- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
I think an ideal podium would have about seven medals, so whatever the outcome, it'll be bittersweet.
Bradley wants to 'bring home some hardware'
- Thread starter Violet Bliss
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
Buttercup, Bradley completely took over Shawn Sawyer thread and most of the posts on Patrick Chan Live Interview Via Skype thread were about Bradley. It was a short thread which didn't interest anybody but Patrick's fans and we all talked fondly of your Ryan.
Well, the real podium should have only one medal - at least that's how the Olympic sports started over 2,500 years ago. Only the victor has glory, no 2nd and no 3rd place. Coincidentally, that's still the ways many countries look at sport results, especially Olympic sports.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
Yeah, but I'm not one of them. Though I think the pewter medal is silly and asymmetric.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
I used to really hate the winner-takes-all only-first-place-matters mentality in sports but I've come to understand its purpose.
Individual sports can be extremely competitive and the difference between the first and second places is sometimes truly minute, as in a tiny fraction of a second. It just seems so unfair to bestow all the glory on one person while most competitors have trained just as hard with devotion and sacrifices. I hate that only one person is considered the winner and the rest are deemed losers. Such attitude seems more prevalent in certain societies and was a culture shock to me.
However, with more understanding of how the mind works and how individual and collective progresses are made, I see the purpose and function of such mentality. People can achieve only what they believe they can, which is why records are broken incrementally and role models are so important. They instill beliefs. Somebody has to be the first to show what can be done. The sole winner system awards and promotes excellence, brutally but effectively. To be the victor of an event, one has to beat everybody else, including the previous winner. The way to ensure this is to be the first to achieve beyond the current level. Thus the envelop is pushed and what is believed to be achievable gets raised, accomplished, and becomes the new challenge.
One way is kind and sharing, motivating more to work hard with lots of consolation prizes. Joy and glory are spread around more. The other way is relentlessly competitive, even cruel, to constantly raise the standard of the sport. Over the long run, the collective benefit of the latter system/mentality becomes clear as part of the human progress.
Back to skating, I definitely don't believe in glory for one in this rather subjective and widely encompassing sport. However, I do see the CoP system contributing to rapid raising of standard of figure skating. It's not perfect and still transitioning after all these years as can be witnessed daily on the boards. But it's challenging. It's been criticized as requiring too much technically, taking away the artistry and performance excellence, until some skaters show that programs with all the difficult technical elements can be beautifully performed. Then the competitors keep raising the levels of skills and degree of difficulty for each element and their programs (taking falls along the way
). Contrary to previous belief, it has now been demonstrated that footwork and transition need not be scraped to do quadruple jumps. The evolution of the sport has quickened under this demanding system. This has become obvious with the coming of age of the CoP babies, the most precocious of whom being Patrick Chan, who bears the brunt of many negative sentiments against the system. Neverheless, watch the new generation. They will do it all, jumps, spins, footwork......with flair and artistry.
Show programs can have the luxury of more leisurely pace to fully express the feelings and beauty of figue skating. But, in competitions, this is truly a demanding Olympic sport where competitors have to bring it under pressure, making the the most difficult athletic executions look easy, elegant, and emotionally stirring, with thousands of pairs of eyes on them, knowing there are millions more not in the arena. It's not for the meek or the weak.
Individual sports can be extremely competitive and the difference between the first and second places is sometimes truly minute, as in a tiny fraction of a second. It just seems so unfair to bestow all the glory on one person while most competitors have trained just as hard with devotion and sacrifices. I hate that only one person is considered the winner and the rest are deemed losers. Such attitude seems more prevalent in certain societies and was a culture shock to me.
However, with more understanding of how the mind works and how individual and collective progresses are made, I see the purpose and function of such mentality. People can achieve only what they believe they can, which is why records are broken incrementally and role models are so important. They instill beliefs. Somebody has to be the first to show what can be done. The sole winner system awards and promotes excellence, brutally but effectively. To be the victor of an event, one has to beat everybody else, including the previous winner. The way to ensure this is to be the first to achieve beyond the current level. Thus the envelop is pushed and what is believed to be achievable gets raised, accomplished, and becomes the new challenge.
One way is kind and sharing, motivating more to work hard with lots of consolation prizes. Joy and glory are spread around more. The other way is relentlessly competitive, even cruel, to constantly raise the standard of the sport. Over the long run, the collective benefit of the latter system/mentality becomes clear as part of the human progress.
Back to skating, I definitely don't believe in glory for one in this rather subjective and widely encompassing sport. However, I do see the CoP system contributing to rapid raising of standard of figure skating. It's not perfect and still transitioning after all these years as can be witnessed daily on the boards. But it's challenging. It's been criticized as requiring too much technically, taking away the artistry and performance excellence, until some skaters show that programs with all the difficult technical elements can be beautifully performed. Then the competitors keep raising the levels of skills and degree of difficulty for each element and their programs (taking falls along the way
). Contrary to previous belief, it has now been demonstrated that footwork and transition need not be scraped to do quadruple jumps. The evolution of the sport has quickened under this demanding system. This has become obvious with the coming of age of the CoP babies, the most precocious of whom being Patrick Chan, who bears the brunt of many negative sentiments against the system. Neverheless, watch the new generation. They will do it all, jumps, spins, footwork......with flair and artistry.Show programs can have the luxury of more leisurely pace to fully express the feelings and beauty of figue skating. But, in competitions, this is truly a demanding Olympic sport where competitors have to bring it under pressure, making the the most difficult athletic executions look easy, elegant, and emotionally stirring, with thousands of pairs of eyes on them, knowing there are millions more not in the arena. It's not for the meek or the weak.
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
I haven't read anything official from NBC as increasing the ratings for figure skating on TV. However, I could believe it happened because of the GPs.
They are the first skating competitions of the new season after a 6 month layover. Even the departed casual fans might want to check it out. What are the ratings for the Nats and 4CCs?
I happend to like the GPs, and I wish they could be extended for repeating them further. It's like Major League Baseball where individual Teams play each other several times leading up to the Pennant. I'd like to believe that the GPF could be on a Sunday afternoon as a serious competition. (Yes, I am dreaminghwell
I haven't seen the ratings for the 2011 US Figure Skating championships. Not sure about 4CC as it was not shown Live anywhere in the USA.
Here is some info for WALLY regarding college basketball and the 10.8 BILLION dollar contract it just signed for the National championship tournamnet.
Not a typo, and the deal is actually worth over 11 BILLION dollars when all media rights are included.
In addition to the tournament deal, college basketball also has a 55 million dollar deal with ESPN for regular season college basketball games.
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...04/ncaa-reaches-14-year-deal-with-cbsturner/1
Anybody have a link to the ratings for the 2011 US Skating Championships?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
The above is spoken by an indivisual fan, and presumably a non competitive skater. Many, many moons ago, I earned a silver medal and this opinion is just killing the pride I had for that. C'est domage.I used to really hate the winner-takes-all only-first-place-matters mentality in sports but I've come to understand its purpose.
Individual sports can be extremely competitive and the difference between the first and second places is sometimes truly minute, as in a tiny fraction of a second. It just seems so unfair to bestow all the glory on one person while most competitors have trained just as hard with devotion and sacrifices. I hate that only one person is considered the winner and the rest are deemed losers. Such attitude seems more prevalent in certain societies and was a culture shock to me.
However, with more understanding of how the mind works and how individual and collective progresses are made, I see the purpose and function of such mentality. People can achieve only what they believe they can, which is why records are broken incrementally and role models are so important. They instill beliefs. Somebody has to be the first to show what can be done. The sole winner system awards and promotes excellence, brutally but effectively. To be the victor of an event, one has to beat everybody else, including the previous winner. The way to ensure this is to be the first to achieve beyond the current level. Thus the envelop is pushed and what is believed to be achievable gets raised, accomplished, and becomes the new challenge.
One way is kind and sharing, motivating more to work hard with lots of consolation prizes. Joy and glory are spread around more. The other way is relentlessly competitive, even cruel, to constantly raise the standard of the sport. Over the long run, the collective benefit of the latter system/mentality becomes clear as part of the human progress.
Back to skating, I definitely don't believe in glory for one in this rather subjective and widely encompassing sport. However, I do see the CoP system contributing to rapid raising of standard of figure skating. It's not perfect and still transitioning after all these years as can be witnessed daily on the boards. But it's challenging. It's been criticized as requiring too much technically, taking away the artistry and performance excellence, until some skaters show that programs with all the difficult technical elements can be beautifully performed. Then the competitors keep raising the levels of skills and degree of difficulty for each element and their programs (taking falls along the way
Show programs can have the luxury of more leisurely pace to fully express the feelings and beauty of figue skating. But, in competitions, this is truly a demanding Olympic sport where competitors have to bring it under pressure, making the the most difficult athletic executions look easy, elegant, and emotionally stirring, with thousands of pairs of eyes on them, knowing there are millions more not in the arena. It's not for the meek or the weak.
The expectations of Chan in winning a Gold Medal is high, but the continuous Board hype will make him a total loser if he doesn't earn gold.C'est domage.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
All this comparison of TV ratings of various sports reminds me of what a publicity director of a major symphony once told me. He was trying to convey to the head honchos that their competitors for audiences were not just the Ballet company and The Grand Opera but football and basketball as well. In fact, all entertainments were direct competitions.
People don't watch figure skating on TV because of other preferred ways of spending their time, which are not limited to sports on TV. They don't schedule skating at the same time slots against commercial team sports, do they?
How are entertainments which may attract similar audiences faring these days? I am refering to the arts since skating encompasses both sports and arts even if there is no definitive consensus among the fans. Of course, skating audiences may have to be lured back from gardening, working overtime, or any number of other activities. How about age demographics? Are fans simply dying out with too few young replacements? Maybe figure skating needs to be cool, hopefully not by adopting the fleeting taste du jour.
People don't watch figure skating on TV because of other preferred ways of spending their time, which are not limited to sports on TV. They don't schedule skating at the same time slots against commercial team sports, do they?
How are entertainments which may attract similar audiences faring these days? I am refering to the arts since skating encompasses both sports and arts even if there is no definitive consensus among the fans. Of course, skating audiences may have to be lured back from gardening, working overtime, or any number of other activities. How about age demographics? Are fans simply dying out with too few young replacements? Maybe figure skating needs to be cool, hopefully not by adopting the fleeting taste du jour.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I think that is a huge point. In the 2008 world championships there was controversy about Buttle's win over Joubert. Joubert
(a) Did a quad
(b) Did not fall down
(c) Gave an enthusiastic and entertaining performance.
Under 6.0, that's it -- Joubert wins.
cbcsports said:
What is interesting is that Joubert is making the same argument, but in reverse, that is now being used against the CoP now. Joubert says that under CoP a clean but relatively simply program is rewarded. CoP detractors nowadays say, no, it was under 6.0 that a clean program was at a premium, and this was a plus for the 6.0 system.
In 2010 the controversy was about Plushenko's lack of transitions. Plushenko fans countered, "well of course he doesn't do transtitions, he does quads." It was even proposed that minimal transitions leading into a quad should be more highly valued than transitions in other parts of the program.
Its a new world, Golda. When Scott Hamilton does TV commentary he keeps emphasizing the idea that under the CoP every little turn you make, from beginning to end, is being scrutinized by the judges and translated into fractions of a point. If you can do that and quads, too -- you're the CoP king!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2010
My opinion expressed is non personal against you, or pro Chan, or even pro winner-takes-all. I simply express my thoughts, opinions, and observations, hopefully drawing discussion, including arguements against my logic, pointing out the lack of acuity in my observation or reasoning. I don't usually describe things as right or wrong though I like to observe and analyse. I often tell persons seeking my advice in RL that what I tell them are observations, not judgements, and that it is what it is and what do you do with it? E.g. In describing the modus operandi of an associate, which might sound negative, I emphasized that it worked for said person who was quite content, but it would not be right for the person I was talking to because of their different goals, talents, and personality so he had to take that into consideration in their joint project. I often have to stop their own judging. Judgements and defensiveness come with your own colored lenses. I never stated a preference for one way or another in the post refered to. In fact, I had stated I never adopted the sole winner mentality but deleted that part for brevity. To me it was implied as my personal inclination.
I am interested in and study mindsets and their effects. E.g. I have waxed philosophical on the Peak thread and Winning Ways thread. On the skating forum, naturally the tangents I go off on are skating and skaters. Please don't project what are not in my mind or in my posts. Indulge me or debate the subject. As a disclosure, I'm a Libran. You know how we argue both sides, right? Maybe I'm more frustrating and aggrevating than I realized. I apologize.
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
Mathman, there are more than a few critics of the CoP (Boitano and Carroll to name only two) and it goes well beyond a quad vs transitions, or how contorted one can become during a spin that ignores music at times in order to get in the eight rotations.
Every one is entitled to their opinion whether it be a nationally syndicated sports writer or a fan.
Here is an article that raises a few good points.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/brennan/2008-01-23-skating_N.htm
"After making $12 million a year with its old TV deal, U.S. Figure Skating is now receiving absolutely no rights fee with its new TV deal. There's no title sponsor for the 2008 U.S. national championships, no chance to scream at any individual judge's scores and no Michelle Kwan."
"In the 6.0 system — the sport's brand — the countries of the nine judges and their scores for an individual skater were plastered on the TV screen. The skater sat in the perfectly named "Kiss and Cry" section, reacting as each judge's score was revealed. It was riveting, the kind of drama any sport would kill for today. How the people who run figure skating kept their jobs after getting rid of such a viewer magnet is one of the sports world's true mysteries."
How ironic her last sentence feels. The ISU bigshots needed anonymous judging to keep their jobs and to avoid another scandal which most likely would have seen Figure Skating banned from the Olympics.
It is harder to catch the manipulation and cheating now but what a price skating paid keeping the scores anonymous.
BTW, I thought Buttle deserved his Gold back in '08 but also can see how Joubert fans saw it differently.
Every one is entitled to their opinion whether it be a nationally syndicated sports writer or a fan.
Here is an article that raises a few good points.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/brennan/2008-01-23-skating_N.htm
"After making $12 million a year with its old TV deal, U.S. Figure Skating is now receiving absolutely no rights fee with its new TV deal. There's no title sponsor for the 2008 U.S. national championships, no chance to scream at any individual judge's scores and no Michelle Kwan."
"In the 6.0 system — the sport's brand — the countries of the nine judges and their scores for an individual skater were plastered on the TV screen. The skater sat in the perfectly named "Kiss and Cry" section, reacting as each judge's score was revealed. It was riveting, the kind of drama any sport would kill for today. How the people who run figure skating kept their jobs after getting rid of such a viewer magnet is one of the sports world's true mysteries."
How ironic her last sentence feels. The ISU bigshots needed anonymous judging to keep their jobs and to avoid another scandal which most likely would have seen Figure Skating banned from the Olympics.
It is harder to catch the manipulation and cheating now but what a price skating paid keeping the scores anonymous.
BTW, I thought Buttle deserved his Gold back in '08 but also can see how Joubert fans saw it differently.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2008
2008 Worlds - haven't seen that one in ages! This is like an old timers' thread :thumbsup:. I'm feeling nostalgic, as this was the subject of my very first post here ("for the record, I'm a Joubert fan who thought Buttle should have won but by a smaller margin" - I stand by that). You told me to post often, post long, which I took to heart during my first two years on GS. Anyway, I just want to correct your argument, MM, insofar as that Joubert at most would have won the LP under 6.0; he was probably too far down after the SP to win in an ordinal-based system. BTW, I think Ryan would have fared better under the old system than he has under CoP; it plays more to his strengths.
IMO, Yuzuru Hanyu is the most precocious "raised in the new system" skater. Not only is he amazingly talented, but he seems to have an uncanny ability to pick the best qualities from skaters he admires and incorporate them into his skating, without sacrificing his own style. He still has a ways to go, but is probably the most promising 16 year old skater I've ever seen, at least in men's skating. Also, after the events of the past month, who doesn't want to cheer for the kid from Sendai? I'm looking forward to seeing him in competition next season.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
But, all of Ryan's major accomplishments as a senior have been under CoP.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
Joubert fell in the short program at the 2008 Worlds. His long program had errors too including ending with a double axel-single toe or something like that, and an easy jump layout despite the one quad. He had mediocre spins at best in both programs. Whereas I can atleast see Plushenko fans arguing his not winning in Vancouver, Joubert or anyone else arguing Joubert deserved to win the 2008 Worlds is shameful and disgusting and anyone who even suggest it should be slapped hard on the side of the head 5 times to knock some common sense into their thick skulls. As it was Joubert was ridiculously overmarked at the 2008 Worlds, highest PCS in both programs, ROTFL! I doubt he even deserved the silver had the scoring been accurate.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
It's hard to say. Cool sports like snowboarding are also relegated to niche spots on television. Although someone like Shawn White can make a lot of money as an individual.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
"Cool" is about perception but also be about Pop culture.
Some say the "beat generation" of the 50's were some "cool cats."
Brando, in the "Wild One" saying this is one of my all-time favorite movie lines:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aru671geGSo
Was it also kind of cool when Huey Lewis sang "it's hip to be square."
Why does that make me think of Rachael and not Mirai, who can astonish some of us with the words that fly out of her mouth?
Whatever, I have followed skating going back to Laurie. It has never once crossed my mind that Laurie, Peggy, Janet, Dorothy or Krisity were "hip" or cool characters.
In fact in USA the whole deal was based on being wholesome and more like the "girl next door when it came to being America's sweetheart and "Queen of the Ice."
The image of Yuna is a careful one and quite guarded. In Korea, like USA the "Ice Queen" or "little sister of the nation" must never be seen kissing in public and boyfriends are out of the question if the goal is to keep the money rolling in after big medals have been won.
Is that cool or is it so far from being "hip" it boggles the mind. :think:
It is all about our perception and it is different for all of us.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2009
--A show on Broadway could run a 100 performances and be a hit. Now it can run for years and still end in debt. The number of Broadway theatres has decreased since the 1950s. The last American playwright to truly be part of the cultural conversation was probably Tony Kushner in the early 1990's with Angels in America (which, despite it's modern masterpiece label, was not a hit on Broadway). It's worth mentioning that Broadway attendance is up in terms of sheer numbers, but not as a percentage of population and any analysis would point out that theatre as a whole as left the cultural conversation in a similar way.
--An article explaining the decline of ballet popularity. This quote in particular is worth noting: "Consider this: Of the 120 American dance companies that received grants from the NEA in 1986, 50% are no longer in existence." (emphasis mine). (2002)
What is cool is by definition niche. As soon as it becomes mainstream/popular, it ceases being cool. How many people have you heard raving about that hot new band that 100 people saw play the club that turn around and cry they're overrated when they sell out that stadium.
Pretty much. I've always found that opposition you point out intriguing, because to me it means that COP is doing it's job and balancing things well (which is an obvious argument). But your final point is even truer: if you have it all, you're King (or Queen). If you don't, you better do everything else extremely well. The less you have, the better you have to be at what you do have.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Yes, it does. Sonia Bianchetti is another expert observer who thinks that the new judging system is harmful to te popularity of the sport.
Personally, I do not think that the scoring system is much of a factor when it comes to the public's entertainment tastes. If the popularity of figure skating really is based on our fondness for sweet girls next door who never kiss on the first date, then maybe SkateFiguring's view is correct. Old figure skating fans are dying out and the present generation spends their entertainment dollar in other ways.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
Was it "cool" when the president of the ISU said publicly that "keeping the judges scores anonymous will help reduce the abilty to cheat." :think:
That's a statement most who worship on the altar of the CoP will never respond to.
I really can't blame them for that because most people find cheating in sports or most other things not to be "cool" but reprehensible.
Am I the only person who felt saddened when Speedy said "suspending Didier for three years was a painful decision?" :sheesh:
For me it was and remains a painful decision that he was not given a lifetime ban. I felt sad when ISU decided it was easier to go with anonymous scores rather than making an honest attempt at ridding figure skating of the most problematic manipulators and cheaters.
Or do some of you really think sweeping it under the table was "COOL"?
That's a statement most who worship on the altar of the CoP will never respond to.
I really can't blame them for that because most people find cheating in sports or most other things not to be "cool" but reprehensible.
Am I the only person who felt saddened when Speedy said "suspending Didier for three years was a painful decision?" :sheesh:
For me it was and remains a painful decision that he was not given a lifetime ban. I felt sad when ISU decided it was easier to go with anonymous scores rather than making an honest attempt at ridding figure skating of the most problematic manipulators and cheaters.
Or do some of you really think sweeping it under the table was "COOL"?
Similar threads
