Mens lp

[chuckm]

Frankly, I don't see any similarity between Buttle and Weir except that they're both lyrical skaters. Jeff is definitely a better skater between the two, probably his only weakness is the inconsistency of his jumps, but his footwork and spins are superior to the Weir's.

Artistry wise, Buttle is much more versatile. Major difference between the two is that Buttle's performance is all about the music, his touches the audiences' hearts with his accurate interpretation of the music; while Weir is all about himself, when the music fits his image and personality, like swan, it works very well, however, his style is very limited, that's why he's getting so predictable and boring.

I also prefer Buttle's programs to Weir's because they have good choreography and nice transitions, instead of tons of simple crossovers and poses between the elements. That's what makes Jeff (and now Patrick Chan) the PCS king.

I always have more respect to the skaters who are willing to stretch their limits and keep changing and improving themselves than those who prefer to play it safe and keeps repeating themselves.

To each his own. Buttle had just ONE competition where it all came together and he skated two clean programs. While he was indeed versatile and artistic, too many of his programs were marred by wonky jump landings and falls. Buttle disappointed his audiences just as many times as he thrilled them.

I don't see that Buttle 'stretched his limits' any more than Weir has, or that he changed and improved himself more than any of the other elite skaters. I think the skater who has done that this year is Jeremy Abbott.

 

[dancingqueen]

The entire presentation of Johnnyness, including his extremely unique costumes and fairly-like beauty, stands out really a lot and can be powerfully addictive because you'd have probably never seen performances like his on or off ice. Nobody else could come up with the program and costume like The Swan. Whatever he skates to, there is very powerful Johnnyness. I think he has star/diva personality on the ice.

Completely agree. :agree:
A skater who has high quality moves is always pleasure to watch and never boring.
I would rather watch a skater like that than skaters who have no style, low quality movements with a lot of choreography .

 

[Buttercup]

Artistry wise, Buttle is much more versatile. Major difference between the two is that Buttle's performance is all about the music, his touches the audiences' hearts with his accurate interpretation of the music; while Weir is all about himself, when the music fits his image and personality, like swan, it works very well, however, his style is very limited, that's why he's getting so predictable and boring.

I also prefer Buttle's programs to Weir's because they have good choreography and nice transitions, instead of tons of simple crossovers and poses between the elements. That's what makes Jeff (and now Patrick Chan) the PCS king.

1. Jeff maybe touched his fans' hearts with his interpretation, but it's clear to me from the discussions here that his skating, while admired by many, did not appeal to everyone as it did for you. So maybe we should avoid such absolute statements about any skater. Personally, I prefer Johnny at his best because when he's on, I can see and feel that he really believes in what he's doing and that he's passionate about it, and because I find him to be amazingly graceful on the ice.

2. Do you really want to use PCS as a validation of skaters' ability to interpret the music and do transitions? I'll remind you that Buttle's PCS was not the highest at 2008 Worlds (6th on the SP, and 2nd on the LP), and that Plushy regularly got insane PCS, long after he stopped paying attention to his music, his choreo or his transitions. Patrick Chan is one of several skaters who get good PCS, and he hasn't by any means eclipsed the others.

I don't see that Buttle 'stretched his limits' any more than Weir has, or that he changed and improved himself more than any of the other elite skaters.

ITA. I think the fact that Buttle went out on such a high note has made people look at his career through very rose-tinted glasses. Buttle had highs and lows in his career, like most skaters.

As for "not playing it safe", the biggest risk for Buttle was quad jumps, and at some point he realized that he couldn't get them right and stopped trying. This turned out to be the right thing for him, but really, I don't see how he was more of a risk-taker than Johnny, or Stephane, or Brian, or Dai, or any of his contemporaries. What's risky differs based on a skater's strengths and weaknesses. Much as I disliked it, Dai's Swan Lake last year was an artistic risk for him. Ararat was not a risk for Jeffrey; it played to his already established strengths.

ae9177, look at Youtubes from four, five or six years ago and you'll see that many of the current elite skaters have improved, each in his or her own way.

 

[chuckm]

Joubert gets ridiculously high PCS scores as well, for massive jumps but bad spins, two-footed skating, and very little in the way of interpretation or musicality.

PCS very often is based on reputation, and not on how well a skater interprets and presents music.

 

[siberia82]

chuckm, I just want to say in advance that as crazy as I am about Fedor, I don't think he'll medal at Worlds (unlike cloudkicker09). My greatest wish is for him to make World team and to establish himself as one of the Top 3 male skaters in Canada. That in itself is a bit of stretch because of his extremely short training time, but I believe he has the ability to pull it off, even if almost no else does.

Considering Andreev's lack of total commitment to training and competing, I just don't see him improving much in such a short time.

There's a consensus amongst those who have attended the Senior Challenge that Fedor's programs are still in the "rough draft" stage (which is totally understandable given that they were created in late October), but even with the wobbles, they can already see that his skating is noticeably more CoP-friendly than last season, plus his routines carry a lot of potential thanks to Buttle's choreography. It's a true testament of Fedor's abilities that he can beat his younger and longer-trained competitors with virtually no training time. Whether or not he can bring it all to the table in time for the 2009 Canadians is another story, but at least we know that he's working hard to get there. Jeff mentioned in the recent Globe & Mail article that he was very impressed by Fedor's rapid progress.

When he finally made the decision to stay in the sport, he wanted to make sure he was 100% comfortable with his training environment. If he wasn't competition-minded, he wouldn't seek Jeff or Orser's help. He obviously felt that he needed a change from his old "comfort zone", and I think he made some very good choices. If Fedor didn't care about his results and simply wanted to skate for the pure joy of it, he could've easily remained with Callaghan and turned to Tessa (who had plenty of free time due to her injury, plus she attended the Senior Challenge to watch him) for choreography. In other words, if he's still slacking off, why would he bother with all these major changes in the first place?

I'm acquainted with a former friend of Fedor's who used to know him when he was a drift racer. They lost touch after he resumed his skating career, and he's officially listed as "retired" in the motor sport world. When the news broke out in the summer that he was considering quitting skating again, I asked her if he had returned to drift racing (I'd imagine that's where he would go should skating no longer interest him). She firmly answered "no"; the motor sport circle hasn't heard a peep from Fedor since he left about a year and a half ago. At the very least, this means he's not splitting his time between skating and drift racing.

I don't think age is much of a factor for him because he didn't touch an ice rink for almost 3 years, so his system was spared much damage and punishment. He also wasn't terribly committed to the sport before his injury, so he hasn't worn out his body as much as the other athletes.

Little faith my foot. Andreev's record speak for itself. He had one good year as a Junior skater nearly nine years ago. His Senior efforts were mediocre at best, and he's been absent from international competition for the past 5 seasons.

True, when you study at his past, his future looks rather bleak. But as far as I know, you're not God, so I still think it's within the realm of possibilty for him to improve his previous senior-level results.

 

[Buttercup]

Joubert gets ridiculously high PCS scores as well, for massive jumps but bad spins, two-footed skating, and very little in the way of interpretation or musicality.

PCS very often is based on reputation, and not on how well a skater interprets and presents music.

I don't have a problem with Joubert's PCS, but then I'm a fan. I think he has his own style and I'll allow it won't work for everyone; but as I see it, though he's not a lyrical kind of skater he works well with the music he chooses*. I also don't tend to have any problems with Carolina Kostner's PCS, a combination that sometimes makes me feel rather unique among GS posters .

But I agree with the second part of your post, though I must remind you that interpretation is just 20% of the PCS. Anyway, the point I was trying to make was that although PCS is an attempt to better quantify the components of the second mark, it remains very subjective and highly influenced by reputation. Once a skater is bumped up to the next tier in PCS, there he or she will usually remain, unless something pretty special happens to change that - and often regardless of the actual skating.

Or does anyone want to suggest that Tomas Verner's PCS for his 2008 Worlds LP was warranted? (and I happen to like Tomas).

* Joubert's spins are back up to level 3 and 4 this year, and PCS doesn't really reflect spins anyway.

 

[ManyCairns]

Anyone who can save us from frenzied Morosov arms will make the figure skating world a better place!

AMEN, sisters and brothers!

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Joubert gets ridiculously high PCS scores as well, for massive jumps but bad spins, two-footed skating, and very little in the way of interpretation or musicality.

PCS very often is based on reputation, and not on how well a skater interprets and presents music.

I definitely see a corelatiion between high tech jumps cleanly executed and PCS hi levels disregarding the bullets in the PCS definitions. However, many fans read the protocols as gospel.

 

[Bennett]

Bennett, I never found Buttle's programs to be addictive; I agree he's versatile and talented, but (as you've probably read in my posts before ) I often find it hard to really get into the programs from many of the subtle, low-key guys. I need more excitement, I , and to me, a singles skater has to be the star, not the background, otherwise why is he/she alone on the ice? They're not there to blend into the background!

Buttercup, thank you for your interesting discussions. I appreciate your insights as always.

Being able to become the "background" was another way of saying that he was excellent at interpreting each piece of music. He could become the music, may it be jazz, opera, movie music, postmodern music etc. Not only the low key ones that you mentioned, he has had some programs that are more energetic and dramatic, esp in his ex programs. And Jeff was equally well in expressing such music.

But looking more closely, he has had his own style despite his versatility. As you said in the below, he picked interesting music that allowed him to bring his personality. But it takes more time to notice his personality, because of the versatility in his choices.

I think where Jeff excelled was in picking interesting music that allowed him to bring across what he could do and his personality, rather than going with the same stuff everyone does. Johnny has also done this on occasion; another skater who is good at getting music to suit his style (which is totally different from those two!) is Brian Joubert. Skaters should look to do something different, not more Toscas, Romeo and Juliets and Spartacus (ice dancers, I'm looking at you!).

 

[Mathman]

However, many fans read the protocols as gospel.

I think the reason that people are so interesed in seeing the protocols is this. If you think of figure skating primarily as a sport, then the only thing that matters is who won and who lost.

Who won and who lost is 100% determined by those numbers and funny little marks on the protocol sheets. Nothing else counts.

 

[Buttercup]

Buttercup, thank you for your interesting discussions. I appreciate your insights as always.

Being able to become the "background" was another way of saying that he was excellent at interpreting each piece of music. He could become the music, may it be jazz, opera, movie music, postmodern music etc. Not only the low key ones that you mentioned, he has had some programs that are more energetic and dramatic, esp in his ex programs. And Jeff was equally well in expressing such music.

It's been an interesting discussion for me, too. I really value your perspective, which is different from mine but always interesting and well-expressed. I see what you mean about the background and versatility. I think we probably both agree about the importance of musical choices that allow skaters to present different aspects of their skating and personality, and push their limits artistically. :agree:

I think maybe part of my problem with Jeffrey Buttle is that I didn't get to see him that often and never really had the opportunity to get into his skating. Until this year, Eurosport generally showed just Euros, Worlds and Olys, and with Worlds often being in places where the time difference is too much, I didn't always get to watch. So naturally I'd prefer the European skaters, whom I get to see much more often. It's not the same on Youtube...

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I think the reason that people are so interesed in seeing the protocols is this. If you think of figure skating primarily as a sport, then the only thing that matters is who won and who lost.

Who won and who lost is 100% determined by those numbers and funny little marks on the protocol sheets. Nothing else counts.

I agree but I believe the question that arose was about Joubert who wins with little more than jumps. Not that his spins, foortwork, presentation are poor but that his scores are right up there with skaters who are far superior in spins, presentation and footwork. The PC is still in subjective mode, and many judges will see a Quad as the most important fact for skating ability, and therefore all PC bullets are so reflected. So I contend that the scores for Hi Tech Jumps are commensurate with the Hi PC (if not the highest then near the top to keep him in winning mode). BTW, Joubert was just used as an example. He has improved quite a bit in his presentation.

Fans may think that judges are going through all those bullets of the PC for each skater, but is it reaslistic thinking? and then come up with such close scores in the PC for a known Quad favorite?

The Quad deserves its high scoring but does that mean everything else in the program should be high scored? Now when the protocols are read, you will see that the fans accept the decisions made by the judges without question as gospel.

However the decisions of the Tech Panel as subject to many a debate especially in underrotations. But even they are accepted eventually.

I do not see anything wrong with disagreeing with a Judge, an Umpire, a Referee, etc.

 

[Mathman]

Now when the protocols are read, you will see that the fans accept the decisions made by the judges without question as gospel.

However the decisions of the Tech Panel as subject to many a debate especially in underrotations...

Thta's an interesting point. The main purpose of the CoP in the first place was to deflect attention from the judges. This seems to have been accomplished. We don't hear about corruption, collusion, bias and inter-federation politics any more.

Instead the microscope is on the calls of the tech specialists -- was that jump underrotated more than a quarter turn or less? Let's see the slo-motion video a few more times.

The funny thing, to me, is that every time I see an underrotation called by a tech specialist, or anticipated by a commentator, that judgement is born out when we see the tape.

Is that because the tech specialists are essentially perfect at doing their jobs? Or is it because all jumps are underrotated, so no matter which ones they call, they will be right?

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

The funny thing, to me, is that every time I see an underrotation called by a tech specialist, or anticipated by a commentator, that judgement is born out when we see the tape.

But do you see the ones that are not called? Maybe they should have been.

Is that because the tech specialists are essentially perfect at doing their jobs? Or is it because all jumps are underrotated, so no matter which ones they call, they will be right?

Did you ever work on 'unanswerable questions' in Philosophy?

 

[Mathman]

But do you see the ones that are not called? Maybe they should have been.

To tell the truth, Joe, I can't really tell. The skaters are turning so quickly, it all just goes by in a blur, to me. It just seems impossible to determine the exact angle of the blade at the precise instant of touch-down.

I tip my hat to the technical callers, as well as to the fans and message-board posters who have quicker eyes than mine.

 

[Hsuhs]

I tip my hat to the technical callers, as well as to the fans and message-board posters who have quicker eyes than mine.

I posted a link to a site with a video player that allows a super slomo, once. You too can become a tech controller!

 

[shine]

Frankly, I don't see any similarity between Buttle and Weir except that they're both lyrical skaters. Jeff is definitely a better skater between the two, probably his only weakness is the inconsistency of his jumps, but his footwork and spins are superior to the Weir's.

Artistry wise, Buttle is much more versatile. Major difference between the two is that Buttle's performance is all about the music, his touches the audiences' hearts with his accurate interpretation of the music; while Weir is all about himself, when the music fits his image and personality, like swan, it works very well, however, his style is very limited, that's why he's getting so predictable and boring.

I also prefer Buttle's programs to Weir's because they have good choreography and nice transitions, instead of tons of simple crossovers and poses between the elements. That's what makes Jeff (and now Patrick Chan) the PCS king.

I always have more respect to the skaters who are willing to stretch their limits and keep changing and improving themselves than those who prefer to play it safe and keeps repeating themselves.

Also even if I'm not completely a Buttle fan (some aspects of his presentation bug me), but I really think some of his programs are all time masterpieces, such as "Naqoyqatsi" and "Adios Nonino". Neither Weir or Buttle has the quad, but Weir's programs and presentation are just totally one-dimensional.

 

[Tonichelle]

according to the judges Buttle had a quad... he just had a non-traditional landing

 

[siberia82]

according to the judges Buttle had a quad... he just had a non-traditional landing

Ha ha, so true. Well, Jeff did perform a clean quad-triple in his 2003 4CC SP, and he's credited as being the 7th Canadian skater to land a quad in competition, but it turned out to be his only good one. hwell:

 

[Mathman]

I posted a link to a site with a video player that allows a super slomo, once. You too can become a tech controller!

I have found that even with super slow motion, and even stop frame, I can't tell whether a jump is more than a quarter turn short or not.

I can't tell, in a particular frame, whether the blade has just started to make contact with the ice, whether the edge has set down into its groove, or whether it is yet supporting the skater's weight. Since jumps are also pre-rotated, I can't tell where to start measuring degrees from.

To make it easy, how many degrees of revolution in the air is a correctly done single loop? 150?