- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
Comments.
Joe
Joe
kyla2 said:Sasha was absolutely exquisite, and even with the fall at the end, she was light years ahead of Mao as far as presentation, and it was NOT reflected in the score. Paul Wylie commented on that fact and said he didn't understand it (that she should have been 6 or 8? points higher than MAO in the PCS). She skated with more passion and added some new moves to the program. Paul Wylie said she was exquisite and he was absoultely right. It was simply one of the most beautiful skates I have ever seen. Shizuka was wonderful as well and skated the footwork section beautifully. Her speed was fabulous. Mao was the jumping bean of the night but I would have placed her after Sasha. Sasha's program was mature, elegant and difficult. The same can be said of Shizuka's. Mao had the jumps and a Bielman and that's it. Her PCS should have been much lower than Sasha's.
Mathman said:I hope Michelle retires...
Mathman said:You know what's the worst thing about the New Judging System? The spins. Everyone is going around really slow sticking out their arms in weird positions hoping that this will count as a "change of position" to get a higher level. A spin can be a pretty element and actually add something of artistic value to a program. Now...ptttt! :no:
I hope Michelle retires and leaves figure skating to lie in the bed it has made for itself.
I think you have a good point about skate order possibly affecting the PCS scores. Jumps and non-jump element levels, I don't think so, though anything is possible given the proclivities of the Caller.sk8er1984 said:I was going hunh??? after seeing the skates. From the results, I figured Sasha had skated poorly. Now I do think that Mao was terrific, and that she definitely deserved the silver, but Sasha was so clearly head and shoulders above her -- even with Mao's 3axel. I wonder if the PCS scores wouldn't have been vastly different if Mao had skated after Sasha, because that would have very starkly shown the maturity differences.
US commentators tend to "see" fewer problems in US skaters (don't know if this happens in other countries). Even though I don't like it, I can understand it as human nature.Kasey said:I stand corrected. The "lip" was about Sokolova. But, it's not a matter of not pointing out the flutz because it has been mentioned multiple times. It's the fact that they were bringing up a jump entry error on one skater, but not pointing out a worse jump entry error on "their" skater.
Red Dog said:First time I've ever heard a Kwaniac say that
Your wish is Speedy's command, sort of. There are three callers. That is, there is a Technical Specialist, an Assistant Technical Specialist, and a Technical Controller who work together on the calls. In the case of a dispute, two out of three majority rules (according to Hockeyfan on the other thread.)Rgirl said:I think we can be hopeful that next season there may be three Callers. If all 3, or 2 of 3 agree on the non-jump levels or that a jump is what the skater intended it to be, ie, a 3/3 rather than a 3/2, then majority rules. If all three disagree, eg, a level 2, 3, and 4 for the same spin, then I say use either the mean or the score closest to the mean. Right now, under the right circumstances, which so far have happened pretty often, the Caller alone can decide who is where on the podium and even who is on or off the podium, especially for the bronze.
From this pageRgirl said:Where does one find the names of the Technical Specialists?
You took the words out of my mouth, Kwanford. Sasha's skate was lovely and it held my interest throughout, which no one else did in this event except the pairs. The music seemed fine to me, after all the criticism. So was the choreaography.Kwanford Wife said:Here's something I never thought I'd say.... Sasha was robbed...
Referee Mr. Paolo PIZZOCARI ItalyJoesitz said:(I would love to see the names and nationalities of the judges but you know me.)