The Greatest Of All Time

[4everchan]

I think that Fischer was saying that just because you defended your title several times, that alone does not make you the GOAT. Ficher himself was a candidate for the GOAT of chess not only for winning a lot of tournamentss and matches but for playing with a vigorous attacking style that wielded great influence over the development of the game, as opposed to Botvinic's "boring" technique of nursing tiny little positional advantages along for 50 moves. (I personally do not find such technique "boring" -- quite the contrary.)

By the way, the old-time GOATs (pre-1950) always came down to a debate between the Cuban Jose Capablanca and Russian Alexander Alekhine -- and was usually settled on the basis that Capalanca had a gentlemanly, genial and expansive personality in civilian life while Alhekine was a mean and nastly bit of goods. (The true GOAT of chess is Gary Kasparov. )

Which brings me to...



Rod Laver, over a 24-year career spanning both the "amateur" and open eras, was ranked the #1 player in the world either 5 times as a pro (or 7, depending on what "official" meant back then) and twice as an amateur. He won the Grand Slam twice (1962 and 1969).(Federer 0, Nadal 0, Djokovic 0 -- they are not Steffi Graf after all. )

Anyway, the one thing I do definitely disagree with is the view that Federer (or Nadal) were better tennis player than Djokovic because they were less taciturn and had a lot of adoring fans. To me, that is irrelevant in GOAT discussions.

Except that most of Rod laver's career was before the open era. It started in 1968. Different rules. Different players allowed in. Not diminishing his achievements but if you look at current records, he only has a handful of major titles in the open era... So again, it is a question of perception

 

[Blades of Passion]

2018 was Kaetlyn Osmond's season.

Absolutely not. She was scoring and placing behind Zagitova and Medvedeva all season, deservedly so. Worlds was an outlier with Zagitova collapsing (after she already won the Olympics and EVERYTHING else that season) and Osmond still should have lost there anyway, to Wakaba Higuchi.

It's very dishonest to use the "Gold medal" in the team event as some kind of thing in Osmond's favor. She skated worse than Zagitova and Medevedeva in that event, individually placing lower. Osmond lost Nationals and her LP was a constant mess leading up to the Olympics. She only did the SP in the team event and still underperformed there. Her LP was never clean the entire season and the footwork sequence was clunky.

Michelle stood on the world championship podium for nine consecutuve years

And was top 3 in the LP for 11 years in a row! It will be very, very difficult for that record to ever be matched.

 

[Mathman]

About the prestige attached to an Olympic team medal, the problem is two-fold. First, figure skating does not have a history of team competitions. In a sport like wrestling, or swimming, or track and field, the dual meet between two teams is hoary with tradition, even though athletes compete as individuals with little in the way of teamwork (I am not counting tag-team wrestling. )

Secondly, our international sport should be in the business of welcoming all aspirants, not of circling the national/patriotic (or even cold war) wagons. If you are, say, a lady skater there is no reason to be especially proud of the fact that there are also a good man skater and a good pairs team and some good dancers living in the same country – nor is it to your discredit if there are not.

Synchro, though – that’s the way to go. In so far as free skating is basically dancing on ice, competition in group numbers would be totally appropriate, not to mention the unlimited choreographic possibilities.

 

[4everchan]

About the prestige attached to an Olympic team medal, the problem is two-fold. First, figure skating does not have a history of team competitions. In a sport like wrestling, or swimming, or track and field, the dual meet between two teams is hoary with tradition, even though athletes compete as individuals with little in the way of teamwork (I am not counting tag-team wrestling. )

Sure, but diving picked up synchro diving and other sports did too. Why is it that figure skating fans are the ones complaining the most about the team event ? My issue with it is that it should be AFTER the 4 disciplines have taken place and not before...
Maybe it's because of other team competitions in figure skating where it's mostly a gong show (WTT) with crazy shenanigans ?

Secondly, our international sport should be in the business of welcoming all aspirants, not of circling the national/patriotic (or even cold war) wagons. If you are, say, a lady skater there is no reason to be especially proud of the fact that there are also a good man skater and a good pairs team and some good dancers living in the same country – nor is it to your discredit if there are not.

I think some fans have decided that such and such skater does or doesn't deserve an olympic medal... For instance, 2022, people absolutely think maddie schizas saved Canada (and she did0) and that if the appeal is won, she will be a very deserving Olympic medalist... and I heard the opposite about Roman... why should he get a medal considering how poorly he skated ? The point is that it's a team event, and sometimes, you watch a volleyball match and one player misses just about everything, yet the rest of his team plays well. You win and lose together... That's the point of a team competition. I think it creates great stories and synergy.

Synchro, though – that’s the way to go.

Not in replacement but as an added discipline. I am all for that. I watched synchro live for the first time this year : amazing. And then, I decided to watch worlds : even better.

In so far as free skating is fundamentally dancing on ice, competition in group numbers would be totally appropriate, not to mention the unlimited choreographic possibilities.

They do group numbers in shows.. but of course, they are not necessarily that fabulous... sometimes, they look almost improvised. It's probably too much asking to impose a group number on the skaters who already have to perform in their individual disciplines as well... but yeah... it would perhaps show figure skating on a different level.

To get back on topic, it's a bit like 4CC versus Euros... when talking about slams or even just championships, some fans really value Euros... but then, nobody really cares that much about 4CC... It's relatively still new so it doesn't have much weight in defining careers. The GPF in the current format is so liked by many fans... I don't give it personally much importance... it's fun for sure. I enjoy watching it !!! But when I started watching skating, GPF was different and it meant something more for me.. .Now, I am more excited about who gets to qualify than I am about the event.

 

[Mathman]

I personally enjoy the antics of the teams at the World Team Trophy. It's like, "Yay! We made it through a grueling competitive season and now we can goof around as much as we want."

I quite agree that in many shows the group numbers are not well rehearsed and have a thrown-together look. The exact opposite of a competitive synchro perfomance where the teams have been honing their routines all year.

As for the Grand Prix, what i like about it is that it brings a different competitive format to the sport -- sort of like "playoffs" versus a big open tournament like Worlds. The original idea was, we have thse big stand-alone events like Skate Canada, NHK, etc. Why not have a "tournament of champions" (as the GP series was originally called) where the Skate Canada champion faces off against the NHK champion and the Eric Bompard championm etc., for the title of champion of champions?

 

[4everchan]

I personally enjoy the antics of the teams at the World Team Trophy. It's like, "Yay! We made it through a grueling competitive season and now we can goof around as much as we want."

I quite agree that in many shows the group numbers are not well rehearsed and have a thrown-together look. The exact opposite of a competitive synchro perfomance where the teams have been honing their routines all year.

As for the Grand Prix, what i like about it is that it brings a different competitive format to the sport -- sort of like "playoffs" versus a big open tournament like Worlds. The original idea was, we have thse big stand-alone events like Skate Canada, NHK, etc. Why not have a "tournament of champions" (as the GP series was originally called) where the Skate Canada champion faces off against the NHK champion and the Eric Bompard championm etc., for the title of champion of champions?

Yes. but then, some fans, in my opinion, are making a whole lot of the champion of champions, when there are only 6 competitors and it is invitational. I am often rooting for underdogs... so in that sense, GPF doesn't satisfy me. I much prefer watching people from a lot of different countries share their skating like at ISU championships.

The format from before, if I am not mistaken, had two LPs. Also, I think more skaters were invited. See, if 12 skaters were invited for GPF, maybe I'd like it better At this point, also considering some nations are stingy with assigning their skaters to challengers, it just means that the rich get richer and the poor, remain poor Even for GPs, 12 is okay but I'd have 18 for each. It's a crime in my opinion, that some talented skaters do not qualify because 1) their country have reached the maximum quota for all events (would happen with Russian women or Japanese women for instance) 2) they are just not ranked high enough to get a couple assignments. This leads to some skaters winning a medal in an event or even the event itself, and not even getting a second spot... I don't like it. I deal with it. I watch it, because I love skating. However, I certainly prefer the format in other sports where anyone has a chance to compete and competitions of the highest level are more frequent.

In any case, this is perhaps why I also value world titles at an equal value with Olympic titles. Getting many world titles means that this skater is consistently on top of everyone who is competing... and consecutive titles at worlds show a dominance over the field. With the Olympics, we have seen skaters winning that one big event and vanish... of course maybe because there is little left to win... but to me, what I appreciate is a long career with consistent accolades, so in that sense, I value world titles a lot just as much as OGM... but it is clear that for some, one cannot be a GOAT without a OGM... so that's alright... everyone's opinion is just as valid.
Back to Wimbledon

 

[Mathman]

The format from before, if I am not mistaken, had two LPs.

I think that some version of this format was used only for the 1999-2000, 2000-2001, and 2001-2002 seasons in an unsuccessful effort to spark up some interest among TV viewers.

Here is what Wikipedia says about the motivation for the Grand Prix series in general:

"Fall international competitions such as Skate America, organized by the skating federations of their host countries, had been held for many years prior to being organized into a series as separate individual events. Following the Nancy Kerrigan attack in 1994, television coverage of skating was saturated with made-for-TV professional skating events, while the traditional "amateur" or "eligible" competitions were neglected. In order to remedy this situation, in 1995, the skating federations from the United States, Canada, Germany, France, and Japan began to plan their events as a series with cooperative marketing of the television rights in those countries, and with prize money funded by the sale of those rights. At this point, the International Skating Union stepped in and asserted its ownership of the international television rights to the series."

As for the two-LP format:

In the 2001–02 season, competitors at the Grand Prix Final performed a short program, followed by two free skating or free dance programs. This was implemented because of television coverage. Ottavio Cinquanta envisioned that the skaters would perform two new free skating programs for the season at the final and this would appeal to and help attract viewers. Instead, most skaters went back to an old free skating program for one of the free skatings. Due to the failure of this plan, the second free skating/dance was eventually removed from the Grand Prix Final."

 

[4everchan]

I think that some version of this format was used only for the 1999-2000, 2000-2001, and 2001-2002 seasons in an unsuccessful effort to spark up some interest among TV viewers.

Here is what Wikipedia says about the motivation for the Grand Prix series in general:

"Fall international competitions such as Skate America, organized by the skating federations of their host countries, had been held for many years prior to being organized into a series as separate individual events. Following the Nancy Kerrigan attack in 1994, television coverage of skating was saturated with made-for-TV professional skating events, while the traditional "amateur" or "eligible" competitions were neglected. In order to remedy this situation, in 1995, the skating federations from the United States, Canada, Germany, France, and Japan began to plan their events as a series with cooperative marketing of the television rights in those countries, and with prize money funded by the sale of those rights. At this point, the International Skating Union stepped in and asserted its ownership of the international television rights to the series."

As for the two-LP format:

In the 2001–02 season, competitors at the Grand Prix Final performed a short program, followed by two free skating or free dance programs. This was implemented because of television coverage. Ottavio Cinquanta envisioned that the skaters would perform two new free skating programs for the season at the final and this would appeal to and help attract viewers. Instead, most skaters went back to an old free skating program for one of the free skatings. Due to the failure of this plan, the second free skating/dance was eventually removed from the Grand Prix Final."

Cinquante should have thought better... Time and money are not infinite to skaters.... I didn't mind seeing the old programs again. He should have just asked for a pro type of program as a third program. That would have been fun.

 

[Mathman]

Back to Wimbledon

By the way, you and I are in agreement about the futility of all-time great discussions. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic dominated the Federer-Nadal-Djokovic era.

As for evolving rules, formats and eligibility requirements over time – whatever. I beat all the guys who were around in my time – good for me. You beat everyone in sight in your time – good for you.

 

[Weathergal]

And it occurred to me that, while we all naturally think of the couples in pairs and ID, given that they can change... where would someone like Aljona Savchenko fit in this? There was a recent video put up on super slams (yes yes, unofficial but still incredible given that they are oh so rarely achieved) and she and Maxim Trankov were two of the four pairs skaters who've done this, but their various partners haven't. In itself it's just another stat but... can one member of a couple in a two-person discipline be a GOAT?

Why not? I certainly think they can be.

 

[Mathman]

Why not? I certainly think they can be.

Irina Rodnina.

Actually, this (winning titles with more that one partner) seems an incredible feat to me. Considering how long it takes for a partnership to gel, then to start all over again -- wow! )

 

[TallyT]

The point is that it's a team event... You win and lose together... That's the point of a team competition. I think it creates great stories and synergy.

The point is that it's not. The skaters are never on the ice together, they don't skate together even in relay. They don't and can't pull together as the volleyball team you speak of must. Again, they just each do their individual program, they have nothing to do with each other. There's no team story because there is no nothing 'teamy' to see except in the peripherals like KnC and podium.

I quite agree that in many shows the group numbers are not well rehearsed and have a thrown-together look.

Stars on Ice last year, even in Japan, it was clear that quite a few of the skaters were not at all taking the group numbers seriously, but then I get the feeling some skaters see show tours as a paid vacation and don't really think about giving the paying audience their very best. FAoI group numbers are somewhat better but still rather Amateur Hour at time (and the costumes don't help).

By the way, you and I are in agreement about the futility of all-time great discussions. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic dominated the Federer-Nadal-Djokovic era.

That's the fascinating thing about the 2016-18 men's group I have praised before: when you look at the 6-7 men who were at the top in the Pyeongchang Olympics (Hanyu, Uno, Fernandez, Jin, Chen, Chan and for me Kolyada, others may add or subtract) every one of them had multiple quads and most seriously multiple quads, every one of them has impressive medal hauls, nearly all of them were lauded for skating skills and/or artistry, nearly all of them do have star quality (okay, in more or less quantity but still), and at least four have been mentioned in this thread as having a claim for GOAT.

So maybe we could say that 2014-18 has a claim, at least in this discipline, to the GOAT quad....

As for evolving rules, formats and eligibility requirements over time – whatever. I beat all the guys who were around in my time – good for me. You beat everyone in sight in your time – good for you.

Youtube threw up videos for me yesterday of Henie and Button, and watching them and reading the comments, it made it so clear that many people love them more than the current skaters - as as you say, good for them

 

[4everchan]

The point is that it's not. The skaters are never on the ice together, they don't skate together even in relay. They don't and can't pull together as the volleyball team you speak of must. Again, they just each do their individual program, they have nothing to do with each other. There's no team story because there is no nothing 'teamy' to see except in the peripherals like KnC and podium.

Not entirely true. The support skaters get in the team event is completely different from the individual event. I understand what you are saying but you are underestimating the synergy of the team event. Maybe some skaters are too concerned about their own performance in their own discipline: some stars don't even participate, but for many it is a different story and it is a wonderful one. It is up to the athletes to understand how to use the energy from their teammates properly. There are other team events where athletes are not on the field at the same time nor even doing a relay... Same deal. It is also about depth in all four disciplines. That is what being individual skaters but about the national program of each skating federation

Stars on Ice last year, even in Japan, it was clear that quite a few of the skaters were not at all taking the group numbers seriously, but then I get the feeling some skaters see show tours as a paid vacation and don't really think about giving the paying audience their very best. FAoI group numbers are somewhat better but still rather Amateur Hour at time (and the costumes don't help).


That's the fascinating thing about the 2016-18 men's group I have praised before: when you look at the 6-7 men who were at the top in the Pyeongchang Olympics (Hanyu, Uno, Fernandez, Jin, Chen, Chan and for me Kolyada, others may add or subtract) every one of them had multiple quads and most seriously multiple quads, every one of them has impressive medal hauls, nearly all of them were lauded for skating skills and/or artistry, nearly all of them do have star quality (okay, in more or less quantity but still), and at least four have been mentioned in this thread as having a claim for GOAT.

So maybe we could say that 2014-18 has a claim, at least in this discipline, to the GOAT quad....

So I got flack for suggesting that over one season the Olympic champion may not be the GOAT and now we are doing quad goats? I guess it supports my point that we can just find objective data in any way or another to support our claims.

Youtube threw up videos for me yesterday of Henie and Button, and watching them and reading the comments, it made it so clear that many people love them more than the current skaters - as as you say, good for them

 

[4everchan]

And btw, in diving, there is now a new team event at worlds, not yet at the Olympics.. every diver has to perform a dive. There are diverse categories to be fulfilled. So they go one at a time ... Archery is the same. Horse jumping too.

 

[TallyT]

Not entirely true. The support skaters get in the team event is completely different from the individual event. I understand what you are saying but you are underestimating the synergy of the team event.

I didn't even see any synergy, I would suggest it is another of those things that is all in the eyes of the beholder. Again, put them all on the ice together, actually competing together, and I'll give it credit as a team sport (and remember, my boy got the top SP score in the team event in 2014 and had nearly all the other teams on their feet so it often makes me happy. I'm not knocking the entertainment and razzle of the event. But it's still a pr cobble-together.)

So I got flack for suggesting that over one season the Olympic champion may not be the GOAT and now we are doing quad goats? I guess it supports my point that we can just find objective data in any way or another to support our claims.

Ummm, your suggestion was for a greatest of all time skater for a specific year? I was suggesting that that quad was the greatest quad (in the men's discipline) of all time. Others may differ, but I think it's a valid 'of all time' usage.

And btw, in diving, there is now a new team event at worlds, not yet at the Olympics.. every diver has to perform a dive. There are diverse categories to be fulfilled. So they go one at a time ... Archery is the same. Horse jumping too.

And therefore (and I don't follow any of them) I would not call them as special as individual medals either for exactly the same reason. I don't have a problem with that. If someone wants to claim team glory, they need to compete as a team.

Anyway, we seem to have gotten away from the point. I would suggest that in 10-20 years, it will be easier for the fans then to look at our recent stars: apart from probably Yuzuru and Mao in Japan and Valieva in Russia (and worldwide for all the wrong reasons) many of them may have faded like Lysenko and Hughes into the pages of history and forum mentions, new names will be fresher. And tastes will be different, which is why body of work (including medals and records and impact as well as skills and jumps and artistry) is so important but also so malleable.

Though I also suggest that if a Canadian man finally gets that individual gold - simply because it will break the curse and make the fairytale - that will be enough to vault him into the ranks, at least

 

[Mathman]

The point is that it's not. The skaters are never on the ice together, they don't skate together even in relay. They don't and can't pull together as (in) volleyball...

That’s what’s so splendid about synchro. It is a team endeavor. And in fact the unison, synchronization (duh), the “many skating as one” is the whole sport, irrespective of the individual skills that are on display.

Plus, when we put together a “national team” of individuals, are they really teammates or are they rivals? Did Tara Lipinski and Micelle Kwan lead the cheers for each other when they competed? Yagudin and Plushenko? As for the Olympic Team event, there is precious little camaraderie when the national team’s #1 opts to skate both the short and the long programs, leaving #2 to twist in the wind without the opportunity to win a medal.

The other good thing about sychro is that if we think that grass roots participation is the key to raising thel visibility and popularity of skating overall, this discipline provides opportunity for engagement for many skaters at various levels to enjoy both the sport itself and the social benefits of being on a team. In contrast, for most of its history, singles figure skating meant hour after hour isolated on your own little “patch.”

 

[4everchan]

I didn't even see any synergy, I would suggest it is another of those things that is all in the eyes of the beholder. Again, put them all on the ice together, actually competing together, and I'll give it credit as a team sport (and remember, my boy got the top SP score in the team event in 2014 and had nearly all the other teams on their feet so it often makes me happy. I'm not knocking the entertainment and razzle of the event. But it's still a pr cobble-together.)

as they say, ymmv

Ummm, your suggestion was for a greatest of all time skater for a specific year? I was suggesting that that quad was the greatest quad (in the men's discipline) of all time. Others may differ, but I think it's a valid 'of all time' usage.

I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. just showing how an OGM can be put under another light.

And therefore (and I don't follow any of them) I would not call them as special as individual medals either for exactly the same reason. I don't have a problem with that. If someone wants to claim team glory, they need to compete as a team.

Anyway, we seem to have gotten away from the point. I would suggest that in 10-20 years, it will be easier for the fans then to look at our recent stars: apart from probably Yuzuru and Mao in Japan and Valieva in Russia (and worldwide for all the wrong reasons) many of them may have faded like Lysenko and Hughes into the pages of history and forum mentions, new names will be fresher. And tastes will be different, which is why body of work (including medals and records and impact as well as skills and jumps and artistry) is so important but also so malleable.

And those fans may look into the OGM winners and their performances. Some are stellar, some are not so good. And then, they may say, a GOAT should not only have the medal but the performance that goes with that medal.

Though I also suggest that if a Canadian man finally gets that individual gold - simply because it will break the curse and make the fairytale - that will be enough to vault him into the ranks, at least

Only for those who think OGM is necessary for GOAT.

I don't agree... but thanks for your positive wishes about the eventuality that a Canadian man get that elusive medal. Clearly, some of the others didn't need it to make history.

 

[Mathman]

I was suggesting that that quad was the greatest quad (in the men's discipline) of all time. Others may differ, but I think it's a valid 'of all time' usage.

I don't object to the usgage, but the same difficulties remain. Was the Hanyu, Uno, Fernandez, Chan group more goat-like than Yagudin, Plushenko, Takahashi and Lambiel? Than Boitano, Orser, Browning and Petrenko? Nepala, Hoffmann, Curry and Cranston? How to evaluate the succession Graftstrom->Bockl->Schaefer?

 

[TallyT]

Only for those who think OGM is necessary for GOAT.

Hey, I don't necessarily - my 2nd pick for women is Kwan who never got one, it's probably just that Kim with her never-off-the-podium (and the fact that I actually love her skating better yes I am biased) pips it for me. Just.

I don't have national pride in either, of course in fact I have yet (and am not feeling hopeful of getting) any in my lifetime.

Another tiny fact: Carol Heiss in the mid-twentieth century won five world gold, and 'dominated women's figure skating like nobody since Sonja Henie' (from wiki) and yet, not only has she not been mentioned here but how many people, even reasonably fannish fans, would recognise her name?

I don't agree... but thanks for your positive wishes about the eventuality that a Canadian man get that elusive medal. Clearly, some of the others didn't need it to make history.

It's not even the medal itself. It's that dramatic fictional (and oh does the public like drama and fiction!) 'curse', breaking it would not mean anything in a hard factual basis but the media and public would love the fairytale ending.

I don't object to the usgage, but the same difficulties remain. Was the Hanyu, Uno, Fernandez, Chan group more goat-like than Yagudin, Plushenko, Takahashi and Lambiel? Than Boitano, Orser, Browning and Petrenko? Nepala, Hoffmann, Curry and Cranston? How to evaluate the succession Graftstrom->Bockl->Schaefer?

It's again something people would probably argue up icy hill and down frozen dale about, true.

 

[Mathman]

Another tiny fact: Carol Heiss in the mid-twentieth century won five world gold, and 'dominated women's figure skating like nobody since Sonja Henie' (from wiki) and yet, not only has she not been mentioned here but how many people, even reasonably fannish fans, would recognise her name?

I will be happy to mention her, since she was my first skating crush. Especially when she starred in a Three Stooges movie -- an acheivement that no other skater has accomplished before or since.

She is not remembered so much because this was before the television age. By 1968 Peggy Fleming was all over "Wide World of Sports" in the U.S. and became much better known.

Plus, I like the list of all-time world champions: Tten times: Sonja Henie. Five times: Herma Szabo (streak ended 1926), Carol Heiss (1960), Michelle Kwan (2003). By logic, this won't happen again until somewhere the decade of the 2040s.

While we are waiting, no other goatlings need apply.

OK, Yuna Kim can apply on the strength of her Olympic medals (exhibti A), her Bond SP (exhibit B) and her Les Miz LP (exhibit C).