Men's Long Program

[Medusa]

Just read some Swiss newspapers - and apparently Lambiel is saying about Joubert that Joubert played it safe and he, Lambiel, risked it all.

This is too funny, Joubert is all angry because Buttle didn't try the Quad and still won, Lambiel seems to be a bit bitter because he tried more than Joubert and ended up without a medal...

Johnny's Quad was perhaps one of the best he did in international competitions - too bad about that stupid free leg. But he tried, payed dearly for it... At least Joubert and Lambiel can't include him in the "played-it-safe"-squad - not that I think that Johnny cares about what they think.

I think Takahashi is a really impressive young man. I enjoyed his fair comments after the short program, he didn't complain about the placement like Lambiel did. For someone who entered the competition as the red-hot-favourite he was a good loser, modest and dignified. The Eurosport guys said that he had a horrific warm-up, couldn't land a single Quad - so I guess he was somewhat satisfied with the fact that he didn't blow it all. But I am quite sure that he is kicking himself for that Double Toeloop...

 

[NatachaHatawa]

I think it's really difficult with the new system for skaters to balance risk taking and assuring a clean program. Sometimes one's worth more than the other and vice versa, but there's no consistency of appreciation.

 

[Medusa]

I found something really funny. It's from here

A se demander si ce flamenco qu’il a défendu avec tant d’ardeur était un bon programme pour un championnat. Détail qui peut avoir son importance, le Suisse n’a jamais récolté l’or avec ce programme d’inspiration espagnole. Pire, il se voit devancé par l’Américain Johnny Weir (3ème, 221.84 pts) et ses attitudes féminines.

The article is actually well written, they talk about how the jump mistakes disrupted the beauty of Lambiel's program and the overall performance, Lambiel talks about being horribly nervous - then about Lambiel risking all the jumps in contrast to Joubert. But the last sentence destroyed it all...

Right, translation for the non-French speakers: The first two sentences talk about doubting that the Flamenco is a good competitive program because Lambiel never won a gold medal with this program. The next sentence says: But it's even worse, he was beaten by American Johnny Weir and his feminine attitudes.

Hmm. I don't think that the figure skating world is seeing Stéphane as the ultimate jock of figure skating, but that's just me.

That statement is also kind of worse than anything the American press ever wrote - not because it says that he has a feminine attitude (which is 1. debatable and 2. insults women because it sounds in the article as if having a feminine attitude is a bad thing - and I personally don't think that that it is a bad thing, neither for women nor for men) - but because it sounds like Johnny doesn't deserve good marks because of his style.

 

[Skye]

Ironically I'm sort of relieved that Takahashi made that Zayak violation, because if he had been on the podium (with all the falls and shaky landings) beating out Weir (who would have appeared to the casual audience semi-clean) it would have been as puzzling as Kostner ahead of Kim and Nakano. And as much as I love Lambiel's Poeta, I have to give the judges credit for hitting him hard on the PCS because that free skate was slow, sloppy and did not have any of the sparkle that usually justifies his high component scores. Joubert should be kicking himself for not giving it all by under-estimating his competition. He complains about the system allowing winning with easy, simple programs but Buttle's program was by no means either easy nor simple. To assume you have the winning program just because your hardest jump has 0.5 more revolutions than the other is foolish and ignorant.

 

[1cmarie]

That statement is also kind of worse than anything the American press ever wrote - not because it says that he has a feminine attitude (which is 1. debatable and 2. insults women because it sounds in the article as if having a feminine attitude is a bad thing - and I personally don't think that that it is a bad thing, neither for women nor for men) - but because it sounds like Johnny doesn't deserve good marks because of his style.

And here I was thinking that the European press was at least a bit more tolerant about such matters than their neighbors in NA. Le sigh....

 

[mycelticblessing]

Just read some Swiss newspapers - and apparently Lambiel is saying about Joubert that Joubert played it safe and he, Lambiel, risked it all.

This is too funny, Joubert is all angry because Buttle didn't try the Quad and still won, Lambiel seems to be a bit bitter because he tried more than Joubert and ended up without a medal...

Johnny's Quad was perhaps one of the best he did in international competitions - too bad about that stupid free leg. But he tried, payed dearly for it... At least Joubert and Lambiel can't include him in the "played-it-safe"-squad - not that I think that Johnny cares about what they think.

I think Takahashi is a really impressive young man. I enjoyed his fair comments after the short program, he didn't complain about the placement like Lambiel did. For someone who entered the competition as the red-hot-favourite he was a good loser, modest and dignified. The Eurosport guys said that he had a horrific warm-up, couldn't land a single Quad - so I guess he was somewhat satisfied with the fact that he didn't blow it all. But I am quite sure that he is kicking himself for that Double Toeloop...

It is terrible how ugly things can become when these athletes start playing the blame game.. I am so glad that Takahashi has been so diplomatic about this. He must be the most frustrated, since his performance yesterday was way below his calibre, and he probably had the most pressure to win. His response really reminds me of Michelle Kwan, in the way that she always accepted defeat with grace. He has the heart of a champion!

 

[Keten]

I think if Johnny's almost best and Lambiel's almost worst are almost equal the European press know what they're talking about. Watched Poeta again, and no matter what, i was impressed by him and his 'attitudes masculins'.

 

[MissIzzy]

Er, that wasn't Johnny's almost best!

 

[Keten]

Er, that wasn't Johnny's almost best!

He nailed all the jumps, except the downgraded quad. So if he had no problem with the jumps, he had no excuse to have a bad program except that he is actually not that good at footwork, spins and artistry.

 

[Mathman]

I think if Johnny's almost best and Lambiel's almost worst are almost equal the European press know what they're talking about.

In that case, its on Stephane not to come to the World Championship and skate his almost worst.

 

[Keten]

This is too funny, Joubert is all angry because Buttle didn't try the Quad and still won, Lambiel seems to be a bit bitter because he tried more than Joubert and ended up without a medal...

i really liked that
I think Lambiel is angry with Joubrt because he wanted him to win as a representative of both Europe and quaddian movement.

 

[taylorfax]

He nailed all the jumps, except the downgraded quad. So if he had no problem with the jumps, he had no excuse to have a bad program except that he is actually not that good at footwork, spins and artistry.

I guess you missed the part where he didn't nail all the jumps then.

 

[jennylovskt]

Maybe so, but wouldn´t it be much more sensible to compare to other Worlds rather than to what happens in smaller competitions? The winner´s technical elements in Worlds freeskate:

2008 Buttle 84.29
2007 Joubert 80.57
2006 Lambiel 78.70
2005 Lambiel 67.32

The winner´s combined technical elements (sp and fs):

2008 Buttle 44.07 + 84.29
2007 Joubert 44.85 + 80.57
2006 Lambiel 39.49 + 78.70
2005 Lambiel 42.56 + 67.32

To me it seems, that Buttle´s result in 2008 is actually the leader in technical elements, although some rules may have changed a bit?

In my opinion, it can only show that the judges don't have a standard measurement to follow. The scores vary greatly from one competition to another competition. And CoP scores inflated year after year. This is one of the many problems in CoP system.

I think the most reliable comparison is to compare within one competition. To compare one competition's scores with another competition's, the conclusion could be easily capped on a question mark.

 

[Keten]

In that case, its on Stephane not to come to the World Championship and skate his almost worst.

Well, see you next year when he comes to Worlds and nails his best. Oh wait, no need to wait for the next year, just go back and see Worlds 2006 (not mentioning about 2005 because though, he was perfect in the short, he wasn't that good in free) and this year's Grand-Prix Final.

 

[Keten]

I guess you missed the part where he didn't nail all the jumps then.

Oh, such a shame. That doesn't explain his lack of quality at spins and footwork etc.

 

[Mathman]

Well, see you next year when he comes to Worlds and nails his best.

Go Stephane!

 

[GoldMedalist]

What the hell has happened at this world championships? The scoring, to me, simply didn't make sense on an element by element basis. How did Brian Joubert get an "e" on his flips and still have GOEs of 0? I thought the computer was supposed to stop judges from inserting anything that wasn't a -GOE?

The whole "e" thing is over-stated. Brian's Flips are some of the best in the World and should get positive GOE despite the wrong edge.

I am a brian fan and naturally I'd have liked to have seen Brian win gold. I'm not shocked by Jeff's gold medal, but however, I am shocked by his 10 point technical advantage.

Goes right back to that flip deduction. Joubert's score would have been between 5 to 6 points higher if graded like last year, without the edge calls.

 

[taylorfax]

Oh, such a shame. That doesn't explain his lack of quality at spins and footwork etc.

Sour grapes much?

 

[screech]

Alright, to put the technical marks into perspective, just based on jumps... Jeff definitely took more risks...

3A+2T+2Lo = 10.30
3F+3T = 9.50
3A = 7.50
3Lz+2T = 8.03 (all jumps from this one on were after the 2 minute point so have extra 10% added in)
3Lo = 5.50
3S = 4.95
2A = 3.85
3Lz = 6.60

Not including the GOE, spins and footwork, Jeff had 56.23 points. He completed 8 triple jumps (2 3A, 2 3Lz, 3F, 3L, 3T, 3S), 3 combos (3A+2T+2Lo, 3F+3T, 3Lz+2T), and a 2A, to maximize his jump marks. There was no way for him to get any more points on triple jumps unless his 3/3 combo had had a loop for the second jump instead of the toe. Jeff took risks. When is the last time he had landed 2 3A in a program? Tracy Wilson said it had been over 2 years. THAT was a risk for him, just as it would have been a risk for Brian to have tried a 2nd quad (or a 2nd 3A). But anyways, now the comparison with Brian's base jump values...

4T = 9.00
3S = 4.50
3A = 7.50
3F+3T = 10.45 (all jumps from this one on were after the 2 minute point so have extra 10% added in)
3Lz = 6.60
3Lo = 5.50
3F = 6.05
2A+1T = 4.29

Brian's total base value for jumps was 53.89. Insanely close to Jeff's (less than 3 points off). Brian completed 1 quad (4T) 7 triple jumps (3S, 3A, 2 3F, 3T, 3Lo). He also did 2 combinations (3F+3T and 2A+1T). Brian did not max out his possible points on jumps by just doing 2 combos. If he had done one more combo he would have probably surpassed Jeff on jumps base value. Brian was rewarded for doing the quad considering how very close the base values were on the jumps and how he hadn't maxed everything out. If he had tried his 2nd (or 3rd) quad he would have surpassed Jeff on base value as well.

Just a note, both of Brian's 3F did have an 'e' by them for edge. A comment was made in a previous post about not all of the GOE being - for the flip. My aunt is a judge and has told me in the past about things like this. The judges only mark the GOE based on what they see. As they go the controller sees the things in replay and slow mo and will mark the downgrade, edge, etc. The judge just marks the quality LIVE, as the program is going on. So if the judge is looking at it and seeing that it was alright, they won't give it a -GOE. If they didn't notice the edge, they won't mark down for it because they don't see what the controller has marked the jump as, the judge just puts +/- GOE on the elements for the quality of what they can notice and see.

So these base value totals don't take into consideration spins and footwork or GOE or anything, just jump base value (with the 10% for late jumps). You can see the amount of difficulty in the program by looking at these base values and that says that Jeff had more difficulty, so by saying that difficulty was not attempted is obviously not taking all things into consideration.

That being said, Brian's skate was amazing. If Jeff hadn't skated as he had, Brians' skate was definitely world champion material. However Jeff skated all out and his skating had an ease to it - he didn't have to think about changing anything to make sure he didn't err - it just happened. Jeff skated and performed like a true champion in the program.

Based on the comments, nobody is debating the outcome of the competition (not even Brian). The general consensus is that Jeff was the fair and obvious world champion, and I think that's great.

One thing I have to add is that I don't think comments in the future should discuss 'luck' for Jeff's win. No, the skating wasn't outstanding. However, most of the top skaters did not have meltdowns - there were multiple tiny mistakes that on any other day could have made any given one of them the world champion. At every competition some skaters make lots of tiny mistakes and finish near the top. This competition was no different - many tiny mistakes but they were just more costly because the top 2 skated brilliantly. So luck had nothing to do with it - mistakes happen at all competitions, except by the top 2 at this one.

Congratulations to all skaters. I'm not a Johnny fan but this year I am actually enjoying him and am happy for him and his bronze medal. I hope that he can keep this up next year with out 'that monkey on his back, or as I like to call it, Evan Lysacek' (quote by Kurt Browning).

 

[DivaDes]

After reading all the posted I felt the need to add in my two cents. Before I start I will say that I am not a fan of Jeff and I am a fan of Brian. However, I will try to be object in my post. I definately feel Brian's pain. I see all these people calling him a "poor sport". The only way for that statement to be true is if skating is treated like a sport. Some of Brian's comment may have been a bit harsh but under the circumstances I understand. I don't understand why everyone seems to be attacking him. Think of how many times Plushenko complained. He complained when Emanuel Sandhu beat him at the Grand Prix final because he beat him on a "technicality", that's sport baby. A number of guys at worlds this year lost placement/medals due to the same thing. Back to the original topic, with regard to the marks in the free skate, I don't understand some of the marks that Jeff got on his jumps. I have read the rules for marking jumps and as an example on his triple axel/double toe/double loop he got a +0.29 GOE which isn't much but 2 judges gave him a +2 and if you watch the jumps the landing of the axel was very scratchy and in order to give him that mark of +2 he would have to be "superior in one jump" and of the 3 jumps none were superior. As I read the rule he should have been receiving -1 because there was a "minor problem in one phase of the jump". Each jump has phases being preparation, take-off, rotation/flight and landing. His triple flip/triple toe had very little flow on the landing. His 2nd triple axel he was forward on the landing. His triple lutz/double toe again little flow on landing. His loop was ok. Sal ok. Yet even with the scratchy/no flow landings every jump except the last lutz received some postive GOE (the last lutz had a 0 GOE). Just on the GOE of his jumps Jeff got 6.01 points. Comparativly, Brian received 6.73 (that included the - GOE on the flips). Those GOE are far to close as Brian's jumps are higher, more powerful and had more flow on the landings. As for Brian receiving higher PCS than Jeff, skating skill includes power/energy and acceleration which Brian accels at. Performance/execution includes physical, emotional and intellectual involvement and style and individuallity, Brian reaction at the end of his performance had more emotion than Jeff ever shows. I could go on but I will leave it at that..for now.

Lastly, the comment that Kurt made about it taking Brian days to master a part of the choreo doen't mean by any stretch of the imagination that he is an inferior skater to Jeff. I'm sure that if we had David Wilson commentation her could comment about things that were difficult for Jeff to learn, in fact he ditched his long program on more that one occasion because he was having difficulty with the choreo and put it all together. I personally prefer well choreographed programs that contain strong jumps, fast spins and difficult footwork to programs that have so many transitions and are filled up with so many turns between the jumps that they jumps suffer.

Sorry for the long post and thanks for reading!!

~D