Does anyone think Michelle has a chance?

[Mathman]

That's an interesting question about figures. The skaters out there now can hardly do them at all, I would suppose, since they have never having been trained in that part of the sport.

But during the century or so that the sport of figure tracing was contested, did the athletes get better and better at it, as ice conditions, equipment, sports nutrition, training facilities, etc. (as Mememe points out) steadily improved? Did the figure skaters of the 1980s trace more elaborate shapes, or do it with greater accuracy, than skaters in the 1920s?

Certainly in the part of the sport that is now dominated by counting jump revolutions, the progress has been dramatic. To me, looking at old films, there have also been gains on the artistic side. Did figures keep pace?

Joe, as GKelly mentioned, Irina Rodnina's resume is almost an exact copy of Sonia Henie's. She won 10 consecutive World Championships (with two different partners), 1969-1978, and three Olympic gold medals, 1972, 1976 and 1980. She also won 11 European Championships and a bunch of other stuff. Although she never made it to Hollywood, she is as revered in Russia as Henie was in the West, and she has taken a leading role in the Russian Olympic movement.

Mememe, yes, I do expect that someone will come along who can outdo Michelle in all the ways that can be measured. She will do triple Axels and quads, spin faster (this can be measured), and -- now -- amass more points on the tech side of the CoP.

What I am saying is that it is the part of the sport that is not measurable that makes us still love the oldies but goodies. To me, how many medals you win is not "measurable" because it only shows how good you were compared to the competition of the time.

Doggygirl, I did not read Antmanb's comment about Bielmenn spins as being a slam against Irina, but rather as an observation of how the judges and technical specialists interpreted the rules last year. It did seem like the way to get a level three was to do a Bielmann, regardless of other considerations. I expect this will be "clarified" in the coming season.

Mathman

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

skills to the same level. Why is Rodnina comparable to Henie? Same number of gold medals: 10 world championships, 3 Olympics

Oh, we're talking medals as the criteria. Personally, I never let medals interfere with my tastes. Otherwise that means Babe Ruth should be forgotten because his homers have been beaten. Sorry, I just don't buy that. A great sportsman is always a great sportsman. Rodnina included, but she didn't set the sport on its upswing, and in my opinion should not take away Henie's original contribution.

In the same era, would anyone consider Sarah a better skater than Michelle or Irina because she has an oly medal? I don't think so.

Joe

 

[antmanb]

That's an interesting question about figures. The skaters out there now can hardly do them at all, I would suppose, since they have never having been trained in that part of the sport.

I have seen this discussion come up on some other boards/groups and i think the older skaters in the sport will have had to have passed at least the first few tests in order to compete at the novice and junior levels.

From memory i think i might have seen Mike Weiss's name mentioned as medalling or coming close to medalling in figures competitions.

I would have thought that both Irina and Michelle being mid 20s will have had to have taken some to compete in the lower levels. Any more any more 20 somethings in the eligible ranks at the mo? There's a slovakian skater who had a season out to have a child Babenko or Babiakova, something like that who is in her later 20s who would likely have had to do figures tests.

Also didn't Michelle take her senior test at age 13? She's 25 now so 12 years ago so she would have taken that in 1992 - presumably because the figures test were then not compulsory for that year, that in part is why she took her senior freeskate test then - i expect that given that figures went in 1991 she probably has the figures test that needed to be passed in order to skate in juniors and would definitely have the figures test required to compete Novice.

Ditto Amber Corwin and some of the other older ladies skaters.

Ant

 

[antmanb]

Oh, we're talking medals as the criteria. Personally, I never let medals interfere with my tastes. Otherwise that means Babe Ruth should be forgotten because his homers have been beaten. Sorry, I just don't buy that. A great sportsman is always a great sportsman. Rodnina included, but she didn't set the sport on its upswing, and in my opinion should not take away Henie's original contribution.

Rodnina is well before my time but didn't she influence pairs skatnig to make it more like the pairs skating we see today? wasn't it Rodnina with both of her partners that really upped the jumping/thrown jump ante in paris skating in trail blazing way a la Dick Button?

I seem to recall comments about them skating like machines - not great on the interpretation side but technical abilities well beyond anything anyone else was doing at the time.

Ant

 

[gkelly]

But during the century or so that the sport of figure tracing was contested, did the athletes get better and better at it, as ice conditions, equipment, sports nutrition, training facilities, etc. (as Mememe points out) steadily improved?

I think yes, but since it was before my time, it's really hard to say. I would venture a guess that, in the history of the sport, at least on the ladies' side, Beatrix Schuba was better in absolute terms than Sonja Henie or Jeanette Altwegg, who were similarly hard to beat in their day. (But I could be wrong about that part.) After 1972, the figures became less important, and freestyle became moreso, especially triple jumps which had never been important before, so that affected how much time and attention skaters paid to each side of the sport. I think it's safe to say that no one has equalled Schuba's ability since.

Did the figure skaters of the 1980s trace more elaborate shapes, or do it with greater accuracy, than skaters in the 1920s?

No, they did not trace more elaborate shapes. They all traced the same figures from the list of school figures. All two circles, i.e. figure 8s, or three circles (like this: ooo), known as serpentines, with one kind of turn incorporated per figure. Even the most complicated of those are fairly simple -- deceptively so, simple does not mean easy!

Elaborate shapes (e.g., Maltese cross) would be what was called "special figures." Those were never part of the world championships, but they were found at some other competitions earlier in the 20th century, including the 1908 Olympics.
http://www.aya.or.jp/~polaris/winter_olympic/index.htm
Click on results, scrol down to 1908, and choose Men's special figures to see some examples.

In terms of accuracy, see my comments about Schuba above.

For a challenge or for aesthetic purposes, skaters sometimes performed elaborations of the basic school figures, combining different turns and loops on the same circle that were never part of the same figure in competition. The best example would be John Curry's "After All" program, and the most recent example would probably be Sarah Hughes's "You'll Never Walk Alone."

There had been some talk in the 60s through the 80s maybe of incorporating such more elaborate combination figures into competition, to move that side of the sport forward, but it never amounted to anything.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Rodnina is well before my time but didn't she influence pairs skatnig to make it more like the pairs skating we see today? wasn't it Rodnina with both of her partners that really upped the jumping/thrown jump ante in paris skating in trail blazing way a la Dick Button?

I seem to recall comments about them skating like machines - not great on the interpretation side but technical abilities well beyond anything anyone else was doing at the time.

Ant

I saw her Pairs skate only once because of work. I am not an expert on her with whomever partners she had. Her Pairs were wonderful and no question of her gold medal but as I've said, medals for me, do not glorify the sport. I'm thinking something exceptional that causes greatness. For Pairs, I found this in the Protopovs. I know they are not particularly liked in their own country, but that has nothing to do with the way they changed the entire scope of Pairs Skating. I couldn't care less if they couldn't on the podium. They gave figure skating something exceptional.

Sonia, Dick and the Protpopovs, I see as exceptionally great skaters. Michelle is heading in that direction. Although I am not crazy about Dance, I would have to say Torvahl and Dean in the same breath.

Joe

Joe

 

[Mathman]

http://www.aya.or.jp/~polaris/winter_olympic/index.htm
Click on results, scroll down to 1908, and choose Men's special figures to see some examples.

What a neat site. I see that Ulrich Salchow actually finished second to teammate Richard Johanson in free skating in 1908, but won overall because he won the figures part.

I saw Victor Petrenko do an Iron Cross as part of an exhibition number in COI a couple of years ago.

MM

 

[mzheng]

Doggygirl, I did not read Antmanb's comment about Bielmenn spins as being a slam against Irina, but rather as an observation of how the judges and technical specialists interpreted the rules last year. It did seem like the way to get a level three was to do a Bielmann, regardless of other considerations. I expect this will be "clarified" in the coming season.

Mathman

MM, you are right. I was just typing out the the same response as you did last night, then thought better of 'why bother' just went on delete the whole thing. She was just took out one sentance from Antmanb's whole context for the argument of argument. What I saw it's the observation of how judge interpreted the rules (old or new) at past worlds. The only level 3 spins from ladies called at worlds are all with Bielmman in it. No?

 

[Doggygirl]

MM, you are right. I was just typing out the the same response as you did last night, then thought better of 'why bother' just went on delete the whole thing. She was just took out one sentance from Antmanb's whole context for the argument of argument. What I saw it's the observation of how judge interpreted the rules (old or new) at past worlds. The only level 3 spins from ladies called at worlds are all with Bielmman in it. No?

Not true. Sasha received a L3 in the LP, and she does not do the Biellmann. The '04/05 rules list 4 criteria, of which 3 must be met for an L3. One of the 4 references a Biellmann position specific to the Layback, but the other 3 do not reference Biellmann at all, and DID represent 3 ways to meet the criteria sans Beillmann. If I understand the 05/06 rules correctly, more criteria have been added specifically to the Biellmann positions in both spins and spirals for them to count (foot must be all the way over the head before revs on spins or seconds on spirals are counted) which I suspect might make things more challenging for Irina and others capable of the Biellmann position next season.

I'm sure I over reacted, and for that I apologize. In general, and in my opinion, many vigorous Kwan fans since Worlds have basically beaten Irina up for using the Biellmann to garner points, as if that is in some way "unfair" even though Irina's strategy was within the rules. So, my apologies to all.

DG

 

[R.D.]

In general, and in my opinion, many vigorous Kwan fans since Worlds have basically beaten Irina up for using the Biellmann to garner points, as if that is in some way "unfair" even though Irina's strategy was within the rules.

You know, I've noticed this as well...I've never said anything about it though...until now.

While I think the position itself is OK, I DO think she overuses it. However, the rules don't state that she can't and good for her for seeing that and maximizing the point system to her ability. Until the rules change otherwise she should be rewarded appropriately according to the rule-book.

Personally, I could say many of the things about her I hear others say. However, I realize the above, and then things are all right. What I think, or others think of that matter, means nothing in the long run.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

What a neat site. I see that Ulrich Salchow actually finished second to teammate Richard Johanson in free skating in 1908, but won overall because he won the figures part.

I saw Victor Petrenko do an Iron Cross as part of an exhibition number in COI a couple of years ago. MM

MM - Does that mean you've changed your mind about the old timers in skating and that they are very much in comparison with those of today? I'll take Dorothy's Delayed Axel over most of the 3As I've seen in our modern time. It's an esthetic thing.

Joe

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

You know, I've noticed this as well...I've never said anything about it though...until now.

Understandably. Cohen fans are also complaining about the over use of the Bielman position as well as the travelling on spins. MK is not repeat not IS's biggest competitior. SC is!!

Joe

 

[R.D.]

Understandably. Cohen fans are also complaining about the over use of the Bielman position as well as the travelling on spins. MK is not repeat not IS's biggest competitior. SC is!!

Joe

In the past, it was a Kwan/Slutskaya rivalry. However, I do think it's a bit early to declare a Cohen/Slutskaya rivalry...they only competed head-to-head (I mean in close combat) what- once? At 2005 Worlds. That was it. And, IIRC, MK and SC never traded victories before like MK and IS, have they? To me, that's the sign of a true rivalry.

I agree that Cohen AND Kwan fans have been guilty of complaining excessively about Irina's Bielmann (sp?) positions. And that's understandable, because naturally the fans want their favorite to win.

Cohen fans are even questioning her third place in the 2004 Worlds freeskate. Please. She was so flat and boring it wasn't even funny. :sheesh:

 

[attyfan]

... MK is not repeat not IS's biggest competitior. SC is!!

Joe

Give everyone time. MK and IS were each other's biggest competitor when Sasha was in juniors. (Also, I think Irina might have more to worry about if SA can come back and skate like she did at Dortmund than she will have to worry about either MK or SC)

 

[R.D.]

(Also, I think Irina might have more to worry about if SA can come back and skate like she did at Dortmund than she will have to worry about either MK or SC)

Ah...wouldn't an Arakawa/Slutskaya rivalry be awesome? :yes: And, if necessary, throw Cohen or a few others in the mix.

 

[attyfan]

In the past, it was a Kwan/Slutskaya rivalry. However, I do think it's a bit early to declare a Cohen/Slutskaya rivalry...they only competed head-to-head (I mean in close combat) what- once? At 2005 Worlds. That was it. And, IIRC, MK and SC never traded victories before like MK and IS, have they? To me, that's the sign of a true rivalry. ... :

When you are talking about "trading victories like MK and IS", did you mean to refer to "MK and SC", who have been doing so for the past two years (MK beats SC at Nats; SC returns the favor at Worlds) or did you mean "IS and SC"?

 

[R.D.]

When you are talking about "trading victories like MK and IS", did you mean to refer to "MK and SC", who have been doing so for the past two years (MK beats SC at Nats; SC returns the favor at Worlds) or did you mean "IS and SC"?

No, I mean MK and IS exactly, who have been "trading victories" in 2000-2002. By "trading victories" I don't mean A wins, then B wins, then A wins again, etc. I mean that IS and MK have dominated the 1st and 2nd spots of every comp. they entered, with results being IS-MK sometimes, and MK-IS other times.

As for MK and SC, rivalry shmivalry. MK has totally dominated everyone, SC included, at Nationals. Lately though, with SC starting to beat MK at worlds and a select few other comps, I suppose this could be the start of a true rivalry. If SC should upset MK next year at Nationals, a long shot but not impossible, then I would say a rivalry has definitely developed between the both of them. Not to mention the pressure on her would increase tenfold, and we all know what happens then.

IS and SC- not quite...I explained this already.

 

[Mathman]

MM - Does that mean you've changed your mind about the old timers in skating and that they are very much in comparison with those of today?

Ulrich Salchow is THE MAN!

 

[Mathman]

About the whole Bielmann issue, I think what got Kwan fans all riled up is that the rules on spin levels under the CoP happen to reward something that Irina is good at and Michelle isn't. To me, this is a complaint about how the NJS rules were implemented last year, not a criticism of Irina.

Michelle's stated strategy last year was to keep her spins simple and try to make up the gap by getting positive GOEs. This strategy backfired, as she acknowledges now: "Level three is level three, and no one cares about the execution."

To me, what really helps Irina is not the Bielmann spins but the Bielmann spirals. Irina has good spins anyway. But her spiral has never been a high point of her programs. With the extra reward for "enhancing" the spiral by holding the Bielmann position, Irina can do spiral sequences that are rewarded for their difficulty and look nice, too:

http://www.skatesweden.se/Bild_IrinaSlutskaya_EM_20030119_IMG2_117_med.jpg

On the other hand, you don't want to get caught looking like this:

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.co...70105202541.photo00.photo.default-340x302.jpg

Mathman

 

[Doggygirl]

She was just took out one sentance from Antmanb's whole context for the argument of argument.

Hi Mzeng. I would love to respond, but I'm not sure how. Could you please elaborate?

If I'm guessing correctly, Antmanb indicated that a Biellmann position was required in order to achieve a L3 Layback spin. I'm new to the NJS too, and maybe I've read the rules incorrectly. I believe what I've read is that there are 3 of 4 criteria that need to be met (under 04/05 rules) in order to achieve a L3 on a Layback spin. I believe I've read that there are 3 of the 4 criteria that have nothing to do with the Biellmann position to achieve L3. That's why I questioned this interpretation of the rules - that Michelle Kwan could not achieve a L3 on a Layback spin without the Biellmann.

I'm not sure what you mean by "context for the argument of argument."

What I'm trying to reference are the ISU Rules about Ladies spins for the 04/05 Season. I would welcome your (or anyone else's) rules based response to further my own understanding.

DG