Great Article About Virtue and Moir and Olympics

Oh lord, this article was pretty weak soup to restart the V/M vs. D/W debate again. . . .

I like this article by Canadian Commentator PJ Kwong:

http://olympics.cbc.ca/blogs/author...yl-davis-charlie-white-show-lack-respect.html

I love how she has an opinion about the event without trying to take away the years of blood, sweat, and tears that Meryl/Charlie put in. She also gives them credit for being amazing skaters. Great article.

Coltrocks12 said:

I like this article by Canadian Commentator PJ Kwong:

http://olympics.cbc.ca/blogs/author...yl-davis-charlie-white-show-lack-respect.html

I love how she has an opinion about the event without trying to take away the years of blood, sweat, and tears that Meryl/Charlie put in. She also gives them credit for being amazing skaters. Great article.

Click to expand...

I agree. Very good article. I too love how it confronts and contradicts the idea that somehow Meryl and Charlie sailed in and were gifted with the gold, rather than working like dogs toward that goal for almost twenty years, just as Tessa and Scott did. When you have two couples who are so good, you can't assume that one of them will always win. The sad part of this season is not the fact that Tessa and Scott won "only" the silver but that both V/M and D/W are probably leaving the sport, and we'll have to do without them from now on.

@ Sandpaper, I am sorry if you took my opinion that they had mistakes in the SD to mean that I expect them to be robots. I don't expect any team to be robots and I did think overall the program was beautiful. I think it was the second best SD of the night and there was a drop off to third for me. I think we will have to agree to disagree on our opinion of the quality of the twizzles. I saw the mistake and I can't un-see it to agree with the consensus. Maybe it's because I am not Canadian and not invested in V/M that I spotted the mistake. If D/W had made a similar mistake, my rooting bias might have created me to miss it.

I don't want to take Vancouver away from Tessa and Scott as they were spot on and amazing. I think they are pioneers and should be celebrated by skating fans for the work that they did to get North America to the top of the podium. I am not sure we have a D/W OGM without the one V/M won four years earlier. They elevated the sport to a new place and that is always to be celebrated.

I do think that they regressed technically (ever so very slightly) from where they were at in 2010 and 2012 to where they were at in 2013-2014. I don't think the problem was not trying hard enough as I saw a team trying very hard to compete well. I don't know what caused the little mistakes, but they made them and as good as both D/W and V/M are little mistakes are going to be the difference. When you add the points they left on the ice with the twizzles and the step sequence you get the difference in the marks. I don't disagree with the difference in points or the placements. I did disagree with the disparate marks in the team event but not the placement.

I am sorry if I offended anyone. I tend to speak my mind and not sugarcoat anything and the older I get the less sugarcoating I do. I didn't intend to offend anybody.

Olympia said:

I agree. Very good article. I too love how it confronts and contradicts the idea that somehow Meryl and Charlie sailed in and were gifted with the gold, rather than working like dogs toward that goal for almost twenty years, just as Tessa and Scott did. When you have two couples who are so good, you can't assume that one of them will always win. The sad part of this season is not the fact that Tessa and Scott won "only" the silver but that both V/M and D/W are probably leaving the sport, and we'll have to do without them from now on.

Click to expand...

I for one am going to really miss both teams and am secretly hoping at least one of the couples will keep competing. I do hope both teams will do television specials and other events so that we can enjoy them for a little bit longer. I am already going through withdrawal from them and skating in general heading into the summer months.

Coltrocks12 said:

@ Sandpaper, I am sorry if you took my opinion that they had mistakes in the SD to mean that I expect them to be robots. I don't expect any team to be robots and I did think overall the program was beautiful. I think it was the second best SD of the night and there was a drop off to third for me. I think we will have to agree to disagree on our opinion of the quality of the twizzles. I saw the mistake and I can't un-see it to agree with the consensus. Maybe it's because I am not Canadian and not invested in V/M that I spotted the mistake. If D/W had made a similar mistake, my rooting bias might have created me to miss it.

I don't want to take Vancouver away from Tessa and Scott as they were spot on and amazing. I think they are pioneers and should be celebrated by skating fans for the work that they did to get North America to the top of the podium. I am not sure we have a D/W OGM without the one V/M won four years earlier. They elevated the sport to a new place and that is always to be celebrated.

I do think that they regressed technically (ever so very slightly) from where they were at in 2010 and 2012 to where they were at in 2013-2014. I don't think the problem was not trying hard enough as I saw a team trying very hard to compete well. I don't know what caused the little mistakes, but they made them and as good as both D/W and V/M are little mistakes are going to be the difference. When you add the points they left on the ice with the twizzles and the step sequence you get the difference in the marks. I don't disagree with the difference in points or the placements. I did disagree with the disparate marks in the team event but not the placement.

I am sorry if I offended anyone. I tend to speak my mind and not sugarcoat anything and the older I get the less sugarcoating I do. I didn't intend to offend anybody.

Click to expand...

There was nothing wrong with the SD from VM in Sochi. Or their FD. And many people continue to believe that the marks did not reflect what was put on the ice as measured against the stated rules for ice dance. While I have a tremendous respect for DW skating and the work they have done to get where they are, I don't believe they are the better skaters or ice dancers. But Sochi wasn't about crowning the best skaters or dancers, it was about determining the current champions. These 2 things are not necessarily the same.

I do believe DW were the better strategists. I think they won the gold medal because they more correctly measured the mood and opinions of the current trends in ice dance, and structured programs to win. The music was big, easily recognizable, and followed traditional interpretations that required not much thought or work from the audience or the judges. It wasn't about new elements or innovation, it was about nailing the levels and skating fast. It was about making a tactical choice to win. I think of it more like writing an essay you know your professor wants to read, taking the right positions, presenting it well, and checking all the boxes to get that "A". And they had the push and support of their home team to make sure the narrative of strength, consistency and being healthy was repeated often by enough people over a couple of years.

For VM, I think they really wanted to "push the envelope" artistically and technically, and believed they would be rewarded for it. It was about pushing themselves and the sport. They read the rules and criteria, and set about to put out the most innovative, artistic and difficult programs they could construct. They worked with all sorts of genres of music from Latin to movie musical to the dramatic Carmen. The idea that they technically regressed is ludicrous. Their programs these last 2 seasons, and especially Carmen, are the most difficult programs ever constructed and delivered on ice. And this came with risk, and their programs developed over the course of the season, generally reaching their ultimate performance by worlds. But their programs required more thought, used more obscure music and interpretations, and require a more mature understanding of dance. I think of this more like writing a brilliant essay for your professor, but you choose a very novel way to present your arguments, and these opinions may not be shared or understood the same way by your professor. Even though all the requirements of the essay are covered, and to an exceptional degree, because it wasn't "spoon-fed" in the traditional way, it gets an "A-" or "B+". Most of what VM did was beyond the scope and ability of most judges, many of whom clearly were not that invested in applying the rules specifically, but relied on reputation, personal preference, and the general narrative of the day (may I remind folks of the publicly stated opinions pre-Sochi by one of the Chinese judges, I think...). The narrative that developed about VM over the last quad was that she was injured, and therefore not as good as before. This narrative was supported by the fact it did take VM most of a season to perfect their programs. And VM did not have enough push from coaches and their home team to counteract some of the nonsense floating about. The narrative really should have been about how VM overcame what would normally be career ending injury to come back stronger than ever, more fit physically, and skated programs that transcend the sport - a true marriage of technical excellence and art. The results for Sochi were already well in the making more than 2 years ago. And VM either mis-read these things, or simply, as I suspect is more true, were more interested in making their mark their own way, regardless of medals. In the end, they found peace with this, as evidenced by their happiness at how they skated in Sochi. They accomplished their goals.

Regardless of whether one likes "tomaatoes" or "tomahtoes", we will definitely miss both teams this coming year. Worlds seemed rather empty without these 2 teams, and I can see the tide turning to more "dance in ice dance" already with some changes in rules. And we will enjoy both teams as they explore life as pros.

I am sorry, but there were mistakes and I can't unsee them just because you want me to believe they were flawless. I don't buy the easy vs. innovative thing either. That is what the Canada media want you to believe.

I'm wondering if some of you are confusing the team event with the individual skating events. There were obvious mistakes - twizzles being one of them, in V/M's team performances. I noticed nothing wrong in the individual performances, though, and thought their scores were too low.

NorthernDancers, I completely agree with you. I came away from Sochi thinking both pairs did an excellent job with no apparent mistakes - and in the end it would come down to personal preference of style. With all things being equal, how could it not?

Coltrocks12 said:

I am sorry, but there were mistakes and I can't unsee them just because you want me to believe they were flawless. I don't buy the easy vs. innovative thing either. That is what the Canada media want you to believe.

Click to expand...

Are you sure you aren't remembering the twizzle mistakes from the team competition? Because those mistakes weren't there in the individual competition.

For the record, I don't have an issue with D/W winning in Sochi--I actually preferred their FD to V/M's. But you must admit D/W's choice of Scheherazade and use of a relatable, grand story was a more "tried and true" method than V/M. I can deal with them winning, but the margin of victory seemed to suggest that D/W were one fall/huge mistake better than V/M, which I don't agree with. I also don't agree with D/W getting higher component scores than V/M in the SD.

Over the past two years, it definitely felt like judges were sending the memo to V/M: "We don't like what you're doing." Either V/M didn't get it, didn't care, or perhaps tried changing things around but the judges still didn't like it. I don't think they were sloppy and bad every time and lost because of that. They most certainly were not sloppy and bad in Sochi.

I'm not sure I agree with everything NorthernDancers said, but just because NorthernDancers feels differently from you doesn't mean he/she is brainwashed by the Canadian media.

Coltrocks12 said:

I am sorry, but there were mistakes and I can't unsee them just because you want me to believe they were flawless.

Click to expand...

Can you point out those mistakes you saw? Just for curiosity because I really don't see them either.
The links are avaiable, so you can rewatch their SD and FD if you like.

V&M missed the third key point in the first Finnstep sequence in the Sd. The tech panel caught the error and gigged them for it, so they only receved level 3 for that skill.

The error was a lot more visible on the live feed I watched than it was from a different camera angle that was used on the NBC nighttime coverage.

You could see Scott out of position, which likely triggered the panel to review it.

I noticed it at the time, and commented on it here
http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...cs-Short-Dance&p=856422&viewfull=1#post856422

dorispulaski said:

V&M missed the third key point in the first Finnstep sequence in the Sd. The tech panel caught the error and gigged them for it, so they only receved level 3 for that skill.

The error was a lot more visible on the live feed I watched than it was from a different camera angle that was used on the NBC nighttime coverage.

You could see Scott out of position, which likely triggered the panel to review it.

Click to expand...

Which one is the third key point? Sorry, I can't remember them.

What about the FD?

The Whole Keypoints thing sort of bugs me because a general audience would not really notice if a couple completed steps on the correct edges or flats or the wrong edge. People watch for the WOW factor and notice when more noticeable mistakes are made. When you have to watch a couple of frames on repeat again and again, it must be asked whether the direction of ice dance is the best, because should a 'wrong' edge REALLY matter in the big picture?

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...cs-Short-Dance&p=856422&viewfull=1#post856422

The thing that was visible was sloppiness in the stop going into the "pepperpot" little hopping bit.

And I noticed the error. Anyone else viewing from that angle would have seen it as off, if not as a failure on a key point.

The point of having a pattern dance segment in the sd, which is ice dance's version of the technical program, is to have all the teams do the same steps, snd compare their performance on an apples to apples basis.

Alba said:

Which one is the third key point? Sorry, I can't remember them.

What about the FD?

Click to expand...

It was their GOE's and PCS that let them down.

GF2445 said:

The Whole Keypoints thing sort of bugs me because a general audience would not really notice if a couple completed steps on the correct edges or flats or the wrong edge. People watch for the WOW factor and notice when more noticeable mistakes are made. When you have to watch a couple of frames on repeat again and again, it must be asked whether the direction of ice dance is the best, because should a 'wrong' edge REALLY matter in the big picture?

Click to expand...

Well, the judges should not judge these things based on the audience response though. The public might not see and understand but they do and it's right to mark them even for a wrong edge, if that's the rule. That's why this is a sport in first place.

dorispulaski said:

http://www.goldenskate.com/forum/sh...cs-Short-Dance&p=856422&viewfull=1#post856422

The thing that was visible was sloppiness in the stop going into the "pepperpot" little hopping bit.

And I noticed the error. Anyone else viewing from that angle would have seen it as off, if not as a failure on a key point.

The point of having a pattern dance segment in the sd, which is ice dance's version of the technical program, is to have all the teams do the same steps, snd compare their performance on an apples to apples basis.

Click to expand...

Sorry doris, I still don't understand. Sloppiness and untidy suggests that it might effect the GoE not the level, or not?
Which is the key point for the level that you're referring to?


I found these blogs. I guess I have to go through with the video. For my own curiosity, I'm not going to do an Adelina's footwork topic.

http://rinksidecafe.wordpress.com/2...-ice-dance-teams-to-have-ever-graced-the-ice/
http://rinksidecafe.wordpress.com/2014/02/01/skating-101-ice-dance/
http://thewrongedgefigureskatingblog.blogspot.it/2013/04/up-close-finnstep.html
http://www.ice-dance.com/main/technical-reference/dance-patterns-descriptions/finnstep

It is typical that it is the untidiness of a skill that causes the tech panel to review something. Excessive throwing of snow from the blades, visible balance checks, being out of position. Then when they review, they see that a key point was missed. The thing that caught their attention may have been a failure at a key point or not, but on review, even a tiny error, that might be missed real time, will be seen.

The third key point in the first sequence is for the man to execute the following correctly:

1. Sw3, Tw1: correct Turns
2. Sw3: correct swing movement of the free leg
3. XB-LFI: free leg crossed behind the skating leg below the knee
4. Correct Edge (RBI) after Tw1

Click to expand...

http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=4351

Which is ISU Communication 1782

Here are the step charts
http://www.ice-dance.com/main/images/stories/pdf/compulsory/Finnstep.pdf

dorispulaski said:

It is typical that it is the untidiness of a skill that causes the tech panel to review something. Excessive throwing of snow from the blades, visible balance checks, being out of position. Then when they review, they see that a key point was missed. The thing that caught their attention may have been a failure at a key point or not, but on review, even a tiny error, that might be missed real time, will be seen.

Click to expand...

Yes. I understand all this but I was hoping that someone can show/explained were it happened and how. In dance it's so difficult to notice some small thing even when you repeat the video again and again. :think:

The third key point in the first sequence is for the man to execute the following correctly:



http://isu.sportcentric.net/db//files/serve.php?id=4351

Which is ISU Communication 1782

Here are the step charts
http://www.ice-dance.com/main/images/stories/pdf/compulsory/Finnstep.pdf

Click to expand...

Thanks a lot. :thumbsup:

As to the free dance, my opinion is that V&M lost it in the tech marks, really. As the judges assigned them, they were slightly worse on almost every skill, exceptions being the circular step (where they tied), and the final choreographic lift, which Tessa & Scott won.

Here's a list comparing the two couples:


Of particular importance is the diagonal step, coming at the end of the program, where Tessa & Scott were just not as fast & crisp as Meryl & Charlie, although both couples hit all their edges and earned level 4.

Additionally, Tessa & Scott had had trouble with lifts all year. From watching the Tessa & Scott show, I wonder how much of the problem was working around Scott's recurring back and neck issues? I wonder whether they chose not to do a combo lift, when their combo lifts have been fabulous their whole career, to avoid stress on Scott?

In any case, by GPF, they had had to simplify their first lift by having Scott remain on two feet rather than one foot. I&K's lift is a very similar lift, done on one foot, so already this becomes a hard sell to give the lift +3, and most of the judges didn't give them +3 on it. The second problem was the change of position rotational lift, which they had struggled with all year, and which is not a particularly unusual lift, and there was nothing special about it. Again, only three judges gave it +3, and one gave it only +1.

Compare this to Meryl & Charlie: Two of their 4 lifts got perfect scores: their first curved lift that is a completely unique lift, and by contrast, their rotational lift, which many teams use some variant of, and which they used in Der Fledermaus, but which no team does better: not only no-hands, with Meryl doing little arm movements to the music, but also coming from nowhere, and with Charlie rotating so fast that Meryl can maintain the split position with her legs parallel to the ice and her torso upright. Their handstand combo lift was not as amazing, but still very good, and not every team does one. It was good because of the ice coverage during the lift. I would have given the straight-line part (the handstand) +2, and the rotational part +3 (for speed of rotation and ice coverage), so the final number could go either way. I'm not crazy about their choreo lift, and neither were the judges-but there aren't that many points up for grabs in a choreo lift.

As to PCS, 58.44 vs 59.13 for Meryl and Charlie, this is pretty much a tie. However, D&W won every component. More striking, they won or tied in Interp/Timing and Composition and Choreo with every judge, including the Canadian judge, all giving them 10's. Only three judges gave Tessa and Scott 10's in those components. If there were something vastly inferior for D&W in those two components, surely at least one judge would have marked them down.

It has got to have been hard to judge PCS for either Meryl & Charlie and Tessa & Scott, considering the crowd didn't get behind either of them that well, with large blocks of people chanting Rossiya for I&K. In such a case, the tech score may have driven the PCS marks. But I think PJ is wrong. She implies that the judges are not sophisticated enough to appreciate Tessa & Scott's program. However, the requirements for a story in a program (and this is clearly spelled out in the ISU communications) is that if there is a story, it must be clearly understandable from the skating.

If V&M made a program with a story that was not easily understandable, then already they are not a 10 by the rules.

And finally there was that salute, hand over heart, give us the gold, play the national anthem move, at the end. I am not a fan of salutes in programs, and possibly some of the judges didn't like it either, and it was the last thing they saw.