The reason she got those scores was not whom she was competing against. It was that due to figures she wasn't in the final flight of events, and she also didn't have the rep power yet (again mostly due to figures which had kept her results down for years). The thinking of judging in the 3 portion competition days was totally different than the post figures era. Had the event been under 91 rules with the same skaters and performances, you would definitely not see 5.5s and 5.6s for artistry either.
Originally Posted by drivingmissdaisy
Skating is art, if you let it be.
Totally different meaning totally wrong. And it's still how a lot of judging goes. Just latching onto reputation/momentum/politics to place skaters.
Originally Posted by pangtongfan
Midori could have won 1988 Olympics even with her poor figures result:
10th in Figures, 1st in SP, 1st in LP = 3.7 weighted grade, highest tiebreaker
Liz Manley = 5th in Figures, 6th in SP, 2nd in LP = 3.7 weighted grade, 2nd highest tiebreaker
Katarina Witt = 4th in Figures, 5th in SP (a case can most definitely be made for all of the American ladies scoring above her here), 3rd in the LP = 3.7 weighted grade, 3rd highest tiebreaker
I never said it was right, now did I. I am just saying had it been post figures, she would have gotten marks closer to what she actually deserved, even with the same competition and same skaters. It wasn't so much that she was competing against the supposably so artistic Witt that kept her artistic marks that low, it was all the things that went into the figures era scoring, and that she was never skating in final flights.
Originally Posted by Blades of Passion
Trenary's short program was pretty weak btw. I don't think she could be placed over either Witt or Manley there.
There was no real coverage of the figures so it is hard to say where the skaters should have placed. An article I read at the time claimed Kadavy choked on her last figure which dropped her from 3rd to 7th. Trenary was 5th, but is possible to believe her figures would be better than someone like Witt who came 3rd but generally was held up in figures. Someone like Leistner who was 6th possibly too, as she generally had very strong figures, and probably were often legitimately stronger than Witt's were.