Exactly. It's basic cross over and cross over and cross over. There is no choreography. Choreographer just told them to skate around, do a few hops and win the Gold. It's the most blatant fixed result in recent memory. Even much more egregious than Sotnikova vs. Kim and Kostner because at least she had to deliver something.
Analyzing G/G and M/D Lillehammer programs
- Thread starter andromache
- Start date
Exactly. It's basic cross over and cross over and cross over. There is no choreography. Choreographer just told them to skate around, do a few hops and win the Gold. It's the most blatant fixed result in recent memory. Even much more egregious than Sotnikova vs. Kim and Kostner because at least she had to deliver something.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Country
-
Don't use a straw-man argument please. This is pairs skating, synchronization of jumps is important, and there were more than 1Loops in that combo. I absolutely love G/G's running jump combo, that's exactly the kind of fluid movement which has been lost in pairs skating and it is not easy to do.
So is synchronization of sbs spins for pairs skating. Oops.
Straw-man argument would be having a 4 jumps combo and add up all the jumps as if they are real elements in term of today value and then declare it's technically superior.
Might as well add up Shizuka 37 triple and double loops and declare it the most difficult jump combo ever because it's worth 100 points or whatever.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Country
-
No it wouldn't be, since that's actually how people looked at it back then. You had commentators saying they deserved 6.0 for technical merit if they skated perfectly because of the difficulty and quality of these moves.
Both teams were amazing that night. Yes, Sergey did single a planned jump and today that would have cost them points, although it was curious to hear Scott Hamilton say "that won't cost him much at all" back then. It must have been a difficult decision that night for the judges. That final flight was probably the best Olympic pairs final I've ever seen.
The problem is it wasn't a difficult decision for the judges at all. Not even close.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
I think now that we've had ten full seasons of IJS and all of its incarnations, and before that a total change in expectations and values in figure skating, including pairs, under 6.0, it's hard for us to get our mindset back into what was valued and awarded back in 1994. Also, I bet the empty choreography in G/G's "Moonlight Sonata" wasn't seen as empty at the time because there was choreography, just not a lot of actual transitions or weaving elements together with transitions. Now people are conditioned to think a lot of transitions = good choreography even if that may not necessarily be the case, though does show attempts at difficulty. I bet the simpler moves done with excellent skill and textbook unison was considered a difficult feature on its own. Unison and that classic two skate as one and with great execution, power, and speed is something that is extremely difficult to master, but something that G/G did master while M/D were behind in that aspect in comparison. I know people think Moskvina and M/D rejected that aesthetic and decided to go in a totally different direction, which is great as it gave us great programs, but I can see why some would think that was just a way to hide their weakness in pairs basics.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2006
Huh? Oh, Sasquatch... please. Got me scared for a second, I wasn't saying anything derogatory about anyone's looks. Grow up.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2006
I always wondered what the Russian sportscasters thought. All we got here was Scottie yelping like an obedient puppy dog in praise of G/G. The whole passion versus perfection tripe. Except M/D brought PASSION and G/G were no where close to perfection that night. It was annoying, Scottie singing G/G's praises and barely able to say anything remotely positive about M/D. "Oh look! Sergei just messed up the sbs spin, but look how he was able to eventually get back into synch. It shows how wonderful they are!!!" *eyeroll* And so on. Any Russians out there who can share your thoughts and thoughts of other Russians who they felt should have won????
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
- Country
-
if you knew anything about Brasseur and Eisler, you would probably understand where I am coming from. Thankfully for them, there were no social media in their era... A lot of people criticized him for his looks... calling them beauty and the beast or other things.... in a derogatory way as he were very big compared to her, a fragile, delicate skater, and so on and didn't have the elegance of other male skaters. It took a lot of work on their part to get rid of that stigma and reach for the top. I am not sure why you think a Sasquatch isn't a bad analogy.... and if you don't find it derogatory, you could at least admit it wasn't necessary. These athletes, whether you like it or not were world champions and olympic medallists in an era where Russian pairs won everything. Their power, their lifts, their lateral twist created excitement for the sport in other countries, opened doors to other styles of pair skating. A little respect goes a long way, especially when as you said, one "doesn't get a skater" ....
Well, I was there, & watched all the practices. I thought that M & D should have won the FS over G&G on that night. However, since I watched all the practices as did many of the judges, M&D had difficult practices, missing jumps or falling out of a lift while G&G were almost perfect in every practice - except on that final. Of course, G&G were a wonderful pair. He was big & strong, she was tiny, so lifts were easy for them. While Dmitriev was also big and strong, Mishkutenok was more of average weight, height, (her body style & weight for a pair skater was always an issue) making lifts much more difficult for them. I was constantly amazed at Dmitriev's strength during the lifts they actually accomplished. When it came to passion, Dmitriev owned it that night and the standing ovation was well deserved. So were the scores a result of what the teams performed that night or a total of all their performances in Lillehammer including practices? Who knows? But at the press conference it was Eisler who did the most complaining over the scores.
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2015
I applaud you for your measured and respectful reply. I personally am quite offended and saddened by the comparison. I feel equally so when I see often see a couple of female tennis stars being referred to as apes.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
Yeah, there's enough material about him where you don't even have to delve into his physical appearance.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2006
Well, maybe I could have said Eisler was this Hulk-like figure, would that have been better? Fact of the matter, is that I was strongly impressed with Lloyd's skating skills. He was rock solid, nice extension, had a feel for movement. I would end up concentrating more on him during their performances. I didn't understand why he couldn't see why their scores were lower than the Russians. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and he had to have known Brasseur was just not up to his level. She was just so awkward and it was a miracle if she could hold on to a two footed awkward throw jump, and if she wasn't sliding across the ice, people would applaud out of relief. Not champion material. IMHO.
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2015
- Country
-
I don't think Hulk-like makes it better. Strong, athletic, or something like unusually strong for a skater, etc would be appropriate... Nowadays, many skaters are bigger... nobody associates them with "beasts" so why him ?
Regarding Isabelle's skating. They were slow. I will easily give you that. However, for having watched them a lot during those years at Nationals, in exhibitions etc, she tended to skate much better when it wasn't big events. She struggled with nerves. She overcame that in 1993 WC ... they took another approach with their LP, more lyrical for her to settle down her nerves. Commentators talked a lot about it on Canadian TV. If all skaters with stage fright managed to deliver just as well as she did in 1993 and even in the LP in 1994, we would be in for a treat...
I respect your opinion that you don't see them as Champion material... but well, for many they are true champions, not only for winning the title, a rare feat for North American pairs, but also for overcoming the beast stigma he was carrying and her, for managing her nerves. True examples of what is needed to achieve your dreams.
Finally, about whining... i find it very hypocritical to assign it to Lloyd Eisler only. MANY amateur skaters complained when the rules were changed and suddenly allowed pros into competitions again. Careers were destroyed for many. For instance, the 2nd and 3rd Russian pairs stayed home to leave room for the pros.... the 1st Russian pair was short of the podium despite skating well. I recall hearing complaints by many skaters from many disciplines and countries. Lloyd got more exposure because he was world champion and actually had a shot at the gold, if the pros had not been reinstated.... Everyone who has played a game to get its rules changed suddenly when they were ahead of the pack to find themselves behind would understand this.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
I could never really gather much sympathy for the then-current amateur medalists or those who had higher placements at previous international competitions when they complained about the fact that pros were reinstated for the 1994 Olympics and thus their competition got more difficult. They already received sort of a gift by having to only wait two years for the next Olympics as opposed to four years. Maybe one could argue that they had to wait six years for the next viable Olympics without established pros, but oh well. That's competition. Not every pro that reinstated was successful.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2014
- Country
-
And Dmitriev's wild abandonment in his skating, which created something dynamic with Natalia's passion and energy.
When I re-watched both SPs and LPs again, I had the same reaction as I did in 1994. Despite being a huge G&G fan, I thought M/D skated better and also communicated better to the audience the essence of their music. Skating values charisma and movement as well as technique. Drama and interpretation are part of the equation.
In regard to G&G's performance, I felt they didn't connect with the audience, or their music as well as in 1988 olympics (maybe because they were more focused on each other?) I heard a clip of Jayne Torvill when she said that for 1984 Bolero, at the end she couldn't remember being on the ice ... and, she said, that's always how it is when you're at your best and in the moment. (paraphrasing, but that is the jist). Gordeeva said in her book that after their 1988 Calgary performance, she couldn't remember it. She regretted that and made sure that 1994 was different in that respect.
I think in 1988, G&G's in the moment performance, along with their perfect, classical pairs' technique, together just created something so memorable for the audience. However many words I read comparing G/G to M/D technique in 1994 ... and everyone has done a great job in this thread elucidating that subject ... for me it comes down to more than technique. And that's why I prefer Natalia and Artur's 1994 Olympic skate. Emotional resonance with powerful music; and they absolutely stood up to the power of that music.
When really good technique disappears into the program, magic happens.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2014
No one can deny G&G's perfection. Their technique was text book = the lifts, the speed, the lines and unison - nothing out of place. However all that became predictable, it did not cause the audience to hold their breath, the way M&D did - or at least for me. G&G's 1994 Moonlight Sonata was also "text book", every move was calculated and well executed, they did not lose themselves in the music whereas M&D totally immersed themselves in the program from start to finish, leaving the audience wanting more and getting on their feet. However G&G had countless wonderful pro programs though, they were more passionate and allowed themselves to let go when they didn't have to worry too much about the scores. But on that night in Lillehammer, M&D skated as if they had nothing to lose and G&G skated with much to lose - they didn't - they won the competition but M&D won the audience - and our hearts.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
I'm starting to think G/G are underrated, which I never thought would ever happen.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2014
- Country
-
LOL. I don't think they are, or ever will be. It's just the context of this thread and that particular competition. I'm finding it really interesting that at least half the people who responded felt the same way I did. I agree with nguyhm that G&G did countless professional programs where they expressed their passion for skating and really let themselves be free.
Similar threads
