I was saying that in 2010 Takahashi with an ugly fall would be hard to justify over two clean skaters including one with much greater tech content.
Nobody had "much greater tech content" than Takahashi in 2010. Plushenko had less planned content in his LP, in fact, because of not attempting a 3Flip. And he frontloaded more. And his footwork was less difficult. His only base value advantage was the Quad in the SP. Someone skating "clean" does not in itself mean something is deserved or not. Takahashi fell on a Quad...which Lysacek did not attempt. The rest of his jumping was overall on the same level of Lysacek (or slightly better), and his overall skating and programs were FAR better.
You shaded Lysacek’s elements earlier but they were a dream compared to Dai’s jumps/spins, half of which had issues. The 3As and 3S were good but, along with that ugly fall on the underrotated quad, the lutzes lacked amplitude
Takahashi's lutzes (the first one especially) didn't lack amplitude LOL, he jumped higher than Lysaeck! This is just nonsense. His 3Loop was bigger as well. He fell on the quad but it was big, and frankly rotated just as much as any quad Lysacek ever attempted, who always turned on the ice with his toepick and never landed backwards. Lysacek did not have quality jumping for the most part. He had adequate jumping; the majority of his jumps were small and sometimes tight on rotation, and should receive 0 GOE. His best quality jumps were the Lutzes, but those don't deserve more than +1 GOE either, as they were not very big and didn't have any very difficult entrance or air position.
And in his final spin, he obviously lost his balance in the layback (and mucked up the edge change). In both the 2010 judges' scoring and in our own 2010 rescoring of the top 8, Takahashi had worst TES of the freeskate. Do you really think that is worthy of Olympic champion?
A couple of Takahashi's spins were not the best quality, but they weren't bad, and what he loses there is already gained back with superior footwork. Doing an edge change on the layback is also more difficult than doing the typical inside sit everyone back then was doing. Lysacek did the easiest positions he could to get his spin levels, and repeated the same sit position and right-foot inside edge change in literally EVERY spin of his SP and LP!!
That last statement is both false and a straw-man, as Takahashi's TES is not the worst when better calls are assigned to the program, and
yes someone could deserve to win a competition while being 8th place in TES. There are two different scores in figure skating, and being "8th place in TES" doesn't say anything about the actual point gap there, which could be rather small.
let’s applaud other “different techniques” like a toe jump using part of the blade instead of the pick, or prerotation, or leaned axis or a leg wrap in a jump (those should count as varied air position GOE bullet, right?!), while we are at it. Hey, it’s not poor technique/execution - it’s just different!
Another straw-man. You bring up several things that are strictly worse, when I was talking about things that can make a turn more difficult. Leg wrap IS very debatable btw, it factually makes a jump more difficult to rotate in terms of overall mechanics. People who leg wrap usually have rotation/amplitude/timing issues on the jump, however, which is what makes it worse. Someone like Midori Ido had no such issues, so yes, in that case it just becomes a different stylistic choice of how to do the jump. Go search and see how many people can do a 3Axel if you tell them they have to keep their free leg up. You won't find many.
Also note that pre-rotating a jump or leaning in the air doesn't mean it's suddenly not credited at all. As long as something meets the minimum definition, it gets the base value, and then quality can be assessed from there. Takahashi's turn was good enough to get credit, and was incorporated very well into the choreography and overall cadence of the footwork; give slightly less in quality score for the element if you want. I didn't give him +3 on any element, so clearly I'm not saying he was technically the absolute best possible.
Chan might have some sloppy wins but he’s won on the basis of higher tech content, good GOE in the elements he did hit, and superior choreography and skating quality, and his competitors not skating to their potential either.
Except that's not true. His competitors often did skate to their potential (or "enough" to beat him) and were just incorrectly given lower marks. Chan frequently had lower tech content because of mistakes he made (or just simply had less tech content) and people frequently considered his overall choreography/performance to be worse. Your own attitude about a more flawed Chan deserving to win in 2012 runs counter to your assessment here. Which basically means you think Chan had more quality as compared to Takahashi there, than Takahashi had as compared to Lysacek here. Yikes!
--
and here we go again.... you could have used other skaters who have won with mistakes... but no... always Patrick... Yes... I am triggered... when will you drop it?
When will
you drop continually trying to tell people to not talk about something they are perfectly allowed to talk about? Patrick is the person who won the most with many mistakes, and the only guy in the 2006-2013 era to win Worlds/Olympics with multiple big stumbles, so the comparison will continue to be relevant.
however, in the rescoring done here, he is pretty much on the podium, if he hadn't lost the time violation points, which was a completely stupid call. in other words: you all marked him higher than the judges in this exercise but then, you personally keep saying he was always overscored...oh the irony !!!!
Firstly, you can't say "you all", the panel is separate individuals, with different marks and opinions. Secondly, the many times Patrick had issues in competitions that people criticize, or the overall criticism about certain component scores, doesn't mean it's impossible he deserved his placement at some competitions. It also doesn't mean that other competitors weren't also overscored. I do think this overall panel still got it wrong though, by putting Chan over Kozuka. The latter has excellent qualities,
at least on the same level as Chan overall here, did not make more mistakes, and had a Quad, which is a big boost. I agree the time violation Chan received in the SP was uncalled for, but I have him 6th in the end, even if all the calls in total were to his benefit. Finally, it's still possible that incorrect placements are being caused by the scoring system itself (someone getting too many points for flawed elements, base values that don't accurately reflect the difficulty, etc).
