Best female skater never to have won a world title ?

[pangtongfan]

I'd say Shizuka is mentally much better than Sasha.

Even that is very hard to say considering Shizuka was prone to frequent meltdowns and was much more inconsistent than Sasha in fact. Sasha in her 4-5 year prime was good at limiting mistakes to 1 or 2 per competition, but was usually 1 mistake too many. Shizuka crashed and burned often, but was somehow good at rising to the occasion a couple times on the big day when the opportunity presented itself.

 

[gmyers]

Arakawa was a terrible doubler of jumps. She would double jumps so many times. I think even she planned a double or doubled in her Olympic free skate. She was capable of big 3/3's but was a big doubler.

 

[pangtongfan]

Check the post above yours, his name is John Curry.

Still no comparision. After a couple of early years where he was naturally behind all the veterans of the 71-72 quad who were ending their career, he finished top 5 at every Worlds and Olympics in the 73-76 quad, except for one (where he probably bombed figures). He qualified for every Worlds and Olympics after his first appearance, and minus that one result his ranking rose every year. He medaled at Worlds the year before his Olympic and World wins, and won Europeans the year of his Olympic and World triumphs.

If that is the best example of an inconsistent career of a World and Olympic winner there is, it only further reinforces there was never a career of a World and Olympic Champion (someone who won both titles) anywhere near as unusual as Shizuka's.

 

[jcoates]

Still no comparision. After a couple of early years where he was naturally behind all the veterans of the 71-72 quad who were ending their career, he finished top 5 at every Worlds and Olympics in the 73-76 quad, except for one (where he probably bombed figures). He qualified for every Worlds and Olympics after his first appearance, and minus that one result his ranking rose every year. He medaled at Worlds the year before his Olympic and World wins, and won Europeans the year of his Olympic and World triumphs.

If that is the best example of an inconsistent career of a World and Olympic winner there is, it only further reinforces there was never a career of a World and Olympic Champion (someone who won both titles) anywhere near as unusual as Shizuka's.

Wrong. Figures were Cranston's career long weakness, not Curry. Figures were Curry's strongest section from 72-75 (6th, 4th, 4th, 2nd). It was only during the 76 season that his placement in free skating exceeded his compulsory placement. He routinely placed in the top four in figures from 74-76. He was coached by Carlo Fassi after all, the master of teaching figures. He tended to lose ground during his SP and LP due to weaker jump content or silly errors in part because he jumped and spun in different directions. He went to seek help from Gus Lussi who stripped down his technique and helped him rebuild and refine it. It took a couple of years, but the results speak for themselves.

I listed Curry because he is the prime example, certainly not the only one. If you're going to insist of citing specific placements like 7th or 10th, then this conversation is not worth having. If you are willing to entertain the quality of performance, then it's worth continuing. That's what I'm focusing on. Yamaguchi routinely underperformed for years in singles due to her pairs career. Like Shizuka, she only won a handful of big events and had a poor fall Olympic season. Like Shizuka, she was not the favorite coming in to Albertville, despite her credentials and previous wins over her rivals. They made errors. She made fewer of them. She won. Whether she finished top five or six in her previous Worlds matters less than the fact that she was underperforming for a time but finally maximized her potential in the end, something Sasha can never say. Boitano also had an up and down career. His 86 WC was a surprise and a level he could not sustain the next season. He was not even considered a complete skater until his 88 season. He was thought of as only a jumping robot until then. Outside of nationals, he had only a handful of big event wins. In fact that entire Olympic cycle was a bit of a dogfight among five to six guys who were constantly jockeying for position. There was no consistent winner until the end. That was my original point. Periods of deep dominance are actually much rarer than people imagine. Surprise winners are to be expected on occasion, as are late bloomers. Skaters who win event after event, year after year (outside of ice dance) are actually the anomalies.

In fact, given the variation of events over time it's unfair to compare Shizuka's lack of wins at events like GPF and 4CC against skaters who never had a chance to enter them.

Also, given the number of OGMs who never won a world title, the fact the Shizuka managed the feat actually legitimizes her further. (Cousins, Kulik, Urmanov, Kazakova (with Dmitriev), Schneldorfer, Schwartz)

 

[Tonichelle]

So the number of competitions participated in or medals won by a skater during a season matters toward their greatness or the value of their WC or OGM? So we can discount G&G's 1989 WC since they only skated one competition. Same with Kwan's 03 title, since she only skated in the same number of events as champions from the 50's and 60's that season. Same for Grishuk/Platov at 95 Worlds (one event) and 97 Worlds (two events). Come on.

I really get tired of champions in any sport being dismissed or diminished simply because they happened to compete before the recent past. It's insulting to them and the tremendous hard work they put into their careers. So what if Button, or Fleming, or Heiss, or the Protopovs only skated 3 or 4 competitions in a season. That actually should make their consistency and dominance that much more remarkable. They had less margin for error. In the case of the singles skaters, they had one less free program to skate to prove themselves. Yes they had figures to set themselves up, but they could still lose with a poor free skate. They were all strong at both.

The vast majority of OGMs did not win while competing against competitors at the top of their games. Everyone, even the winners usually makes mistakes in the Olympic performances. Yamaguchi, Witt-both times, Hamill, Fleming, Schuba, Baiul, Hughes, and Arakawa all won over fields that made notable errors. Some of them even screwed up themselves. That does not delegitimize their wins in the slightest. Same for the men, ice dancers and especially the pairs.

Plenty of others have have shaky seasons leading up to winning suffering significant losses (Yamaguchi, Lipinski, Yagudin lost Nationals, Urmanov, Petrenko, Baiul, Lysacek, Virtue and Moir.)

As for Shizuka's previous Worlds finishes, I stand by my previous point. It's not how you start, but how you finish. Sasha is the most glaring example of that. Shizuka was clearly one of those athletes who needs more time to mature and grow into their talents. Not everyone is going to be a teen phenom and be dominant from the start or have a legendary career with tremendous longevity and consistency. Most champions have a very narrow window during which they peak which is bookended by periods of mediocre to poor results, followed by either decline or retirement. John Curry is the prime example of this. 14th, 9th, 4th, 7th, 3rd and 1st in consecutive years at Worlds. Cranston was similarly up and down (13th, 11th, 5th, 5th, 3rd, 4th, 4th). No one calls their careers disappointments, but in reality, they each had two truly standout seasons internationally. Could they have done more? Of course, but what they did do, is something every skater dreams of. The rest was simply part of the journey to get there. I say Shizuka would not have achieved what she did without having all the setbacks she endured. BTW, I was at 2003 Worlds and everyone in my section thought she was undermarked. She had out attention from the warmup with the 3-3-3 combos she was practicing right below us. She was wonderful then and you could see the potential. It just took time for it so sink in with the judges. Sometimes the placement matters less that the effort or the relative competition (03 was a very well skated event).

 

[mousepotato]

So the number of competitions participated in or medals won by a skater during a season matters toward their greatness or the value of their WC or OGM?

Of course not, but certainly in a career. If the Olympic gold medal or World gold medal is all they ever won in a pretty mediocre career, they are certainly not regarded as the best skaters to ever grace the ice.

So we can discount G&G's 1989 WC since they only skated one competition.

Was that the first World gold they had won? No, it wasn’t they won many golds and silvers prior to that. They didn’t go from 22nd to 8th to 1st than back to 9th.

A career like Shizuka's is enormously rare. She had only two top 7 finishes at Worlds and Olympics, and both were Golds. She qualified directly for the Grand Prix final only once her whole career (the other time she skated as an alternate). From age 17 to 20 she failed to qualify for 5 straight World and Olympic events, and most presumed her career was over. She was beaten out for spots by the likes of Yoshie Onda who usually went on to place somewhere from 11th to 20th. The year before winning Worlds she placed 8th at Worlds, just between Elena Liashenko and Jennifer Robinson (both whom would be out of the top 10 by next year when she won Worlds). The year after winning Worlds and before winning Gold at the Olympics she took 9th place at Worlds, and initially announced she was retiring. The year of winning her Olympic Gold she failed to qualify for the Grand Prix final with 3rd place finishes at both her Grand Prix assignments.

It doesnt mean she isnt a great skater but lets be real here. This is not a typical Olympic and World Champion career, in fact it is the only one ever seen of such nature in the history of figure skating probably.

Check the post above yours, his name is John Curry.

pangtongfan said her career was enormously rare and not typical and it wasn't compared to other skaters who had made it to the top of the podium more often.

Arakawa was a terrible doubler of jumps. She would double jumps so many times. I think even she planned a double or doubled in her Olympic free skate. She was capable of big 3/3's but was a big doubler.

She did double at the Olympics; both her triple-triple combinations were changed to a 3Lz+2Lo and 3S+2T.

Like I said before, coming off of 2 bronze grand prix medals, not making the GPF, a bronze at nationals, 3rd place after the short; who thought she was the favorite for gold? She performed well, even with doubling her jumps but she really wasn’t the gold medal favorite at the Olympics or Worlds because she was rarely a gold medal skater.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Of course not, but certainly in a career. If the Olympic gold medal or World gold medal is all they ever won in a pretty mediocre career, they are certainly not regarded as the best skaters to ever grace the ice.

mousepotato, would you argue that Janet Lynn, then, is in fact not one of the greatest skaters ever to grace the ice?

 

[FlattFan]

Of course not, but certainly in a career. If the Olympic gold medal or World gold medal is all they ever won in a pretty mediocre career, they are certainly not regarded as the best skaters to ever grace the ice.

Like I said before, coming off of 2 bronze grand prix medals, not making the GPF, a bronze at nationals, 3rd place after the short; who thought she was the favorite for gold? She performed well, even with doubling her jumps but she really wasn’t the gold medal favorite at the Olympics or Worlds because she was rarely a gold medal skater.

Shizuka had two high pressure events where she held it together. TWO more than Sasha in her entire competitive career. If Shizuka is mediocre, what is Sasha? a Jewish Bebe Liang?
Shizuka never got the support from her fed. She was behind a bunch of people for no reason. But that's not the story of her skating career, is it?
Even before the SP, she was already the favorite to win the gold medal. The other two were nervous and shaky, and there she was, hitting triple lutz triple loop during practice sessions. Fumie was the national champion, but Scott was like, "watch out for Shizuka, strongest of the three sent by Japan"
If anyone's seen her practice leading up to the SP and LP, no one in their right mind would bet against her winning the gold. She was the favorite.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Separately, I think Arakawa's achievement is besmirched not so much for the journeyman aspect, but the abrupt shift from journeyman to gold medalist. She went to the Nagano games and subsequent Worlds, but after that, was absent from four world championships. Out of sight, out of mind and all that. She came back strong then improved even more.

It's hard for me to understand people dismissing her mental fortitude. Remember how Midori Ito had to apologize to Japan for not winning gold, or Mao Asada's reaction in Vancouver? The pressue these girls are under is insane. That she was able to withstand that at a key moment [also recalling that Japan, at the point of Arakawa's skate, hadn't won a single medal either (part of the reason they took out one of the 3-3's was to not disappoint the nation and completely miss the podium - she didn't do the other because her landing wasn't strong enough)] is impressive. This is what ice skating international had to say

"Only three ladies look ready to rumble. I stick with my prediction of yesterday, though I have to say, Arakawa has an unmistakable I-am-here-to-win attitude. Irina looks confident, while Sasha remains inscrutable.

" (this is before the short program).

"In practice she worked hard, and exuded a confidence lacking in many of the other ladies. She "won" all three practices I saw at Palavela, and an elite coach (who would probably prefer not to be named) said the same thing. Cohen on the other hand missed several practices and did not seem to really press herself in the ones where I saw her. Perhaps she had the need to conserve her leg, which is not 100%, and so I guess she deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Slutskaya appeared to me in practice to display an almost fool hearty confidence. I did not see her do one complete one through; not even to mark her program with all steps and connecting moves. Mostly she listened to her music, wandered around the ice, and worked a few elements individually.

Of all three ladies Arakawa presented herself as the one with her head screwed on the tightest, working the hardest without a hint of doubt showing. "

(this is after the free skate)

I don't see how you can land insane 3-3-3s in practice, convince watchers of your determination to win gold as well as looking like there is no doubt in your mind, win all the practices, and then go out and actually win gold without amazing mental fortitude.

Was she THE favourite? Maybe not. But she was certainly mentioned as a medal candidate (Sports Illustrated thought she would come in third).

 

[miki88]

Separately, I think Arakawa's achievement is besmirched not so much for the journeyman aspect, but the abrupt shift from journeyman to gold medalist. She went to the Nagano games and subsequent Worlds, but after that, was absent from four world championships. Out of sight, out of mind and all that. She came back strong then improved even more.

It's hard for me to understand people dismissing her mental fortitude. Remember how Midori Ito had to apologize to Japan for not winning gold, or Mao Asada's reaction in Vancouver? The pressue these girls are under is insane. That she was able to withstand that at a key moment [also recalling that Japan, at the point of Arakawa's skate, hadn't won a single medal either (part of the reason they took out one of the 3-3's was to not disappoint the nation and completely miss the podium - she didn't do the other because her landing wasn't strong enough)] is impressive. This is what ice skating international had to say
" (this is before the short program).

But was Shizuka ever as much pressure from her country as Midori or Mao? I felt Miki was under more pressure at Turin from her federation than Shizuka. And she didn't handle it very well.

 

[ImaginaryPogue]

Oh, probably not. Until after the short program, where a medal was on the line.

 

[Olympia]

This thread is getting more exciting by the post.

Several reasons for Curry not to be thought of as an exact parallel to Shizuka, although they both share the trait of being late bloomers:
1. His position in skating is important, in fact crucial. He's one of the founders of the modern style of men's skating, which melds athleticism to musicality. Without Curry, I don't think we'd have had Boitano, for example. Shizuka is the first Japanese skater to win gold, true, but she's not a founder of a new kind of skating the way Curry is.
2. While Shizuka was very good, she won partly because the favorites, Sasha and Irina, stumbled a bit. She was the dark horse of the group. by contrast, Curry was the favorite, in the West at least, and he didn't really have any significant competition in Innsbruck. He ruled the ice like a king both for the short program and the long.

Okay, back to Shizuka. I agree that she has a unique career profile. Her skills remained with her so that at 24, she was still doing things that other skaters had already given up on. She must be incredibly strong and well conditioned. You couldn't have looked at her at, say, eighteen and say, "This girl is going places." Yet she won the Big Two. And though she left competitive skating soon afterward, she has continued to impress in pro skating.

 

[jenaj]

She did double at the Olympics; both her triple-triple combinations were changed to a 3Lz+2Lo and 3S+2T.

Like I said before, coming off of 2 bronze grand prix medals, not making the GPF, a bronze at nationals, 3rd place after the

She doubled her planned triple loop at the 2006 Olympics. She ended up with five triples.

 

[burntBREAD]

I don't understand how Shizuka could've done two triple-triple combinations without breaking the Zayak rule, anyways. I tend to believe her 3Lz-2Lo was planned because in practice videos she was doing that first combination with a 2Lo anyways.

If she did two triple triples her layout would be:
3Lz-3T (or 3Lo)
3S-3T
3F
3Lo
3Lz (Zayak rule if first combo was 3Lz-3Lo)
3S-2T-2Lo (Zayak rule if first combo was 3Lz-3T)
2A

I honestly believe she was only planning the 3S-3T, because that solo 3Lz and the three jump combo with the 3S were always going to be there.

 

[jcoates]

Remember that heading into Turin, ladies skating in general was being heavily criticized because Mao had hit the scene, won the GPF and was being lauded by sports writers everywhere as the true favorite and likely OGM but for a quirky age rule that was screwing her over. The Japanese women in particular were all being roundly dismissed as not even the best in their own country and almost unworthy of being there. They all had a lot to prove and were under tremendous pressure as IP pointed out. Under those circumstances and the greater Japanese team's dismal failure up to that point, I'd say that pressure was equivalent to Midori or Mao. It was personal, situational and national pressure all roled into one. Further, since Shizuka had tasted both success and miserable disappointment, she had to overcome doubts about her ability to hold it together. That takes a heck of a lot of strength and determination in my book.

Olympia I have to disagree with you a bit on Curry and how he was perceived. Yes, he won Euros heading in, which elevated his status as one of the favorites, but he was not the exclusive favorite. He still had a reputation for cracking under pressure. Cranston was also favored at the outset to pull off a Robin Cousins style win (just ok in figures and spectacular in free skating) and so was Kovalev based on his steadiness at everything. Volkov was also in them mix as was Hoffman. On paper there were so many possibilities despite Curry's apparent maturation.

Check out Otto Jelinek expressing such doubts during the first minute or so of Curry's program.
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMjU0NzEwNDU2.html (at about the 3 min mark)

Despite working mightily to improve his figures, Toller was working from behind in the LP. Still there was a chance. He's won the SP to Curry's second. In fact in 75 Worlds, Curry finished in the exact same places in the CF and SP (2nd, 2nd) only to place 5th in the LP and finish 3rd overall. So there was the possibility for Curry to screw up. John skated early and perfectly however and essentially shut the door. But going in, based on past seasons, a win was not guaranteed, especially tow competitions in a row.

ETA: Burnt Bread, she always practiced a variety of combinations and was know to make program adjustments depending on what she landed. Ito did the same. Both were known for practicing multiple 3-3 combos and even listing them on element sheets. They did not always do them however. She could easily have taken out a jump combo or pass if warranted.

 

[FlattFan]

I don't understand how Shizuka could've done two triple-triple combinations without breaking the Zayak rule, anyways. I tend to believe her 3Lz-2Lo was planned because in practice videos she was doing that first combination with a 2Lo anyways.

If she did two triple triples her layout would be:
3Lz-3T (or 3Lo)
3S-3T
3F
3Lo
3Lz (Zayak rule if first combo was 3Lz-3Lo)
3S-2T-2Lo (Zayak rule if first combo was 3Lz-3T)
2A

I honestly believe she was only planning the 3S-3T, because that solo 3Lz and the three jump combo with the 3S were always going to be there.

I remember the commentators said she was planning a triple lutz triple loop combo.
Anyway, this was her layout
3Lz-2Lo
3S-2T
3F
2A
3Lz
2Lo
3S-2T-2Lo

She could do this layout and wouldn't violate any rule.
3Lz-3Lo
3S-3T
3F
2A
3Lz
2A
3S-2T-2Lo

 

[Olympia]

Jcoates, I can't remember exactly (that was my first Olympics) how heavily favored Curry was compared to Cranston. I just remember thinking how lucky we were to have two such giants competing. For some time afterward I thought that my euphoric excitement at watching them was just the luster of first discovery of the sport I would love ever after. But now with YouTube, I can see that these two men were extraordinary for any time, not just the one in which they competed. They were powerful, mature artists and wonderful technicians. So if you're correct and Curry was not the automatic favorite, I'm cool with it. The fact that they both were at their best during those Games is enough for me. I seem to remember that Cranston was ninth after figures, fifth after the short program, and third after the long. That's pretty compelling evidence that he was a stellar free skater. Curry's achievement was more balanced, as I recall, being in a much higher position after figures. As you pointed out in an earlier post, he studied with Fassi, a master of figures. (As did Peggy Fleming, who was as strong in figures as she was in free skating, unlike Janet Lynn.)

Either way, that was a night of skating for the ages. It would have been a crying shame if either Kovalev or Volkov had won instead. They were run of the mill by comparison, however high their jumps were. Was Hoffman in contention that year? I know he nearly squeaked by Cousins in 1980. Though formidable, he was not a skater for the ages any more than the two Soviets were. I don't think that's chauvinism on my part; Curry and Cranston were simply the class of the field.

 

[jcoates]

Jcoates, I can't remember exactly (that was my first Olympics) how heavily favored Curry was compared to Cranston. I just remember thinking how lucky we were to have two such giants competing. For some time afterward I thought that my euphoric excitement at watching them was just the luster of first discovery of the sport I would love ever after. But now with YouTube, I can see that these two men were extraordinary for any time, not just the one in which they competed. They were powerful, mature artists and wonderful technicians. So if you're correct and Curry was not the automatic favorite, I'm cool with it. The fact that they both were at their best during those Games is enough for me. I seem to remember that Cranston was ninth after figures, fifth after the short program, and third after the long. That's pretty compelling evidence that he was a stellar free skater. Curry's achievement was more balanced, as I recall, being in a much higher position after figures. As you pointed out in an earlier post, he studied with Fassi, a master of figures. (As did Peggy Fleming, who was as strong in figures as she was in free skating, unlike Janet Lynn.)

Either way, that was a night of skating for the ages. It would have been a crying shame if either Kovalev or Volkov had won instead. They were run of the mill by comparison, however high their jumps were. Was Hoffman in contention that year? I know he nearly squeaked by Cousins in 1980. Though formidable, he was not a skater for the ages any more than the two Soviets were. I don't think that's chauvinism on my part; Curry and Cranston were simply the class of the field.

Hoffman missed the bronze by .04 under the points system back then and silver by .30. It was extremely close between the guys behind Curry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_skating_at_the_1976_Winter_Olympics
http://www.winter-olympic-memories.com/html/results/jp_3d/12_innsbruck/12_figure/12_figure_m_ex.htm (This link is great, it shows all the jumping around in position that most of the men were doing under that judging system. The actual score 5.9 vs 5.7 actually mattered then much as scores matter now because they were totaled rather than converted to factored placements, often leading to narrow little victories or losses as often as huge leads being built up. Very similar to COP in that regard. I think that actually supports my argument from the end of my previous post in the Lysacek thread that from a scoring perspective, COP is much like this systems cumulative structure which can lead to less straightforward results which are influenced by a wider range of factors rather than just a jump here or there. The factored ordinal system was simpler, but far less flexible and nuanced.)

Had he been slightly cleaner in either his SP or LP has would have medaled. FYI, he was round internationally for a longer period than any of his contemporaries. First Olympics was 68 at age 12, then 72, 76 and 80. He won everything in 74 (Worlds and Euros), promptly go hurt, missed 75 and came back by 76 (won bronze at Euros and Worlds). He was consistently on the podium the rest of his career. He was always a threat, just not always a spectacular one. He was a real steady eddy and likely the best jumper of the top men, a technical machine with little style.

 

[hikki]

Not being a native English speaker I don't know how to interpret the title of this thread: a) The skater whose superb quality was not reflected in the competitive record, and does not have a piece of, well, gold, to prove how splendid she is. *A bit different from Kwanford Wife's "shouldda" as I don't think skaters I've named necessarily came close ; or b) The best female skater who could've won a world title but didn't end up with one.

From the perspective of the latter, I agree about the likes of Fumie, Nancy and Surya. Personally with Surya I wish she had won at least one (esp. in '93) and I was rooting for her over Yuka in '94.

If we're talking about a) though, I have no hesitation in raising names like Tiffany, Yukina, Tonya (could've won too), and Carolina (meanwhile I actually think she should not have come as close to winning as she has).

Then there's Fumie, while I realise I sound harsh, who I'm glad didn't win because I just don't see her as a quality skater in so many respects. The opposite goes to Shizuka. What a shame it would've been if such s superb skater had never won any title!!! We wouldn't be seeing the gorgeous programs of hers as a pro without the exposure she enjoys as the title(s) holder.

While we're on Shizuka, I couldn't find the first performance that impressed me, the 1996 NHK SP. Her first senior debut, nailed 3z/3t (might have been 2/3) and 3f like it was nothing, and when she bowed to the audience she sort of had a cold smile as if to say, "meh!", like an ice queen already at that age!

Here's how she progressed:

1995
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dVd6N_0yRY&feature=related

2002 (she received ridiculously low marks as I remember)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK-9Fl7qZds

2003
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltuz2mbIlJA

2004
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xzGdVragbo

2005
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q381hrTBzSE

And then FlattFan's video which shows her beautiful skating. Thanks FlattFan, starting the video from the point you set I could re-appreciate her skating even more.

 

[Olympia]

Hikki, I totally agree with you about Shizuka's quality, and that it would have been a shame if she had not won a world gold. I was a huge fan of Michelle's and almost as devoted a fan of Sasha's. But I had no trouble rejoicing when Shizuka won the OGM in Torino, and as the years have passed, I've grown more and more pleased with that win. She has lived up to it since then, both as a skater and (at least insofar as I am informed as a non-Japanese speaker) as a person.

I'm not sure which interpretation of the title, a or b, to choose, but in a thread like this, it's fun to explore all aspects of the idea, because every investigation leads to more interesting ideas. So pick one or both and enjoy!

Jcoates, I had forgotten that Hoffman's career lasted that long. I remember that Dick Button said he was generally popular and well-liked in the skating community, even in those cold war days. I know that he's remained active in skating. As a judge, I believe that he voted for Oksana in 1994 and Kwan in 1998--presumably in both cases he backed artistic expression over pure technique.

I recall getting the same impression from his skating as your characterization of him: steady, technically solid, but not really inspired. He had the bad luck to come along during an incredibly fertile period for men's skating, when two masterful stylists who also had technical command were on the scene, John Curry and Robin Cousins. Even so, Cousins never won a world title, yielding instead to Hoffman in 1980.