Jason Brown

[StitchMonkey]

I think pretty much all their commentary on Jason this season has been off the mark and very repetitive. It gets tiresome to listen to them say "we love Jason" and then tear him to shreds. They did something similar with Ashley.

And Ashley is doing very well, and everyone is enjoying it. They are predators stalking their prey. They likely know that Jason is not going to fade away, much like Ashley did not. So they tear him down while proclaiming love, so that when he inevitably does well, they can jump right back on that bandwagon and push the comeback angle. Makes for a good narrative.

 

[Mrs. P]

And Ashley is doing very well, and everyone is enjoying it. They are predators stalking their prey. They likely know that Jason is not going to fade away, much like Ashley did not. So they tear him down while proclaiming love, so that when he inevitably does well, they can jump right back on that bandwagon and push the comeback angle. Makes for a good narrative.

I do remember them tweeting something to the effect that they only snark at people who are worth snarking at, i.e. if you weren't any good we wouldn't even bother talking about you.

The skaters are pretty good natured about the whole thing, I think. And deep down, David Lease is a die-hard skating fan, whether you agree with his opinions or not. Honestly, I think for Ashley, he's much more preferable than the Twitterverse who are actually downright mean to her, especially post-Nationals last season.

Also WA, regarding room for all -- yes I agree. You don't seeing me wish they didn't exist. Quite the contrary, they should exist and as long as there are people who will listen to them, they will keep trucking along. I'm all about variety. But I also have the right, as a consumer, to state that I don't agree or care for it (and expressing that opinion through my non-clicking).

 

[StitchMonkey]

I do remember them tweeting something to the effect that they only snark at people who are worth snarking at, i.e. if you weren't any good we wouldn't even bother talking about you.

The skaters are pretty good natured about the whole thing. And deep down, David Lease is a die-hard skating fan, whether you agree with his opinions or not.

Also WA, regarding room for all -- yes I agree. You don't seeing me wish they didn't exist. Quite the contrary, they should exist and as long as there are people who will listen to them, they will keep trucking along. I'm all about competition.

Part of my soft sport for them comes form the Series they did on IJS where they actually talked about what the criteria was for various things and then scored some skaters. I found that really useful and interesting, and frankly I wish they would do that more often. Hearing people talk about why they think an element deserve to check off a given box, really can help make this system make sense.

They are entertainers very much, and like the tweet you referenced said, they are keeping an eye out for who they should pay attention too (and they dropped the ball on Josh it seems!). They are weaving a story, but it is interspersed with knowledgeable comments here and there. I am glad we have something like it.

 

[Mrs. P]

I got curious.

So I looked at every international competition Jason has done in his senior career and counted out every triple jump he's done and whether he UR, popped, fell or zayaked on it. Also, I looked to see how many of these jumps got neutral or +GOE (this is the hardest stat to do cause for combos the -GOE counts for everything even if part of the combo is fine).

UR is a lot easier, since you can clearly see which jump was deemed UR. Same with pops and zayaks.

So here's the stat. Out of 105 triple jumps attempted he got a UR or DG on 17 of them. That equals a percentage of 16.1 percent. Hardly a chronic problem. Out of those 17 UR/DGs, 8 of them were on the 3A (47.1 percent). The rest were on 3Z (2), 3F (1), 3S (2) and 3T (3).

The more telling stat, however, is the netural/+GOE. Again it's not a precise figure due to the nature of how -GOE is calculated. I also counted very minor -GOE (i.e. -0.10) as neutral. Out of 105 triple jumps, 69 of them received neutral or +GOE, or 65.71 percent. The 3A got + or netural GOE about half the time. The triple flip was his best jump, it got neutral/+GOE about 82.35 percent. Other jumps were in the 60 and 70 percent range.

So he's not a chronic UR-er, but 34 percent of his jumps do not get a +GOE boost. When you have a BV disadvantage, giving away points more than 1/3 of your triple jumps is pretty significant. So perhaps that is what he means when he told Phil Hersh that if he had not reached the maximum on his jumps, other than the quad.

If he is capable of doing 43 clean long programs in practice, he and his team likely do not like the fact they are giving away points on 1/3 of about his jumps in competition.

 

[WeakAnkles]

Thank you all for the BALANCED comments.

 

[Interspectator]

I got curious.

So I looked at every international competition Jason has done in his senior career and counted out every triple jump he's done and whether he UR, popped, fell or zayaked on it. Also, I looked to see how many of these jumps got neutral or +GOE (this is the hardest stat to do cause for combos the -GOE counts for everything even if part of the combo is fine).

UR is a lot easier, since you can clearly see which jump was deemed UR. Same with pops and zayaks.

So here's the stat. Out of 105 triple jumps attempted he got a UR or DG on 17 of them. That equals a percentage of 16.1 percent. Hardly a chronic problem. Out of those 17 UR/DGs, 8 of them were on the 3A (47.1 percent). The rest were on 3Z (2), 3F (1), 3S (2) and 3T (3).

The more telling stat, however, is the netural/+GOE. Again it's not a precise figure due to the nature of how -GOE is calculated. I also counted very minor -GOE (i.e. -0.10) as neutral. Out of 105 triple jumps, 69 of them received neutral or +GOE, or 65.71 percent. The 3A got + or netural GOE about half the time. The triple flip was his best jump, it got neutral/+GOE about 82.35 percent. Other jumps were in the 60 and 70 percent range.

So he's not a chronic UR-er, but 34 percent of his jumps do not get a +GOE boost. When you have a BV disadvantage, giving away points more than 1/3 of your triple jumps is pretty significant. So perhaps that is what he means when he told Phil Hersh that if he had not reached the maximum on his jumps, other than the quad.

If he is capable of doing 43 clean long programs in practice, he and his team likely do not like the fact they are giving away points on 1/3 of about his jumps in competition.

Wow...I wish commentators could have a page of your stats when doing commentary at the end of a program. It's very interesting. :shocked:

 

[WeakAnkles]

And Ashley is doing very well, and everyone is enjoying it. They are predators stalking their prey. They likely know that Jason is not going to fade away, much like Ashley did not. So they tear him down while proclaiming love, so that when he inevitably does well, they can jump right back on that bandwagon and push the comeback angle. Makes for a good narrative.

Hmm...perhaps I spoke too soon. I can't disagree with this more. Like Mrs P said, they criticize those they think are worth criticizing. And ultimately they want to see GOOD SKATING, not screw with skaters heads for the sake of "a good narrative."

 

[Mrs. P]

Wow...I wish commentators could have a page of your stats when doing commentary at the end of a program. It's very interesting. :shocked:

This is exactly what I want. Don't say he's a chronic UR-er if the actual numbers don't show that.

I did another version of number crunching just looking at jumping passes and how many of them had a major error (zayak, pop, fall) as well neutral/positive GOE. This provided a different view point.

Out of 96 jump passes over eight senior international competitions (Olympics include three segments with the team event):

16 of those jumping passes were UR (16.7 percent)
3 of them resulted in falls (3.1 percent)
2 of them were popped jumps (2.1 percent)
1 was a zayak (the 3Lo was invalidated due to the weird waxel error in his Olympics FS; 1 percent)

The jumping pass view is more accurate at looking at +GOE since it's given this way, not by individual jump. So out of 96 jumping passes, 70 of them received +GOE or was neutral or 73 percent. So a better number than the individual jump number (which is skewed, again because you have to count all the jumps in a combo that gets -GOE). Still, you're talking about giving away points on more than a quarter of your jumping passes. Again when you don't have the BV to protect you, this is significant.

 

[StitchMonkey]

Hmm...perhaps I spoke too soon. I can't disagree with this more. Like Mrs P said, they criticize those they think are worth criticizing. And ultimately they want to see GOOD SKATING, not screw with skaters heads for the sake of "a good narrative."

They are not messing with anyone's heads. . . they are predicting who is going to be talked about months down the line so they can have been talking about them the entire time. Of course they want good skating, but they also do try to predict who will skate well and talk about them the entire season for instance. They don't make the skating, they only make the show. They have no control over how people skate, they do have control over what they talk about. So yes I think they are always on the look out for who they should be keeping an eye on and who is going to be the next flavor of the month. That is what I mean by narratives, if they peg the right skaters early on, the season can be a more cohesive narrative. The skaters are not the prey, the buzz about the skater is the prey. They are looking for skaters worth talking about, they want to do it first. By being able to reference something they have said before, they are more likely to get more views, so in many ways it is in the show's best interest to talk about the skaters who are likely to have strong seasons.

As an example, had they had interesting stuff to say about Josh and COC, and maybe argued it was a one off and to keep an eye on him, people would be more likely to rewatch that episode post nationals. As it stands, they kinda missed the boat on Josh, so they don't really have that narrative aspect of his assent. He was not mentioned in their preview show for instance. This is a case where they missed a chance to construct a narrative as they just did not predict it accurately. That is not a dig at Josh or anyone they focused on, just that they did have some skaters they talked about on going, and some they did not as much. Had they been talking about Josh all season, his now doing well would play into that narrative.

I can see how my comment could come across aggressive, but really it is more how I would describe a shopping trip.

 

[karne]

ETA Karne: it was in the SP at 2014 worlds. I should probably stop talking about Dave Lease, but he has been pushing the "Jason is a chronic < " thing all season, ever since Nebelhorn, far more than I recall JW doing.

Sorry, I meant that the first time I ever heard the "Jason is a chronic underrotator" line was JW's commentary during the Olympic team event LP and I remember going "what the...?" then.

I'm a HUGE fan of TSL, not just because of the interviews, but I also really love the recaps. Why? Precisely because of the snark. It's such a refreshing change of pace from more mainstream reportage of skating events. It's also how most people view skating. Think I'm way off base there? Read some of the threads from when events are run live. You read just as much snark as you'll hear on TSL. If Dave and Jenny were positioning themselves as objective sports reporters, I could see that it would be a problem. But in terms of their recaps, they're not. They're simply knowledgeable fans, albeit ones with a 'rhymes with witchy' side. And they're also often quite funny and more on the mark than people on here give them credit for. YMMV of course. And if they're not your cuppa, drink what makes you happy. But they get so much criticism here that I feel duty bound to say, yes, I'm a HUGE fan of TSL. Even when I disagree with them (like I did about their take on Jason's quad--not one of their brightest moments).

I think the way they present the snarky commentary is more or less how a lot of fans talk about skating. I agree with you. There was a time when I never failed to miss one of their shows and would wail in misery if my bandwidth had broken for the month. But this season I feel like they stepped over the line into nasty a few too many times. Their total rip-apart of Max post CoR - well, to listen to them talk, you'd think they were talking about a kid in basic skills, not a US National Champion and GP medallist! And so I had difficulty watching them again. They also made a few snippy comments directed at his "work ethic" (Josh has also been targeted by them for this too) and it was all just...you loved this guy a year ago, and now he's your punching bag.

(and they dropped the ball on Josh it seems!).

Well, that's no disgrace. EVERYONE did.

As an example, had they had interesting stuff to say about Josh and COC, and maybe argued it was a one off and to keep an eye on him, people would be more likely to rewatch that episode post nationals. As it stands, they kinda missed the boat on Josh, so they don't really have that narrative aspect of his assent. He was not mentioned in their preview show for instance.

As I said above, everyone missed the boat on Josh, so that's not a slight on them. Josh wasn't even mentioned in the NBC's preview, either.

The only narrative they really had on Josh before Nationals was the "he slacks off at training" narrative. Which I always felt was bunk. You can't land quads if you're slacking off at training. You can't create masterpieces like Schindler's List if you're slacking off at training.

 

[WeakAnkles]

They are not messing with anyone's heads. . . they are predicting who is going to be talked about months down the line so they can have been talking about them the entire time. Of course they want good skating, but they also do try to predict who will skate well and talk about them the entire season for instance. They don't make the skating, they only make the show. They have no control over how people skate, they do have control over what they talk about. So yes I think they are always on the look out for who they should be keeping an eye on and who is going to be the next flavor of the month. That is what I mean by narratives, if they peg the right skaters early on, the season can be a more cohesive narrative. The skaters are not the prey, the buzz about the skater is the prey. They are looking for skaters worth talking about, they want to do it first. By being able to reference something they have said before, they are more likely to get more views, so in many ways it is in the show's best interest to talk about the skaters who are likely to have strong seasons.

As an example, had they had interesting stuff to say about Josh and COC, and maybe argued it was a one off and to keep an eye on him, people would be more likely to rewatch that episode post nationals. As it stands, they kinda missed the boat on Josh, so they don't really have that narrative aspect of his assent. He was not mentioned in their preview show for instance. This is a case where they missed a chance to construct a narrative as they just did not predict it accurately. That is not a dig at Josh or anyone they focused on, just that they did have some skaters they talked about on going, and some they did not as much. Had they been talking about Josh all season, his now doing well would play into that narrative.

I can see how my comment could come across aggressive, but really it is more how I would describe a shopping trip.

Ok, that's a clearer explanation of what you meant. Then again, alot of sportswriters do that. At least I can say the Daily News and NY Post coverage of the Yankees is similar in targeting possible ongoing narratives (and I'm a big Yankess fan). And they too are prone to the "flavor of the moment" syndrome, so I don't think the problem is relegated just to TSL.

 

[Li'Kitsu]

So here's the stat. Out of 105 triple jumps attempted he got a UR or DG on 17 of them. That equals a percentage of 16.1 percent. Hardly a chronic problem. Out of those 17 UR/DGs, 8 of them were on the 3A (47.1 percent). The rest were on 3Z (2), 3F (1), 3S (2) and 3T (3).

I did something similar, because I wanted to see if Jason's 3A was really as much of a problem as a lot of people say it is. So I looked at the stats from 23 different skaters for this season and last (though it's not the exact same skaters for those 2 seasons), and counted the 3As either as +GOE, UR, pop, fall or completed (meaning +GOE and -GOE but not caused by one of the previous three mistakes).
(I also had the same problem with combinations... I ended up counting 3A combos were the mistake happened on the second jump as completed, but not as +GOE)
I counted only international events though, since for a lot of skaters getting the national scores is, well, a pain in the ***. Sorry!

And, at least from that group: Jason's succession rate last season was the third lowest (behind Misha Ge and Ross Miner, who usually has a pretty good 3A) with 42,8% getting +GOE and 64,3% being completed. The average is 62,3% with +GOE and 83,6% completed for all the guys. This season, he had +GOE on 50% of his 3As, while the average is 58,8% (when it comes to the +GOE, he's had a better succession rate this season than Artur Gachinski, again a guy with a usually very good 3A, and the allegedly consistent Maxim Kovtun). So first of all, there's an upwards trend, and second the difference is not as big as I think some people make it sound.
Also he tends to make most of his mistakes at the beginning of the season while a lot of the other guys are all over the place or tend to be even better in the first half. So I'd rather expect his stats to go up compared to last season again after worlds - and IMO the fact that he's still improving is the most important info from this

It's also pretty much what you already said before: he URes, but falls and pops less then others. His UR rates are the highest out of all the skaters - last season it were 28,6%, this season so far it's 25%. It's more noticeable this season though because there is only one other skater to get any UR call on the 3A (Misha Ge, and it was just once). Last season there were a lot more (Aaron, Brezina, Kozuka, Miner, Takahashi and Yan for example - all of which are very good 3A jumpers overall).
If you look at falls and pops combined, Jason was at 7,1% last season and had a lower mistake rate than Abbott (21,3%), Brezina (15,4%), Dornbush (8,3%), Fernandez (10%), Ge (25%), Hanyu (10,5%), Kozuka (8,3%), Menshov (12,5%), Miner (33,3%), Mura (8,3%), Rippon (22,2%), Voronov (11,1%), Ten (11,1%), Yan (16,6%) and Chan (11,1%). Only 7 guys were better than Jason in the no fall and no pop category. This season looks different since he had 2 falls on the 3A in the earlier comps. But since the overall succession went down, he's more middle of the pack now in that regard.

Base line: His 3A is giving him more trouble then it does for the "average" skater. But IMO, it's not as bad as it's made out to be and he has the bad luck of competing under a system were URs are worse than falls. He's also still improving, so that's good news

PS: it's off topic but my fan heart needs to say this: Oddady kicked everyones behind with a +GOE rate of 100% last season! And with the second highest average GOE of 1,93 no less. Now I miss him again...

 

[dorispulaski]

Odadaddy

I am glad he has a commentary gig.

 

[Interspectator]

I love reading stats like this. It's great. Keep it up.
Jason's programs are easy on the eyes (even when his costumes are not) because I can usually count on him to do a solid program with minimal pops and falls that includes many transitions and difficult spins as well. It is to be greatly commended that while still keeping pretty consistent, he is also upping his technical content.

And Odaddy...I weep. But hey, it's been recently announced that he's going to be a regular on the cast of Asa-chan, a National morning broadcast! Whoopiie. Getting his boys through university.

 

[Tavi...]

Hmm...perhaps I spoke too soon. I can't disagree with this more. Like Mrs P said, they criticize those they think are worth criticizing. And ultimately they want to see GOOD SKATING, not screw with skaters heads for the sake of "a good narrative."

Since "good narrative" is my language, I assume this comment is directed at me. I am sure Jenny and Dave are knowledgeable and want to see good skating. I listen pretty regularly to their recaps and interviews. Their interviews are usually very, very good. Their recaps are often funny and interesting. But I disagree with you that they only want to see good skating. They may not have consciously sat down at the beginning of this season and said "hey let's pick on Jason and Ashley," but that is precisely what they've done, consistently. When you do that kind of thing, it becomes a "narrative" that generates interest and drives blog traffic and comments. IMHO, there is a big difference between their good-natured, laughing, "whose daughter is better, mine or yours" snarks about Tuk and Radionova and their...carping, for lack of a better word, on Ashley's lack of technical difficulty or Jason's under rotations.

I am not saying they should never criticize Jason, Ashley, or any other skater. I am saying that I object to the fact that they have consistently failed to snark with nuance, let's say. Ashley, for example, began making technical improvements long, long, before Jenny and Dave acknowledged it and Dave "apologized." And although you can rightly criticize Jason for a lot of under rotated jumps and other issues this season, he also achieved new personal bests twice this season, which I don't think Dave and Jenny have ever acknowledged. If a skater is worth criticizing, his or her improvements are also worth noting. To the extent that Jenny and Dave have failed to make balanced comments on Jason, they are shaping a narrative that he is little more than a chronic under rotater who undeservedly won Nats this year. You want balanced appreciation of TSL? I guess I'd like balanced comments from TSL, and IMO, they frequently fail to make them.

 

[Li'Kitsu]

I love reading stats like this. It's great. Keep it up.
Jason's programs are easy on the eyes (even when his costumes are not) because I can usually count on him to do a solid program with minimal pops and falls that includes many transitions and difficult spins as well. It is to be greatly commended that while still keeping pretty consistent, he is also upping his technical content.

And Odaddy...I weep. But hey, it's been recently announced that he's going to be a regular on the cast of Asa-chan, a National morning broadcast! Whoopiie. Getting his boys through university.

If you want to know something about these numbers (or others), just ask
And yes, I also appreciate it a lot that I don't have to go into 'anxious-mode' when Jason is on the ice. My fan heart needs a little security once in a while!

And a big for Odaddy! He deserves it!

 

[Mrs. P]

I did something similar, because I wanted to see if Jason's 3A was really as much of a problem as a lot of people say it is. So I looked at the stats from 23 different skaters for this season and last (though it's not the exact same skaters for those 2 seasons), and counted the 3As either as +GOE, UR, pop, fall or completed (meaning +GOE and -GOE but not caused by one of the previous three mistakes).
(I also had the same problem with combinations... I ended up counting 3A combos were the mistake happened on the second jump as completed, but not as +GOE)
I counted only international events though, since for a lot of skaters getting the national scores is, well, a pain in the ***. Sorry!

And, at least from that group: Jason's succession rate last season was the third lowest (behind Misha Ge and Ross Miner, who usually has a pretty good 3A) with 42,8% getting +GOE and 64,3% being completed. The average is 62,3% with +GOE and 83,6% completed for all the guys. This season, he had +GOE on 50% of his 3As, while the average is 58,8% (when it comes to the +GOE, he's had a better succession rate this season than Artur Gachinski, again a guy with a usually very good 3A, and the allegedly consistent Maxim Kovtun). So first of all, there's an upwards trend, and second the difference is not as big as I think some people make it sound.
Also he tends to make most of his mistakes at the beginning of the season while a lot of the other guys are all over the place or tend to be even better in the first half. So I'd rather expect his stats to go up compared to last season again after worlds - and IMO the fact that he's still improving is the most important info from this

It's also pretty much what you already said before: he URes, but falls and pops less then others. His UR rates are the highest out of all the skaters - last season it were 28,6%, this season so far it's 25%. It's more noticeable this season though because there is only one other skater to get any UR call on the 3A (Misha Ge, and it was just once). Last season there were a lot more (Aaron, Brezina, Kozuka, Miner, Takahashi and Yan for example - all of which are very good 3A jumpers overall).
If you look at falls and pops combined, Jason was at 7,1% last season and had a lower mistake rate than Abbott (21,3%), Brezina (15,4%), Dornbush (8,3%), Fernandez (10%), Ge (25%), Hanyu (10,5%), Kozuka (8,3%), Menshov (12,5%), Miner (33,3%), Mura (8,3%), Rippon (22,2%), Voronov (11,1%), Ten (11,1%), Yan (16,6%) and Chan (11,1%). Only 7 guys were better than Jason in the no fall and no pop category. This season looks different since he had 2 falls on the 3A in the earlier comps. But since the overall succession went down, he's more middle of the pack now in that regard.

Base line: His 3A is giving him more trouble then it does for the "average" skater. But IMO, it's not as bad as it's made out to be and he has the bad luck of competing under a system were URs are worse than falls. He's also still improving, so that's good news

PS: it's off topic but my fan heart needs to say this: Oddady kicked everyones behind with a +GOE rate of 100% last season! And with the second highest average GOE of 1,93 no less. Now I miss him again...

Thanks for this. This is definitely interesting reading. Also thanks for the nice stat on Odaddy! I love Oda. I always felt he was a bit underappreciated because of his tendency to zayak. Anyway, I'm also happy that he's so beloved and popular in Japan and that he has a awesome post-skating career going for him.

This means it's time to whip out the Nobu/Jason photo: https://twitter.com/jasonbskates/status/382905067839315969
http://web.icenetwork.com/photos/66233824 <---check out photo 2.

 

[LRK]

Since "good narrative" is my language, I assume this comment is directed at me. I am sure Jenny and Dave are knowledgeable and want to see good skating. I listen pretty regularly to their recaps and interviews. Their interviews are usually very, very good. Their recaps are often funny and interesting. But I disagree with you that they only want to see good skating. They may not have consciously sat down at the beginning of this season and said "hey let's pick on Jason and Ashley," but that is precisely what they've done, consistently. When you do that kind of thing, it becomes a "narrative" that generates interest and drives blog traffic and comments. IMHO, there is a big difference between their good-natured, laughing, "whose daughter is better, mine or yours" snarks about Tuk and Radionova and their...carping, for lack of a better word, on Ashley's lack of technical difficulty or Jason's under rotations.

I am not saying they should never criticize Jason, Ashley, or any other skater. I am saying that I object to the fact that they have consistently failed to snark with nuance, let's say. Ashley, for example, began making technical improvements long, long, before Jenny and Dave acknowledged it and Dave "apologized." And although you can rightly criticize Jason for a lot of under rotated jumps and other issues this season, he also achieved new personal bests twice this season, which I don't think Dave and Jenny have ever acknowledged. If a skater is worth criticizing, his or her improvements are also worth noting. To the extent that Jenny and Dave have failed to make balanced comments on Jason, they are shaping a narrative that he is little more than a chronic under rotater who undeservedly won Nats this year. You want balanced appreciation of TSL? I guess I'd like balanced comments from TSL, and IMO, they frequently fail to make them.

I gather you're not a fan of either? Or I'd be surprised at your saying that.

Anyway, I do agree about their not just wishing to see good skating. In fact, they love "hot messes". They have said so. Repeatedly.

 

[Mrs. P]

I gather you're not a fan of either? Or I'd be surprised at your saying that.

Anyway, I do agree about their not just wishing to see good skating. In fact, they love "hot messes". They have said so. Repeatedly.

Yes, I think you pointed out that the whole "daughter" thing is done in sarcasm, right? Though David Lease had the whole "daughter" thing back when he was running the Aunt Joyce blog, but I guess when I think about it, that was done in sarcasm as well.

As I said, the reasons outlined above is exactly why I stopped listening. I realize I might miss out on valuable commentary they may have in these recaps (and I acknowledge there is such insight), but I figure that's a small price to pay for not my head evertime. They're not going to change their approach and there are people who like it, again, for various reasons (i.e. the reasons WA and Stitch pointed out).

And also their commentary, in general, hasn't really changed MY viewpoint of skaters, so really they have nothing to gain from me listening to them either, other than the extra web hit, which is really inconsequential. (And that's not to say I'm not open to changing my viewpoint; I find that others' analysis do a better job of changing my mind regarding skaters; not to mention my own experiences watching skaters, both on TV and in person.)

I also feel we're giving more space in this thread then is warranted. We know their opinion on Jason at this point.. Many of the people who are fans who that listened to it don't agree with it. No point of bemoaning it.

So shifting gears. Jason's apparently still taking classes at UCCS: https://twitter.com/jasonbskates/status/569219608797773824

Interpersonal Communication. That's an interesting class to take.

 

[iceberg]

Judging from his track record it seems he can only win in his home buffer zone as he is their crowd favorite. But not in the international scene. With Joshua Farris' 2 beautifully choreographed programs the latter is the only one at this point who could give the US mens a podium finish.