1996 Worlds: Men "rejudged"

[drivingmissdaisy]

That is so unfortunate. You almost wonder if Plushenko or Yagudin hadn’t doubled jumps or made technical errors in that singular competition if that might have laid the groundwork for quads being worth way more.

I think the goal was for PCS and TES to have a similar ceiling (based on what the competitors were able to do at the time), much like 6.0 judging.

 

[gkelly]

I think the goal was for PCS and TES to have a similar ceiling (based on what the competitors were able to do at the time), much like 6.0 judging.

I believe it was. At the time, 3 quads, toe and Sal, was the upper limit of what men were doing and the factors were set in that context.

 

[4everchan]

I cant wait to do the 88 olympic one next. I'll prob finish it next week. Do you remember what event where Goebel came out on top when they tested the system was?

liz Manley for the win

 

[gkelly]

Do you remember what event where Goebel came out on top when they tested the system was?

2002 Olympics

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

I believe it was. At the time, 3 quads, toe and Sal, was the upper limit of what men were doing and the factors were set in that context.

Ah okay - so, along with Yagudin/Plushenko making tech errors that would have allowed Goebel to be 1st with the preliminary method of calculating scores, if Goebel had tanked and failed to do 3 quads then the quads might not have been devalued? That's a bit lame.

If anything they should have recognized that the best skater on the day if they far outperform everyone else, especially technically, should have a shot to win (especially if the faves with less tech content fail to skate their best).

Looking at the protocols, it is wild that only two judges gave Goebel 5.9's for technical in the FS and some even gave him 5.6 and 5.7; and some gave him 5.4's for artistry just so that they could hold him back.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Ah okay - so, along with Yagudin/Plushenko making tech errors that would have allowed Goebel to be 1st with the preliminary method of calculating scores, if Goebel had tanked and failed to do 3 quads then the quads might not have been devalued? That's a bit lame.

That wasn’t the only event that system was tested on. It was just notable because the placements with test version produced that unexpected outcome. The system has to work for women and pairs events too, so there was a lot of tinkering with values based on all the data. The goal is for well-balanced programs to score high; as good as Tim was on the jumps, everything else was lacking when compared to the top Russian men. I don’t recall anyone at the time, even the US commentators, disagreeing with the result.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

That wasn’t the only event that system was tested on. It was just notable because the placements with test version produced that unexpected outcome. The system has to work for women and pairs events too, so there was a lot of tinkering with values based on all the data. The goal is for well-balanced programs to score high; as good as Tim was on the jumps, everything else was lacking when compared to the top Russian men. I don’t recall anyone at the time, even the US commentators, disagreeing with the result.

I think it was that they were the de facto 1 and 2.

If you wan't to talk about "everything else was lacking" - not one single jumping pass of Plushenko's had a transition going into it or a transition coming out of it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3auc9cPwD-c

Goebel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQXiiknXAH8) did a spread eagle into a triple axel (super rare), hydroblading into a triple loop, beautiful spread eagles and highlights throughout like the walley and hops into his flying spin. Goebel not only had more transitions and edgework (like his outside-inside spread eagle), but also had well-centred spins with extra rotations and solid positions. The stepout of his triple axel was the only significant error - but even if he did it I highly doubt that would have convinced the judges to overtake Plushenko.

Plushenko had confidence, flair and way better projection and presence/charisma than Goebel, for sure.. but talking about the SKATING and program construction... he had no difficult or multidirectional turns, the spins had way fewer rotations and position changes than Goebel's spins, and very weak sit (sometimes almost upright) positions.... if we're talking about the skating skills, substance and content of his choreo there was a ridiculous amount of basic stroking into jumps... and so many two footed glides - not kidding I counted at least 7 time where he just glided along on two feet... and still took breaks to pose and preen.

Women's was the only gold the US cared about and they assumed Kwan would get it - they were just pleased at the surprise medal in men's (and Goebel was on nobody's radar to medal) that none of them really cared to suggest that he outskated Plushenko and outjumped Yagudin. Of course with the Russian pairs judging scandal right before, it would have been pretty bad optics to protest another Russian win (for Timothy Goebel of all people, who wasn't even the reigning US men's champion).

 

[yfan1]

I think it was that they were the de facto 1 and 2.

If you wan't to talk about "everything else was lacking" - not one single jumping pass of Plushenko's had a transition going into it or a transition coming out of it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3auc9cPwD-c

Goebel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQXiiknXAH8) did a spread eagle into a triple axel (super rare), hydroblading into a triple loop, beautiful spread eagles and highlights throughout like the walley and hops into his flying spin. Goebel not only had more transitions and edgework (like his outside-inside spread eagle), but also had well-centred spins with extra rotations and solid positions. The stepout of his triple axel was the only significant error - but even if he did it I highly doubt that would have convinced the judges to overtake Plushenko.

Plushenko had confidence, flair and way better projection and presence/charisma than Goebel, for sure.. but talking about the SKATING and program construction... he had no difficult or multidirectional turns, the spins had way fewer rotations and position changes than Goebel's spins, and very weak sit (sometimes almost upright) positions.... if we're talking about the skating skills, substance and content of his choreo there was a ridiculous amount of basic stroking into jumps... and so many two footed glides - not kidding I counted at least 7 time where he just glided along on two feet... and still took breaks to pose and preen.

Not to disagree with much of what you've written, because I 100% thought Goebel deserved silver here. But just to say, Goebel did have weaker skating skills than Plushenko. You can literally see from that video that his crossover quality is far lower, his glide is less powerful, and even the commentators say he's slower.

If we were to talk about CoP that was established after these Olympics (so the one that was used at the Olympics in 2006), I'd say Plushenko deserved skating skills and performance, but Goebel deserved the other three components. That and the tech base value would put him ahead of Plushenko.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Not to disagree with much of what you've written, because I 100% thought Goebel deserved silver here. But just to say, Goebel did have weaker skating skills than Plushenko. You can literally see from that video that his crossover quality is far lower, his glide is less powerful, and even the commentators say he's slower.

If we were to talk about CoP that was established after these Olympics (so the one that was used at the Olympics in 2006), I'd say Plushenko deserved skating skills and performance, but Goebel deserved the other three components. That and the tech base value would put him ahead of Plushenko.

Yeah I agree that Plushenko skated with better crossovers (he exhibited so many crossovers to prove that!) and had greater speed but I do think Goebel had deeper edges and a greater variety of difficult turns and things like walleys and transitional movements which also exhibit skating skills. The fact that Plushenko had so much two footed skating and two foot glides also puts Goebel ahead for me in that department. But Plushenko definitely had more power and presence, and Goebel lacked star quality and panache. Of course, one was going for sweet charming American in Paris and the other was going for strong confident matador (I’m pretty sure he killed a half dozen bulls with all those repeated sword thrusts!).

 

[yfan1]

Of course, one was going for sweet charming American in Paris and the other was going for strong confident matador (I’m pretty sure he killed a half dozen bulls with all those repeated sword thrusts!).

Well that's the problem with skating's choreography/performance/interpretation scores. Anyone can sass it up to Carmen. It takes far more to skate to Lyra Angelica. I'm not sure how this is supposed to be taken into account in the scores.

 

[gkelly]

Well that's the problem with skating's choreography/performance/interpretation scores. Anyone can sass it up to Carmen. It takes far more to skate to Lyra Angelica. I'm not sure how this is supposed to be taken into account in the scores.

I'm not so sure "anyone" can sass it up to Carmen. Some skaters (though not many elite medal contenders) are too shy or too focused on the technical side of what they're doing to project much sass. Or too insecure on their blades to risk strong sharp movements.

The early-IJS program component guidelines gave more detail about what judges were supposed to look for in each of the then-five components:

Performance/Execution
• Physical, emotion, and intellectual involvement
• Carriage
• Style and individuality/personality
• Clarity of movement
• Variety and contrast
• Projection • Unison and “oneness’ (Pair Skating and Ice Dancing)
• Balance in performance (Pair skating and Ice Dancing)
• Spatial awareness between partners – management of the distance between partners and management of changes of hold (Pair skating and Ice Dancing

Choreography/Composition
• Purpose (idea, concept, vision)
• Proportion (equal weight of parts)
• Unity (purposeful threading)
• Utilization of personal and public space
• Pattern and ice coverage
• Phrasing and form (movements and parts structured to match the phrasing of the music)
• Originality of purpose, movement and design
• Shared responsibility of achieving purpose (Pair Skating and Ice Dancing)

Interpretation/Timing
• Effortless movement in time to the music (timing)
• Expression of the music’s style, character and rhythm
• Use of finesse to reflect the nuances of the music
• Relationship between the partners reflecting the character of the music (Pair Skating and Ice Dancing)
• Appropriateness of music (Original Dance and Free Dance)
• Skating primarily to the rhythmic beat (Free Dance)

Assuming a skater has some basic competence at smooth gliding on simple edges, I think it would be very easy to skate more or less in accordance with smooth lyrical music like Lyra Angelica. Expressing some nuances with arm movements would be pretty easy. Bringing in whole body expression, and especially using soft variations of knee bend and edge depth to highlight nuances, while also executing steps and turns etc. beyond simple edges, would require a lot more skill.

Meanwhile, there are nuances to be found in Carmen, and more opportunities for variety and contrast especially if the program includes excerpts from different parts of the opera.

I can easily imagine weak, competent, and exceptional performances to both kinds of music.

 

[yfan1]

I'm not so sure "anyone" can sass it up to Carmen. Some skaters (though not many elite medal contenders) are too shy or too focused on the technical side of what they're doing to project much sass. Or too insecure on their blades to risk strong sharp movements.

I think if you put two similar skilled skaters together and gave them the option to choose between Carmen versus Lyra Angelica (or some other piece), they'd go the easy route, because it's just far easier to produce that sort of performance, than convincingly portray something like introspection.

Assuming a skater has some basic competence at smooth gliding on simple edges, I think it would be very easy to skate more or less in accordance with smooth lyrical music like Lyra Angelica. Expressing some nuances with arm movements would be pretty easy. Bringing in whole body expression, and especially using soft variations of knee bend and edge depth to highlight nuances, while also executing steps and turns etc. beyond simple edges, would require a lot more skill.

Meanwhile, there are nuances to be found in Carmen, and more opportunities for variety and contrast especially if the program includes excerpts from different parts of the opera.

I think that when things like jumps, speed on spins, flexible positions in spins, speed across the ice, "spectacular" transitions (split jumps, leaps) are expected, then it's far easier to integrate them into choreography with something like Carmen, or at least the distilled "sassy" Carmens we get in figure skating (the original Opera, of course, tends to more complex). A very skilled skater might be able to do all that and still make it look introspective, but it's easier to jump to the bombast of music like Carmen when doing all that. Also happens to be more forgiving of mistakes when it comes to overall impression.

It's just easier to cook up a simplistic interpretation of Carmen, than Lyra Angelica.

 

[gkelly]

I think if you put two similar skilled skaters together and gave them the option to choose between Carmen versus Lyra Angelica (or some other piece), they'd go the easy route, because it's just far easier to produce that sort of performance, than convincingly portray something like introspection.

For me, the easy route would be the slow and introspective.

I think it really depends a lot on the skater's personality as well as their skill set.

They're being judged on how well their movement matches the music, more than on their emotional depth. Although of course that is also rewarded if evident.


I've never skated to either of those pieces, but I have done these and I know which one felt more natural to me, was more successful competitively, and allowed me to better showcase my skating skills:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GF_xSWzpcRY&t=35m10s

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

What I think is really difficult is actually interpreting syncopated music accurately. Ice dancers need to be good at that.

It's just easier to cook up a simplistic interpretation of Carmen, than Lyra Angelica.

Yes, probably. It's also possible to do a simplistic interpretation of Lyra Angelica, but it would probably fall flat.
Which is probably why lower level skaters have not often attempted it.

But for the Kwan fans among them, East of Eden has been fairly popular.

However, judges need to focus on what the skater actually does and not overreward a simplistic performance to music that does all the "variety and contrast" for the skater instead of the skater actually showing it themselves in how they move.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

I think if you put two similar skilled skaters together and gave them the option to choose between Carmen versus Lyra Angelica (or some other piece), they'd go the easy route, because it's just far easier to produce that sort of performance, than convincingly portray something like introspection.


I think that when things like jumps, speed on spins, flexible positions in spins, speed across the ice, "spectacular" transitions (split jumps, leaps) are expected, then it's far easier to integrate them into choreography with something like Carmen, or at least the distilled "sassy" Carmens we get in figure skating (the original Opera, of course, tends to more complex). A very skilled skater might be able to do all that and still make it look introspective, but it's easier to jump to the bombast of music like Carmen when doing all that. Also happens to be more forgiving of mistakes when it comes to overall impression.

It's just easier to cook up a simplistic interpretation of Carmen, than Lyra Angelica.

This exactly! Carmen was actually one of my very first free programs when I skated as a juvenile skater (I distinctly remember my coach giving me 3 cuts of music to choose from: Indiana Jones, Last Starfighter from Top Gun, and Carmen, and I chose Carmen, lol). It's well known, it's easy/accessible, and it lends itself to aggressive power skating and staccato movements that really don't require you to have developed a ton of refinement in your skating... you can be a little wild with it - you don't need great posture or carriage - if anything a bit of stiffness/hunch lends itself to the masculine matador character (for a male skater, at least). You don't really need edges or difficult turns, just need flourishes, histrionics, and dramatic flashiness and selling an attitude. Something like Lyra Angelica or a Chopin or Rachmaninoff or anything more lyrical/classical that requires nuance or a greater understanding of musicality is immensely harder and requires much more maturity and sophistication which is a lot harder to attain and takes years. There's a reason there's a million Carmens and so few Lyra Angelicas.

 

[yfan1]

It's well known, it's easy/accessible, and it lends itself to aggressive power skating

Right. If you're improving your crossovers, then a good way to show you've learned them well enough is by skating to bombastic music, because you can put many of them for a simplistic piece of choreography. The speed will showcase itself, and it will work decently as interpretation.