Men - Free Program | Page 7 | Golden Skate

Men - Free Program

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
I see nothing wrong in what Stojko said. It is rather a reaction to the praises of the others, calling Chan the best skater ever. We know which part of figure skating matters the most to Stojko and it is his right to think that way. For him the best skater ever has to be technically far above all, which also means doing jumps and combinations and spins that have not already been shown 12 years ago.

Twelve or two years ago nobody skated a program with multiple quads and the kind of complex transitions and footwork sequences of today. Should figure skating progress the way Stojko deems fit, there would be jumping contests filled with quads and quints and not much of anything else.

Nobody would complain if Chan got 270 points or so, but reaching 300 subjectively demands more, for Stoijko and people who judge figure skating like he does. He is quite right though in saying that Chan is "the poster child of the new scoring system, with the ability to chalk up points with all facets of skating."

Getting no complaints is impossible and not the basis for scoring a performance. How did you come up with 270 anyway besides that it might perhaps stop your complaints? Can you demonstrate and rationalize such a mark with scoring protocols of your own for discussion here?

Saying somebody is a poster child of the current scoring system is a dismissive statement about that person's accomplishments. Stojko was judged by the 6.0 of his days and he won legitimately by the system. Nobody has deemed him unfit champion because his skating would not win by COP. But why should today's skaters skate as if they were competing under the same system as he did? That would be utterly ridiculous and moronic.
 

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
I see nothing wrong in what Stojko said.
Agreed. Stojko presented his thoughts in a very logical way: First, he defined what "the best skater ever" meant according to his dictionary--"a skater who blows the doors off" in every aspect of skating, and he pointed out the fact that Chan is not the best throughout figure skating history in terms of jumps and spins. I think he was correct in saying that.
Of course, one may have a different perspective and define "the best skater ever" as the most well-balanced skater who might not be the best in every element but is unmatchable as a whole. Under this definition, Chan is arguably the best ever.

Give Stojko a break. He has a valid albeit different point of view.
 
Last edited:

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
There is no one single skater who is the very best in every aspect. "A skater who blows the doors off" in every aspect of skating does not exist. And anybody close to this ideal would more likely emerge under COP which Stojko has no respect for.
 
Last edited:

jettasian

Match Penalty
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Even without quads, Patrick is still miles ahead and better than Stojko ever be.

Chan is "the poster child of the new scoring system, with the ability to chalk up points with all facets of skating."

This quote has been brought up many times. I do wonder why's Patrick the only one taking advantage of this "new" scoring system? I mean, there are many skaters out there, why don't the others do the same? Or maybe they are not capable of doing so? It's funny that this quote makes it looks like the system's designed FOR Patrick despite it was there long before Patrick doing competition.
 
Last edited:

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Even without quads, Patrick is still miles ahead and better than Stojko ever be.
Well, Stojko was once the poster child of the old scoring system, whereas Chan the one of the new scoring system. So they are even.:biggrin:
Also, based on his own definition, Stojko pretty much excluded himself from being the "best skater ever". So it is not discriminatory against Chan. :biggrin:
 

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
And therefore in Stojko's mind there is no best skater ever. Chan is one of the best but not the best ever.

The point in my original post was not about who the best skater is or whether or not Chan is the best. I admire Stojko for his grittiness, hard work, jumping ability and some other fine qualities as a winner. But I'm no fan of his skating or his opinion of what constitute great skating, which seems to be a common view and a sore point with him that he is still reacting to. My original post stated it was how I felt about his comments over the last few years, before Chan was ever considered for the status of the best skater. Stojko just comes across as having a tunnel vision about how Men's skating and skaters should be judged. It's about quads, quads, and more quads.

eta

Also, based on his own definition, Stojko pretty much excluded himself from being the "best skater ever". So it is not discriminatory against Chan.

I've been wondering: Whom has Stojko considered an excellent or the best skater, either an idol of his or someone during or after his competitive days? Recent media reports are usually his criticism of other skaters and the IJS, no doubt because his reactions about recent events are sought.

etaa

Well, Stojko was once the poster child of the old scoring system, whereas Chan the one of the new scoring system. So they are even.

No, he was not. In fact, he was much criticized for lack of artistry which was the more important half of the scoring. Thus my statement that he was still reacting to the criticism and probably resentment about being unfairly judged.
 
Last edited:

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
I've been wondering: Whom has Stojko considered an excellent or the best skater, either an idol of his or someone during or after his competitive days?
I forgot where I got this idea (they had drinks together or something), but my impression is that Stojko thought highly of Plueshenko.
 

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
I forgot where I got this idea (they had drinks together or something), but my impression is that Stojko thought highly of Plueshenko.

He naturally sided with Plushenko during the last Olympic, but I didn't read direct praises. However, it would most likely Plushenko if Stojko had to choose. Outside of himself. :)
 

Florian

On the Ice
Joined
Apr 27, 2011
Country
Germany
Getting no complaints is impossible and not the basis for scoring a performance. How did you come up with 270 anyway besides that it might perhaps stop your complaints? Can you demonstrate and rationalize such a mark with scoring protocols of your own for discussion here?

Saying somebody is a poster child of the current scoring system is a dismissive statement about that person's accomplishments. Stojko was judged by the 6.0 of his days and he won legitimately by the system. Nobody has deemed him unfit champion because his skating would not win by COP. But why should today's skaters skate as if they were competing under the same system as he did? That would be utterly ridiculous and moronic.

I haven't had the time to fill out an own scoring protocol for Chan. I might do once I have the opportunity for it. 270 was just a number I choose as maybe the "felt" maximum for a perfectly executed program with those elements. That's why I used the word "subjective". And this was not supposed to be a big criticism of Chan, rather of the scoring system and/or judging.

For me, saying somebody is a poster child of a scoring system is not a dismissive statement about that person's accomplishments. No, the system was not invented for Chan, but he is just the one who perfectly takes advantage of it, like Trixi Schuba once did with the figure skating system of her time. And that rather can be seen as a praise, about him being quite clever or at least lucky to favour the skating the system rewards. And I don't hate the skating that is rewarded today. I don't want a jumping contest either. For me an ideal skater has to be the best in every aspect of skating and art. If this ideal has ever existed is another question. Nevertheless do we compare the skills of skaters independently of the the system they had to skate in. And the most concrete and objective measure throughout history are the jumps, if one likes it or not. With Chan as champion, we are back at a good level after we had a rather unsatisfaying decade there, but as the big champion he is, breaking scoring records after records, one can demand that he levels up this, as Button, Browning, Stojko, Goebel, Pluschenko once did. That he is the more complete skater of at least two of them is clear. And he surely is someone who challenges himself and isn't easily satisfied, so I am optimistic. Those demands naturally appear because he is not just a champion, one of many, but because he is miles away of the rest given the scores and can usher in a new era. And he and also his fans have to live with those high expectations I think.
 

Florian

On the Ice
Joined
Apr 27, 2011
Country
Germany
I forgot where I got this idea (they had drinks together or something), but my impression is that Stojko thought highly of Plueshenko.

Yes, after the Olympics he appeared together with Pluschenko and Katarina Witt in a show on German tv and defended him. He also praised Goebel in that discussion.
 
Last edited:

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
BTW, Men's SP and Ladies' Free, the complete show, is up on www.CTV.ca. Much nicer full screen than Youtube videos. The Pairs Free and Ladies' SP was on the site yesterday but not to be found today, so watch this segment of the competitions now if you wish.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
I haven't had the time to fill out an own scoring protocol for Chan. I might do once I have the opportunity for it. 270 was just a number I choose as maybe the "felt" maximum for a perfectly executed program with those elements. That's why I used the word "subjective". And this was not supposed to be a big criticism of Chan, rather of the scoring system and/or judging.

I tried it, just for fun. I did not give any negative GOEs. The only +3 I gave was on the 3Lz+half-loop+3S, which was absolute perfection. I do not see why he got so many +3's on his spins, which seemed to me to be fine but unexceptional. Maybe I don't know what I should be looking for.

On the program components, the scores for Interpretation (five perfect 10s out of 8) and P/E (also five perfect 10s out of eight) seemed too high. His interpretation of the the music was fine but I think 9.0 would have covered it, and the same with performance and execution. I thought the choreography was super, though. So 285 with 15 homer points seems OK to me.
 

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
On the program components, the scores for Interpretation (five perfect 10s out of 8) and P/E (also five perfect 10s out of eight) seemed too high. His interpretation of the the music was fine but I think 9.0 would have covered it, and the same with performance and execution.
:thumbsup: I'm more generous. I would have given him 9.25. Choreography was not perfect either. "As a choreographer, I saw small details that need to be fixed,” said Lori Nichol.
 

jettasian

Match Penalty
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
I tried it, just for fun. I did not give any negative GOEs. The only +3 I gave was on the 3Lz+half-loop+3S, which was absolute perfection. I do not see why he got so many +3's on his spins, which seemed to me to be fine but unexceptional. Maybe I don't know what I should be looking for.

On the program components, the scores for Interpretation (five perfect 10s out of 8) and P/E (also five perfect 10s out of eight) seemed too high. His interpretation of the the music was fine but I think 9.0 would have covered it, and the same with performance and execution. I thought the choreography was super, though. So 285 with 15 homer points seems OK to me.

I'd add the solo quad and the 3A, and the 7th jump, Lutz?, and the 2A exit, all of these were gorgeous as well. So at world, I'm sure he will get many +GOE on these jumps, so I think he will probably get 290 to 295?
 

let`s talk

Match Penalty
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Well, this is the men's division, not ice dance. You won't see many men trying to distinguish a tango-like quad from a waltzy quad.
Well, but this logic leaves the men's filed just hopeless! Luckily, it's not true. A good deal of male skaters in the past and present could and can show the artistic performances and sophiticated presentations than that blah Aranjuez. I won't evet bother to start the list, it's quite long. 200 for doing what others could do years ago and even better is just embarrassing, like the whole inflation thing itself. It reminds me some soviet economy plan: they told us we must reach those numbers, so we will (forget the quality)!:laugh:
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
^ Lambiel is the only recent skater that I would say actually tried to display different forms of dance in his routines.
 

skatinginbc

Medalist
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Lambiel :love: I wish he had won the Olympics with a perfect performance. I thought he had the potential of becoming the "best skater ever". :)
 

Violet Bliss

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
It may be a taboo to proclaim Patrick Chan's artistry but I will do it.

There have been and there are many great artistic skaters and I admire them, but I dare say, none can do what Patrick can do presentation and performance wise his way. Many can skate cute, or joyous, or seductive/sexy, funny, sad, etc. They have quick dance steps, dramatic gestures, facial emoting, etc., but, as in life, elegance and sophistication are darn near impossible to fake. Patrick's skating and performance are just that, elegant and sophisticated. His Phantom Of The Opera was extremely passionate and dramatic while Aranjuez is majestic and sad at the same time. His skating and the music carry the audience along across the ice. Name me a skater who could skate these programs? And portray these emotions with such grand skating, not just acting, skills? Like the rest, Patrick can do fun show programs and even a macho cheese now that he's all grown up, but to put out such grand and emotional competitive programs with the highest degree of difficulty, on speed unmatched by anyone, his artistry is unique and beyond the capacities of most.

I'm not here to declare Chan the most artistic skater. It is subjective and many are great and unique. There is no point for contest as we want to enjoy and admire them all. But to call Chan inferior artistically is untrue and unfair, if one would just open the mind and eyes to really watch him do his magic. And the best is yet to come from him.
 

jettasian

Match Penalty
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Well, but this logic leaves the men's filed just hopeless! Luckily, it's not true. A good deal of male skaters in the past and present could and can show the artistic performances and sophiticated presentations than that blah Aranjuez. I won't evet bother to start the list, it's quite long. 200 for doing what others could do years ago and even better is just embarrassing, like the whole inflation thing itself. It reminds me some soviet economy plan: they told us we must reach those numbers, so we will (forget the quality)!:laugh:

List them (the bold part), who are the others?

As for the blah Aranjuez, of course, it's blah. I mean, why would a hater likes anything Chan does? That'd not make any sense.
 
Top