I still don't get what makes it appealing though? They have none of the artistry or performance appeal of the ladies (and no, plushenko, never had this), and they have the tricks, yes, but most of them struggle with them and even when they don't the quad jumps aren't exactly aesthetically pleasing (Hanyu and Chan may be the exceptions). But even with Hanyu and Chan, there's just still no appreciable stage presence there. I certainly hope that these next four years help them with that, as they'll be more mature by then.
Regardless of the fact that Tarasova is pretty full of herself, much of what she said I'm in agreement with - especially the difference between Plushenko's skate and Lysacek's skate in Vancouver.
This was too long for me to read without falling asleep. Patrick Chan was a victim of his nerves and too much pressure to be the first Canadian Male to win Gold at the Olympics. End of story.
This was too long for me to read without falling asleep. Patrick Chan was a victim of his nerves and too much pressure to be the first Canadian Male to win Gold at the Olympics. End of story.
I think you guys are missing the point of the writer and what he means when he calls Patrick Chan a Prometheus.
It means that the way that Patrick Chan set the direction of Men's figure skating in this most recent Olympic cycle refocused it on demonstrating great basics besides just having strong jumps. The article also mentioned that Chan additionally inadvertently set up his own undoing, by way of the very talented Yuzuru Hanyu who studied Chan's strengths and also worked on great basics + jumps.
Meanwhile, the writer points out that early genius Plushenko was capable of doing the same but that in his pragmatic quest for victories, he, along with Mishin, betrayed their true ideals of the sport ("jumps as extensions of glides") and "stripped" down his later performances. The writer admires the struggle and imperfection of striving for well-rounded excellence rather than a clean empty product, hence his appreciation of Chan and Hanyu despite their mistakes at the Olympics.
I thought the article had very interesting insights and makes me respect Mishin as a coach even more.
Patrick Chan is the first person to combine Quads with non-stop transitions (except going into the 3Axel...it must be said). That's great.
But it comes at the cost of sacrificing performance, choreography, and interpretation. Not to mention consistency.
End result: not worth it. Virtually nobody wants to watch his skating instead of the skating we've seen from Yagudin, Lambiel, or Browning. It's not as exciting. It's not as interesting. It's not as FUN.
Lambiel or Takahashi were not dominant enough to be consistent champions. They are usually considered to be artistically gifted, charismatic skaters who could, at their best, do difficult jumps, excellent spins (Lambiel), or excellent footwork (Takahashi), but not consistently. At Chan's best, he could (and sometimes did) combine the hardest yet most effortless-looking quads, nice 3Axels, breath-taking footwork, and good choreography (even if some can criticize his performance abilities.)I would understand giving Chan such an importamce if his world victories were undisputed. But they are not.
The writer forget about Lambiel, forget about Taka, forget too many things.
Umm, Plushenko stripped down his programs not just at the injury-riddled end of his career...he did it during the peak of his rivalry with Yagudin, as well. Just as the article said, he and Mishin saw that Yagudin was making a comeback before 2002 SLC after his struggles, and they apparently changed their strategy. It wasn't just the 6.0 judging system...I recall that Yagudin included some dramatic highlights in his programs that weren't jumps; in particular, I love his Gladiator FS where at one point he drops low and slides on the ice. From 2002-2006, Plushenko had quite hollow programs.For example let's see first how Chan will fare in the next 10 years if now is less than a stable skater. Then compare him with Plushenko. For now he should have compared Plushenko till he was 23 and not with the end of career of Plushenko, when too many injury let him to minimalise his programs.
Yes, Chan has used cleverly the point system, but was he so inovative? Was any of his transition, steps, spins something new with which he really pushed the sport?
So basically: neither Chan nor Takahashi/Lambiel were all that consistent, but for some reason this means that Lambiel and Takahashi's accomplishments should be discarded? Why are we comparing Chan at his best and Takahashi/Lambiel not at their best? It's not a relevant comparison. Also, was Chan dominant enough to be a consistent champion, or was he merely scored well enough to be a consistent champion? That's not the same thing, you know. BTW, I think someone on FSU actually compared Chan and Takahashi directly and concluded that Takahashi actually had more transitions while Chan had more difficulty. And Takahashi is a much better performer.Lambiel or Takahashi were not dominant enough to be consistent champions. They are usually considered to be artistically gifted, charismatic skaters who could, at their best, do difficult jumps, excellent spins (Lambiel), or excellent footwork (Takahashi), but not consistently. At Chan's best, he could (and sometimes did) combine the hardest yet most effortless-looking quads, nice 3Axels, breath-taking footwork, and good choreography (even if some can criticize his performance abilities.)
I think you guys are missing the point of the writer and what he means when he calls Patrick Chan a Prometheus.
It means that the way that Patrick Chan set the direction of Men's figure skating in this most recent Olympic cycle refocused it on demonstrating great basics besides just having strong jumps. The article also mentioned that Chan additionally inadvertently set up his own undoing, by way of the very talented Yuzuru Hanyu who studied Chan's strengths and also worked on great basics + jumps.
Meanwhile, the writer points out that early genius Plushenko was capable of doing the same but that in his pragmatic quest for victories, he, along with Mishin, betrayed their true ideals of the sport ("jumps as extensions of glides") and "stripped" down his later performances. The writer admires the struggle and imperfection of striving for well-rounded excellence rather than a clean empty product, hence his appreciation of Chan and Hanyu despite their mistakes at the Olympics.
I thought the article had very interesting insights and makes me respect Mishin as a coach even more.
Igor Poroshin
http://www.sports.ru/tribuna/blogs/bladerunner/574662.html
Yes, it's very sad that both guys fell down. But that's not at all the point. The point is that what these two guys do on the ice is beyond precedent, beyond comprehension. The point is that these boys are the warriors, the poets, the tightrope walkers of their art. They fall because they work without a safety net. The point is that the road yields to the ones who risk and fall, not the ones who crawl along to collect the next paycheck for their family. That only these bladerunners move our civilization forward. That Patrick Chan, even without a gold medal, became the Prometheus of figure skating. Undoubtedly, Tatyana Tarasova knows who Prometheus was.
Oh please, don't ruin my almost burst into tears mood how poeticThese are definitely the most poetic words said about any of warriors who have ever hit the ice with their... :yes: