Stojko beat Plushy on Oly and WC because of his longevity! But lost finally because of the difference in EC/FC (we know FC began only since 1999)and GPF. I didn't calculate GP because there are too many and I am sure Plushy will win anyway.
Of course it's not a very good method for comparison but it's one of the method. and of course, it cann't show the competition quality
Last edited by wmsb; 05-25-2011 at 03:44 PM.
Yet even quadless and unspectacular Lysacek beat a clean Plushenko in Vancouver so...Plushenko is consistent. This is the greatest asset for him. Unlike Lysacek who has only triples in his pocket, Plushenko has quad and consistency.
Last edited by silverlake22; 05-25-2011 at 06:01 PM.
pangtongfan you know it is not a given Plushenko SHOULD skate every time like he did in Vancouver in LP, he maybe skate better or worse, it is not the ultimate skate to take it as a reference, it is just his most recent one. And let him comeback and then you laugh, the guy is NOT even reistated yet. Why so much fuss, use him as bathroom break
How many cases are in figure skating that NOT the best skater wins. Comments are based a lot on the word IF. IF Chan had skated in Vancouver like 2011 Worlds he would have been Olympic Champion, if Abott and Kozuka had skated his best in Vancouver he should/would have been on the podium, if Mao skates to her potential IMO she is the best current skater, but this is a huge IF. There are many ifs in ever competition BUT Abott rarely has the quad and Verner hits the quad and falls in everything else. There is no way Joubert with his 500 medals of any color was just lucky that the others were head-cases, or they didnt skate well. We dont speak for one two times, Brian has been medalling through out his career. This season it is a transit season he changed choreographer and coach, he got injured again and I dont know how much motivated he is still. But bottom line is Joubert has a very long career consistently ON podium in every competition with a tone of medals and ABott and Verner dont. Kozuka also was not a World medalist till now but he skated great at TEB and got the pcs. Maybe Abott and Verner are more natural talented the way you put it but they certainly are worse athletes. I dont know how much better skaters they can be when they rarely skate to their potential.Joubert also benefits from the fact that skaters like Verner and Abbott are headcases and have never medaled at Worlds and thus don't have consistently high PCS, because IMO, at their best they are also better than Joubert.
Mao was the best skater at her best back in 2006 and 2007 but that time has long passed. Had she been in Turin and skated to her potential she would have been an Olympic Champion, and I feel it is awful she was deprived of that chance. Mao skated very well at Japanese Nationals and Four Continents and even lost to Ando, so even a clean Ando has a chance against a clean Asada, never mind having any chance against a clean Kim. I cant imagine a clean Mao coming even close to a clean Yu Na Kim at this point. The Olympics for instance she would have lost by almost 15 points to Kim even skating perfectly in both programs. The fact of the matter is she hasnt improved for years, while the others particularly Kim, Ando, and Rochette have, so even her best is no longer the best. Too many bad choices with coaches and wrong priorities.
Anyway back to the men I fully agree with Silverlake's assessment on Joubert. And now things are even harder for him since the level of the men is raising much higher than the 2005-2009 period he had his most success. If guys like Brezina and Oda can fully get their acts together, and Gachinski and Amodio mature and improve further the field by Sochi will be scary, despite Chan's virtual lock on the gold all the way through. And I consider Amodio already the French #1. The only place he lost to Joubert was Nationals, he is the reigning European Champion, and international judges give him higher PCS than Joubert now. Based on the jugding of French Nationals the French federation might have wanted to keep Joubert as their #1 but the international judges have made their feelings clear and the French fed. will have no choice but to follow suit if they want a hope of a medal in Sochi.
1998 Stojko was handicapped with an injury and no 4-3, him and Kulik never skated clean at the same competitions....
And no Olympic Gold makes them less of skaters?
ie. Michelle Kwan (vs Lipinski), Kurt Browning (vs Petrenko), Brian Orser (vs Boitano)?
Oh yeah Stojko's parents came from Hungary and Slovenia, so he could be "considered" European as well
Last edited by bibi24; 05-25-2011 at 08:39 PM.
I agree, bibi24.
At the time Stojko was active, he was pretty dominant. Whether he was a better skater than everyone he competed against is not the issue. He did beat them all a good part of the time. He wasn't a textbook-pure skater like Kulik, but he was certainly impressive as a jumper. He led the way in many of the jumping advances that we now take for granted. Add to that his temperament, which can best be described as pit bull. Whatever the opposite of headcase is, Stojko was. He was virtually impossible to intimidate. There's something refreshing and admirable about that. I think he won the silver in 1998 on just about one leg. They had to roll a carpet out onto the ice for him to get to the podium for his medal, because he couldn't skate out to it; he'd used up everything he had in his long program.
And seniorita, I agree that often it's not the best skater who wins. As a dancer friend of mine once said, sometimes the magic happens for someone on that night. There's an injury, someone gets more nervous than usual, someone else gets less nervous than usual. If skating were predictable, we wouldn't have to ask the skaters to show up. We could just take their average statistics, crunch the numbers, and award the prizes. Luckily, that's not the way things work.
Last edited by Olympia; 05-25-2011 at 08:54 PM.
There may be 2 ways to mearsure athletes: one is providing standard measurment; another is something like "i think/regard/consider/believe A is the greater/better than B"
What makes Michelle greater/better than Tara? Her achievment, program, influence, fans, or something else? after some standard, maybe the comparison can be done
Last edited by wmsb; 05-25-2011 at 09:36 PM.
People who think Stojko was not dominant must not have even followed skating much back then. I am not a fan of Stojko by any stretch, but he was most definitely the dominant skater of his era. Probably not the most talented, enjoyable, or memorable but definitely the one to beat. For instance in the 1994, 1995, and 1997 seasons he lost only 1 event in all those combined, that being the 94 Olympics were many thought he should have won as well. And from 1993-1998 seasons he only finished lower than 2nd two times, both of those in the 95-96 season which was his biggest "slump" season of his prime.
His contemporaries feared his technical ability which was by far was the strongest at the time, even without the quad for that matter, his mental toughness, and his consistency. Basically the only way he could be beaten is to either have an off competition with major mistakes or to be hammered on the 2nd mark by the judges like he was in Lillehammer.
Eldredge was his most consistent rival and Elredge was so inferior to Stojko that a clean Elredge could not even beat a clean Stojko without doing his famed quad. Stojko could leave out his biggest weapon and still was pretty much certain to beat his most consistent rival with both going clean. The only hope Todd had to ever beat Elvis was something like the 96 Worlds with Elvis falling in the short program, otherwise he had no chance. Only Urmanov or Kulik could force Stojko to need his quad to beat him, but both were wildly inconsistent and could hardly ever produce clean enough to beat Stojko.
Plushenko was probably even more dominant AFTER Yagudin retired, but at that point he had no competition at all whereas Stojko atleast had Elredge, Urmanov, and Kulik, a 6 time World medalist and two Olympic Champions.
Anyway I still consider Plushenko superior to Stojko. I think in their mutual primes they would have had a hard battle with Plushenko probably winning 6 or 7 out of 10 or so. However it is not in anyway true Stojko as far as competitive record and impact on his own era is not in the same league. Plushenko would not find Stojko any pushover like his Goebel, Honda, Joubert, or Lambiel were to him.
Last edited by pangtongfan; 05-25-2011 at 09:58 PM.
but, can we say from another point of view. the reason why plushy don't have competitor with 6 world medalist and 2 olympic champion, is because he is much more dominant.
I think Plushy do have competitor as Goebel (2 time world medalist), Takeshi Honda (2 time world medalist), Brian Joubert and Stefan Lindemann......yeah! 6 time World medalist.
btw, Stojko have 2 olympic champions as competitor because he lost to both of them. I don't think it can be used as evidence to "Stojko is not so dominant because he faced a more aggressive competition"......the dispute seems like...
- A is more dominant than B
- That's because B has more aggressive competition
- Why B has more aggressive competition
- Because B has lots of Olympic Champion as competitor
- Why B has Olympic Champion as competitor
- Because B compete with them in Olympic and lost, so his competitor is Olympic Champion
- Then how about A
- Unfortunately, A himself is the Olympic Champion, so he don't have so many Olympic Champion as competitor (Actually A has 2 Oly Champion as competitor as well)
No, i am not saying A's competition is more aggressive than B's, I am just saying there is logical problem by using "competitor's title" as evidence.