- Joined
- Jul 30, 2009
I'd really like Ashley to have another shot at Worlds, but this season where there's only 2 spots I want it to be Nagasu and Gao.
And do you think Christina can help get those three spots for USA?
:think:
I'd really like Ashley to have another shot at Worlds, but this season where there's only 2 spots I want it to be Nagasu and Gao.
Why does that make me feel like something was off at Natls?
I think US Skating / judges looked at Rachael's 5th place finish from '09 Worlds and decided she was our best bet in Vancouver. I think they inflated her scores - in comparison to the others - past the point of credibilty at Natls.
That's an age old question that may never be answered. As much as we can argue about that, and we will, there is one thing I am certain of. The ISU judges DO NOT consider national placements or scores. I remember this talk of a "gentlemen's agreement" that ISU judges would not reverse national placements. I have seen no evidence of such an agreement. In fact, recently it seems our top man and lady at Nationals are not on top at Worlds.
I think it is quite likely that the judges assumed that Rachael had won U.S. Nationals after her fine skate, and therefore piled on the points to give her a strong send-off to worlds. All countries do this.
And do you think Christina can help get those three spots for USA?
:think:
Maybe. I mean, her PCS probably won't be that high but it's not like Ashley's are that high internationally either. Plus Christina's jumps are always rotated, never 2 footed, and she's attempting a 3-3 in her SP and 7 triples in her FS. She's also been pretty consistent. I mean, if Mirai is say 3rd, then Christina could finish as low as 10th and they'd still get 3 spots back, more realistically say Mirai is 4th or 5th and Christina say 8th. That seems doable. Ksenia was 8th at this year's worlds and Christina beat her at the JGPF.
I think that's a somewhat different question. I took your earlier post to mean that you were thinking like this. The ISU judges at the 2010 Olympics and 2010 World championships scored Mirai higher than Rachael. Therefore the U.S. judges will probably follow suit and give Mirai higher scores than Rachael at 2011 U.S. Nationals, or at least not give Rachael any special favors in the judging.
I do agree with with what you wrote here. I think it is quite likely that the judges assumed that Rachael had won U.S. Nationals after her fine skate, and therefore piled on the points to give her a strong send-off to worlds. All countries do this.
I do not, however, think that the U.S. judges then said, whoops, now we better hold Mirai back to keep her behind Rachael. I think they scored Mirai on a comparable standard, and... only the two downgraded jumps prevented Mirai from catching Rachael's score..
Considering just Rachael alone, and not comparing her to anyone else, I will meet you halfway on why her Olympic score was twenty points lower than her score at Nationals. 10 points for tthe two downgrades at the Olympics and 10 points nationalistic grade inflation.
Let's wait until we get to the Grand Prix before making any real predictions.
Given Mirai's performance last season, though, I'd say she can realistically get anywhere from silver (if she skates clean, assuming a clean Mao) to 7th (even if she bombs à-la-WC2010). So, I say we should try to send someone who can reliably get around 6th. I'd say Rachael at this point, but I can also see Ashley and MAYBE Christina pending how her PCS fare on the international scene.
But why do all countries do this? What do they think they gain by inflating scores? Does anyone actually think the ISU judges score skaters better because they earned 300 points at their Nationals? I guess I would understand if this inflation actually provided some benefit. But I don't see any.
I felt the same way you did. I didn't get it. I still don't. But I was somewhat mollified when I saw that the scores at the Olympics were inflated as well. Are Olympic scores always that inflated? I don't remember them being like that before, under either system. In any case, maybe it was a good thing that the national competitions inflated scores if that is the way it was going to be at the Olympics.
I felt the same way you did. I didn't get it. I still don't. But I was somewhat mollified when I saw that the scores at the Olympics were inflated as well. Are Olympic scores always that inflated?
Well, there have only been 2 Olympics under COP. In 2006, none of the ladies broke 190, but the medals were just as shiny.
In fact, I don't ever remember thinking that an ISU event was inflated before these Olympics.
Her Olympic score was still one of the highest intl scores she ever received
But why do all countries do this? What do they think they gain by inflating scores? Does anyone actually think the ISU judges score skaters better because they earned 300 points at their Nationals? I guess I would understand if this inflation actually provided some benefit. But I don't see any.
Still, at the end of the day, I think the U.S. judges will want to send Rachael and Mirai to worlds. Which is not to say that they won't have to skate extremely well at nats to make sure they are on the team.
But I think if there are any two skaters the judges will subconciously want to reward it will be those two - based on their Olympic performances. I think they will both be forgiven for their mistakes at worlds, even if it did mean we didn't get our three spots back.
You are probably right, but that coin has another side. If another lady manages to bump Mirai or Rachael off the World team next year, she will really have earned it. She will be on the World team having received no favors from any quarter.
Kim won 6-2 and 6-1 and just overwhelmed her poor opponent.
BTW she won 1.7 million and a 500K bonus for a 2.2 million dollar payday.
She is my favorite at the moment and one of the best hardcourt players I ever seen.
Yeah, really felt sorry for Zvonareva--same thing happened in the Wimbledon final, she just... tightened up. I understand, having played tennis since age 4. Not a good feeling hwell: