What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Re: Urmanov

Thanks Jaana and Joe for responding to my Urmanov question. He did have some of the most outrageous costumes. I almost fell out of my chair when I saw the bronze bra he wore in his Egyptian program. :rollin: . Ilia's Olympic long costume was very strange, but it was not of bad taste IMO. But Urmanov's costume selection was a running joke in NA.

p.s. I agree he is a very good looking guy and has a wonderful body line and body proportion.

Re: Urmanov

> Joesitz
Did the gold medal mean he was the Best of All male skaters for the next four years? or just that night?>

I don´t think that any win should mean that now one is the best for that and that period? One of course holds the title. Only then if the other competitors are not even close it can be a fact, and in that case matters are very boring in competitions, in my opinion. Anyway, Urmanov was the reigning Olympic champion for next four years. Unfortunately he got injured in Worlds 1997 (after having won the short programme) and could not defend his Olympic title in 1998.

Urmanov is the only recent male skater who has remained in eligible skating after his Olympic win. From e.g. Ilia Kulik it can not be said for sure how well he might have succeeded. On the other hand, if the top athlete has reached her/his goal, the Olympic gold, I understand the need to set new goals, and for an athlete to choose what she/he personally is more interested in and wishes to develop. Especially in these days as injuries occur because of the quad for example. Besides if some top athletes don´t reach their goal, it is natural that they give e.g. for the Olympic gold a new try.

>With Elvis at this best and Urmanov at his best, do you think Elvis would win?>

No, at his best Elvis would not win by international judges if Urmanov (or any other skater which has the skating style and the presentation the judges prefer) would skate his best, in my opinion.

>It's nice to win Gold, but does it tell the whole story?>

Well, I personally don´t need any stories to be told, I prefer to watch interesting and exiting competitions, LOL. In e.g. figure skating competitions matters are a bit strange compared to "normal" competitions in other sports:

- an unknown athlete cannot win e.g. at Worlds or Olympics
- "having had a strong season" helps an athlete even if she/he is not at her/his best at Worlds
- "first you work for the reputation and after that the reputation works for you" (Irina Rodnina´s words)

BTW, I have always felt that it is unfair that strong presentation marks are holding the skater up when she/he fails technically in some elements. If e.g. a skater gets 5,2-5.5 in technic, it does not look right that presentation might be 5,8-5,9. To me more fair would be only about 0,2 points above the technical marks.

Marjaana

Re: Presentation Marks

I absolutely agree, Jaana - Presentation marks are what makes figure skating a subjective sport. Technical can be measured to a big degree, but presentation has no barriers.

Like you, I see the fall as a fault in presentation. I do not buy that, 'if s/he recovers well it can be ignored' rationale. Imo, the fall should be an automatic deduction; if the recovery is not good the deduction should be higher.

My gymnast judge friend wonders how a fall is not necessarily a deduction in figure skating. In gymnastics a judge would be in trouble if no deduction was made.

It's what a skater does at that competition only that should be judged - not what s/he can usually do.
Joe

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Joesitz:

Usually, for skaters, what matters most is not the medals, but that they leave their "mark" on skating or change it in some significant way for the better. Toller Cranston for example, changed mens' skating forever by his avante garde approach and dramatic skating. Though Toller never won an Olympic gold medal Toller is "widely acclaimed as the most influential figure skater of this century."

There are many skaters over the years who I have followed and enjoyed watching who have never captured the gold medal, but they have left their impression on me because of their talent and love for the sport of figure skating.

Ladskater

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

<em>My two cents on the Olympic GOLD. It is the # 1 Prize for Skaters to get. However, There are very few or maybe even 1 who if they get the Gold of not. As still transended the Gold Medal. Because, of what they have done without the GOld.

Take Michelle, She has rosen above the Olympic GOld Medal pretty much ( even without getting one). She has been around for so long & has been winning so much( HER BODY OF WORK) it speaks for itself. The One or two nights( her long programs) when her nerves got the best of her & she wasn't able to get the gold.

It kind of is in the same category as Steven Speilberg(sp) with the Oscars. Coming so close year after year. & then Boom nothing. Same with Susan Lucci, How many times was she nominated for best actress( 14 or 15 Years in a row ) before she won. By the Time Steven S. & Susan L. won their awards. It was almost anti- climatic(sp, ) They by their body of work & Year after year of great performaces. & by them Leading the pact or being in the leading pact. Had already moved beyond the award itself. They themselves became bigger than the award. The buzz was by the time the award cermony would come around was. Will Steven Get his Oscars or Susan Would she finally win her ward. They had won everthing else but. Michelle is like Steven & Susan. She has already pretty much transended the Olympic Gold. I know that she would love to get it 2006 ( if she is still skating) but, she has in some way moved past it. LIke it was stated. She is a Winner with or Without the Gold

HER BODY OF WORK: After each olympic loss. She has come back skating better than ever.


I do belive that People can rise to the occasion & have a great skate during the olympics or other certain events. But, for me it is the Long Run. Event after event after event is the Staple mark for me. Not necessarily the one night.

Michelle, Alexei, Irina & Plushenko( the Current Skaters) some of the skater that I am talking about. Their winning records speaks for itself. Though, Irina & Plush haven't moved beyond the Gold yet. But, Their carrers do say something for them.

I don't Know, Winning the GOld is Great. But, A skater without the Gold & who has a Winning carrer for 10 years & a Icon Status vs a Gold Medal Winner with a maybe a 3 to 4 year career. I'd take the Skaters that I mentioned above as True Champs with or without GOld Medals( Alexei not included. He WON , Thank God) </em>

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Greate post, Pather. ITA.

Re: Importance of Gold

I think Kurt's ever GROWING fandom proves that it's not the medals that draws people to them... or makes them(skaters) great... it's the skating... so yeah GOLD is important to the casual fan and the skaters' egos.....

Re: Importance of Gold

Ditto Pather: Alexei - He WON. Thank God!
Alexei, not Sarah, rescued SLC for me. His win carried me back to the 'old days' of my childhood when every heir-apparent, all my favorites won the OGM. Peggy, Dorothy, Scott, Brian, John Curry, Robin Cousins, Torvill/Dean. I've been feeling cheated by the lucky little girls since '94. Maybe it's really been all about that Body of Work all along. However, the only competition available on TV in the old days WAS the Olympics, so we thought it was the be-all-and-end-all title.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

I don't agree with some of you who said that those girls were "lucky" to have had the performances of their lives to win the Oly gold (I'm sorry if I have inferred wrongly). Credit to them, they did put up some great performances (except Oksana?) and I don't think that had anything to do with luck. Nevermind that they had much less pressure than the hot favourites did or the latter had a splatfest, a great performance is a great performance.

Nevertheless, these same young Oly champions have shown to the public and the skating community that the Oly gold doesn't make a legend or a great skater. And incidentally, Michelle has shown to them that it's the body of work and longevity at the top that should define what a legend or a great skater is.

Re: Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

<em>Thanks, MZHENG & TOUTESTGRACE: I just think that some skaters & Fans put to much on the Olympic GOLD Medal. I still have to go with the Entire Body of Winning Years Can only truly make that Gold Medal Shine. Otherwise, at the end of the day. They have the title & a place in the record books but, that is it.

Examples: Tara( Sorry tara fans) not to bring up the debate about the Skate( she won it is over) ( or her very short career) But, she came she won( Olympics, Worlds, Nationals) & then It was over before the flames the closing cermonies at the olympics. But, her career was so short( do the injuries or whatever her reasons). She is just the name in the Book.

Sarah: On the Other hand, with her career plans unknown right now. But, This past season was god awful. She should have just skiped it all together. I can't remember what board it was. But, I do remember a thread about if she was mature enough or tough enough to handle to handle the pressure that her win brought. She was suppose to kick butt this past season because she was the Olympic champ. The Answer was No.
But, With her career still pretty much up in the air in regards to her schooling. Who knows. But, Her olympic win was great for her for those few months until the new season started again. Her fans & reporters thought that the Gold Medal would make her a better skater than she was. Thing is that Sarah( Though she skated the best that Night & truly deserved the Gold) However, others had to make mistakes in order for her to win. People tend to forget that or just plan ignore it. Her body of work does NOT support her Gold Medal. She skated great when she had nothing to lose & let it Fly. SHE WON.

& I Have to agree that Alexei for me( someone who has been watching skating for over 30 years) . His Performance, was the saving grace of skating at SLC. If Not the Games themselves. With all the Fuss about the Pairs, The Ice Dance, Ladies ( Problem with the russians saying Irina should be 1st.) It was the Mens who had a clean slate ( somewhat). I still question how can Plushenko fall on his combo & omitt it & still get a 5.9 on presentation. He is a great skater. But, the Combination is a must & to leave it out because the 1st jump failed. Well, anywho:lol: But, it was Alexie who left no questions asked with his 2 programs. & His scores were his rewards for his performances. Alexie along with Elena & Anton are the ones with Blazing Gold Medals. They have years upon years of winning seasons to prove it.

Just a though
</em>

What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Apache,

"Luck"----what's wrong with that term? When someone states that Tara, Sarah and even Oksana were lucky on the night of their Olympic performance, I don't intepret that to mean they didn't deserve the gold medal. The statement stands for itself---luck---either you have it or not.

Tara, Sarah and all the other Olympic champions in every venue who ever won gold medals throughout history have experienced some sort of luck on that particular day in which they won. This in no way takes away from their performance nor does it tarnish their gold medals. It's simply a fact.

For any athlete to be ready to perform at the top of their sport at any given Olympics is pure luck. As many have stated, some sports are so age sensitive that hitting the perfect age at that particular Olympic year is nothing but luck. How else can you explain events to which you have no control (like when you are born, for instance) putting you at the right place at the right time?

That's how I see it.

Dizzy

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

stilldizzy7, I agree there are some elements of luck in winning the Olympic gold to a certain extent. If Michelle hadn't fallen on her 3F and had placed above Irina, the outcome would have been different. If the Olympics were held in 1996, Michelle would very likely have been the champion. To me, it's consistency, longevity as a top skater and the body of work that make a legend or a great skater. Certainly not the Oly gold.

I don't like to use "luck" because it tends to take away the gold from the "lucky" girls, even if that's not our intention. And I feel it's not fair to their fans. Also, as a huge Michelle fan, I somehow have the responsibility to safeguard the reputation of all Michelle fans. That's why I avoid using "luck". It saddens me Michelle fans have been perceived as rabid, irrational and mean and we know that's not true. Every skater has his/her fair share of such fans.

Anyway, that's just me, I certainly don't impose my thoughts on anyone. I just disagree.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Not that it's needed, but I'll just add my agreement with the majority that it is the body of work that is what counts, not the medal count or color. But I don't think body of work should be limited to eligible competition. Paul Wylie, for example, used his Olympic silver medal in '92 to launch is pro career in which he skated many superb and even transcendant performances. I daresay that most people remember and love Paul for his pro performances far more than those of his eligible career, with the exception of his Olympic performances. And although Kurt Browning won four (I think--correct me) World gold medals, he won no Olympic medals despite two tries, yet like Paul Wylie, the artistic and technical growth of his skating as a pro has endeared him to many fans who were not familiar with him as an eligible skater, although I think with Kurt it is the combination of his eligible and professional skating that makes his ouevre so special.

I don't mean to pick on Joe, but I have to disagree with the following statement: <blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The last three ladies Oly champions took the gold and ran. That was their aim and they succeeded.[/quote] With Oksana, I don't think she had a choice in what she was going to do. From everything I've read, her coach and de facto caretaker, Galina Zmieskaya, made the decision that Oksana go pro. At that time, pro skating was where the money was and coming from such a poor background, who can blame Zmieskaya at her age for wanting to "cash in" on both Victor and Oksana as OGMs? I think Oksana did whatever Galina wanted. Afterall, what choice did she have?

With Tara, her hip was giving her problems even at the Olympics. I don't think Tara "ran"; rather I think she made the best choice she could considering her physical condition as well as her concerns about her parents. If she continued training as an eligible, her parents would have remained separated and I believe Tara was sincere in wanting to see her parents living together again.

As for Sarah, I think when she won the OGM, she probably had every intention of continuing on as an eligible skater and in fact, she did compete as an eligible skater in '02-03. Unfortunately, she had problems. She competed in the Campbell's competition and was slated to compete in the GP series. However, injury, weight gain, commitments as the OGM, and perhaps other factors changed things. Sarah did compete at Nationals and lest we forget, won the silver medal, and of course she placed sixth at Worlds. I would not call that taking the gold and running. I think Sarah wanted to continue her eligible career and from what she says, still desires to compete; however, I think she is coming face to face with the realities of trying to do school, OGM commitments, and eligible-level training--just as Michelle encountered the difficulties of going to college and trying to keep up her competitive schedule and training.

Personally, I don't think that continuing to compete as an eligible skater defines how good a skater is. I think some skaters are geared towards competition while others are geared towards creativity. I think this was the case with Ilia Kulik. Even as an eligible he stated in many interviews that he wanted to do things on the ice that no one had ever done before in terms of choreography and experimenting with technique. Continuing an eligible career is not conducive to this kind of expression. Kulik is perhaps not as well known in the US because of his choice to skate with SOI after he won his OGM, but he is achieving his personal goals of creativity on the ice. I think this also brings up the issue of what satisfies the individual skater. I've seen Kulik, Browning, Wylie, and Yamaguchi do programs with SOI that they could never do as eligibles, not even in exhibition. I have found them memorable, moving, and artistically challenging in a positive way. First with Chris Dean and then on his own, Kulik has introduced true hip-hop into his skating. Regardless of what one thinks of hip-hop, it is a new way of skating. Browning has down program after program using inspiration from muscial theatre, ballet, the circus, Spanish dancing, jazz, and rock. In so doing, he has become IMO the greatest overall mover on the ice today. Kristi too developed a repertoire during her decade with SOI that went from classic skating programs to almost unclassifiable programs such as "Doop-Doop," as well as her unforgettable "Bridge Over Troubled Water." And Paul Wylie's pro programs are remembered deep in the hearts of many, many fans.

Anyway, to imply that a skater's impact stops when they stop skating as an eligible is to me missing the contributions of many great pro skaters--and I didn't even mention G&G. Pro skating has been in a slump since about '99 and perhaps it will never be what it was in the mid-'90s. But you never know; things could cycle in such a way that pro skating has a resurgence.

Of course I love eligible skating and appreciate the great difficulty of continuing to do 7 or 8 triple programs year after year, but pro skaters do 7 to 8 triples a show night after night. IMO the top pro skaters' contributions to skating are just as important as the top eligibles; they just aren't seen by as many people. But it is from the pro ranks that a lot of the creativity comes that makes eligible skating more interesting, ie, in choreography by pros such as Sandra Bezic, Chris Dean, and Lee Ann Miller, to name just three.

So my take on the gold is that it is relative to the skater. Janet Lynn never won a World or Olympic gold yet she is one of the most beloved skaters among skating fans. I could go on with many examples. However, I do think that skaters WANT the OGM and as I think Jaana mentioned in Mathman's Olympic thread, because the Olympics is only every four years, winning an Olympic medal, especially the OGM, is a more elite club. And I do think there is something to be said for someone putting it all together under all the pressure of the Olympics. To me, it does not define a skater in general, but it does give them the cache of having done it under conditions of the most extreme pressure and I think that is nothing to sneeze at.

When I consider skaters like Oksana, Tara, and Sarah, I respect them for their Olympic and other accomplishments. When I consider skaters like Michelle, Irina, and Kurt Browning, the Olympics don't even enter my mind. It's their years of superb contribution to the sport that matters. Is one better or more important than the other? In my mind, no. But I can see how for others there might be a difference.
Rgirl

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

Wanted to add that it wasn’t Kurt, Paul or Kristi’s eligible career that made me take extra notice in them and see them as legends in this sport. It was their body of work some time after they went pro. I know Kurt and Kristi had the medals but I was so impressed with them after they went pro. So far Paul is the only other skater to move me to tears on a regular basis (Michelle is the other of course).

I’m sorry but Sarah wasn’t under extreme pressure. She was I’m sure nervous and all but no pressure. I also think the realities that Sarah faced also were the fact that she was the OGM and she still wasn’t a favorite. She still would need others to falter to win at this point. I mean really I thought her OGM would do her favors in the judges eyes but I was wrong.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I mean really I thought her OGM would do her favors in the judges eyes but I was wrong.[/quote]

You were half right. As I stated in other borad and thread that while OGM did not automatially improve her many tech issures like her fans and medias would believ, thus her first mark didn't get hold up in front of international judges at worlds (US judgs certainly hold her up at Nats). But the OGM did buy her the second mark at worlds. Do you really think her presentation was better than Elena L. (sorry don't know how to spell the last name)? I don't.

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

<em>Call me crazy but, I knew that Medal would not push up her scores. With all the trouble that they had at SLC. & the way they are suppose to be cleaning up the juding. though, I still do see scores he held up. But, the way she had been skating this past season & her lack of artistic presence. They can't hold her up. Sahsa's scores I see being held when she had errors. But, at least she has a very big artistic side.

But, I do have to agree with those who stated that Paul Wylie's body of work. & How, he actually improve after he turned pro. He had an amazing presence on the ice. Very Very SOULFUL. Kristie also improve after turning pro.

The Olympic Gold is # 1( make no mistake) However, without the body of wins after wins after wins. It doesn't make you the # 1 Skater.

Alexie Winning ( Means he is #1) his body of work proves it. If Plushkeno would have won it, it would mean that he was # 1. His body of work proved it. If Timmy G. won( Alexei & Plushenko would have to have to cut off their feet for that to happen) It would mean that Timmy skated the best that Night & was lucky that Both men made major mistakes for him to win.</em>

Re: What's Your Take on the GOLD?

I didn’t see Elena L skate unfortunately and I certainly enjoy her more than I ever have Sarah but I think Sarah’s scores were right on for her presentation at Worlds except for the 5.8 that was probably given by a U.S. judge. Actually I always think Sarah is gawky but I think she skated well in her 2nd long program (minus the fall on the flip). It was her jumps that were bad but her flow and moment across the ice was really nice that day.

I do agree she was held up big time at Nationals. That was one of her worst skates to me but I was mainly thinking internationally. You know it would be nice to see how Sarah would be scored at Nationals this coming year since now they know that she won’t be held up at Worlds if she doesn’t improve her technique.