Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 94

Thread: Peggy Fleming said (Is MK the best?)

  1. #31
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,556
    Quote Originally Posted by jenaj View Post
    So many Olympic gold medalists are far from the best-ever or even among the best and so many legendary or soon-to-be legendary skaters do not have an Olympic gold medal (Browning-no Olympic medal at all!, Kwan, Lynn, Ito, Chen, Asada (probably), Takahashi (probably)) , that I don't think that should be an absolute requirement for "best ever."
    Sure it should, if one skater has to be the best in a category. Depending on whether you favor jumps or artistry or competitiveness, you have Yuna, Peggy, and Katarina who all won a lot in women's, and Plushenko, Curry, and Yagudin for the men. What separated them from the field is that they were able to handle the pressure of being gold medal favorites and skate well, whereas the great who didn't win beat themselves on the biggest stage. That has to count for something.

  2. #32
    ~high art~
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    636
    Kwan a better spinner than Kim? Good grief.

    Kim has superior flow and edge quality as well. Kwan can have extensions.

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,147
    Quote Originally Posted by jenaj View Post
    So many Olympic gold medalists are far from the best-ever
    An irrelevant argument since the poorest Olympic gold medalits (no doubt the ones you are referring to) indicate nothing. Like my post said of course some of the legendary skaters without an Olympic Gold can rank over some of the Olympic winners, but it is hard to make a case for them to rank over all the Olympics winners who also dominated World competition for years, also made a huge impact on the sport, also displayed great longevity, but actually have the hardware of Olympic Golds and winning at the biggest event in the sport too. When people defend favorites without an Olympic Gold they always attack and reference the runt of the litter like Hughes, Baiul, Lysacek, maybe Lipinski, as if that is somehow proof that they can be elevated above ALL Olympic Gold medalists without one somehow, lol!

    The Olympic Gold is absolutely a prerequisite for any consideration as THE best ever. Perhaps you can be top 5 without one at absolute max. No athlete in any sport, especialy an individual sport, who didnt win the biggest event in their sport atleast once, can ever be called the best ever.

  4. #34
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Moment View Post
    Kwan a better spinner than Kim? Good grief.

    Kim has superior flow and edge quality as well. Kwan can have extensions.
    Yes, a better spinner. Kwan beats Kim on basic Camel and Sit in position and centering. Layback is a wash (though, the arch in their back is similar, and Kwan DID flirt briefly with a good free leg position in 2000 and 2001 before going to the lowered free leg layback. ) Again, CoP positions are NOT indicative of "good spinning". Sure, Kwan was no amazing spin doctor and neither is Yuna, but she (Kwan) was better at the basics than Kim.

    Look at the change of edge on their spirals, Kwan is MARKEDLY better, which shows you the comparison of edges fairly well. Look at the lutzes between the two. Kwan's entrance edge (especially Earlier in her career) is a true, deep BO edge (which, admittedly, flattened out towards the jump sometimes.) Kim's is just a flip entrance with her ankle rolled over to the outside edge. Kwan has better edges.

    Flow: Well, CoP really doesn't have time for flow, either between elements or out of jumps. Flow is ALSO indicative of good edges (usually) so....

    By all means, show me direct comparisons of the edges between the two.

  5. #35
    ~high art~
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    636
    Don't know where to begin with. Stop making up lies about what you don't know, especially about the Lutz entrance. YNK uses her knee for her Lutz takeoff, not her ankle. It is impossible to jump with such power and efficiency when you have to force your ankle to maintain an LBO. A good example of such imperfect technique is Joannie Rochette who has to pre-rotate her upper body to land a fixed Lutz.

    Not to mention Michelle Kwan flutzed. It was a flutz. It's simple as that. So how does a fact that YNK has a better Lutz technique than MK or anyone work in your favor?

  6. #36
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    829
    To answer the question, Michelle is great, one of the greatest ladies skaters ever. THE greatest? Don't think there's a definitive answer to that. Clearly, it's the off-season.

    It's enough to just be in the conversation as the greatest. That said, I think the answer may differ depending on what country you're in.

    Quote Originally Posted by zschultz1986 View Post
    Yes, a better spinner. Kwan beats Kim on basic Camel and Sit in position and centering. Layback is a wash (though, the arch in their back is similar, and Kwan DID flirt briefly with a good free leg position in 2000 and 2001 before going to the lowered free leg layback. ) Again, CoP positions are NOT indicative of "good spinning". Sure, Kwan was no amazing spin doctor and neither is Yuna, but she (Kwan) was better at the basics than Kim.
    No, Michelle was not a better spinner than Yu-Na Kim. Yu-Na would never have dominated CoP the way she did had she not been an excellent spinner. Michelle was never a strong spinner under 6.0, and that was one reason why she found it difficult to adjust to CoP (in addition to her injury).

    In terms of speed, variety of positions, difficulty of positions, and spin features, Yu-Na blows Michelle out of the water. It's tough arguing with someone who thinks that their layback arch "is a wash," though. Find me a Michelle Kwan layback that has the speed, centering, variety of positions, and back positioning that this one by Yu-Na Kim does.

    All you're focusing on is basic positions and I don't even think that Michelle really "beats" Kim there in a definitive way. But quantitatively, in terms of other criteria for the quality of a good spin--Yu-Na wins hands down. Michelle just didn't have the variety of positions that some of her peers then and today's CoP skaters have. She didn't have a lot of speed. She didn't hold her positions for a long time. Yu-Na does.

    One could argue that if Michelle had trained under CoP her entire career, her spins would've been more CoP friendly. And yes, I think they would have, but she would never have been like Alissa Czisny because she simply lacked the flexibility and the natural spinning skill. I suspect that spin wise, she would've done similarly as Joannie Rochette and Rachael Flatt did under CoP (who even did the same feature that Michelle did, spinning in opposite directions). Michelle would've been lucky to get close to Yu-Na's ability to maximize levels and GOE on spins. And note that Michelle had the incentive under 6.0 to improve her spins--her peers, starting with the baby ballerinas (Naomi Nari Nam, Sasha Cohen, Sarah Hughes) had far superior spins with more positions and more features than Michelle, as did her greatest competitor, Irina Slutskaya. And while spins didn't count for a whole lot under 6.0, they did count for something--Sarah Hughes would never have won the Olympics had she not had great spins in addition to those triple/triples.

    Look at the lutzes between the two. Kwan's entrance edge (especially Earlier in her career) is a true, deep BO edge (which, admittedly, flattened out towards the jump sometimes.) Kim's is just a flip entrance with her ankle rolled over to the outside edge. Kwan has better edges.
    Sorry, but this is just wrong. The fact that you claim Michelle's lutz has a "true, deep BO edge" and that it's better than Kim's lutz (...Kim's lutz has a flip entrance??? ) is just baffling since Michelle did flutz and it was worse earlier in her career. She later improved it.

    You don't have to take my word for it, you can see Michelle's flutz at the 1998 Olympics here, and the British Eurosport commentators note it as well.

    Flow: Well, CoP really doesn't have time for flow, either between elements or out of jumps. Flow is ALSO indicative of good edges (usually) so....

    By all means, show me direct comparisons of the edges between the two.
    Yu-Na had better "flow" and speed (generated by her edges) in her Olympic performances than Michelle did in hers.

    I am a huge Michelle Kwan fan, and followed Michelle Kwan's career longer than I did Yu-Na's. They both have their unique strengths and weaknesses in their skating. Disappointing to find others try and tear down Yu-Na to make Michelle look better.

    That said, the first time I heard British Eurosport commentators call out Michelle's flutz, I felt like I had just found out that there was no Santa Clause. But I celebrate Michelle for everything undeniably great that she did do, and I don't feel there's a need to portray her as a more perfect skater than she was.

  7. #37
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,556
    Quote Originally Posted by jaylee View Post
    You don't have to take my word for it, you can see Michelle's flutz at the 1998 Olympics here, and the British Eurosport commentators note it as well.
    I always thought it was funny that Frank Carroll pushed the flutz issue in between the 1997 and 1998 seasons, when commentators were coming down much harder on Lipinski for her flutz in the Olympic year. Yet Michelle also flutzed (not as bad as Lipinski) but that was not brought up much by the US commentators.

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,147
    Who was a better 6.0 spinner between Kwan and Kim is fairly close, still would go with Kim slightly. Kim is a WAY better COP spinner than Kwan. There isnt a single spin Kwan does better under COP thinking. Kim had much more complex positions and much superior speed.

    It seems to be a GoldenSkate myth that has developed in recent months though that Kim is a weak spinner. Fans of every skater from Gold, Sotnikova, Asada, Osmond, Wagner, have all claimed at some point the last 3 months one reason they can beat a clean Kim is a supposed edge in spins, despite that all those skaters repeatedly earn less points on spins; and the only one the suggestion isnt purely laughable for are Asada and Gold perhaps. Even a Kostner fan called Kostner a better spinner, Kostner with the Worlds ugliest layback and mostly slow and awkward spins, LOL! Next thing you know we will be hearing Ando, Bonaly, Kerrigan, and Chen Lu were better spinners.

  9. #39
    Custom Title Mathman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    28,102
    To me, this whole discussion shows how futile it is to compare skaters from different eras skating under different rules which valued different things. Here is a 6.0 program. It would not get a lot of CoP points. No triple-triple, spiral held too long, spin positions too basic, etc. And yet...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q#t=1m25s Lutz edge

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q#t=1m55s Outflowing edge on landing

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q#t=0m53s Spiral sequence

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q#t=2m50s Basic positions in combination spin. Olé!

    Some people like CoP programs better. OK by me. Still...
    Last edited by Mathman; 06-04-2013 at 01:09 PM.

  10. #40
    can't come down to Earth prettykeys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy View Post
    I always thought it was funny that Frank Carroll pushed the flutz issue in between the 1997 and 1998 seasons, when commentators were coming down much harder on Lipinski for her flutz in the Olympic year. Yet Michelle also flutzed (not as bad as Lipinski) but that was not brought up much by the US commentators.
    And the sheep continue to bleat the same things...they are experts on flutzes as long as they are not the ones executed by Kwan.

    It is definitely a futile debate as to who is the GOAT due to the differences in era, environment, competitors, rules, etc. Fun? Sure. But seriously...YuNa's Lutz is "just" a Flip entrance with her ankle rolled to the outside edge? I don't think zschultz understands this, but that leads to counter-rotation, which is part of the difficulty of a true Lutz. Michelle's "Lutz" set-up is an outside edge that is unremarkable in light of the fact that her ankle rolls towards the inside edge and which was worse earlier in her career up to and including 1998, 1999. Michelle's "Lutz" might as well be called a Flip with an outside edge in transition. There, I can play semantics, too. Every reference I've read has said that a real Lutz's outside edge gets deeper towards takeoff due to the counter-rotational mechanism.

    And crossing over from the other "Who would dominate under 6.0 and CoP" thread, the notion that Michelle would have been capable of a great deal more 3-3's had she grown up under CoP is laughable because she had incentives under 6.0 to be doing 3-3's more often and of a greater difficulty than 3T-3T. For heaven's sake, look at what actually happened: she lost to Tara Lipinski in Nagano due to her lower technical difficulty and to Sarah Hughes in SLC due to her lower technical difficulty (not to mention Irina Slutskaya's jumping abilities.) Furthermore, it's not as if doing those 3-3's were asking her to revolutionize Ladies' Figure Skating; what about merely maintaining the standard set during the Ito/Yamaguchi era? And I think someone mentioned this before by tallying her clean-skate record while attempting her 3T-3T's. Her consistency starts to go down, as well as possibly her ability to perform...have at it.

    Go ahead and make a case for your favourites all you want, go ahead and imagine a creative scenario where a time capsule or a message to aliens in outer space asks us to pick 10 programs by one skater only, but I really can't abide by these excuses in favour of said favourite and bizarre critiques against a suggested alternative who is widely considered to have an excellent Lutz.

    Frankly, if I had to create a time capsule/alien message, I believe I could select 10 programs from a variety of skaters that would be better than the listed 10 solely by Kwan. I think that says enough--that is, one skater does not, for me, adequately encompass the best performances in and aspects about this sport.

  11. #41
    Rejoicing in the land of Kwan kwanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,440
    Don't ya'll get tired of having the same frickin' argument over and over and over and over again? Sheesh...

  12. #42
    can't come down to Earth prettykeys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by kwanatic View Post
    Don't ya'll get tired of having the same frickin' argument over and over and over and over again? Sheesh...
    It's not anybody's fault that nostalgic Kwan Krazies have to keep having these discussions every month or two and swiping at the modern skaters. Look at how many YuNa fans are fed up about it in just this thread.

    Also, pot, kettle, black.

  13. #43
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    342
    I wasn't tearing anyone down, I was just comparing the two. I am, in fact, a fan of Yuna's. I do cede that I do have rose-tinted glasses when it comes to Kwan cause she was my favorite growing up, and I have noticed her flaws as I have gotten older.

    I love how "X was better than Y at Z" comes to mean "Y WAS TERRIBLE AT Z" Again, just a comparison, and I can really only do it by 6.0 standards, since Kwan really never competed with the CoP variations.

    But whatever, I'm done with this thread, because instead of explaining things to those of us who never studied the biomechanics of Figure Skating and have only been fans, I get jumped on and told I am a liar. So you all can have this thread. I pray you aren't teachers or coaches.

  14. #44
    can't come down to Earth prettykeys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,801
    Quote Originally Posted by zschultz1986 View Post
    I wasn't tearing anyone down, I was just comparing the two. I am, in fact, a fan of Yuna's. I do cede that I do have rose-tinted glasses when it comes to Kwan cause she was my favorite growing up, and I have noticed her flaws as I have gotten older.

    I love how "X was better than Y at Z" comes to mean "Y WAS TERRIBLE AT Z" Again, just a comparison, and I can really only do it by 6.0 standards, since Kwan really never competed with the CoP variations.

    But whatever, I'm done with this thread, because instead of explaining things to those of us who never studied the biomechanics of Figure Skating and have only been fans, I get jumped on and told I am a liar. So you all can have this thread. I pray you aren't teachers or coaches.
    It's not "just" a comparison when you are actually putting down another skater's technique, and one that is actually considered superior to Kwan's on a specific jump called the Lutz. That's called leaving your biases unchecked at the door. Take it as a learning experience and next time don't make dubious claims--which you now admittedly know little about--and then retreat crying victim once you are called out on it.

  15. #45
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    256
    sigh...

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •