Was 1999-2003 the most diverse period of dance champions?

[temperboy28]

For a long time it has been common in ice dancing for teams to win titles in the bunches. Often even before its inclusion as an Olympic sport, teams would win 4 World titles in a row often. Since its inclusion in an Olympic sport teams to dominate and sweep all the Worlds they enter in the quadrennial was common. The biggest example of diversion was a team say losing 1 Worlds in that quadrennial, but winning the other 3 and Olympics (Klimova and Ponamarenko from 1989-1992).

However from 1999 to 2003 you saw something very different. 5 different World Champions in ice dance. 1999 it was Krylova/ Ovsiannikov, 2000 it was Anissina/Peizerat, 2001 it was Fusar-Poli/Margalio, 2002 it was Lobacheva/ Averbuhk, and 2003 it was Bourne/Kraatz. The 2002 Olympic Champions were Anissina/ Peizerat, but only a 5-4 split over obacheva/Averbuhk. So this 5 year period, with its wide mix of Champions is a huge diversion from what dance had been up until then, especialy since its inclusion as an Olympic sport.

Now I do have to say a large part of this was probably the back injury of Anjelika Krylova that prematurely ended the amateur career of Anjelika Krylova/Oleg Ovsiannikov. They had won silver at the 96 Worlds, 97 Worlds, 98 Olympics, behind controversial Gritschuk/Platov and then gold at the 98 Worlds, and 99 Worlds with Gritschuk/Platov now gone. However even with them gone, past patterns of dance would indicator another team, probably the team ranked just behind at the time, to take over and collect titles in bunches for awhile. This did not happen. So what was the cause of this period of so many various changing hands of the World title, and the biggest titles spread out among a variety of teams like never before during this period? Was it:

1)None of the top teams of that period were clearly superior enough to the rest to dominate or be the clear leaders during this period.

2)Dance judging improved after the 98 Olympics bloc judging scandal, in that it started to become more open, and by the judging being more open it allowed the event to become more competitive then it had been previously.

3)It was a case of various federations getting involved in the battle, and in some cases trading off wins with one another, by promising something now in return for something later; along with battling against other top teams federations to might deals with others to win out over them, but the other top countries federations doing the same in return.

 

[gkelly]

I would say all of the above. I would also include some specific factors such as not only Krylova/Ovsiannikov's injury/retirement but also Bourne/Kraatz's and Lobacheva/Averbukh's injuries and problems with program choices in 1999-2000 which opened the door for some surprise medalists at 2000 Worlds; Anissina/Peizerat's fall at 2001 Euros; and the OD rhythms in 2000 and 2001 playing to the strengths of Fusar Poli/Margaglio.

 

[Antilles]

I think it's a bit of all three as well. The cynic in me says more number 3.

If K&O stuck around, they may not have continued to dominate. They won World's and I believe Euros in '99 by one judge over A&P, and plenty of people seemed to think A&P should have won those competitions. 2000 would have been a very interesting season had K&O been able to compete, as both teams were set to skate to Carmina Burana in the FD.

It was very refreshing to see some movement in the standings. It was a big deal in 2000 when a Russian team did not make the podium. That was probably my favourite World's competition. I loved all three FDs that medalled, and thought the judging overall was quite fair. With B&K's absence, I also didn't have to hear Canadian commentators complaining about them being robbed.

 

[Ladskater]

I think it's a bit of all three as well. The cynic in me says more number 3.

With B&K's absence, I also didn't have to hear Canadian commentators complaining about them being robbed.

Hey!!!! tha'ts not a nice thing to say. B&K were not the only dance team out there that felt they were overlooked. Anyway, they paid their dues and worked their way to the top.

 

[slutskayafan21]

The most interesting thing of all perhaps is how many 5-4 split Anissina/Peizerat lost from 1999-2002 at the biggest events:

1999 Europeans - lost 5-4 split to Krylova/Ovsiannikov
1999 GP final - lost 5-4 split to Krylova/Ovsiannikov
1999 Worlds - lost 5-4 split to Krylova/Ovsiannikov
2001 Worlds - lost 5-4 split to Fusar Poli/Margalio
2002 GP final - lost 4-3 split (same as 5-4 basicaly) to Bourne/Kraatz

 

[slutskayafan21]

Hey!!!! tha'ts not a nice thing to say. B&K were not the only dance team out there that felt they were overlooked. Anyway, they paid their dues and worked their way to the top.

They were also punished when they did speak out. Their talk of bloc judging (correct talk as was proveable just looking at the ordinal patterns) leading into the 98 Olympics, almost certainly cost them an Olympic bronze medal.

 

[JonnyCoop]

They were also punished when they did speak out. Their talk of bloc judging (correct talk as was proveable just looking at the ordinal patterns) leading into the 98 Olympics, almost certainly cost them an Olympic bronze medal.

I was actually under the impression, and the way I recall it, was that they didn't speak out until AFTER the final Oly results, and were then threatened with being suspended from Worlds if they didn't "zip it". So I don't think that speaking out cost them the bronze in Nagano, because they hadn't said anything until afterwards; if you mean it cost them the bronze in SLC, well, I think the big splat they took at the end of their FD pretty much did THAT for them...

As to the original question posed by this thread, I, too, would have to say that it was a combination of the 3 as well.

 

[Antilles]

B&K were robbed on occassion, but so were most of the other dance teams. Canadian TV commentators had no objectivity when it came to B&K. There were times when B&K got better marks or results than they deserved, but the Cdn TV commentators never mentioned those instances. Come to think of it, B&K never complained about those competitions, either. (I'm thinking 96 Worlds over A&P, for one.)

I think what lost B&K a medal in '98 was their CD error, and the abominable program they called an OD that year. It was the only crappy program they ever had, and it just happened to be in an Olympic year.

I admire competitors who speak about about judging problems, but it looks bad when you only complain about your own results. Real guts is complaining about other people's crappy results, ie the bronze medal debacle of C&S over D&V.

 

[slutskayafan21]

I was actually under the impression, and the way I recall it, was that they didn't speak out until AFTER the final Oly results, and were then threatened with being suspended from Worlds if they didn't "zip it". So I don't think that speaking out cost them the bronze in Nagano, because they hadn't said anything until afterwards;

I recall them at both NHK and the GP final talking out to the media about their being bloc judging against them (which actually in some instances there was, such as Ita, Rus, Fra putting them behind team(s) nobody else did at both competitions). The CBC announcers were mentioning during the Olympic telecast Bourne/Kraatz were paying the price for speaking out about the bloc judging.

if you mean it cost them the bronze in SLC, well, I think the big splat they took at the end of their FD pretty much did THAT for them...

I agree, but I thought the Italians had a worse fall, and a sloppier program in general. Of course though they are the World Champions so.......... well this is another topic so I will stop now. Actually the Lithunians should have beaten both of them that night, and probably been on the podium over both overall at those Olympics.

 

[escaflowne9282]

Call me crazy, but I 've never thought B&K were wuzrobbed at all. In Nagano, I never understood why there were so many complaints over them not medaling. In the GPF that season, they finished second behind G&P and ahead of K&O IIRC, and they were competing a completely different OD. Then they went to Nagano and used that horrid Grease Lightning , which had nothing but crossovers and progressive steps. They finished fifth in the Nagano OD and in all honestly should have been lower. Then in the FD, whether you preferred Riverdance or A&P's Romeo and Juliet is a moot point because they were too far down from the OD and the CDs to overtake the French for bronze (IIRC they actually finished ahead of the French in the FD too)

I agree, but I thought the Italians had a worse fall, and a sloppier program in general. Of course though they are the World Champions so.......... well this is another topic so I will stop now. Actually the Lithunians should have beaten both of them that night, and probably been on the podium over both overall at those Olympics.

Eh, I admit , B&K's Michael Jackson medley was very good, and FP&M's I Will Survive just plain sucked. The problem is , FP&M only had one partner fall , whereas with B&K they both fell, and that automatically warranted a bigger deduction. I agree that D&V were screwed that year , but I've never felt B&K were robbed at either Olympics.

 

[JonnyCoop]

I thought that B & K had the worse fall, too; FP & M covered theirs a little better, plus it was mid-program, so they could just move along; B & K's was at the very end of the program and if the last thing the judges see of your program is the two of you sprawled out onto the ice (and not due to any type of excessively dramatic pose ), it's not going to win you any points. I do agree, however, that overall FP & M were held up quite a bit at SLC; if anyone else BESIDES the reigning World Champions had shown up at the Olys with such a hideous FD, they would have probably been knocked down about 8 notches from their Worlds ranking instead of just 2.

 

[Ptichka]

The most interesting thing of all perhaps is how many 5-4 split Anissina/Peizerat lost from 1999-2002 at the biggest events:

1999 Europeans - lost 5-4 split to Krylova/Ovsiannikov
1999 GP final - lost 5-4 split to Krylova/Ovsiannikov
1999 Worlds - lost 5-4 split to Krylova/Ovsiannikov
2001 Worlds - lost 5-4 split to Fusar Poli/Margalio
2002 GP final - lost 4-3 split (same as 5-4 basicaly) to Bourne/Kraatz

Yes, and then they WON on a 5-4 split at the Olympics over Lobacheva/ Averbukh

I agree that D&V were screwed that year , but I've never felt B&K were robbed at either Olympics.

+1

 

[Mathman]

+1

Is that GOE?

 

[clairecloutier]

I found the 1999-2003 period in dance frustrating. I really didn't understand or agree with the judging at most of the events. Worse yet, I actually didn't like most of the "top" teams competing during that era. I felt like most of those teams had at least one serious flaw that prevented me from enjoying their skating.

Krylova & Ovsiannikov--Good technically, but way too overly dramatic and pretentious in their artistic "expression." Angelika's wild contortions and overacting just ruined their skating IMO.

Anissina & Peizerat--My favorite team from this era; I loved their programs, costumes, and expression. However, they made a surprising number of mistakes in competition for such a high-level team, and it was always clear that Marina was much the stronger skater.

Fusar-Poli & Margaglio--Their success was completely inexplicable to me. I thought their form, line, and unison were terrible, not at all worthy of supposed world champions.

Lobacheva & Averbukh--All I can say is "blah." I felt like this team never developed any personality or interest to their skating. And their unison and presentation was at times sloppy. It was a complete mystery to me why they came so close to winning the OGM in Salt Lake.

Bourne & Kraatz--Despite their great popularity, I felt like this team never reached their true potential. To me, they seemed to stagnate both technically and artistically after 1996 or so. None of their programs ever seemed quite right. Many of the programs were fun, but they looked too easy, not like championship-winning programs. It was either that, or they made mistakes during the programs. I always felt like this team probably didn't get along too well off the ice, and that this was reflected on the ice in a certain lack of unity and "togetherness."

Drobiazko & Vanagas--A nice team, with great chemistry and charisma. I did like them quite a bit, but sometimes questioned the level of difficulty in their skating, Sometimes they looked more like pairs skaters than dancers.

Chait & Sakhnovsky--As with Fusar-Poli & Margaglio, their sudden (and fleeting) success during this period was frustrating to me. Although they were stronger technically than some of the other teams, I disliked their frenetic, wild style.


It was actually a big relief to me when most of these teams retired after 2003. Since then, I've enjoyed ice dance much more. I felt like the next group of top teams that came up--including Navka & Kostomarov, Dubreuil & Lauzon, Denkova & Staviyski, Belbin & Agosto, Delobel & Schoenfelder, Grushina & Goncharov--was generally much stronger both technically and artistically than the top teams were in the 1999-2003 era. Plus, the introduction of CoP raised the technical standards of ice dance programs very noticeably.

 

[JenFinFan]

I disagree with putting Dubreuil and Lauzon as good skaters. In my opinion I don't get this team and I never will. I find their skating to be sloppy and not any difficulty in their programs. They both have difficulty doing twizzles and any kind of elaborate footwork. I just don't like them and I never will. I for one am baffled at their rise in the world. I just don't believe they belong anywhere near the podium.

I think what did Bourne and Kraatz in was their coaching. Dubova really didn't do much for them. I believe had they stayed with Ponomoranko(sp) that they most likely would have had better results. This team had it all. But there just was someting perhaps missing. I found Victor to be weaker than Shae Lynn. Their splat at the end of their program in Salt Lake was his fault. He just grabs Shae Lynn than he tumbles on the ice with her. I found that she needed a strong partner than him.

As for the bloc judging I do believe that it existed. I mean you had Gailhaguet admitting publicly that he had made a deal with the Russians. Not mention Balkov on tape. And lets not even get in into the Salt Lake debacle. Dance in that era was very political. I am not saying it is not now, but maby a little less than in that era.

 

[clairecloutier]

Jen, I agree that footwork is not a strong suit for Dubreuil/Lauzon, especially twizzles. And, in general, they don't have quite the strength and power in their edging that some of the other top teams have. However, I would argue that their lifts are probably the best in the business right now, and their choreography, interpretation, and transitions are excellent. Just my opinion. I do wish, though, that they were a bit stronger in footwork. If they were, I think they would have won Worlds the last two years, instead of getting the silver medal.

 

[GoldMedalist]

I'm not as trained at dance but saying Dubreuil and Lauzon are not good is....???? Don't get that.

Anyway, it seemed to me at 2007 Worlds that Denkova/Staviski were the strongest technically, Dubreuil/Lauzon were the strongest musically, and Belbin/Agosto got the Bronze because people like looking at Tanith. Yes?

 

[JenFinFan]

Like I said I don't find them (D&L) good technically. Take a look at those sorry looking twizzles. No speed, no synchronicity to them. D&L don't have deep edging and they don't have any difficult footwork. Plus their romantic "we are so in love" type dances are so old and nauseating.

 

[escaflowne9282]

I mean you had Gailhaguet admitting publicly that he had made a deal with the Russians. .

He never admitted to that

 

[JenFinFan]

Escaflowne, during the 1998 olympic games cbc did an interview with him and he said "The French are not only strong on the ice but we are strong off the ice". Take that for what it's worth. Bezic also said that there was a fix in Nagano. Take all that and with Yuri Balkov on tape you got to admit something was weird during those games.