Jason Brown

LRK & L'Kitsu -you are right - the criticism was probably inevitable, but what really matters is how any of this stuff affects Jason, not whether Dave Lease annoys me or some people don't like his programs. Worlds should be very interesting, for many reasons.

ETA, Mrs P, you have sensible thoughts, as always! I think your point about the changes that come with being a contender rather than just someone with potential is a really good one. I actually think that may be part of Phil Hersh's seeming harshness.

By the way, the Manleywoman interview with PH is excellent, and makes me like him better and understand where his criticism is coming from more. It's quite different than the TSL joint recap - he is much more thoughtful and open. Alison asked some really good questions.

I hope none of the current amateur skaters listen to Dave and Jenny's recaps. While their interviews are gentle and invariably positive, the recaps are often quite catty. The interviews could hardly be otherwise--who would agree to a tough interview? I'm guessing that few if any skaters listen to the recaps--they and their coaches know how they did and don't have the time or interest to find out how others feel. If they did, I'm sure there'd be some cranky skaters after each recap.

^I ignore them.....I'm sure that they and others like them post here at GS. That's enough for me.

Sam-Skwantch said:

^I ignore them.....I'm sure that they and others like them post here at GS. That's enough for me.

Click to expand...

Yep. Honestly, if you guys didn't talk about them, I would have no idea of their thoughts, nor do I care. As I said previously, I acknowledge the fact they bring something to the table, i.e. videos take a lot of work as far as shooting and editing and people enjoy them for various reasons, but ultimately, I personally don't find a value in the recaps. So I don't see the point in giving of my valuable time listening to their opinions.

That's not to say I try to avoid opinions that are different then mine. I don't always agree with Phil Hersh, but I'm fine with his work. The same goes for Johnny and Tara as well. I don't always agree with their opinions, but neither of them are without useful commentary.
Also, I'm not against tough interviews. It comes with the territory of being a top competitor. But there is a HUGE difference in being tough and being snarky, IMO. It's reasonable to ask why you are suddenly putting the quad at 4CC when you previously told everyone you weren't planning on doing so until this summer. It's reasonable to ask whether the risk was worth it this time.

Mrs. P said:

Yep. Honestly, if you guys didn't talk about them, I would have no idea of their thoughts, nor do I care. As I said previously, I acknowledge the fact they bring something to the table, i.e. videos take a lot of work as far as shooting and editing and people enjoy them for various reasons, but ultimately, I personally don't find a value in the recaps. So I don't see the point in giving of my valuable time listening to their opinions.

That's not to say I try to avoid opinions that are different then mine. I don't always agree with Phil Hersh, but I'm fine with his work. The same goes for Johnny and Tara as well. I don't always agree with their opinions, but neither of them are without useful commentary.
Also, I'm not against tough interviews. It comes with the territory of being a top competitor. But there is a HUGE difference in being tough and being snarky, IMO. It's reasonable to ask why you are suddenly putting the quad at 4CC when you previously told everyone you weren't planning on doing so until this summer. It's reasonable to ask whether the risk was worth it this time.

Click to expand...

Totally agree with this, and I wish it was what Hersh had done with the column on the SP, rather than insinuate cause and effect through prepositional phrases. I want to hear the questions and the answers. I don't want to hear his assumptions.

I have liked Johnny's commentary in the past, so I found the 4CC LP and the "manufactured through practice" commentary disappointing. Dave and Jenny will just have to live without me; I'm sure they'll get over it.

And I surely hope *no* elite skater cares what any journalist, commentator or internet poster thinks of him/her/them. Life is too short.

Since I am one that actually does watch TSL, I thought i would chime in. Try thinking of it as Entertainment Tonight/TMZ/Access Hollywood/Etc. that focus on skating. Really that is not that far off from what it is, it is largely frosting and gossip, but so what, plenty of people enjoy TMZ too.

That being said, as someone with no skating experience I actually do feel like I have been able to learn some stuff from them here and there. Sometimes their criticisms, timed with a video really have helped me to get some concepts and ideas in skating. I am very visual, so seeing an example of a mule kick for instance while they are talking about it, really is helpful for me in trying to understand skating more. They do know what they are talking about, at least more so than I dothey just choose to present themselves in more a gossip columnist light. It is mostly entertainment, but they do usually give me something to look for/pay attention to as I am watching, which I am at a knowledge level that I still find very useful.

StitchMonkey said:

Since I am one that actually does watch TSL, I thought i would chime in. Try thinking of it as Entertainment Tonight/TMZ/Access Hollywood/Etc. that focus on skating. Really that is not that far off from what it is, it is largely frosting and gossip, but so what, plenty of people enjoy TMZ too.

That being said, as someone with no skating experience I actually do feel like I have been able to learn some stuff from them here and there. Sometimes their criticisms, timed with a video really have helped me to get some concepts and ideas in skating. I am very visual, so seeing an example of a mule kick for instance while they are talking about it, really is helpful for me in trying to understand skating more. They do know what they are talking about, at least more so than I dothey just choose to present themselves in more a gossip columnist light. It is mostly entertainment, but they do usually give me something to look for/pay attention to as I am watching, which I am at a knowledge level that I still find very useful.

Click to expand...

As I said, I get why people do find value in what they do. And I've tuned into a few interviews; I really enjoyed the one they did with Luba and Dylan, the Canadian pair. However, the recaps don't really offer much for me most of the time and I feel it's just another person's opinion, albeit ones that come from personal experience and knowledge gained from being in the sport themselves.

As for technical knowledge, I get that from knowledgeable people here at GS who present it without much snark or by reading the ISU documents myself. Hell, I've even watched a few USFSA webinars for fun. They are super dry, but they give him the knowledge I need to understand the sport. (Also you're talking to someone who learned how to roller skate and swim by reading books (along with doing it, obviously), so this is sort of how I work. )

But not everyone is like me, thank you Ms. obvious, so if TSL is able to help others understand the sport in some way, more power to them.

Also this thread has 200 pages, whee!

Mrs. P said:

As I said, I get why people do find value in what they do. And I've tuned into a few interviews; I really enjoyed the one they did with Luba and Dylan, the Canadian pair. However, the recaps don't really offer much for me most of the time and I feel it's just another person's opinion, albeit ones that come from personal experience and knowledge gained from being in the sport themselves.

As for technical knowledge, I get that from knowledgeable people here at GS who present it without much snark or by reading the ISU documents myself. Hell, I've even watched a few USFSA webinars for fun. They are super dry, but they give him the knowledge I need to understand the sport. (Also you're talking to someone who learned how to roller skate and swim by reading books (along with doing it, obviously), so this is sort of how I work. )

But not everyone is like me, thank you Ms. obvious, so if TSL is able to help others understand the sport in some way, more power to them.

Also this thread has 200 pages, whee!

Click to expand...

Ohh I am happy to watch webinars too when I find them! The TSL just serves as a comfortable entry level platform is more what I am saying. I can see why others would find them irritating, but for someone looking for more entry level commentary, they are not too bad.


To be honest a lot on GS is still over my head, I still read it, and it half makes sense, or at least I remember the words, but usually need to see it for it to click. I read many many times that that lutz rotates opposite the direction the skater is going and is harder than a flip (in theory) for this reason, but it took a perfect fan cam of Adam Rippon practicing at nationals for for the idea to finally make sense. But having read it over and over and been clueless did at least teach me to look for it enough to see it when I had the chance. I need the visual, if there is a way to misread directions, I assure you I can find a very logical and well thought out way to misinterpret them.

Okay, now for a slight change of topic. In the Jeremy Abbott thread, Sandpiper (I think) said roughly that the fact that Jason under rotates jumps at all is a problem b/c the top men don't, and if they do it's not on 3A but usually the 2d jump in a combo. So Jason's lack of quad, 3A troubles and "low jumps in general" make it appear he's a weak jumper.

So first question: are Jason's jumps low? Because I've actually heard more than a few commentators mention the height & quality of his jumps (not generally the 3A, tho). And he frequently gets quite good GOE, so I have to think his jumps aren't THAT bad in general. What do you think?

Second question: is it true that most top men don't under rotate much? Obviously, that depends in part on who you define as a top man and what you mean by "much". But I took a very quick look at judges protocols for 2013 & 2014 worlds, Europeans,4CCs, and the Olympics, and I saw quite a few men in the top ten of each comp being called for < or even <<. And the < was most frequently called on the 4T or 4S, solo or in combo, and it occurred more often in the FS. In fact, in 7 competitions, Hanyu got called for 2 < 4T and 1< 4S. Chan, Takahashi, Aaron, & Kozuka have all been called for < 3A. Ten, Takahashi, Mura, Kozuka, Abbott, Dornbush, Rippon, Reynolds & Kovtun have all been called for < or even << quads, both solo and in combo.

This was just a quick look at a few recent competitions so it may not reflect reality and I may have made mistakes. In some competitions, most people were clean and in others, multE people were called for <. I didn't look at GPs. What do you think? Are these findings skewed somehow? And if they aren't, why do people view Jason as a weak jumper?

papagena said:

Okay, now for a slight change of topic. In the Jeremy Abbott thread, Sandpiper (I think) said roughly that the fact that Jason under rotates jumps at all is a problem b/c the top men don't, and if they do it's not on 3A but usually the 2d jump in a combo. So Jason's lack of quad, 3A troubles and "low jumps in general" make it appear he's a weak jumper.

So first question: are Jason's jumps low? Because I've actually heard more than a few commentators mention the height & quality of his jumps (not generally the 3A, tho). And he frequently gets quite good GOE, so I have to think his jumps aren't THAT bad in general. What do you think?

Second question: is it true that most top men don't under rotate much? Obviously, that depends in part on who you define as a top man and what you mean by "much". But I took a very quick look at judges protocols for 2013 & 2014 worlds, Europeans,4CCs, and the Olympics, and I saw quite a few men in the top ten of each comp being called for < or even <<. And the < was most frequently called on the 4T or 4S, solo or in combo, and it occurred more often in the FS. In fact, in 7 competitions, Hanyu got called for 2 < 4T and 1< 4S. Chan, Takahashi, Aaron, & Kozuka have all been called for < 3A. Ten, Takahashi, Mura, Kozuka, Abbott, Dornbush, Rippon, Reynolds & Kovtun have all been called for < or even << quads, both solo and in combo.

This was just a quick look at a few recent competitions so it may not reflect reality and I may have made mistakes. In some competitions, most people were clean and in others, multE people were called for <. I didn't look at GPs. What do you think? Are these findings skewed somehow? And if they aren't, why do people view Jason as a weak jumper?

Click to expand...

As Mrs. P said...people are now comparing him to the Best, the top guys. It's not...'Wow he's not a bad skater' any more, it's 'How good is he, really?'

I personally don't think his jumps are very small. And his transitions in and out of them make up for a relatively lower jump. However, compared to the 'Top Guys' Hanyu, Javi, Han Yan, Denis Ten, Patrick Chan, yes his jumps are lower and cover less ice.

For underrotations, when Hanyu underrotates, it is almost always a fall. He has been doing that this year because of lack of training. Not an excuse, just an observation. Hanyu generally gets very few URs.
But as Sandpiper mentioned; if your hardest jump is a 3A, your jump errors cascade downwards and hurt your jump reputation a lot more than if your hardest jump is a 4S- and you underrotate it sometimes.
So, the Top Jumpers right now can be said to be Hanyu, Javi, Han Yan, Patrick, Mura. Of these men, only Patrick has been called for a UR on his 3A. But to make up for it, he has a killer 4T3T combo.
Just my 2 cents on the matter.

It comes with the territory of being a Champion; people do scrutinize the winner a lot more than say, a 6th place finisher at Nationals.

Because Jason doesn't have a quad, there's an expectation that the triples have to be perfect. And that's also Jason's calling card -- he emphasizes clean programs as opposed to boosting BV.

A UR on a quad isn't a big deal cause it's a quad. But a UR on triples stand out more cause of the perception that they're "easier." UR on triples are also more costly, as opposed to a rough landing on a quad or a 3A. It's a perception is realty type of thing. Not that I agree with it, but that's what it is.

As for everything else, there seems to be more weight put more on height on jumps as opposed to the other qualities of a good jump, such as difficult entrances/exits, flow, ice coverage, etc. The height of Jason's jumps, to some, are not as good as the other men. But the +GOE looks at more than height. That's why you had people sort of outraged that Shoma Uno's 3A got +2 in GOE --- it doesn't get a lot of height relative to Josh or Yan Han, but he does it out of a spread eagle, which provides a boost in +GOE.

ETA: What Newbie said

Also I'd add that Jason does have a occasional UR problem, but it's more the consequence of making a mistake, not a chronic. Instead of falling or popping, which some men do when a jump isn't going well, i.e. lack of speed into a jump, Jason URs. And URs are more costly than falling (again there's that whole debate). Way back in 2010, he basically had like 6 URs at JGP Japan, he had like 6 URs over the short and long program. By Junior Worlds 2011, he only had on UR, in the FS (though his flutz was called).

Also Jason tends to not be an early season skater and that's due, I think, to the newness of his programs. Rohene seems insistent on not letting up on the choreography (a good thing) so many times I think he URs cause he hasn't gotten used to building speed to do the choreography and do the jump.

ETA 2: That said, the top men are prone to their own errors as well, just that the extra BV protects them if they get everything else. See Hanyu at Trophee Eric Bompard last season. He popped one quad and fell on the other, but basically hit everything else, including two 3As.

While Jason's 3A's are not super big, his 3f3t and generally his 3lz 1/2 loop 3S have lovely height and flow going out, and the second jump is as big asthe first.

Even at 4cc's his 3f3t in the fs got GOE +1.5. Two judges gave it +3.

plus he does these combos in the bonus and does not lip or flutz any more. And the jumps are out of transitions.

Also, IJS puts a lot more weight on 3A and quads because of their difficulty, as far as execution. As a result, the maximum +GOE for a +3 across the board is just that, +3. For every other jump, the maximum GOE for +3s across the board is 2.1. (The deductions, obviously are harsher for 3As and quads as well).

Jason's +GOE for 3A:
Nebelhorn SP: 0.67
Nebelhorn FS: -0.67 (UR); -1.67 (UR/+REP due to lack of combo)
Skate America SP: -3.00 (fall)
Skate America FS: 1.00; -3.00 (fall/UR)
Rostelecom SP: 0.43
Rostelecom FS: 1.00; -2.29 (rotated but two-footed)
4CC SP: -1.14 (UR)
4CC FS: 0.14; .71

AVERAGE GOE: -0.59

Jason's +GOE for 3F-3T:
Nebelhorn SP: 0.93
Nebelhorn FS: 0.47
Skate America SP: 1.20
Skate America FS: -1.30 (huge stepout)
Rostelecom Cup SP: -2.10 (stepout, UR)
Rostelecom Cup FS: 0.80
4CC SP: 1.00
4CC FS: 1.50

AVERAGE GOE: 0.31

Basically, tons of room of improvement for the 3A, considering the maximum +GOE is 3.00. His 3F-3T is better, but again, lots of room to get more points, especially considering that he can get up to 2.1 points. Considering that he has a BV disadvantage currently, Jason's team (as he said) needs to keep getting those +GOE points. 4CC showed us it's possible....

papagena said:

So first question: are Jason's jumps low? Because I've actually heard more than a few commentators mention the height & quality of his jumps (not generally the 3A, tho). And he frequently gets quite good GOE, so I have to think his jumps aren't THAT bad in general. What do you think?

Click to expand...

One of my initial concerns, wayyyyyyy back when I first saw him, was that his 2A at the time was positively tiny. I was convinced he'd never get a 3A because he just didn't have the height. Now, that was a totally unfair thing to think, really, because he was barely 16 and a skinny, weedy little dude. As he got older and his body developed from being a child to being an adult, his 2A got bigger, and he soon had the height for a 3A.

I think his toe jumps are much bigger and of much better quality than his edge jumps. I could watch him do flip and lutz all day long, especially the flip. The loop and the salchow scare me because those are still quite small. But this is all comparative talk; anyone's jumps are going to look off-kilter and messy next to Josh's, and anyone's jumps are going to look small and slow next to Max. Those two, particularly, contribute to the impression that Jason's jumps are sub-par because theirs are just so great.

papagena said:

Second question: is it true that most top men don't under rotate much? Obviously, that depends in part on who you define as a top man and what you mean by "much". But I took a very quick look at judges protocols for 2013 & 2014 worlds, Europeans,4CCs, and the Olympics, and I saw quite a few men in the top ten of each comp being called for < or even <<. And the < was most frequently called on the 4T or 4S, solo or in combo, and it occurred more often in the FS. In fact, in 7 competitions, Hanyu got called for 2 < 4T and 1< 4S. Chan, Takahashi, Aaron, & Kozuka have all been called for < 3A. Ten, Takahashi, Mura, Kozuka, Abbott, Dornbush, Rippon, Reynolds & Kovtun have all been called for < or even << quads, both solo and in combo.

This was just a quick look at a few recent competitions so it may not reflect reality and I may have made mistakes. In some competitions, most people were clean and in others, multE people were called for <. I didn't look at GPs. What do you think? Are these findings skewed somehow? And if they aren't, why do people view Jason as a weak jumper?

Click to expand...

As for URs, well, a lot of people do it, you're right and your results aren't skewed at all (although my brain is now simultaneously :shocked: and trying to think when Max could have possibly got a 3A<).

I don't think Jason does it any more than anyone else, really. Where this really started was at Nebelhorn this year when he got dinged four times, which is a lot but very unusual for him. The other issue is that when he tends to UR a jump, it tends to be the second 3A in the LP, which many see as a major problem (I have to admit, I do too). I know some of the chronic UR stuff came from Weir at the Olympics, who carried on as though Jason was landing short on everything there.

When you look at Jason's jumps, he actually has a really lovely air position; everything is tucked in well, his feet are always tight together and his toes are always beautifully pointed. I think he could stand to pack on a few pounds of muscle; I'm not saying he has to look like Max, but he does look very slender and perhaps could use some more power in the engine room, so to speak. Which might help with his other perceived problem as well: his "slowness". Still, he's only twenty; and it may well be that his body might naturally do that in the coming years as he reaches his athletic peak.

Everything you all have said makes sense, and Mrs P, your GOE analysis is spot on, as usual. I guess there's still a lot of room to improve his jump GOE. But it seems to me we give passes to a lot of skaters for < quads. I was really surprised by how many I found. If quad guys occasionally miss quads or fall or do wonky landings, we say, oh, he had a bad day. With Jason, people start predicting the end of his career.

I'm sure that will eventually change. I'm just bemused, really.

ETA Karne: it was in the SP at 2014 worlds. I should probably stop talking about Dave Lease, but he has been pushing the "Jason is a chronic < " thing all season, ever since Nebelhorn, far more than I recall JW doing.

I'm a HUGE fan of TSL, not just because of the interviews, but I also really love the recaps. Why? Precisely because of the snark. It's such a refreshing change of pace from more mainstream reportage of skating events. It's also how most people view skating. Think I'm way off base there? Read some of the threads from when events are run live. You read just as much snark as you'll hear on TSL. If Dave and Jenny were positioning themselves as objective sports reporters, I could see that it would be a problem. But in terms of their recaps, they're not. They're simply knowledgeable fans, albeit ones with a 'rhymes with witchy' side. And they're also often quite funny and more on the mark than people on here give them credit for. YMMV of course. And if they're not your cuppa, drink what makes you happy. But they get so much criticism here that I feel duty bound to say, yes, I'm a HUGE fan of TSL. Even when I disagree with them (like I did about their take on Jason's quad--not one of their brightest moments).

WeakAnkles said:

I'm a HUGE fan of TSL, not just because of the interviews, but I also really love the recaps. Why? Precisely because of the snark. It's such a refreshing change of pace from more mainstream reportage of skating events. It's also how most people view skating. Think I'm way off base there? Read some of the threads from when events are run live. You read just as much snark as you'll hear on TSL. If Dave and Jenny were positioning themselves as objective sports reporters, I could see that it would be a problem. But in terms of their recaps, they're not. They're simply knowledgeable fans, albeit ones with a 'rhymes with witchy' side. And they're also often quite funny and more on the mark than people on here give them credit for. YMMV of course. And if they're not your cuppa, drink what makes you happy. But they get so much criticism here that I feel duty bound to say, yes, I'm a HUGE fan of TSL. Even when I disagree with them (like I did about their take on Jason's quad--not one of their brightest moments).

Click to expand...

FWIW, I was thinking of you regarding my acknowledgement that people DO like it

As I said, this is why I don't listen. Better for everyone. Fans can listen and enjoy it and I can find other things I value.

I don't need another snarky knowledgable fan perspective. I know that you didn't mean this when you said the above, but it's exactly the fact there is plenty of snark and commentary on these boards that makes TSL absolutely unnecessary for me.

What I really want doesn't really exist, honestly. ESPN-style commentary. Where the stats are broken down one by one every five seconds. I mean if you watch any football game, you are constantly bombarded with stats. Rushing yards. Interceptions. Passing yards. Same with basketball. I do realize that ruins the experience for most skating fans, so that's why it doesn't realize it exists (i mean, people are grumbling about ISU tracker thingy.)

The skate radio thing from U.S. Nationals was probably the closest to what I want. But they're sort of dry, just the facts type. I want the "Mid-Majoirty" of figure skating (i.e. website about basketball teams in mid-major conferences). The site is gone, sadly, but this article explains exactly why I loved it: http://deadspin.com/ten-mid-majority-posts-you-must-read-before-the-site-di-1555287101

So the stat collecting on my part is completely out of self-interest, honestly. If someone did it for me, I probably wouldn't bother, LOL.

Mrs. P said:

The skate radio thing from U.S. Nationals was probably the closest to what I want.

Click to expand...

I just LOVED skate radio. . . . but partly for the visual aspect i confess.

Something more like the current trio doing skate radio could work. There is room for more than what skate radio did, but overall, i just loved it and wish so much they had it at every competition.

Mrs. P said:

FWIW, I was thinking of you regarding my acknowledgement that people DO like it

As I said, this is why I don't listen. Better for everyone. Fans can listen and enjoy it and I can find other things I value.

I don't need another snarky knowledgable fan perspective. I know that you didn't mean this when you said the above, but it's exactly the fact there is plenty of snark and commentary on these boards that makes TSL absolutely unnecessary for me.

What I really want doesn't really exist, honestly. ESPN-style commentary. Where the stats are broken down one by one every five seconds. I mean if you watch any football game, you are constantly bombarded with stats. Rushing yards. Interceptions. Passing yards. Same with basketball. I do realize that ruins the experience for most skating fans, so that's why it doesn't realize it exists (i mean, people are grumbling about ISU tracker thingy.)

The skate radio thing from U.S. Nationals was probably the closest to what I want. But they're sort of dry, just the facts type. I want the "Mid-Majoirty" of figure skating (i.e. website about basketball teams in mid-major conferences). The site is gone, sadly, but this article explains exactly why I loved it: http://deadspin.com/ten-mid-majority-posts-you-must-read-before-the-site-di-1555287101

So the stat collecting on my part is completely out of self-interest, honestly. If someone did it for me, I probably wouldn't bother, LOL.

Click to expand...

Funny, I was thinking of you when I wrote if it's not your cuppa, drink what makes you happy. And I totally LOVE your serious statistical analysis. You can learn so much from it (or at least I do). Believe me--I went back and read the stats before I did my Grand Prix predictions (and I came in fourth overall, me and FGMT, so you can see how helpful they were!). It IS a shame that there isn't a vlog dedicated to that kind of commentary. Still - no reason why there can't be both. In fact, my opinion is the more the merrier--as long as the commentary is interesting and informed. And even if the snark is a turn off for you and a good many other people on here, Dave and Jenny are informed commentators. It's one of the reasons why I think they do the best long-form interviews of any of the skating sites.

Though they do also bring the stupid sometimes. I mean the Jason @ 4CC commentary was just stupid.

WeakAnkles said:

Funny, I was thinking of you when I wrote if it's not your cuppa, drink what makes you happy. And I totally LOVE your serious statistical analysis. You can learn so much from it (or at least I do). It IS a shame that there isn't a vlog dedicated to that kind of commentary. Still - no reason why there can't be both. In fact, my opinion is the more the merrier--as long as the commentary is interesting and informed. And even if the snark is a turn off for you and a good many other people on here, Dave and Jenny are informed commentators. It's one of the reasons why I think they do the best long-form interviews of any of the skating sites.

Though they do also bring the stupid sometimes. I mean the Jason @ 4CC commentary was just stupid.

Click to expand...

I think pretty much all their commentary on Jason this season has been off the mark and very repetitive. It gets tiresome to listen to them say "we love Jason" and then tear him to shreds. They did something similar with Ashley.