I'll be tarred and feathered for saying that, but it's probably my least favorite Michelle program, or at least my least favorite of her "major opus works"), but there is absolutely no comparison. Kristi's program was technically brilliant, but the music was just a huge mismatch for her personality and her performance skills at that time. Lyra kicks it's butt up one side and down the other. So does Tara's. Frankly, so does Midori's free skate from Calgary.

prettykeys · Oct 31, 2010

pangtongfan said:
6 triples and 7 triples is not the same thing when women who did 6 triples landed a triple lutz-triple toe, one of the hardest triple-triples out there. Lets say Nancy Kerrigan had landed 7 triples (with a triple toe-triple toe as well) would she have beaten Kristi with her performance in 1992? I am not saying Nancy is Michelle of course, but you get the point.

I'm trying to take into account the hard technical merits as well as the artistic strengths. You're right, just the pure # of triples isn't the only factor to consider in technical ability, but I don't think even a 3Lz-3T 6-jump program inherently overrides a 7 solo-triple program, unless there is something remarkable about the former. For example, Kristi's jumps were good, but she was no Midori Ito. I think technically-speaking, Nancy or Michelle's 7-triples would have beaten a 6-triple Kristi program. Then when you take presentation into account, the clean Michelle wins over a botched Kristi.

pangtongfan said:
And under COP Michelle would have only had 6 triples counted with her 98 performance since only 7 jump passes are allowed and 1 of them has to be a double axel. And we know Kwan in 98 wasnt doing any triple-triples at that point with her injury so that is out the window. Unless she made some significant alterations, which is possible but only a guess as we never saw Kwan at her best in COP but the general feeling is she wasnt as COP-suited, she would not beat Shizuka's more COP friendly programs over a 2 program total with just a 1 triple advantage.

Could you elaborate on what is more "CoP-friendly" about Shizuka's 2006 programs and why they had the advantage over Michelle's 1998 programs? Yes, you are right about the jumping-pass limitation, but even taking that into account. The main hesitation I would have over proposing a Michelle win is that Shizuka could have pulled in more triples if she needed to, a bunch of triple-triple combos even.

Mathman · Oct 31, 2010

Michelle would have won in 1988, 1992, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006, 2010, and 2012 (instead of just in 1998, 2002, and 2006, as happened in reality. :yes

But despite that...

Could you elaborate on what is more "CoP-friendly" about Shizuka's 2006 programs and why they had the advantage over Michelle's 1998 programs?

Michelle's 6.0 non-jump elements -- spins and step sequences -- were not designed for the CoP. She would have got all level ones and twos, even for her spiral. The CoP in those days gave levels for lots of details like changes of edges and positions that skaters didn't do in Michelle's day.

When the CoP first came out, Michelle made a deliberate choice to consentrate on quality and make up in GOE what she lost in levels. It didn't work. The GOEs for low level elements were so miniscule that she lost ground in the non-jump elements.

Ironically, after Michelle retired they tweaked the levels and GOEs in a way that she would have been more competitive, even without changing her program.

Blades of Passion · Nov 1, 2010

pangtongfan said:
WRONG. Kristi was always considered far stronger in artistry and presentation than Tara. Tara's presentation is the exact reason Tara needed Kwan to make major mistakes to score almost all her big wins, and that people were shocked at the Olympics when Kwan skated cleanly and actually lost to Tara.

Kristi's 1992 Olympic performance did not have better presentation than Lipinski's 1998 Olympic performance. Lipinski's 1998 Olympic performance was a special one and better than any other performance she had ever given. Those are the performances being compared, not Kristi's later performances. And, no, Kristi was not always considered to be incredibly artistic. She was considered to be a nice skater with a strong array of jumps prior to 1991. She improved after that (and was ultimately considered the most artistic of the 1992 field), but her presentation as an amateur did not reach the same level as Lu Chen or Michelle Kwan.

pangtongfan said:
A triple-triple sequence is not a triple-triple combination. A triple toe into triple salchow sequence is much easier than even a triple toe-triple toe combination. It is what people who cant do triple-triple combinations like Maria usually go to. For Tara it was something a little extra but hardly a big deal.

You are incorrect. There is a difference between a Triple Toe-Triple Salchow combination and a Triple Toe-Triple Salchow sequence. One of them has steps between them and one does not. Doing a half-loop between a Toeloop and a Salchow, and having no other steps or turns, makes it a combination. Lipinski did a COMBINATION. And, no, it is not easier (everyone is better at different moves of course but in the grand scheme of things it is objectively NOT easier).

pangtongfan said:
Another fail. Kristi beat Michelle in artistic scores when they met at the Ultimate Four in 97 when Kwan was already in her prime and had some of her best programs (people might say they were even better than 98 had she actually skated them cleanly more), an even which Michelle won only after Kristi imploded on her jumps in the 2nd round after leading.

Another fail on YOUR part, yes. Kristi in 1997 was a more mature skater than she was in 1992, which is the performance we are talking about. And, no, Kwan's 1997 program was certainly NOT considered at the same level as her 1998 Olympic program.

Aside from that, there is a thing called clout. Kwan was fresh of her first World title at the competition you speak of and was still a young girl. Kristi was an Olympic Champion and a Professional Champion many times over. Of course the judges would automatically prefer Kristi at that point in time.

pangtongfan said:
When Kristi skated left to skate were Ito, Kerrigan, Harding at her peak, and Bonaly. In 98 left to skate were Tara, a fat slumping Irina, past her prime Chen, and Butyrskaya. The potential standard in 98 which could not be known when the first skater of the final flight finished was alot higher in 92.

Judges were not using the technical mark as accurately back then. That was the first Olympics where every top female was actually trying at least 5 different Triple jumps and there wasn't yet a clear standard set about what the expectations were. Kristi was the overwhelming favorite for the title after the SP and thus 5 Triples in the LP was good enough for a split of 5.7's and 5.8's. It's clear that Kwan would have received the higher technical merit mark if those performances were put back-to-back.

pangtongfan said:
Yu Na would have destroyed any women in Olympic history with her Vancouver skates so the over 20 point margin over 2 programs means nothing. She was also overmarked a bit which exagerrated it more. Mao with 3 triple axels over the 2 programs would have still probably won any other Olympics in history, especialy under COP. Especialy considering Mao is considered a very good all around skater outside of the jumps too, even if people werent crazy of her 2010 programs.

Again, you ignore the fact that Mao made two mistakes in her performance, one of which was a major mistake by any standard. Joannie Rochette nearly beat her in the LP with a step-out on a jump and no 3-3 combination. Given that Michelle Kwan in her prime CERTAINLY could have done the CoP spins/footwork/spirals at least as well as Joannie, and that her performances were less technically flawed on the jumps and would have received higher presentation scores, I'm quite sure she would have been able to place above Mao.

pangtongfan said:
What you are saying on Michelle is purely speculation. People didnt say she was past her prime in 2004 when she did one of her greatest performances ever at Nationals and was favored to win Worlds. She mysteriously became past her prime once COP was interested.

Of course it's speculation, that's the point of this discussion. :scratch:

Michelle didn't compete on the Grand Prix at all for the 2004 season. Going into Nationals, the talk was that she would lose her title to Sasha Cohen. Sasha Cohen beat her in the SP and then Michelle roared back in the LP to take the title.

In 2005 it was clear that she was on a decline, without even taking CoP into consideration. She took her 3Loop out of her jump repertoire for the entire season, even though Nationals was still a 6.0 competition, and at Worlds she was having problems on regular jumps, which is not a CoP issue.

Michelle in her prime was completely capable of doing CoP variations. Not the Beillman spin, but definitely the rest.

pangtongfan · Nov 1, 2010

Blades of Passion said:
Kristi's 1992 Olympic performance did not have better presentation than Lipinski's 1998 Olympic performance. Lipinski's 1998 Olympic performance was a special one and better than any other performance she had ever given. Those are the performances being compared, not Kristi's later performances. And, no, Kristi was not always considered to be incredibly artistic. She was considered to be a nice skater with a strong array of jumps prior to 1991. She improved after that (and was ultimately considered the most artistic of the 1992 field), but her presentation as an amateur did not reach the same level as Lu Chen or Michelle Kwan.

You obviously have poor memory or didnt even follow skating back then. Kristi was revered for her artistry in 91 and 92 which was considered by far the best in the womens field at the time just like Michelle in 98. It was the reason Ito and Harding had to try the triple axel everytime out to even have a hope of beating Kristi.

You are incorrect. There is a difference between a Triple Toe-Triple Salchow combination and a Triple Toe-Triple Salchow sequence. One of them has steps between them and one does not. Doing a half-loop between a Toeloop and a Salchow, and having no other steps or turns, makes it a combination. Lipinski did a COMBINATION. And, no, it is not easier (everyone is better at different moves of course but in the grand scheme of things it is objectively NOT easier).

Maria did that series of jumps the same way with a half-loop between and it was always considered a sequence, not a combination. And it was always considered easier than even Michelle's triple toe-triple toe.

Another fail on YOUR part, yes. Kristi in 1997 was a more mature skater than she was in 1992, which is the performance we are talking about. And, no, Kwan's 1997 program was certainly NOT considered at the same level as her 1998 Olympic program.

Michelle's 97 programs never got the same acclaim since she rarely skated them cleanly and at her best, especialy in the major competitions. Her 97 short program was amazing, and definitely one of her best ever as well.

Kristi was a more versatile performer by 97 than 92, but her programs at the 97 Ultimate Four were more in leiu of her amateur style programs.

Aside from that, there is a thing called clout. Kwan was fresh of her first World title at the competition you speak of and was still a young girl. Kristi was an Olympic Champion and a Professional Champion many times over. Of course the judges would automatically prefer Kristi at that point in time.

They were all ISU judges which would be clearly partial to ISU skaters, and Kristi had already started her decline as a pro and had been challenged and even beaten in competitions by Yuka Sato over the last year, while Michelle was at the peak of her hype and considered absolutely unbeatable at the time. Again you fail.

Judges were not using the technical mark as accurately back then. That was the first Olympics where every top female was actually trying at least 5 different Triple jumps and there wasn't yet a clear standard set about what the expectations were. Kristi was the overwhelming favorite for the title after the SP and thus 5 Triples in the LP was good enough for a split of 5.7's and 5.8's. It's clear that Kwan would have received the higher technical merit mark if those performances were put back-to-back.

It wasnt just 5 triples. It was 5 triples with a triple lutz-triple toe, one of the most difficult triple-triple combinations, a 2nd triple lutz 30 seconds from the end, and many jumps out of difficult entrances including a difficult triple flip. Hence why her tech. marks were still so high with 5 triples.

Again, you ignore the fact that Mao made two mistakes in her performance, one of which was a major mistake by any standard. Joannie Rochette nearly beat her in the LP with a step-out on a jump and no 3-3 combination. Given that Michelle Kwan in her prime CERTAINLY could have done the CoP spins/footwork/spirals at least as well as Joannie, and that her performances were less technically flawed on the jumps and would have received higher presentation scores, I'm quite sure she would have been able to place above Mao.

Joannie was overmarked since she was in Canada, which everyone knows. Many debate whether she even deserved the bronze over Nagasu who finished 13 points back. You dont know if Kwan could do COP spins as well as Joannie, she never showed whether she could level 4 type spins at all. Joannie also has bigger jumps which would get higher GOE. As for Kwan's presentation scores, Kwan would not be as dominant under PCS scoring as presentation scores, the criteria is totally different. Kwan's performances more than anything created a kind of intangible magic and she was the most polished skater out there (apart from Chen and adult Cohen), and those kind of things arent really part of the PCS critiera. Joannie is not the most artistic skater but she is a tough opponent on PCS under COP since she skates programs with very challenging choreography and carries them through well. She also gets her highest scores in Canada by a long ways, making her as a reference all the more pointless as if the Olympics were anywhere else she wouldnt have even been close to Mao with the same performances (and I laugh in your face if you even suggest otherwise).

The sheer difficulty of Mao's programs would more than compensate for 2 mistakes in the long unless someone else skated spectacularly with atleast a triple-triple.

Michelle didn't compete on the Grand Prix at all for the 2004 season. Going into Nationals, the talk was that she would lose her title to Sasha Cohen. Sasha Cohen beat her in the SP and then Michelle roared back in the LP to take the title.

There was talk of Sasha beating her only since Sasha by then was being considered to have reached such a spectacular level of skating, nothing to do with Michelle's decline. Michelle chose to sit out the Grand Prix multiple times in her career including 98-99. She probably wouldnt have even done it at all after the 98 season if it wasnt for the pressure by the ISU.

As it was Michelle did one of her best performances ever at the 2004 Nationals and shut down any hope of even a clean Sasha winning, something that a past her prime Michelle would not be capable of, and went into Worlds as the favorite for the title.

In 2005 it was clear that she was on a decline, without even taking CoP into consideration. She took her 3Loop out of her jump repertoire for the entire season, even though Nationals was still a 6.0 competition, and at Worlds she was having problems on regular jumps, which is not a CoP issue.

Michelle in her prime was completely capable of doing CoP variations. Not the Beillman spin, but definitely the rest.

Michelle never showed the kind of spins that are required to get high levels under COP. Like I said I dont agree with many things COP, her spins were good and quite difficult in their own way, just not via COP requirements. She never had the kind of extreme back flexability or the ability to constantly change positions and edges on all sorts of spins to meet COP standards for the highest levels. And no Biellmann's under COP means you are losing points btw, like it or not.

Blades of Passion · Nov 3, 2010

Oh boy, quote wars with Slutskayafan.

pangtongfan said:
You obviously have poor memory or didnt even follow skating back then. Kristi was revered for her artistry in 91 and 92 which was considered by far the best in the womens field at the time just like Michelle in 98.

Her artistry was revered for being the best in the amateur field of that time. She was not considered one of the all-time best skaters at that point, whereas many people were already saying that about Kwan after her showing at 1998 Nationals.

pangtongfan said:
Maria did that series of jumps the same way with a half-loop between and it was always considered a sequence, not a combination. And it was always considered easier than even Michelle's triple toe-triple toe.

Only by some people. Different people are better at different moves. Some people who are able to do the 3Toe-3Toe find it more difficult to do a 3Toe-3Sal.

pangtongfan said:
They were all ISU judges which would be clearly partial to ISU skaters, and Kristi had already started her decline as a pro and had been challenged and even beaten in competitions by Yuka Sato over the last year, while Michelle was at the peak of her hype and considered absolutely unbeatable at the time.

Yeah, Yuka Sato beat Kristi as a professional a couple times. So did Midori Ito. Kristi still had 3 World Professional titles to only 1 for each of them, though, and was the reigning champion. And, yes, being an OLYMPIC Champion when Kwan was only in the first year of her artistic awakening definitely gave her the edge over Kwan in the eyes of the judges.

pangtongfan said:
It wasnt just 5 triples. It was 5 triples with a triple lutz-triple toe, one of the most difficult triple-triple combinations, a 2nd triple lutz 30 seconds from the end, and many jumps out of difficult entrances including a difficult triple flip. Hence why her tech. marks were still so high with 5 triples.

Her tech marks wouldn't have been that high with 5 Triples under more competitive, learned circumstances. The judges back then often didn't leave much room on the tech mark even if skaters with waaaaay higher possible content were left to skate. Ito and Harding both failed to make the top 3 in the SP, so that gave them even more incentive to mark Yamaguchi up - she was the only person in the top 3 after the SP that the judges could bear winning.

There's no way anyone would have ranked Yamaguchi's 5 Triple program over Kwan's 7 Triple program. FYI, Kwan had a Triple Lutz late in her program as well. And another Triple in the last 15 seconds.

pangtongfan said:
Joannie was overmarked since she was in Canada, which everyone knows. You dont know if Kwan could do COP spins as well as Joannie, she never showed whether she could level 4 type spins at all. Joannie also has bigger jumps which would get higher GOE. As for Kwan's presentation scores, Kwan would not be as dominant under PCS scoring as presentation scores, the criteria is totally different. Kwan's performances more than anything created a kind of intangible magic and she was the most polished skater out there (apart from Chen and adult Cohen), and those kind of things arent really part of the PCS critiera.

I'm 100% sure Kwan in her prime could do CoP spins at least as well as Joannie. Joannie's ugly change-of-direction, change-of-edge upright spin would have been a piece of cake for Kwan, who did change-of-direction spins in far more difficult positions and showed change-of-edge spins in both the Camel and Upright positions at 2005 Worlds. Kwan showed she could do the haircutter in the layback when she had to, she would clearly be capable of the leg-grab sit spin, and she already had both the Y-spin and crossfoot in the upright position. And, of course, spinning in the same position for 8+ rotations? Not a problem. BTW, Kwan even managed the 3-jump combination in her very first attempt at 2005 Worlds. CoP would not have been her downfall at all, given that she was in her prime (which is what we are talking about).

The intangible quality Kwan certainly counts under CoP. Perhaps not as much, and it's hard to achieve with CoP, but it would still have been there. Her presentation scores would have been way higher than Mao's for sure.

pangtongfan said:
As it was Michelle did one of her best performances ever at the 2004 Nationals and shut down any hope of even a clean Sasha winning, something that a past her prime Michelle would not be capable of, and went into Worlds as the favorite for the title.

Michelle was still past her prime in 2004, hence no attempt at a 3-3 combination even when she likely needed it to have a chance of winning the LP at 2004 Worlds (and an eventual 3rd place finish). Her passion, talent, dedication, and inspiration is what carried her through 2004 Nationals. Past-her-prime Michelle at her very best was still better than Sasha-in-2004 her very best, though, your assumption is incorrect. And in 2005 Michelle was clearly struggling more, regardless of CoP.

pangtongfan said:
And no Biellmann's under COP means you are losing points btw, like it or not.

Only in the Layback spin and only in 2006, not 2010's rules. Michelle probably wouldn't have tried to do a change-of-edge in the Layback, though, and still settled with a Level 3 in 2010. Joannie never got higher than Level 3 on a Layback spin.

wonbinfan86 · Nov 3, 2010

While I'm not a fan of MK there's no way Tara should have beaten MK, Tara has even more boring choreography than Michelle and her jumps are tinier than Caroline Zhang's, she barely gets 2 inches off the ground. Shizuka Arakawa should have gotten the gold, unfortunately we didn't have COP back then.

pangtongfan · Nov 3, 2010

Blades of Passion said:
Oh boy, quote wars with Slutskayafan.

Slutskaya is one of my least favorite skaters ever so already your logic confounds.

Her artistry was revered for being the best in the amateur field of that time. She was not considered one of the all-time best skaters at that point, whereas many people were already saying that about Kwan after her showing at 1998 Nationals.

We are going to have to agree to disagree here. Kristi had already reached a far higher level of skating by 92 than what Witt had in 88, and at that point many considered Witt the greatest or atleast modern times most accomplished skater ever. Kristi was definitely considered an all time great already after dominating an exceptional womens field 2 seasons in a row. And Kristi's artistry was considered hands down the best of her time just as much as Kwan in the late 90s. Probably moreso since many considered an in form Chen just as artistic as Michelle if not moreso.

Yeah, Yuka Sato beat Kristi as a professional a couple times. So did Midori Ito. Kristi still had 3 World Professional titles to only 1 for each of them, though, and was the reigning champion. And, yes, being an OLYMPIC Champion when Kwan was only in the first year of her artistic awakening definitely gave her the edge over Kwan in the eyes of the judges.

At her professional peak in 93-95 a skater like Yuka Sato could never have challenged let alone beaten Kristi. No disrespect to Yuka who I like alot but she is not a legendary skater, she is an excellent skater and a top supporting star, who won a surprise World title in a watered down post Olympic Worlds, and who otherwise failed to win another major medal even in a transition period. She may have better than ever as a pro but Kristi losing events to her was a sure sign of decline, especialy with all the mistakes she was starting to make which she almost never made from 91-95 (other than on a triple salchow attempt). Losing to Midori, the greatest jumper in figure skating history, and Kristi's longtime fellow heavyweight rival, is not the same at all. Kristi even at her peak can lose to Midori, Kristi at her peak cannot lose or be challenged regularly by Sato.

Either way Kristi was 25 years old and now struggling with consistency on her once rock solid triples. She had lost the World Pros in a shocker to Sato with 3 major mistakes in 96, and won the World Pros in ugly fashion with 3 major mistakes in 97 in a controversial win over Sato and Kadavy. She was clearly not in her competitive prime anymore, while the all time peak of Kwan's skating (other than her early 97 big event inconsistency) was 96-98 and at the 2000 and 2001 Worlds.

Her tech marks wouldn't have been that high with 5 Triples under more competitive, learned circumstances. The judges back then often didn't leave much room on the tech mark even if skaters with waaaaay higher possible content were left to skate. Ito and Harding both failed to make the top 3 in the SP, so that gave them even more incentive to mark Yamaguchi up - she was the only person in the top 3 after the SP that the judges could bear winning.

While she wouldnt have been the most preferred choice I dont see why Nancy Kerrigan would be an unbearable winner. She was a reigning World medalist who had 7 triples planned and was touted by commentators, experts, and judges for her artistry as well (despite how many fans now remember her, her skating hasnt aged too well), and she would become at first coronated the early favorite for the next Olympic Gold immediately after Kristi and Midori's retirement so she couldnt have been that dreaded as a potential big event winner by TPTB.

I'm 100% sure Kwan in her prime could do CoP spins at least as well as Joannie. Joannie's ugly change-of-direction, change-of-edge upright spin would have been a piece of cake for Kwan, who did change-of-direction spins in far more difficult positions and showed change-of-edge spins in both the Camel and Upright positions at 2005 Worlds. Kwan showed she could do the haircutter in the layback when she had to, she would clearly be capable of the leg-grab sit spin, and she already had both the Y-spin and crossfoot in the upright position. And, of course, spinning in the same position for 8+ rotations? Not a problem. BTW, Kwan even managed the 3-jump combination in her very first attempt at 2005 Worlds. CoP would not have been her downfall at all, given that she was in her prime (which is what we are talking about).

Again I remind you that the only reason Joannie even came close to the silver in Vancouver was because the Olympics were in Canada. Her scores are not a good barometer of Michelle's ableness to beat Mao, since if the Olympics were in any other country Joannie would have been lucky to maybe eke out Nagasu for the bronze with the same performances. Joannie of the 2010 Games would have been a threat to Kwan of the 98 Games at the 2010 Games too simply because of the location and the perenially biased Canadian hosted judging, if for no other reason.

The intangible quality Kwan certainly counts under CoP. Perhaps not as much, and it's hard to achieve with CoP, but it would still have been there. Her presentation scores would have been way higher than Mao's for sure.

Way higher than Mao for sure!?!?! You presume an awful lot based on very little and seem to expect others to do the same. It is quite obvious you are a massive Kwan fan and just a wee bit biased. Mao is an extremely talented overall skater who well before her prime and skating to an immature NutCracker program was already getting almost the same PCS as Cohen and Slutskaya. Kwan in her only Worlds under COP, albeit not at her best, was dusted by Cohen and Slutskaya under PCS, even in her clean and quite nice short program. Even under 6.0, a far better system for Kwan than COP, a prime Kwan found herself challenged on presentation scores often by Slutskaya who people dont even consider a very artistic skater.

Michelle was still past her prime in 2004, hence no attempt at a 3-3 combination even when she likely needed it to have a chance of winning the LP at 2004 Worlds (and an eventual 3rd place finish).

She did not need. She nearly won the LP at Worlds despite a doubled 2nd triple lutz.

Her passion, talent, dedication, and inspiration is what carried her through 2004 Nationals. Past-her-prime Michelle at her very best was still better than Sasha-in-2004 her very best, though, your assumption is incorrect.

By your logic Sasha must be a second rate hack, rather than a skater praised heavily for her artistry, spins, spirals, and talent level, who people think should have won major titles like World and Olympic Gold. Sorry a past her prime Michelle would not be better at her best than a prime Sasha at her hypothetical best.

And in 2005 Michelle was clearly struggling more, regardless of CoP.

True but acclerated much more by COP. After all it is no coincidence she looked far worse at Worlds while trying to come to grips with COP than she did at Nationals or any of the cheesefests of the season where while she may not have looked totally peak still looked quite strong and right on track until Worlds. She looked like the 2nd favorite behind Slutskaya going into Worlds, but COP proved to be alot harder for her than predicted.It is quite obvious you are a massive Kwan fan.

emma · Nov 3, 2010

^So, I admit, I'm a totaly Kwan fan, and yes she, in the clarity of hindsight, was battling both a hip injury and adjustments to Cop. But if I remember correctly, and please correct if I am wrong, she looked far worse at Wrolds in the first round (I can't believe it, but I forget what we used to call that first LP they did to qualify for the SP), had a wierd skating past time in the SP, but a good SP, and very decent LP...no? I have no doubt Kwan hated the CoP change, but I think what I'm saying is despite the difficulties, she was very much in the mix....but maybe I'm missing your point???

Mathman · Nov 3, 2010

emma said:
(I can't believe it, but I forget what we used to call that first LP they did to qualify for the SP)

I believe it was called the "qualifying round?"

Yeah, that was a wierd competition. As I remember it, the first stage of ladies qualifying was early inthe morning, the ice was too wet, and everyone including Michelle fell all over the place. By the second round later in the day the ice had firmed up and everyone did OK.

Then the time deduction in the short program whch cost her a full tenth in each of the technical and presentation marks. That was kind of her own fault, however, because at nationals it timed out at exactly 2:40, so someone on her team should have been alert enough to cut it down by a second or two to be on the safe side.

The real problem, though, was that the music dies out at the end to a faint whisper, which the audience can;t hear (especially if they are cheering), so it always looked like she was still moving after the music stopped.

Then in the LP a streaker jumped onlo the ice and Michelle had to scurry for safety while the security guys came out on the ice in regular shoes and slip-slided their way around the rink trying to catch the guy.

(Still it was a great Worlds because of Lambiel and Lindemann. :rock:

)

Olympia · Nov 3, 2010

I forgot about the streaker! That was a weird competition indeed. And Michelle still managed to do pretty well and didn't implode from nerves. If she decides to go into diplomacy, she'll have had great practice in dealing with surprises and adversity.

I don't know whether she'd have become a great CoP skater if her hip had held up, but I like to think she would have. On the other hand, she might have decided to take the path Torvill and Dean took after their return in 1994 ended up with them in bronze medal position. After their free skate, she was asked what she and Christopher Dean would do with the upcoming changes in ice dance rules, and she said with that unflappable British calm, "We don't care, because we're not going to be here." Sometimes it's a liberating thing to be able to make one's way to the door.

pangtongfan · Nov 3, 2010

I actually do think Kwan would have been a great skater under COP as well, just not as dominant of one as she was under 6.0. Kwan is a 5 time World Champion, there is a huge difference between her level of dominance and the level below "great". :laugh:

I am not saying she wouldnt have won some World titles under COP either, I am just not ready to say she would have won every Olympics with her best skate under COP the way Blades of Passion is, a concept made all the more amusing when she couldnt win the Olympic Gold it turned out even under 6.0.

Mathman · Nov 4, 2010

^ But the question was not so much whether Michelle might have won if she had skated at various other times. The question was about how that particular prpgram and performance (the 1998 Lyra Angelica as performed at Nagano) stacks up against winning programs from other years.

For instance, inserting that program into the 2002 Olympics she would have got at least third, ahead of Kwan.

doubleflutz · Nov 4, 2010

Olympia said:
I don't know whether she'd have become a great CoP skater if her hip had held up, but I like to think she would have.

I would have liked to see her going after Level 4 footworks consistently (in some magical world where her hip was invincible and she skated through Vancouver). I wish more ladies would attempt them.

pangtongfan · Nov 4, 2010

Mathman said:
^ But the question was not so much whether Michelle might have won if she had skated at various other times. The question was about how that particular prpgram and performance (the 1998 Lyra Angelica as performed at Nagano) stacks up against winning programs from other years.

For instance, inserting that program into the 2002 Olympics she would have got at least third, ahead of Kwan.

Well Kwan would have won easily in 2002 with her 98 performance. Sarah Hughes was and always will be the biggest embarassment of an Olympic Champion in skating history. Sarah Hughes is one of the least great skaters to ever win an Olympic medal of any color, even a bronze medal, never mind winning the Olympic Gold.

Even Slutskaya with her 3rd worst/Olympic and World performance of her very long career (after her ill 2004 Worlds and the 2006 Olympics) still missed winning by the tiniest margin and would have won had any of a Finnish judge not dropped from a 5.8 technical to 5.7 for presentation, had Hughes been given .1 less in relation to Butyrskaya in the short program, or had a Slovenian judge not given Kwan a gifted 5.9 for required elements in the short program. Kwan and Cohen had a fall and two foot landing each, no triple-triple trys, and still also took judges off Hughes. And Cohen wasnt even that good a skater yet in 2002 to boot.

Tonichelle · Nov 4, 2010

pangtongfan said:
WRONG. Kristi was always considered far stronger in artistry and presentation than Tara. Tara's presentation is the exact reason Tara needed Kwan to make major mistakes to score almost all her big wins, and that people were shocked at the Olympics when Kwan skated cleanly and actually lost to Tara.

"Always"??? Maybe as a professional, yes, which in adn of itself encourages artistry over technical. But considering the two NEVER COMPETED against each other, how can we truly compare? I've never even heard that comparison until now.

I'd actually put the 1992 Kristi on par with the 1998 Tara - except for a little more maturity that just comes with age.

Yu Na would have destroyed any women in Olympic history with her Vancouver skates so the over 20 point margin over 2 programs means nothing. She was also overmarked a bit which exagerrated it more. Mao with 3 triple axels over the 2 programs would have still probably won any other Olympics in history, especialy under COP. Especialy considering Mao is considered a very good all around skater outside of the jumps too, even if people werent crazy of her 2010 programs.

:sheesh: To each their own, I'd pay to see Kristi well before paying top dollar to see Yuna or Mao.

Layfan · Nov 5, 2010

Olympia said:
I forgot about the streaker! That was a weird competition indeed. And Michelle still managed to do pretty well and didn't implode from nerves. If she decides to go into diplomacy, she'll have had great practice in dealing with surprises and adversity.

I don't know whether she'd have become a great CoP skater if her hip had held up, but I like to think she would have. On the other hand, she might have decided to take the path Torvill and Dean took after their return in 1994 ended up with them in bronze medal position. After their free skate, she was asked what she and Christopher Dean would do with the upcoming changes in ice dance rules, and she said with that unflappable British calm, "We don't care, because we're not going to be here." Sometimes it's a liberating thing to be able to make one's way to the door.

I always forget about the streaker too..

But you said it... even though Michelle had a few problems she still won bronze. Sasha, too. When Sasha or Michelle "bombed" that meant they won silver, bronze or came in fourth. That was supposed to be disappointing! These days, you can look back at that with perspective and appreciate how difficult it must be to have to enter competitions in which anything less than gold is considered a defeat and also appreciate how great it was for the USA to have those two skaters...

Sarah Hughes was and always will be the biggest embarassment of an Olympic Champion in skating history. Sarah Hughes is one of the least great skaters to ever win an Olympic medal of any color, even a bronze medal, never mind winning the Olympic Gold.

Embarrassment for who? For Sarah? I'm sure Sarah is anything but embarrassed about giving the skate of her life to beat the likes of Michelle Kwan and Irina Slutskaya. Embarrassing the judges? They rewarded the best skate of the night even though the skater wasn't the biggest name in the competition. Or maybe you are saying that it's Michelle, Irina and Sasha who should be embarrassed for being human and struggling a little under pressure....:think:

Tonichelle · Nov 5, 2010

Layfan said:
Embarrassment for who? For Sarah? I'm sure Sarah is anything but embarrassed about giving the skate of her life to beat the likes of Michelle Kwan and Irina Slutskaya. Embarrassing the judges? They rewarded the best skate of the night even though the skater wasn't the biggest name in the competition. Or maybe you are saying that it's Michelle, Irina and Sasha who should be embarrassed for being human and struggling a little under pressure....:think:

Blades of Passion · Nov 5, 2010

pangtongfan said:
We are going to have to agree to disagree here. Kristi had already reached a far higher level of skating by 92 than what Witt had in 88, and at that point many considered Witt the greatest or atleast modern times most accomplished skater ever. Kristi was definitely considered an all time great already after dominating an exceptional womens field 2 seasons in a row.

She didn't dominate womens skating 2 seasons in a row. She was beaten by Midori Ito and Tonya Harding multiple times each. Midori Ito was the favorite going into the Olympics, in fact. And, no we aren't going to agree to disagree, because your assertions are very annoying and incorrect. Kristi was not considered an all-time great going into the Olympics. Her level of skating reached higher than Witt's TECHNICALLY, yes, but she was not considered nearly as good of a performer. She was seen as the most artistic within the field of skaters she was competing against and whoever is seen as the best of the field automatically gets 5.9's on the second mark.

pangtongfan said:
At her professional peak in 93-95 a skater like Yuka Sato could never have challenged let alone beaten Kristi. No disrespect to Yuka who I like alot but she is not a legendary skater, she is an excellent skater and a top supporting star, who won a surprise World title in a watered down post Olympic Worlds, and who otherwise failed to win another major medal even in a transition period.

The only thing that seems to matter to you is the results of competitions. Sad. Yuka Sato is a better skater than Kristi Yamaguchi outside of the jumps. Given that the technical requirements of profession skating were lower, and that Sato had been continually improving in her jump consistency, it's not surprising that she would be able to challenge Kristi.

pangtongfan said:
While she wouldnt have been the most preferred choice I dont see why Nancy Kerrigan would be an unbearable winner. She was a reigning World medalist who had 7 triples planned and was touted by commentators, experts, and judges for her artistry as well (despite how many fans now remember her, her skating hasnt aged too well), and she would become at first coronated the early favorite for the next Olympic Gold immediately after Kristi and Midori's retirement so she couldnt have been that dreaded as a potential big event winner.

The judges dreaded anyone but "the person who is worthy of the title" winning. Midori and Kristi were the favorites and then Tonya was seen as a dark horse and Nancy was seen as Bronze at best. Since Midori and Tonya blew it in the SP, Kristi was the only person the judges wanted to see win. She was already considered the most artistic, so the more technically gifted top contenders failing to deliver was their death knell, unless Kristi seriously blew it in the LP (which she didn't and hence her scores).

pangtongfan said:
Again I remind you that the only reason Joannie even came close to the silver in Vancouver was because the Olympics were in Canada. Her scores are not a good barometer of Michelle's ableness to beat Mao, since if the Olympics were in any other country Joannie would have been lucky to maybe eke out Nagasu for the bronze with the same performances.

Incorrect. Joannie had momentum as the reigning World Silver Medalist and her choreography was seen as better than Mao's. Not to mention her mother dying and creating sympathy. She most certainly would have won the Bronze even if the Olympics had been held in Nagasu's home town. Nagasu was seen as too immature, even if incredibly talented.

pangtongfan said:
Way higher than Mao for sure!?!?! You presume an awful lot based on very little

Nope, Michelle's program was renowned. 5.9's across the board at Olympics and the most 6.0's ever for a performance by a singles skater at Nationals is not "based on very little". It's very safe to assume that Kwan would have been rewarded in the PCS.

pangtongfan said:
Kwan in her only Worlds under COP, albeit not at her best, was dusted by Cohen and Slutskaya under PCS.

That was Kwan's worst program ever from 1996 onward, even before converting it to CoP at Worlds. Terrible example.

pangtongfan said:
She did not need. She nearly won the LP at Worlds despite a doubled 2nd triple lutz.

No, she DID objectively need a Triple-Triple in 2004 to ensure herself a 1st in the LP if everyone else skated their best. Miki Ando was capable of a Quad + multiple 3-3 combinations. I'm sure Kwan knew that her program without a 3-3 might not be good enough to beat that.

pangtongfan said:
By your logic Sasha must be a second rate hack, rather than a skater praised heavily for her artistry, spins, spirals, and talent level, who people think should have won major titles like World and Olympic Gold. Sorry a past her prime Michelle would not be better at her best than a prime Sasha at her hypothetical best.

More jumbled synthesizing of my points. The fact is that Cohen's LP in 2004 simply didn't have the same impact as Kwan's LP. Kwan was still artistically better than Cohen. She wasn't past her prime in 2004 because of deficiency in her presentation, she was just past her prime because of the lack of a Triple-Triple. Cohen DID skate that program her very best in the competition after Worlds and the reception for the performance was not nearly as thunderous as what Michelle received (nor were there a string of perfect 6.0's across the board).

pangtongfan · Nov 5, 2010

Blades of Passion said:
She didn't dominate womens skating 2 seasons in a row. She was beaten by Midori Ito and Tonya Harding multiple times each.

She won Worlds 91, Olympics 92, Worlds 92, U.S Nationals 92, Goodwill Games 1990. That is dominating womens skating like it or not. And her record vs Ito those 2 season was 3-1 and vs Harding was 4-2. Except for U.S Nationals 91 she won all the biggest events she was in. Nobody cares if she lost to Harding at Skate America or Ito at Trophee Lalique when you win all the events that matteer. You dont have to win every single event you enter to be dominant. Otherwise Michelle Kwan would have never dominated womens skating since the only season she was ever undefeated was 02-03 where she didnt even do the Grand Prix.

Midori Ito was the favorite going into the Olympics, in fact.

Probably but it doesnt matter. What matters is what actually happened. And what actually happened was Kristi winning 91 Worlds, 92 Olympics, and 92 Worlds. Midori 4th at 91 Worlds,a distant 2nd at the 92 Olympics, and withdrawing from the 92 Worlds.

And, no we aren't going to agree to disagree, because your assertions are very annoying and incorrect.

OK so you wish to continue to force your own stupid and false viewpoints on others even though nobody intelligent will ever come over to your side. Fine your choice. :laugh:

Kristi was not considered an all-time great going into the Olympics. Her level of skating reached higher than Witt's TECHNICALLY, yes, but she was not considered nearly as good of a performer. She was seen as the most artistic within the field of skaters she was competing against and whoever is seen as the best of the field automatically gets 5.9's on the second mark.

No the best in a field at a given time does not automatically get all 5.9s on the 2nd mark. In many of the years of womens skating from 77-84 there were World events without nobody getting 5.9s on the 2nd mark, and even when someone did it was never unaminous.

The only thing that seems to matter to you is the results of competitions. Sad. Yuka Sato is a better skater than Kristi Yamaguchi outside of the jumps. Given that the technical requirements of profession skating were lower, and that Sato had been continually improving in her jump consistency, it's not surprising that she would be able to challenge Kristi.

Yes Yuka is a better competitive skater than prime Kristi on the planet you live on which is not Earth. Next.

The judges dreaded anyone but "the person who is worthy of the title" winning. Midori and Kristi were the favorites and then Tonya was seen as a dark horse and Nancy was seen as Bronze at best. Since Midori and Tonya blew it in the SP, Kristi was the only person the judges wanted to see win. She was already considered the most artistic, so the more technically gifted top contenders failing to deliver was their death knell, unless Kristi seriously blew it in the LP (which she didn't and hence her scores).

Oh but wait apparent skating queen Yuka Sato was in the field (she finished 7th) so I guess Kristi wasnt really the most artistic skater that year. :laugh:

Incorrect. Joannie had momentum as the reigning World Silver Medalist and her choreography was seen as better than Mao's. Not to mention her mother dying and creating sympathy. She most certainly would have won the Bronze even if the Olympics had been held in Nagasu's home town. Nagasu was seen as too immature, even if incredibly talented.

She would not have gotten as high of scores as she did nor would she have even been close to Mao in scores had the Olympics not been in Canada, had the performances been the same. Fact. I really dont care about your delusional viewpoint on the matter either.

Nope, Michelle's program was renowned. 5.9's across the board at Olympics and the most 6.0's ever for a performance by a singles skater at Nationals is not "based on very little". It's very safe to assume that Kwan would have been rewarded in the PCS.

Scores at Nationals are meaningless to a serious discussion. Sorry.

As for 5.9s across the board at Olympics let me remind you of your own words: "whoever is seen as the best of the field automatically gets 5.9's on the second mark." Kristi getting straight 5.9s (except for Japan) for even a flawed LP for her standards at the Olympics apparently didnt impress you.

That was Kwan's worst program ever from 1996 onward, even before converting it to CoP at Worlds. Terrible example.

Yet that same program was given 4 6.0s at Nationals even not skated that well anyway. I guess that already dispells the significance of how many 6.0 received at Nationals which you were using as your "proof" of something higher. :laugh:

No, she DID objectively need a Triple-Triple in 2004 to ensure herself a 1st in the LP if everyone else skated their best. Miki Ando was capable of a Quad + multiple 3-3 combinations. I'm sure Kwan knew that her program without a 3-3 might not be good enough to beat that.

You really look more clueless by the minute. Miki Ando in 2004 was a horrible skater outside of her jumps, and even her jumps were mostly pitched forward and not very good quality. In the LP at Worlds she nailed everything except her quad including multiple 3-3s and barely held onto 4th place. Kwan lost the LP to Shizuka by 1 judge with a doubled 2nd triple lutz. With it she would almost certainly have won the LP over Shizuka, and the performance Shizuka did at those 2004 Worlds was 5x superior to anything Miki Ando of 2004 was ever capable of putting out even with her quad salchow. Kwan's competitors at the 2004 Worlds for gold were Shizuka and Sasha. Miki Ando was a sloppy and unpolished newbie jumping flea who could medal if the big guns crashed and burned.

More jumbled synthesizing of my points. The fact is that Cohen's LP in 2004 simply didn't have the same impact as Kwan's LP. Kwan was still artistically better than Cohen. She wasn't past her prime in 2004 because of deficiency in her presentation, she was just past her prime because of the lack of a Triple-Triple. Cohen DID skate that program her very best in the competition after Worlds and the reception for the performance was not nearly as thunderous as what Michelle received (nor were there a string of perfect 6.0's across the board).

It really shows your complete ignorance that you call Cohen's performance at Worlds (or Nationals) her very best. :laugh:

At Nationals she fell and missed another jump. At Worlds she had a major error, many shaky landings, left out a combination, and was tenative. Cohen's best performances were during the Grand Prix circuit (except for the Grand Prix final) and unfortunately at Cheesefests. Best of all at a Cheesefest right after Worlds which she would have easily won Worlds or Nationals with had she duplicated it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2s-lm0mhbM

And you really think a prime Kwan, except for her very pre pubescent years, was some sort of triple-triple Queen? How many triple-triples did she land after the 96-97 season? An average of about only one per season up until her final World title in 2003. And the only one she ever landed was a triple toe-triple toe, the easiest one out there.

Lastly any 6.0 that was awarded at the 2004 Worlds was a joke. Given your being obliviousness to facts I am sure you arent even aware 43 6.0s were awarded at those Worlds including perfect 6.0s to the likes of Winkler & Lohse, an up and coming Pang & Tong for artistry, 11 perfect 6.0s to the then #1 but none legendary Navka & Kostomarov, Plushenko falling on his rear entering a jump and getting 6.0s. And Cohen in the short program of those Worlds when she did actually skate her best unlike her tenative and flawed LP received multiple 6.0s for presentation herself. Cohen skating subpar in the LP is likely the only reason the slew of candy bogus 6.0s they had probably reserved for Cohen went to Kwan anyway.

Michelle Kwan's 1998 Olympic Long Program

doubleflutz

prettykeys

Mathman

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

wonbinfan86

Match Penalty

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

emma

Mathman

Olympia

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

Mathman

doubleflutz

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll

Layfan

Tonichelle

Idita-Rock-n-Roll

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be

pangtongfan

Match Penalty

Similar threads

Connect with us