I don't see how this picture have anything to do to with the different flip or luzt entrance and I begin to feel that from the way you post it has been a personal issue toward me. If you cannot control you anger toward me, please do it via PM. It totally unfair to other user to have to endure this fight which is not related at all to the topic that has been discussed.
Dai is loved by god of skate. So special. I always wonder why his artistry does not show up in the score? So unfair
Hoping perfect free tomorrow from him..
No, it has nothing to do with the flip o lutz entrance. You think I should carry the burden of proof that Dai fell, so I want to show you I did the work. I don't have any anger toward you or anyone. From now on, we don't have to talk to each other.
First, I never post for you to show pictures to prove that Dai fell - it was another poster.
Second - Yes, I think it a good solution from now on we don't have to talk with each other. :agree:
I think this maybe one of Brian's last chance to medal at Worlds. Hope he succeeds!
It seems to be that Patrick Chan was overmarked, as is often the case. Even when he makes errors, he almost always places first, with a generous lead over many of his competitors. How many mistakes does he have to make in order for him to lose 1st place?
Your eyesight is your problem and nobody else's.I didn't see anyone supplied any photo proof at 4CC men's SP thread when a multi-paged cries on Chan's "fall" broke out.
That's a lie. I was the one who posted that photo of Chan's "non-fall" in MEN- Short Program thread, post # 384. Do me a favor, if your please: don't lie if my name is involved. Thanks in advance. :disapp:The photo came in later.
Are you saying ISU is finally playing a fair game?Well Dai's unfall today has different meaning to Patrick's earlier unfall. Patrick's unfall was noticed and pounced upon because up until then, one could expect such an 'unfall' to be marked as a fall, and then suddenly the rules appeared to change for Patrick. Once that prescedent had been set, then CoP had to maintain the standard and so today, Dai's fall was marked as 'unfall'. In other words, Patrick's unfall appeared to have occured for Patrick's sake, but Dai's unfall today appears to have been done in order to maintain the image of CoP's objectivity.
Thanks. Did anyone watch CBC? During his interview with Russell, I think he said it differently...don't recall. I'm trying to find the video but CBC only has the Bold version so far.
Because Can Fed ordered the judges to do so! We have the maple syrup to sweeten the judges, the oil to make their cars moving and the beavers to chop their woodsIt seems to be that Patrick Chan was overmarked, as is often the case. Even when he makes errors, he almost always places first, with a generous lead over many of his competitors. How many mistakes does he have to make in order for him to lose 1st place?
Your eyesight is your problem and nobody else's. That's a lie. I was the one who posted that photo of Chan's "non-fall" in MEN- Short Program thread, post # 384. Do me a favor, if your please: don't lie if my name is involved. Thanks in advance. :disapp:
I didn't see anyone supplied any photo proof at 4CC men's SP thread when a multi-paged cries on Chan's "fall" broke out. The photo came in later.
Not a surprised to see such a rude hysterical reaction from you. It's kind of a norm really. But hell the Internet rules for you guys. The irony is that you only proved my point- the photo of Chan's "non-fall" was not not supplied as you claimed it was. It was posted within 12 hours as soon as the first article in the internet with the relevant photo showed up. Yeah, it was in post #326 with link to the rian article with photos included. I didn't say that I was the first who posted the photo. I said I posted it, and I did, as a separate image without the article text, in post #384. So, why don't you give yourself your own advice and get your fact straight. As for your claim that I posted the "fall photo" in post #336 is ether a lie too or you have a lack of humor. The image in that post was a sarcasm on judges' decision. Your dearest Patrick is wearing a differrent suit. So it cannot be a photo of 4CC fall. But the sense of humour is individual and not international. I am not blaming you for having a different one.What a serious charge you've put on me!
I did your favor and went back to 4CC SP thread. I've found these:
1. Talking about Chan's "fall" started from Page 8. Scattered and stretched for 14 pages until first photo appeared.
2. The first photo about that "fall" was posted on Page 22, post #326. But it was not by you.
3. Your "fall" photo was posted on Page 23, post #336.
4. You've posted the same photo from post #326 onto post #384 which was on the last page (Page 26).
The truth is: I was absolutely correct on what I've said. Oops!
You'd better get your fact straight and think twice before you attempt to use such eye-popping word to accuse me or anyone!:sarcasm: