- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
What an interesting article and what an interesting set of quotes! They reveal what each of the top three couples thought about when they created this year's programs, and it makes this year's scoring for these three couples make a lot of sense.
I put off watching this until I could see it on the Olympic Channel with Tanith and Ben's commentary. They started the program with the top 3 rhythm dances, but only showed the top two flights of free dances.
May I say I like Tanith plus Charlie as commentators more than Tanith plus Ben? Charlie brings more technical info. But Ben is good too. It is a great team, and I wish NBC would use them for all broadcasts of dance, on all their platforms. For one thing, they talk very little during the actual skating.
Back to the article, and to the event it covers.
Hubbell and Donohue said (paraphrased) they choose programs that show off their power and a tradeoff between abandon and control. What they are thinking about when they picked music is winning by showing off their strength...which is strength. But what they do not speak of is the music, or the story they are telling, or the audience, so it is no surprise they get programs that fall flat with the audience. It never is a good idea to forget that judges are part of the audience.
I am afraid I have always thought of them as dancers who don't really care about their music very much. They focus on their speed and attack, often missing the beat, and they did that here. And errors, when they occur, rattle them and destroy the performance, because neither the music, the story, nor the audience can lift them back up. This dance was at its best at nationals, I think.
Piper and Paul OTOH talked about picking programs with the audience in mind, and then creating a program that would emphasize and clarify what the music was saying to them. And here they had a wonderful performance that impacted and moved the audience. The new costumes make a huge difference. All their motions are more clearly visible in them. The dance spin is a bit clunky, otherwise a very moving and beautiful performance. They are excelling in bringing out the meaning in the music. However, their tech was two points lower than Chock and Bates, something not to forget in how the programs were ranked by the judges.
As to Chock and Bates:
I saw an odd program that they air as filler on Olympic Channel when a scheduled event has been cancelled. It is called "Hiitting the Wall, " and has two female athletes interviewing different Olympic athletes about the training regimens they use in the gym, off ice, so to speak. Such a surprise! They spent half the program on Cappellini & LaNotte on ice dance training. They showed them doing weight lifting on a weight bench, but to a metronome, working on the sharpness and quickness of motion and lift of the barbell to every beat. It was quite fascinating. I can see C&B doing that drill. When they are on, every finger (and everything else) is aligned, particularly in this Snake program, and so sharp and quick, executed with such snap and emphasis. The best version I think was at the GPF. It is remarkable that when there is a mistake, somehow they get back on the beat and into the performance again, as here. It is a trait that commands respect from judges, as here, and coupled with the fact that the fall was on a transition, and so lost no technical points, explains the win.
What puzzles me in this program is their second lift. They always get about +1.8 GOE on it. This from a great lifting team that routinely gets all 4's and 5's from their combination lift at the start of this program. The problem is the exit which looks uncontrolled, and yet it must be intentional since they do it the same way every time. It is a snake-y looking movement, highlighting the jointless movements a snake might have if you flipped it around like that. The lift fits the program's story, but it is costing them at least 1.5 points to do it that way, and yet they haven't changed it. I have found this curious, but it is in keeping with what they describe here as their creative process: they heard and loved the music, and it told them a story they wanted to tell the audience. And they say the changes they have made in the program have been done to tell the story better. Apparently, that must be more important to them than the 1.5 tech points!
Here and at nationals they have been a bit careful to insure high levels. It detracts a bit from the performance, but it has yielded higher technical marks. I hope to see it at its best at Worlds!
The RD in contrast, definitely was the best I have seen them perform it so far.
I put off watching this until I could see it on the Olympic Channel with Tanith and Ben's commentary. They started the program with the top 3 rhythm dances, but only showed the top two flights of free dances.
May I say I like Tanith plus Charlie as commentators more than Tanith plus Ben? Charlie brings more technical info. But Ben is good too. It is a great team, and I wish NBC would use them for all broadcasts of dance, on all their platforms. For one thing, they talk very little during the actual skating.
Back to the article, and to the event it covers.
Hubbell and Donohue said (paraphrased) they choose programs that show off their power and a tradeoff between abandon and control. What they are thinking about when they picked music is winning by showing off their strength...which is strength. But what they do not speak of is the music, or the story they are telling, or the audience, so it is no surprise they get programs that fall flat with the audience. It never is a good idea to forget that judges are part of the audience.
I am afraid I have always thought of them as dancers who don't really care about their music very much. They focus on their speed and attack, often missing the beat, and they did that here. And errors, when they occur, rattle them and destroy the performance, because neither the music, the story, nor the audience can lift them back up. This dance was at its best at nationals, I think.
Piper and Paul OTOH talked about picking programs with the audience in mind, and then creating a program that would emphasize and clarify what the music was saying to them. And here they had a wonderful performance that impacted and moved the audience. The new costumes make a huge difference. All their motions are more clearly visible in them. The dance spin is a bit clunky, otherwise a very moving and beautiful performance. They are excelling in bringing out the meaning in the music. However, their tech was two points lower than Chock and Bates, something not to forget in how the programs were ranked by the judges.
As to Chock and Bates:
I saw an odd program that they air as filler on Olympic Channel when a scheduled event has been cancelled. It is called "Hiitting the Wall, " and has two female athletes interviewing different Olympic athletes about the training regimens they use in the gym, off ice, so to speak. Such a surprise! They spent half the program on Cappellini & LaNotte on ice dance training. They showed them doing weight lifting on a weight bench, but to a metronome, working on the sharpness and quickness of motion and lift of the barbell to every beat. It was quite fascinating. I can see C&B doing that drill. When they are on, every finger (and everything else) is aligned, particularly in this Snake program, and so sharp and quick, executed with such snap and emphasis. The best version I think was at the GPF. It is remarkable that when there is a mistake, somehow they get back on the beat and into the performance again, as here. It is a trait that commands respect from judges, as here, and coupled with the fact that the fall was on a transition, and so lost no technical points, explains the win.
What puzzles me in this program is their second lift. They always get about +1.8 GOE on it. This from a great lifting team that routinely gets all 4's and 5's from their combination lift at the start of this program. The problem is the exit which looks uncontrolled, and yet it must be intentional since they do it the same way every time. It is a snake-y looking movement, highlighting the jointless movements a snake might have if you flipped it around like that. The lift fits the program's story, but it is costing them at least 1.5 points to do it that way, and yet they haven't changed it. I have found this curious, but it is in keeping with what they describe here as their creative process: they heard and loved the music, and it told them a story they wanted to tell the audience. And they say the changes they have made in the program have been done to tell the story better. Apparently, that must be more important to them than the 1.5 tech points!
Here and at nationals they have been a bit careful to insure high levels. It detracts a bit from the performance, but it has yielded higher technical marks. I hope to see it at its best at Worlds!
The RD in contrast, definitely was the best I have seen them perform it so far.
Last edited:
