Lysacek out of Grand Prix; at odds with USFS

[Bluebonnet]

I don't think men's field is weak at all. There are nearly a dozen interesting skaters in the world. If you say US men's field is really weak, I'd agree. It might not be strong enough till Nathan Chen grows up.

Assume Yu Na Kim is left, it does look weak for ladies.

In Dance, isn't this supposed to be the best era ever in North America? Still it can't prevent the decline.

Pairs was never strong discipline for US.

[gmyers]

We have Judy Blumberg, an ISU tech specialist and 3 time world bronze medalist. She's excellent at doing the same things Kurt does, calling elements in real time and explaining them to boot. Sadly, she's only ever been used sporadically on TV during the last 25 years. Paul Wylie was also pretty good, although he and Kurt and Button all screwed up on ESPN in 2008 when they miscalculated the quality of Buttle's performance vs Joubert's more difficult jumping passes. Many of the US skaters who've been trained in IJS have gone into coaching or other fields altogether rather than commentary (Dungjen, Sand, Krall, Goebel, etc.) , largely because those opportunites have been monopolized by Hamilton and previously Button. To my knowledge, Scott does no formal coaching. Sandra, though a Canadian, has worked almost exclusively on US TV as far as commentary goes for some time. She no longer choreographs eligible programs due to her issues with IJS. She acts as a consultant for skaters on non IJS issues like emoting, posture, choice of music. Whereas, the top Canadian commentators are involved in either coaching (Tracy, PJ) or choreography (Kurt). That may greatly impact their ability to accurately call skating under the current system.

It would be good if more of the commentators knew more about it from an experience standpoint. In 2008 the commentators did also underestimate the value of triple jumps againts quads. Wylie was doing agiain in 2009. The instances of people thinking quads mattered in winning an event was so overdone.

[gkelly]

And the ISU has changed the value of quads (in response to lobbying from coaches and skaters who do them, as I understand) several times in the last few years. So commentators working with last year's rules can be especially off in their estimates.

When we start getting commentators who did most of their competing under IJS, we'll get a different perspective.

Speaking of which, maybe the guy whose name is in this thread title will be ready to try some commentary in a few years.

[Kitt]

When we start getting commentators who did most of their competing under IJS, we'll get a different perspective.

Speaking of which, maybe the guy whose name is in this thread title will be ready to try some commentary in a few years.

Doubtful; as I recall Evan on DWTS, he was wooden in his comments, almost inanimate. I just don't think he is sharp enough!

[CARA]

And the ISU has changed the value of quads (in response to lobbying from coaches and skaters who do them, as I understand) several times in the last few years. So commentators working with last year's rules can be especially off in their estimates.

When we start getting commentators who did most of their competing under IJS, we'll get a different perspective.

Speaking of which, maybe the guy whose name is in this thread title will be ready to try some commentary in a few years.

Wooden, you say, Kitt. Maybe he could learn. After all, I hear "they pay decent money" for commentating.

[Bluebonnet]

Speaking of which, maybe the guy whose name is in this thread title will be ready to try some commentary in a few years.

Ah, I hope not. His flat tones and unexpressive, unenthusiastic voice is not good for commentary.

[SkateFiguring]

What commentators like Kurt and Tracy do is also showing viewers the perspectives of the experts including the judges. Whatever they notice and comment on leaves an impression that it is important and likely matters in the scoring. When commentators watch and comment much like the fans do, they reinforce the superficial impressions while ignoring the technical aspects of skating which of course are big factors in the scoring. Viewers don't need someone to point out the pretty or the dramatic including the falls. Commentators should show different eyes in looking at the performances.

[Kitt]

He'd probably spend all his time justifying his OGM!

[Bluebonnet]

He'd probably spend all his time justifying his OGM!

[CARA]

He'd probably spend all his time justifying his OGM!

I see you think really highly of Evan.

[SkateFiguring]

He'd probably spend all his time justifying his OGM!

Very believable probability.

[jcoates]

^^^Let the baseless Evan bashing by those who can't get over Vancouver begin again.

[SkateFiguring]

Hey, funny is funny. I'm entitled to a little laugh after repeatedly defending Lysacek's win. The probability of him doing that is based more on circumstances and personality than the legitimacy of his OGM.