Thanks for voicing that. I would have never thought the arch was too much, but I 'spose that is why I "doubted" it, not said "no one could" disagree. Maybe others feel the same way??? Maybe an example of how arched you think it should be and how much it needs to be to be considered an Ina Bauer would be nice to share.
Yes. Shizu's Ina Bauer is beyond criticism.That's beautiful but it's as if it's a different move.
This is something that makes me think Freudian. But again JMO. "Potty talk" as I have heard it called before.:agree: I just see a display of balance, control and use of the forward outside edge in a curve - preferable with no wobble. But JMO.
I see there are different views, that is OK with me to hear one take, so I figure it should be OK to hear a different POV. Maybe not?
I think Shizuka's arch is too much as well. Here is a good pic (IMO) of an Ina Bauer. I can take a little more arch, but not much.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v54/felicia__nicole/USnats2003Kwan4E.jpg
Problem is most fans and some judges think extreme flexibility (read contortionism) is the most important thing in figure skating. In fact I daresay that they think it is more important than edging and flow.I think Shizuka's arch is too much as well. Here is a good pic (IMO) of an Ina Bauer. I can take a little more arch, but not much.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v54/felicia__nicole/USnats2003Kwan4E.jpg
SpunSilver: OK-I think then it was Nagasu that had the fizzled out, not fully stretched I-spin! At least, that's what I thought of it. There were a few attempts at an side catch/I-spin, and IMO, only Bebe's was imressive.
no way, Nagasu had a beatiful I-spin! you are confused with someone else.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfLmJcKJdLA