- Joined
- Nov 10, 2004
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjARDCovgA4&feature=related
I think she looked pretty good. Probably better than she does currently??
I think she looked pretty good. Probably better than she does currently??
I am not a skater, so I have never been a competitor in figure skating.
I have also not been an audience member of any figure skating competitions (though I am unsure how that would make my comments on youth/nerves more qualified.)
I do, however, have a number of Track & Field, Baseball (not softball), and LOL Chess medals sitting in a box. And then of course is my greatest love for which I have no awards except being invited to a national tournament.
A good point and maybe a matter of semantics. But what about the point that I raised about strategy. Isn't a skater who chooses to be a bit more cautious doing so for one primary reason? I doubt if Shiz was "playing it safe" in order to assure winning a bronze medal.
Sorry i thought i'd made it clear by saying i disagreed, but it got lost in the length of the post. I disagreed because i think exactly that - she skated conservatively aiming to win the silver or bronze. If she had her eye on the gold she would have gone for the harder combos presuming that Slutskaya would go for them (having gone for them all season long). Shiz dropping the 3/3s would have been like e.g. in this upcoming Olympics, Joubert dropping all his quads because Lysacek fell twice in his LP but Pluschenko was still to skate. You know you need the technical arsenal to win, if you know this and you drop it, then you can't be going for the gold surely?
Anyway it doesn't particularly matter, tactics are for nowt in this sport because the ice is slippery and you can accidnetally end up downgrading something (like Shiz's triple loop) without intending to. The only tactic that seems to work - is skate to the best of your ability and do everything you plan, if you do that you can win, if you don't you leave the door open.
Ant
Shiz dropping the 3/3s would have been like e.g. in this upcoming Olympics, Joubert dropping all his quads because Lysacek fell twice in his LP but Pluschenko was still to skate.
Ant
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjARDCovgA4&feature=related
I think she looked pretty good. Probably better than she does currently??
She would have won it. There is no fear factor at that age. Cohen and Slutskaya did have the fear factor. Shizuka took advantage of that.OK, so I am thinking?? Was 2006 a "what would have happened for Mao" had she been 2-3 months older? Anyone have COP comparison for this? Are her best days behind her? FLAME AWAY!!!
So simple yet clear.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Arakawa would have definitely put 3-3 in her program if she were aiming for the gold.
Some say Order of Skate does not affect the outcome. Don't believe it.Sorry, but if I was coaching Shiz I would have kept her LP the way she skated it.
Based on Irina's two previous Olympic performances would it be necessary for Shiz to take more risk than - as ant suggested - taking her best shot at a clean performance?
I miss Irina, admired her greatly - but all three of her Olympic performances never approached what she had shown in lesser events. Bad luck, nerves, health, etc. many factors could have contributed.
Why would Shiz be intimadated to the point of adding more risk based on Irina?
And Shiz managed to skate well enough to make it necessary for Irina to be very good that evening.
Had Shiz failed on a 3x3 that night the Gold medal might have gone to Sasha or opened a window for a slighlty better Irina.
Some say Order of Skate does not affect the outcome. Don't believe it.
I actually don't think that she looks exceptionally good in those clips, you clearly see that the jumps are relatively low, she rarely hits a clean flowing edge on the landing. Same goes by the way for the other babies who won Olympic Gold, neither had exceptional clean jumps, with full clean rotations and nice flowing edges out of them. I am not very sorry that she couldn't start at the Olympics, I much preferred to see three women battle it out for the top spot, not upset by a little girl who at this one window in her career had the body that allowed her to complete difficult jump layouts despite seriously flawed technique.
Sorry, but if I was coaching Shiz I would have kept her LP the way she skated it.
Based on Irina's two previous Olympic performances would it be necessary for Shiz to take more risk than - as ant suggested - taking her best shot at a clean performance?
I miss Irina, admired her greatly - but all three of her Olympic performances never approached what she had shown in lesser events. Bad luck, nerves, health, etc. many factors could have contributed.
Why would Shiz be intimadated to the point of adding more risk based on Irina?
And Shiz managed to skate well enough to make it necessary for Irina to be very good that evening.
Had Shiz failed on a 3x3 that night the Gold medal might have gone to Sasha or opened a window for a slighlty better Irina.
Had Irina didn't mess up her jumps, the gold would have gone to Irina as well. There's no point of second guessing because it can go on and on.. and I really don't think taking Irina's previous olympic performances which was 4,8 years ago as a main consideration in 2006 would be the right way. The main consideration to take as some kind of an indicator should be how she skated through the most recent year(i.e. Worlds,GPS, Euros and so on).
Given her dominant performances throughout the Olympic season, Irina would and should been a clear intimidation to Arakawa if the gold was what Shiz had been craving for.
The rather safe & clean strategy of Shiz was to realistically aim for bronze or silver and hope for the best. Had it been the other way around, as Irina the one who was playing by that tactics, I would agree it was a good strategy for gold. But for Shiz, realitstically.. No.
BTW totally out of subject.. I wasn't really a big fan of hers but I personally rooted for Irina.
Knowing her history of struggles, I somehow firmly believed at that point that this Olympic might be that *moment* for her.:no:
I am not very sorry that she couldn't start at the Olympics, I much preferred to see three women battle it out for the top spot, not upset by a little girl who at this one window in her career had the body that allowed her to complete difficult jump layouts despite seriously flawed technique.
If I am remembering correctly, we don't have to guess what the strategy of Arakawa's team was. They came right out and said it, in several interviews immediately after the event.
The full program had places for two triple-triples. I believe the first was a possible triple Lutz-triple loop, and in the second part of the program, a triple Salchow-triple toe. When Sasha took herself out of contention (as they believed, watching her fall twice), and with only Slutskaya among the contenders to go, team Arakawa decided to cut down the first triple-triple to a triple-double, and just go with one triple-triple, the Salchow-toe.
This strategy was based both on conservatism -- make sure that Japan wins at least one medal -- and also on the fact that Irina had not been landing triple-triples in practice, so one clean triple-triple by Shizuka would probably be enough for the win.
So Shizuka omitted the first triple-triple as instructed, and when the time came for the second one, it wasn't there and she bailed with a triple-double. Even after also doubling the loop, her program stood up when Irina came up with one of the worst performances of her career.
(That's how I remember it from the news conferences, anyway.)
I would agree with this if the Olympic games were about what level of artistic maturity the audience most wants to see.
If it is about who is the best at their sport, then, come one, come all. If the seriously flawed child outskates everyone else, so be it.
If I am remembering correctly, we don't have to guess what the strategy of Arakawa's team was. They came right out and said it, in several interviews immediately after the event.
The full program had places for two triple-triples. I believe the first was a possible triple Lutz-triple loop, and in the second part of the program, a triple Salchow-triple toe. When Sasha took herself out of contention (as they believed, watching her fall twice), and with only Slutskaya among the contenders to go, team Arakawa decided to cut down the first triple-triple to a triple-double, and just go with one triple-triple, the Salchow-toe.
This strategy was based both on conservatism -- make sure that Japan wins at least one medal -- and also on the fact that Irina had not been landing triple-triples in practice, so one clean triple-triple by Shizuka would probably be enough for the win.
So Shizuka omitted the first triple-triple as instructed, and when the time came for the second one, it wasn't there and she bailed with a triple-double. Even after also doubling the loop, her program stood up when Irina came up with one of the worst performances of her career.
(That's how I remember it from the news conferences, anyway.)
.
Everyone knew that if Arakawa skated a 6-Triple program and Irina skated a 6-Triple program (with both of them doing all the extra double jumps in combination as well), that Irina was 99% likely to win the Gold Medal.
Arakawa needed the Triple-Triple to win, in theory.
When she made the decision not to do the 3-3, she was conceding the Gold medal in exchange for an almost certain spot on the podium.