Men SP

[gioccia]

It seems to be that Patrick Chan was overmarked, as is often the case. Even when he makes errors, he almost always places first, with a generous lead over many of his competitors. How many mistakes does he have to make in order for him to lose 1st place?

I dunno...he's one of a kind...like SS.

[let`s talk]

Two things have been proven once again:

1. Men's event still remains the most corrupted segment of FS thanks to PChan&Co. His stumbling footwork of a drunk man with positive GOE made me laugh even more than any of his hilarious falls. Nevertheless he should send a thank-you kiss to Jeremy who took some portion of critics from Chan. It seems like Lakernik was speaking only for the Russian radio and for nobody else- PCS don't get reduce when the skating has falls. Chan patrol can sleep peacefully.

Brezina should be in the lead. Abbot shouldn't be in the top 10 at all.

2. The positive side of this event is a lot of competitors were fighting with Chan as with an equal, even if they knew that he would be overscored as always. While Plushenko demoralized everyone. The king is still the one and the only no matter how many imposters are showing up.

[let`s talk]

I didn't see anyone supplied any photo proof at 4CC men's SP thread when a multi-paged cries on Chan's "fall" broke out.

Your eyesight is your problem and nobody else's.

The photo came in later.

That's a lie. I was the one who posted that photo of Chan's "non-fall" in MEN- Short Program thread, post # 384. Do me a favor, if your please: don't lie if my name is involved. Thanks in advance.

[let`s talk]

Well Dai's unfall today has different meaning to Patrick's earlier unfall. Patrick's unfall was noticed and pounced upon because up until then, one could expect such an 'unfall' to be marked as a fall, and then suddenly the rules appeared to change for Patrick. Once that prescedent had been set, then CoP had to maintain the standard and so today, Dai's fall was marked as 'unfall'. In other words, Patrick's unfall appeared to have occured for Patrick's sake, but Dai's unfall today appears to have been done in order to maintain the image of CoP's objectivity.

Are you saying ISU is finally playing a fair game?

[SGrand]

Thanks. Did anyone watch CBC? During his interview with Russell, I think he said it differently...don't recall. I'm trying to find the video but CBC only has the Bold version so far.

I watched the interview and that's pretty much what he said to Scott. I think he usually slightly pretends to lose his balance, but he actually did this time and had to save it by putting his other foot down.

[blainechan]

It seems to be that Patrick Chan was overmarked, as is often the case. Even when he makes errors, he almost always places first, with a generous lead over many of his competitors. How many mistakes does he have to make in order for him to lose 1st place?

Because Can Fed ordered the judges to do so! We have the maple syrup to sweeten the judges, the oil to make their cars moving and the beavers to chop their woods

[Bluebonnet]

Your eyesight is your problem and nobody else's. That's a lie. I was the one who posted that photo of Chan's "non-fall" in MEN- Short Program thread, post # 384. Do me a favor, if your please: don't lie if my name is involved. Thanks in advance.

What a serious charge you've put on me!

I did your favor and went back to 4CC SP thread. I've found these:

1. Talking about Chan's "fall" started from Page 8. Scattered and stretched for 14 pages until first photo appeared.

2. The first photo about that "fall" was posted on Page 22, post #326. But it was not by you.

3. Your "fall" photo was posted on Page 23, post #336.

4. You've posted the same photo from post #326 onto post #384 which was on the last page (Page 26).

The truth is: I was absolutely correct on what I've said. Oops!

You'd better get your fact straight and think twice before you attempt to use such eye-popping word to accuse me or anyone!

[let`s talk]

I didn't see anyone supplied any photo proof at 4CC men's SP thread when a multi-paged cries on Chan's "fall" broke out. The photo came in later.

What a serious charge you've put on me!

I did your favor and went back to 4CC SP thread. I've found these:

1. Talking about Chan's "fall" started from Page 8. Scattered and stretched for 14 pages until first photo appeared.

2. The first photo about that "fall" was posted on Page 22, post #326. But it was not by you.

3. Your "fall" photo was posted on Page 23, post #336.

4. You've posted the same photo from post #326 onto post #384 which was on the last page (Page 26).

The truth is: I was absolutely correct on what I've said. Oops!

You'd better get your fact straight and think twice before you attempt to use such eye-popping word to accuse me or anyone!

Not a surprised to see such a rude hysterical reaction from you. It's kind of a norm really. But hell the Internet rules for you guys. The irony is that you only proved my point- the photo of Chan's "non-fall" was not not supplied as you claimed it was. It was posted within 12 hours as soon as the first article in the internet with the relevant photo showed up. Yeah, it was in post #326 with link to the rian article with photos included. I didn't say that I was the first who posted the photo. I said I posted it, and I did, as a separate image without the article text, in post #384. So, why don't you give yourself your own advice and get your fact straight. As for your claim that I posted the "fall photo" in post #336 is ether a lie too or you have a lack of humor. The image in that post was a sarcasm on judges' decision. Your dearest Patrick is wearing a differrent suit. So it cannot be a photo of 4CC fall. But the sense of humour is individual and not international. I am not blaming you for having a different one.