- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
One skater Kwan wouldnt have had to worry about under COP is Sarah Hughes though. Boy would she ever have been toast under that system, her career highlight might have been 5th place on year at Nationals or something.
How will Kwan and/or Kim be viewed in the future?
- Thread starter bumpy
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2013
I agree with this.... about 100000%
The CoP skater and the 6.0 skater are two very different skaters. One (CoP) rewards difficulty and individual elements, one (6.0) rewarded consistency and the program, the complete package of a program.
Yuna and Michelle would have been damn good in any era though. In 6.0 I would think Michelle would win the artistic mark, and Yuna would dominate the tech mark, usually. Though Yuna is not slouch when it comes to Presentation.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2004
- Country
-
:agree:
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2011
Yeah.... right.
ITA with you. She is a real talent, and a real champion.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Concede? I think you mean "celebrate."
Need me to tap my foot to send the signal to everyone so they can celebrate LOL
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Frank Carroll made an interesting point in his recent interview with TSL. He said that judges score differently at the Olympics than at Worlds. At the Olympics, they will give the prize to the person who "goes for the gold." That's what Sarah Hughes did in her free skate in 2002.
I'll admit there were times when I was a bit jealous or bitter as Yuna rose up the ranks with her phenomenal jumping prowess and then ultimately won the 2010 Olympics. It's really petty, I know, but I felt almost threatened as a fan that Michelle's legacy was supposedly being diminished.
But then I grew up (figuratively, it happened in quite short a time span). Everyone knows that sports are meant to progress.
I know, right? I was OK by the time Yuna Kim came along, but at the 2006 Olympics I was hoping that neither Irina nor Sasha would win and get ahead of Michelle in the OGM category.
OK, so Shizuka won and got ahead Michelle in OGM category -- somehow, that didn't sting so much.
Last edited:
When I watch videos of skaters from the 70's and before, I always see comments from new skating fans and current skaters commenting on how pathetically easy and lame everything is. It's kind of disturbing how little perspective these people have.
It worries me that in 5-10 years people might have the same reaction to Michelle, and then in 20-30 years towards even Yuna's skating.
With that said, it's kind of interesting that in this sport even if current skaters are doing things earlier skaters wouldn't have even dreamed of, there's still individual elements that some older skaters did better, whether it's a spread eagle or classic layback spin.
Fortunately, I also know of fans (and I'm sure you do, too) who view some of the older skaters for the first time and are wowed by the flow, the edge control, and the importance they give to the music. Isn't it great when that happens? Generally a receptive fan can see the appeal of Janet Lynn, John Curry, Toller Cranston, and others who brought something extraordinary to skating. If, on the other hand, all one does while viewing skating is measure the height of a jump, count revolutions, and look for landings, I can see that Curry's Olympic program from >gasp< 1976 might be a letdown. I think it's the viewer's loss, myself.
Even in an easily measurable sport such as track and field or swimming, when you know that the girls' team would beat one of the great old champions, it's still skin-tingling to see one of the milestone competitions. To watch Jesse Owens in Berlin doesn't suffer at all from the fact that modern runners have faster times.
YuNa Kim would crush not just Janet Lynn but whatever guy was skating at the time. I think Ondrej Nepela was the 1972 OGM? But that doesn't make either Janet Lynn or Ondrej Nepela without worth as a skater to watch. Far from it.
If you're a truly greedy skating fan, as I am, you don't want to narrow down your list of great skaters. You want to keep adding to it.
(By the way, Pointyourtoe, I have seen and enjoyed Floskate's videos, too. I agree that she is indeed one of the great resources for skate fans on YouTube.)
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
I don't deny that Sarah deserved the gold medal for her performance at the Olympics, but she really was just able to 'relax' and enjoy her experience more so than any of the top3 after the SP. She was really skating more for herself and didn't expect to win the gold at all. So, she wasn't truly going for the gold. That one program was The Skate of Sarah's career and I think that's what every skater should hope for whether or not they are in medal contention. Shizuka Arakawa also deserved her OGM, but she had the advantage of seeing the stumbles of others and her performance was 'safe' by excluding her 3-3's - she knew that she had to just stay on her feet to be a lock for silver medal.
As for this thread, the current title asks how well MK and Yuna will be regarded in skating history. My answer is 'well' and as amongst the 'greats'. Some of the most iconic skaters of our time (Janet Lynn, Kurt Browning, etc.) have not won OGM's. So, it's definitely not the sole measure of a skater's place in history.
Also, there are some geographic considerations. Since there aren't many tours in the US, non-skating fans probably would not recall that Yuna won OGM. If you ask non-skating fans in the US if Michele Kwan won an OGM, some would say yes!!! But during a thread from many years ago, it was mentioned that [while well regarded] Kwan was not considered to be as iconic as she is in the US. Yuna is a household name in Korea - not just because of skating, as she is also a pop star and actress and model/spokesperson. Just as Mao Asada has been a household name throughout Japan from early in her career. They are all great skaters and the successes of one vs. another should take nothing away from each of them nor should they be disregarded by the rabid fans of others.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
It's amazing when you stop and think about the progress that has been made in the last fifteen years. Now they can send text messages on their iphones.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
You could be right on the last part. I guess a question is whether Asada is considered a legitimate all time great as well despite being the distant #2 skater of her own era (Slutskaya is only #2 of her era behind Kwan but is still considered an all time great by most). Also could Kostner be considered an all time great if she wins silver or gold in Sochi and her 2nd World title a month later, along with her longevity, horde of European titles and medals, and all her World medals.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
Yes that is true, but under COP it wouldnt have mattered. She would only have 2 or 3 clean triples counted before programs, the rest downgrades or edge calls, and even those few clean triples would get 0 or - GOE with her strange technique and high mule kicks on all her toe jumps. Her spins were strong but fairly simple and I doubt she was capable of the complex spins required today. She might never have even made a World team under COP. I am not sure she could have even beaten someone like Amber Corwin most of the time, LOL! Someone like Nikidinov who she regurlarly beat under 6.0 would have crushed her anytime she didnt have a total meltdown under COP.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2013
Not a fan of Sarah but she had a beautiful layback and a biellman. She probably would've managed high level spins
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
She had a beautiful layback but that doesnt mean she could get a high scoring one today. Today skaters dont just do a beautiful layback, they do one with an edge change, position change, usually ending in a Biellmann, etc....That is required for a high level.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2013
But again all of this speculation about pre-COP skaters using COP standards is just...
As to your other comment a lot of skaters today have hideous Biellmann positions that still get ratified.
If relatively inflexible skaters like Joannie Rochette and Akiko Suzuki can get high levels on most of their spins..
As to your other comment a lot of skaters today have hideous Biellmann positions that still get ratified.
If relatively inflexible skaters like Joannie Rochette and Akiko Suzuki can get high levels on most of their spins..
Very well said. I think one measure of a great skater is when they have performances/programs you will revisit time and time again. Technical difficulty of individual elements might advance with time but great skating is timeless.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2013
Carolina Kostner had mostly level 1 spins with a couple level 2 at the 2005 world championships. At the 2013 world championships she had level 4's on all of her spins except a level 3 on the layback.
COP is a lot more adaptable than people think, in my opinion, if skaters have the time and health.
COP is a lot more adaptable than people think, in my opinion, if skaters have the time and health.
Similar threads
