Olympic Pairs -2002

Pandora's box has opened again. Seems this subject has the likelihood of staying around for quite a while. I wouldn't be surprised if during the 2006 Olympic figure skating coverage, during the pairs competition, this subject will come up again and be discussed. Wouldn't it be something if once again we have Scott and Sandra discussing and showing clips of what happened in 2002!
I read earlier Vash 01's post and I agree. The competition was very good but I believe that E&A's was better. I give the gold to Elena & Anton. And don't get me wrong, I like both pairs very much. I think that awarding a second gold medal was also wrong because it opens up the problem that in the future others will protest if something goes wrong and will want to get a gold medal too.
I haven't seen E&A skate in a while since I can't afford to go see live skating until someday in the future when my finances are better. I can't comment on how they have improved or not. I have seen J&D skate a coupld of times and have enjoyed their programs but I think they have many nice lifts but have not improved in other areas. I would love to see these two pairs skate and/or compete often. Unfortunately professional competition barely exist. Please let's get to the point, some day soon, when we can close Pandora's box on E&A and J&D 2002 Ollympic performances.

:scratch:

hmmm.... what's that sound I hear......

Ah yes! That's it! The faint sound of whinnying as a horse is beat to death......

Canuck

Again, the eight components of presentation are each important and deservedly worthy of nitpicking.
To some posters, Variation in Speed means fast skating only without any variation. IMO, no skater has more consistent speed (not all that with variation) is Carolina Kostner. Unfortunately, the seven other components do not give her much to go on, imo, except maybe Use of Rink Area.

Regardless of any one nitpick, it does not make another skater better if the other skater has problems with all the components. IMO, it is ok to point out a skater's perceived weaknesses but it does not convince other posters that that particular skater should lose a competition or be beaten by another skater unless you speak of the whole package.

However, a nitpick could be written in the style of corrective criticism and not a bash.

Joe

Choice of material matters

This debate will continue on forever, but I have gone back and reviewed this event, and I have made a few observations. One thing is certainly clear, and that is the totally subjective nature of interpretation of the rules for judging the event. Purists view the rules one way, some view the rules very liberally and most fall somewhere in between.

Several things are very clear. The event is to demonstrate excellence and mastery of the sport of Pairs Skating.

((((Side Note: Pairs Skating is NOT Singles Skating. To learn either, a knowledge and mastery of basic skating skills is required, but they are not the same at all. The techniques your learn developing as a Pairs skater with your partner are vastly different from learning how to be a singles skater. Stroking is different biomechanically in Pairs, jump timing and entrances are different, Pairs spinning is a completely different technique from solo spinning, unison techniques are integral and not taught in singles, and are different, and how to form one unit performing moves with another person is vastly different than being a singles skater.))))

Singles skating techniques are a relatively small portion of the focus in Pairs skating, but are highlighted at the Olympic level by the side by side jumps and spins, as well as in footwork and transitions. These highlights within Pairs skating are to demonstrate skating abilities and unison, but are more duet skating than Pairs skating.

Beginning Pairs often use more of the duet style of skating, where they do shadow skating, and skating side by side barely toughing each other in unison because this is relatively easy to learn, and is part of the beginnings of learning to be a Pair. Later, the team develops programs that encorporate more Pair skating, doing elements and skating as a unit rather than a duet. You see more of this type of skating at the Novice and Junior level, as well as in Ice Shows, because duet skating is more basic than Pairs Skating.

If you examine the "Love Story" program, it is clear, especially after Jamie and David's subsequent "Tristan" and "Orchid" programs, that this program was more duet skating/show skating than Pairs Skating, and was a program from early in their development as a team. They were play acting the "Love Story" in a very literal interpretation, very concrete, and in a very theatrical way. But, they had no original moves, no original transitions, lots of skating on two feet, lots of crossovers, lots of side by side skating, and they were apart and not touching for a great portion of the program.

So this much is also clear: Sale and Pelltier demonstrated excellence in Duet Skating and Show Skating with high quality Pair Elements sprinkled into their program. But did they demonstrate mastery of Pairs Skating with "Love Story"?

I say that they did not. Their choice to do "Love Story" openned up the door for B & S to win even with errors because "Love Story" is a Junior Level program that has too much emphasis on duet skating and show skating elements, and deserved a much lower base mark than "Meditation", which has an emphasis on Pairs Skating: two skaters performing the program as one unit.

I believe that both the Technical and Artistic base mark for B & S should have been 0.2 or 0.3 higher than S & P and 0.1 to 0.2 higher than the Chinese, Americans and other Russians.

As Scott Hamilton said, "Maybe they are a tenth or two better than everybody else." I believe they were that night becaise S & P decided to play it safe and do the easier "Love Story".

Maybe if they kept "Orchid" and skated it flawlessly and with passion like "Love Story", they would have won hands down by being better PAIRS SKATERS that night instead of DUET SKATERS.

In my view, B & S deserved their placement, and S & P chose the wrong material to present at the Olympics.

But all is subjective, and the debate will go on forever.

S&P had the skate of their lives on that night;

Click to expand...

I disagree. I thought they performed LS better at the GPF. Then, Sale didn't land the throws forward.

ChiSk8Fan, that was a fantastic post. Whatever side a person might be on, you brought an original POV to the debate, IMO.

Mathman

Oh, boy, here we go again!

IMHO, B & S are superior skaters to S & P. Elena and Anton skate with a level of difficulty, sophistication, and polish that Jamie and David cannot match.

B & S's Salt Lake City long program was skated extremely well. His "bobble" on the double axel - which was a milosecond in the program - was played up as though it was a huge, destructive mistake - which it was not. S & P's "Love Story" program had some lovely moments, but it wasn't on the same level, choreographically and artistically, as the program skated by B & S, in my view.

Frankly, I think the media blew this up way, way beyond any reasonable level. I am still a bit irritated at Sandra Bezic, for her (IMHO) arrogant attitude and her statements that she was "embarrassed for her sport". For Heaven's sakes, give me a break. Sandra is a Canadian, and so are Jamie and David. Don't you think that fact had at least some influence on her judgment? I was also annoyed at Scott Hamilton for jumping on the bandwagon and criticizing the judging as being "unfair", etc.

Had it not been for the French judge coming forward with the allegation that she had been pressured to change her vote, the final (first) result would have stood.

SkateFan4Life said:

Had it not been for the French judge coming forward with the allegation that she had been pressured to change her vote, the final (first) result would have stood.

Click to expand...

Exactly. It was not the media reaction, not Scott Hamilton and Sandra Bezic, not the uproar in the arena, that caused any unusual action to be taken. It was the confession of the judge.

MM

Mathman said:

Exactly. It was not the media reaction, not Scott Hamilton and Sandra Bezic, not the uproar in the arena, that caused any unusual action to be taken. It was the confession of the judge.MM

Click to expand...

And that's what happened. ITA Mathman. It was not a question of which team skated better, it was a question of collusion. the tie score was implemented quickly to cover up as much as possible the other Federation involved in the collusion.

It seems that most posters on this thread gave opinions of the teams and most said they preferred B&S but it was S&P's NIGHT.

Joe

Mathman said:

ChiSk8Fan, that was a fantastic post. Whatever side a person might be on, you brought an original POV to the debate, IMO.

Mathman

Click to expand...

Thank you

tazban01 said:

I'm not sure what music would be considered in the "same classical genre" as meditation. The choreography doesn't suit any music that comes to my mind, but I'm not all that familiar with classical music outside of skating. What music were you thinking?

Click to expand...

I was thinking of the adagio genre, like "The Swan" and "Ave Maria," as well as relatively static slow pieces, like some Chopin Nocturnes, and songs like "Casta Diva," "O Mio Babino Caro," Schubert's "Nacht und Traume," and Tchaikovsky's "Why?" Actually, pretty much a lot of the music that is on compilations that are named like "Classical Music by Candlelight" .

If Massenet was the choice, I wish the program had been choreographed to "O Doux Printemps" instead. It has a lot more guts in it. "Meditation" was meant to be transitional music.

ChiSk8Fan

Very well stated. Ditto.

ChiSk8Fan said:

This debate will continue on forever, but I have gone back and reviewed this event, and I have made a few observations. One thing is certainly clear, and that is the totally subjective nature of interpretation of the rules for judging the event. Purists view the rules one way, some view the rules very liberally and most fall somewhere in between.

Several things are very clear. The event is to demonstrate excellence and mastery of the sport of Pairs Skating.


Beginning Pairs often use more of the duet style of skating, where they do shadow skating, and skating side by side barely toughing each other in unison because this is relatively easy to learn, and is part of the beginnings of learning to be a Pair. Later, the team develops programs that encorporate more Pair skating, doing elements and skating as a unit rather than a duet. You see more of this type of skating at the Novice and Junior level, as well as in Ice Shows, because duet skating is more basic than Pairs Skating.

If you examine the "Love Story" program, it is clear, especially after Jamie and David's subsequent "Tristan" and "Orchid" programs, that this program was more duet skating/show skating than Pairs Skating, and was a program from early in their development as a team. They were play acting the "Love Story" in a very literal interpretation, very concrete, and in a very theatrical way. But, they had no original moves, no original transitions, lots of skating on two feet, lots of crossovers, lots of side by side skating, and they were apart and not touching for a great portion of the program.

So this much is also clear: Sale and Pelltier demonstrated excellence in Duet Skating and Show Skating with high quality Pair Elements sprinkled into their program. But did they demonstrate mastery of Pairs Skating with "Love Story"?


I In my view, B & S deserved their placement, and S & P chose the wrong material to present at the Olympics.But all is subjective, and the debate will go on forever.

Click to expand...

I have no problem with your opinion on who should have won but the way I read it, it seems that B&S should have just got a gold medal whether they skated flawlessly or flawfully. It didn't matter. Their past performances were what should be counted. They did not skate duets. There didn't even have to be a competition. Am I correct?

My take on duets is that they usually come in the form of musical instruments (2 instruments complimenting each other) or in vocals (Sonny and Cher not to mention Aldalgisa and Norma).

Pas de Deux is a ballet term as a dance for two. If two people are dancing that is a pas de deux.

Pairs to me seems to be about two skaters performing together a routine either in competition or in a show.

If story telling does not measure up to Pairs then how would one explain B&S Chaplin routine? It was a very cute routine and your comments on Love Story would apply to that to. Am I correct?

I appreciate your preference to B&S, but it is not mine.

Joe

Joesitz said:

I have no problem with your opinion on who should have won but the way I read it, it seems that B&S should have just got a gold medal whether they skated flawlessly or flawfully. It didn't matter. Their past performances were what should be counted. They did not skate duets. There didn't even have to be a competition. Am I correct?

Click to expand...

Hmm. That's not what I got from that post at all. I got that S&P presented the wrong program if they wanted to show that they mastered pairs skating (and not duet style). Their Tristan and Isolde and Orchid programs were more difficult in the pairs skating skills they presented and would've been able to beat Meditation. That's what I got from the post. It had nothing to with their past performances.

Joesitz said:

I have no problem with your opinion on who should have won but the way I read it, it seems that B&S should have just got a gold medal whether they skated flawlessly or flawfully. It didn't matter. Their past performances were what should be counted. They did not skate duets. There didn't even have to be a competition. Am I correct?

Joe

Click to expand...

Well, not exactly my intent in the literal sense of the word, Joe. B & S still had to go out and perform sbs triple jumps, beautiful lifts, huge throws, footwork, death spirals, spins, pair spins, pair spirals, transition double three turns, MITF, and all the things they did do well that evening.

In terms of demonstrating a complete package that highlights Pairs Skating---two skating in conjunction and in unison to perform elements, dance and entertainment and beauty, "Love Story" lacks in comparison to a program like "Meditation", in that it emphasizes shadow skating, simple, but powerful transitions and literal choreography that would work as a show program (I am not saying other programs do not, but this one is an example of supreme excellence in this genre of program).

I am of the opinion that S & P could have presented different material at the Olympics and the this could have altered the results and opinions.

B&S won. That's what I think, and I think it was unfair what happened to them at the Olympics.

I don't think that S&Z should have won bronze either.

ChiSk8Fan said:

Well, not exactly my intent in the literal sense of the word, Joe. B & S still had to go out and perform sbs triple jumps, beautiful lifts, huge throws, footwork, death spirals, spins, pair spins, pair spirals, transition double three turns, MITF, and all the things they did do well that evening.

Click to expand...

I was just joshing because I read it that once the music was announced that no contest was necessary.

In terms of demonstrating a complete package that highlights Pairs Skating---two skating in conjunction and in unison to perform elements, dance and entertainment and beauty, "Love Story" lacks in comparison to a program like "Meditation", in that it emphasizes shadow skating, simple, but powerful transitions and literal choreography that would work as a show program (I am not saying other programs do not, but this one is an example of supreme excellence in this genre of program).

Click to expand...

No argument. I agree, I just didn't get the category of "Duet".

I am of the opinion that S & P could have presented different material at the Olympics and the this could have altered the results and opinions.

Click to expand...

Me too. I loved the Wagner (but I think it was an SP). I thought in spite of all this, S&P were the winners based on a total clean program, but when the results came up, I said ok and when I saw that the French judge going for B&S I was more convinced that B&S should be the winners. But when the collusion became apparent, I reverted back to S&P. I am against cheating and very sorry for both teams having had to share that medal.

Joe

At the time, I would have judged in favor of Elena and Anton. I admit, the reusing of an old program is one of my pet peeves, no matter how well done it is. Jamie and David were excellent, for sure. But I favor skating that transports me to another place, that draws me in completely and entrances me. Elena and Anton did that, Jamie and David didn't. Also, although I do not know so much about the degrees of difficulty of pair elements, I have read that the difficulty in the Russians program was greater. But even without that, for me, they were the better, in spite of the errors.

Kasey

Kasey said:

Also, although I do not know so much about the degrees of difficulty of pair elements, I have read that the difficulty in the Russians program was greater. But even without that, for me, they were the better, in spite of the errors.Kasey

Click to expand...

What was the source of that read about difficulty and could you explain exactly now that you have learned the intracacies of judging difficulties what were the differences between the two teams?

Your last sentence makes more sense. It is you opinion and I respect that. JMO.

Joe

I have been following this discussion with great interest, and after rewatching both LPs, I decided to throw in my two cents .....

Judging conspiracy notwithstanding, I think a strong case could be made for either pair finishing on top of the podium. B&S had a more demanding program, in terms of technical elements, intricate choreography and innovative moves. But I felt that they were tentative throughout their freeskate, and while Anton's turnout of the double axel by itself didn't disrupt the rest of the program, that combined with Elena's scratchy landings on both throw triple jumps, made you aware that they had, as Sandra Bezic put it, "to fight all the way through the program". Most of the elements were executed beautifully, but as a whole I didn't feel that B&S "connected" with the music because of the little flaws in their performance. There was a hesistancy and cautiousness in their performance which I found very uncharacteristic of B&S, especially since their beautiful lines and elegant upper carriage highlights the smoothness they have on the ice.

And perhaps there lies the reason why the audience, and many commentators, thought S&P should have won: performance. S&P had a simpler program; Love Story did not have the complex and intricate choreography that Meditation had, but it was performed much better -- the program itself was more than the sum of its parts. Without the problems B&S had in their program, Love Story became a seamless blend of athleticism and artistry, and S&P completed the technical elements (throw triple jumps, lifts, throw triple twist) without interfering or interrupting the "story" they were telling on the ice. I think S&P were smart in returning to Love Story for SLC, as it had obviously captured the audience's attention when they performed it first time round at Worlds 2000, and the music struck an emotive chord with the crowd because the music itself had its own history and people could relate to it better than Meditation.

I can only speak for myself when I say this: while I admired Meditation, I didn't respond emotionally to B&S's performance that night. S&P, on the other hand, drew me into their program, showing not just the light and playful side of love, but, in the middle section of their program, the pain and anguish it can bring when things go wrong, and by the end of the performance, I had a lump in my throat. I felt that, through their skating, they established an emotional connection with the audience, and their "achievement" was even more impressive given the fact that they had executed very difficult technical elements flawlessly.

I too agree that Orchid and Tristan & Isolde were more difficult and complex programs, but Love Story set a mood and atmosphere, it acquired an emotional resonance through S&P's intimacy and interaction. By paring down the program to tell a "love story", Love Story may have lost some of the detail in terms of choreography, but what it lacked in intricacy, it made up for in clarity and cohesion.