- Joined
- Feb 17, 2006
It's so sad that Brian's dad doesn't come out to support him; he should be so proud! :disapp:
Brian Joubert Interview
- Thread starter gsk8
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2006
actually your own tim goebel was the first to land not three, but four quads in a program.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2006
yeah, i know, isn't that sad. His dad must be a jerk if he's not proud.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2004
Well at least that he has his mother and the loving support of his fans behind him
I do not believe that Tim Goebel ever landed four ratified quads (by the ISU) in a single program - he was the first to land three under the old system.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
A little bit OT, but Tim is quoted in todays's Detroit paper as saying that what's wrong with the New Judging System is that the scoring is too artistic. "The technical scores should be weighted more heavily than the artistic...it is, after all, a sport."
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
I think the Technical is THE sport. The PCS scores should reflect the correct technique in judging the elements, but I think the goe's do that or should. Other than that I think a judge should score how the music is being skated to. If it's just being used for background because the scoring requires music, then a heavy deduction should be imposed. Timing and rhythym should be essential.
Mood and character should be included; intricate movement should be visible with exceptional basics.
Of course a lively bouncy routine with a perfect quad (men) or 3x3 (ladies) will grade the mood, character, timing and rhythym much more in the PCS scores. Oh the judges won't go overboard; just enough to keep the tech guy up front.
Methinks, Tim is wrong with balance in favor of PCS.
I would like to see the disappearance of the tech asst, and a separate panel for PCS scores.
Joe
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2003
ITA!
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
The "I'm the MAN!" strategy only works if you are in fact "the MAN!" and more often than not, there isn't _a_ "the MAN!" but several potential "the MAN!"s and trying to act like "the MAN!" when you're not is just kind of ... pathetic: "Here I go with my bunny hops and massive double toe-double toe combination, in your FACE! Plushenko!"
In a real competition, wise competitors take into account (depending on skate order) what their main rivals have done/are likely to do. It's called 'strategy'.
As a commentator in 1992 (discussing Yamaguchi's strategy) Katarina Witt summed up her entire competitive philosophy thusly: 'Just do enough to win' (maybe not her exact words), and went on to describe how she decided to junk the triple flip in her LP in Sarajevo after seeing the problems Sumners had in the SP.
I'd rather a skater decided what to risk based on the competition rather than stalking a botched Big Element (as Plushenko has done more than once).
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
That has always been my impression of this skater.
Okay Mafke, well done, LOL! That is the single funniest line I've read in ages.
Sometimes I'm frustrated that English is my second language.
What's so funny in that line?
(I thought it was neither fair nor funny but I surely must be wrong).
You're right that humor is definitely the most difficult feature of language to translate.
It's funny to me, if I'm interpreting it correctly, because Mafke is saying if 'lesser' skaters - you know, the guys who just aren't going to make the podium no matter what - were to try and adopt a "I'm DA MAN! attitude" it would be sort of pathetic because the biggest guns in their 'arsenal' are bunny hops and double toe-loops. Mafke isn't saying that is Brian - because Brian can take on any attitude he wants as he actually has 'the goods' (multiple quads, plenty of gold medals, etc.) to win the big events...and to challenge Plushenko in the past....but with a lesser skater....an attitude of "I'M IT! I'm the MAN!" would just fall....flat.
Hope that made sense. Btw, and this is waaaaaaaay off topic, but if you've seen the new 'Borat' movie....there is a funny scene where a language coach tries to explain American humor to Borat.
And....falls flat.
Last edited:
The problem is not with trying but with succeeding
. And often it is easier to be funny yourself than to understand the subtelties of someonelse's humour.Thanks Zanzibar for your explanation. Now I understood.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
The context was whether skaters should use "strategy," modifying their program depending on what their competitors did or didn't do. Should they play the odds and do "just enough to win?"
To me, a better mind set for someone like Brian is to say, "I'm going to do three quads. The rest of you, do as you please."
I think this is a good attitude even for the skaters who are not podium candidates. "I am here to skate my program. When I perform, there is no one on the ice but me."
As for Plushenko "stalking" his jumps, I think he did that out of personal pride, not because of what someone else might or might not do. Like Midori Ito pulling that triple Axel out of her hat at the end of her LP at Albertville.
When a skater does "just enough to win," taking advantage of poor outings by his or her competiors, yes, the skater may win another medal to grace the bottom of his sock drawer.
But who loses? The audience. The sport.
To me, a better mind set for someone like Brian is to say, "I'm going to do three quads. The rest of you, do as you please."
I think this is a good attitude even for the skaters who are not podium candidates. "I am here to skate my program. When I perform, there is no one on the ice but me."
As for Plushenko "stalking" his jumps, I think he did that out of personal pride, not because of what someone else might or might not do. Like Midori Ito pulling that triple Axel out of her hat at the end of her LP at Albertville.
When a skater does "just enough to win," taking advantage of poor outings by his or her competiors, yes, the skater may win another medal to grace the bottom of his sock drawer.
But who loses? The audience. The sport.
Oh, I don't know MM - might have to disagree with you a teensy bit. If an athlete does the minimum to win - that's good strategy. In other words, say a skater is the last to skate, and after seeing what his rivals do, he then decides whether he'll add a second quad or some other element. I can respect that. Each one of this big jumps takes a physical toll - each one could be the one that causes a sprain, a torn ligament, etc. There is no shame in a gold medal that comes even if by .01 of a point, even if it could have come with a much wider margin of victory. As Alexei once said..."Nobody remembers how you skated at the world championships...what they remember is who won."
Of course, we all love those thrilling, near perfect efforts where the skater goes all out and gives it 150%, but in the end...it is about getting the gold....even at a narrow margin of victory. Just my thoughts on it.
Of course, we all love those thrilling, near perfect efforts where the skater goes all out and gives it 150%, but in the end...it is about getting the gold....even at a narrow margin of victory. Just my thoughts on it.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I have to say I totally disagree with Alexei. I don't think anyone remembers (or much cares) who won. Once the contest is over, it's on to the next one and what have you done for me lately?
I don't remember who won the World Series in 1966. But I remember my first big league baseball game, when Joe Pepitone hit a huge home run in the eighth.
I don't remember who won the ladies world figure skating championship in 1990, but I remember fighting back the tears when Johnny Weir skated to Unchained Melody at COI in 2005.
I loved the performance of Watanabe and Kido at Skate America in 2002. They finished next-to-last, but they turned me on to ice dance.
I remember Michelle's performance of the Rachmaninoff short program at the Goodwill Games in 1998. I don't remember if she won or lost. This performance helped me turn the corner on the saddest chapter of my life. I've been a fan of figure skating ever since.
Last edited:
Similar threads
