Irina Slutskaya and Olympics 2002
- Thread starter NadezhdaNadya
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
What say you to a CoP rescore then!
I don't think it's too helpful, there were different expectations back then. I would be using my own scale of values for spins/footwork if I were to do it, though. None of the existing CoP systems are appropriate.
I dont want to interrupt your analyses, but if I remember correctly then Sasha was involved with the choreo at both her programs and because of that, brought something unique to the table. She had joy, attitude and amazing flexibility. She brought great maturity for a 17 years old and yet, kept the youth on ice. It was a perfect mix, the best of both worlds so to speak and nobody had this during the Olympics.
Her spirals, the layback were second to none and she was really into her programs. You really noticed that at the venue, her eyes were sparkling like little stars.
For me she was the best skater in the short, the one that really skated into my heart and I would have given her the first spot that evening as for me, she was not only flawless but with the best overall performance that day. Yes, Michelle was amazing too, but I just believed Sasha more, which I suppose is a personal preference.
Two things from the Free of Sasha I remember well, her mistake at the start, that looked a bit odd and I believe took away some of her spirit, but then again, she had that moment when she had to clap into her hands and it was very noticable in the whole venue. What I also remember was her elegance and yet the fire, again it was the best of both worlds and a nice mix of various things and quite fitting to Carmen.
This for me, was the big difference to Sarah. Sarah was no doubt great with her jumps (not on me to judge if they were done correctly), but her programs did lack the art, did lack the maturity. Thinking about how I felt back then, this was also why I was so angry about the result. I guess I could have accepted Irina or Michelle winning, due their reputation and the maturity, even though they both looked tight and less energetic in the Free. But Sarah and I dont mean this rude or so, but she was just another kid on ice for me, which again is not meant to be rude, just how I felt back then.
If Sasha wouldnt have had the fall, I guess she would have won and nobody had a right to complain. Sarah from my point of view, took all by suprise and completely exposed the weakness of the old judging system. Sasha on 4th felt so wrong in many aspects, was that one error truly so bad, compared to three other skaters that just did not convince with their artistry? But I honestly wouldnt know who I would kick out of the top 3, to give her a medal and if so, which colour would it be?
Now I give back to you folks and your professional judging.
Her spirals, the layback were second to none and she was really into her programs. You really noticed that at the venue, her eyes were sparkling like little stars.
For me she was the best skater in the short, the one that really skated into my heart and I would have given her the first spot that evening as for me, she was not only flawless but with the best overall performance that day. Yes, Michelle was amazing too, but I just believed Sasha more, which I suppose is a personal preference.
Two things from the Free of Sasha I remember well, her mistake at the start, that looked a bit odd and I believe took away some of her spirit, but then again, she had that moment when she had to clap into her hands and it was very noticable in the whole venue. What I also remember was her elegance and yet the fire, again it was the best of both worlds and a nice mix of various things and quite fitting to Carmen.
This for me, was the big difference to Sarah. Sarah was no doubt great with her jumps (not on me to judge if they were done correctly), but her programs did lack the art, did lack the maturity. Thinking about how I felt back then, this was also why I was so angry about the result. I guess I could have accepted Irina or Michelle winning, due their reputation and the maturity, even though they both looked tight and less energetic in the Free. But Sarah and I dont mean this rude or so, but she was just another kid on ice for me, which again is not meant to be rude, just how I felt back then.
If Sasha wouldnt have had the fall, I guess she would have won and nobody had a right to complain. Sarah from my point of view, took all by suprise and completely exposed the weakness of the old judging system. Sasha on 4th felt so wrong in many aspects, was that one error truly so bad, compared to three other skaters that just did not convince with their artistry? But I honestly wouldnt know who I would kick out of the top 3, to give her a medal and if so, which colour would it be?
Now I give back to you folks and your professional judging.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
A fall on the second jump of a combo is typically a -0.3 deduction. Yes, that is in the SP, but it's not like falls shouldn't reduce the technical score in the LP. You of course seem to equate a nosedive on Slutskaya's flip with Sasha's hot mess of a combo where she FELL. If you think the two are the same then you really don't understand how 6.0 scoring operated.
If you want to overlook errors, that's fine. Somebody could just as easily say "oh the flip was fine and landed without any hand or free foot touchdown, so we should just ignore the balance check, the same way we can simply pretend Sasha's never happened". It really isn't fruitful to analyze performances with you in this case as you are convinced that Slutskaya is a slab of cow meat and Cohen is veal, a classless analogy which frankly delegitimizes any possible contribution you have to this thread in my view.
Nevertheless, I stated where I would have given Cohen a 5.6 - she fell (sat on the ice), she flutzed both lutzes, downgraded her 3T, had scratchy landings on both lutzes, she had a spin issue, and had no 3-3 combo or anything remotely close to one -- no, a 3-3 attempt doesn't count if it's that badly executed. I was tempted to give a 5.5, but keeping it at 5.6 reflects the quality of her spin and spiral positions (even with some control/centeriing issues), and her cleanly executed triples. Slutskaya had no 3-3 but she didn't fall, and her jumps were high and had a few more transitions into them like the running 3s into her loop, her spins were okay except could have held positions for more rotations but no major errors on them, and of course accounting for the nosedive on the 3F, the awkward salchow 4-jump series, and a lack of a 3-3 attempt/execution -- so 5.7 for me.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
I think a more interesting discussion would be whether Kwan or Cohen deserved bronze. That the US judge had Slutskaya ahead of those two says everything there is to say on whether her placement in the top 2 for the LP was correct. In fact, he had Slutskaya in 3rd behind that pair in the SP.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
That doesn't say anything, actually. It could be said Inman had a bias towards making Hughes the winner, since he contributed to her LP being what it was. Interesting how his placements were exactly what they needed to be in order to support that result. Ultimately none of that is relevant, though. None of the judges are necessarily relevant. It's entirely possible for an entire panel to just get it wrong, and it happens all the time. If we were to follow the reasoning you're putting forth, not a single judge put Kwan 4th in the LP, whereas one did put Slutskaya that low, which would seemingly mean it's "impossible" to argue for Kwan being off the podium. I think it's just a waste of time to discuss along those lines. Analyzing the actual skating itself is all that matters.
The reasoning of many (including Inman, publicly) seems to simply be that Kwan/Cohen fell and didn't skate the absolute best they could, even aside from that error, so therefore Slutskaya without a fall must be placed ahead because of who she is. I find that reasoning to be overly binary and superficial. While falls were deservedly viewed more harshly in 6.0 than they have been throughout most CoP years, it still shouldn't be an automatic disqualifier. Throwing a high presentation score to someone just because of their track record and relative cleanliness isn't the correct way to evaluate a performance. Judges are constantly under a lot of pressure to fall in line with those politics, but that doesn't make it right. Slutskaya's skating here was really the worst she had done to date at Worlds/Olympics. She lacked the charm of her younger years in skating and the authority of her older years in skating, leaving us with a mechanical and cautious performance that never built up meaningfully or displayed much beautiful movement, and containing a lot of inferior posture as she pumped around the ice.
That's never what I said. It's unbelievable how any conversation with you results in an endless string of straw-man statements and misrepresentations. Don't try to tell someone they don't understand 6.0 scoring when your own marks make no sense within the very incorrect framework you tried to peddle (Cohen would be at a 5.1 tech mark at most in the LP if you applied the crazy things you said). Plus how you didn't understand the way there's 12 possible ordinal placements above a 5.8/5.8 marking.
And again, you gave the same tech mark to each of them as I did, and yet you keep pontificating as if your grade is better and as if you have some kind of better understanding, when you don't.
No, this is just you failing to comprehend an analogy of your own mischaracterization. Disgraceful that you try to turn it around as something else, I never said that was my realistic opinion. You are the one who made an unfair, empty statement about Cohen. I made an absurdist comparison to represent how illegitimate your claim was and to show the difference. I could have used cars, shoes, whatever. I simply chose food, as that played off you using the word unseasoned.
Alex D gave a very worthwhile contribution to the analysis of Cohen's skating and that line of discussion is what should be continued, not this nonsense.
^what is your analysis of Cohen's program then?
I do not know what you mean by "different expectations". It's still skating, even if it looked different, and we might want to compare how the PCS of these competitors looked compared to now, which is what I am interested most in. What about our all-time objective scores? 
I also wanted to know how many UR calls people were thinking Hughes should get, because people seem to have a huge investment in them without actually pointing any out. These were also the Olympics that lead to the CoP (from a different event of course), you'd think they kept something desirable from the skating here. But I think Tim Goebel won in the test of the initial CoP, and they didn't want that
I do not know what you mean by "different expectations".
It's still skating, even if it looked different, and we might want to compare how the PCS of these competitors looked compared to now, which is what I am interested most in. What about our all-time objective scores? I also wanted to know how many UR calls people were thinking Hughes should get, because people seem to have a huge investment in them without actually pointing any out. These were also the Olympics that lead to the CoP (from a different event of course), you'd think they kept something desirable from the skating here. But I think Tim Goebel won in the test of the initial CoP, and they didn't want that
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
This makes no sense. Putting Slutskaya behind Kwan would have resulted in an American 1-2 with Kwan winning which would have been a more “desirable” result from a US standpoint than Hughes 1st and Kwan 3rd.
Of course that would have been a scandal because people wouldn’t understand how Kwan with a fall could beat Slutskaya or overall Hughes with two triple triples. Although given your veal - ahem, real - love for Cohen and push for Dai to win in 2010 it seems you much prefer Olympic champion who fall versus cleaner skaters with better content. :sarcasm: You do you boo!
With your incessant straw man arguments and all. Right off the bat, I'm just giving my impressions. I think the podium order should've been 1. Hughes 2. Kwan 3. Cohen. IDK if this'll work out via 6.0 - I am sure it did when I first did it, but I don't want to deal with the placement nonsense again, and I think the 6.0 scores are even more meaningless than CoP ones, so I won't be writing those out. Impressions up for discussion though!
SP:
Hughes: I think the program is lacking. The only thing that stands out to me is the opening with her gazing down at the ice and doing short spirals, which are then recalled towards the end of the program, but held much longer and covering more ice. Technically, I think she has very nice spins (a very CoP-esque flying camel) and a great 2A, but not the greatest spiral sequence, nor are her other two passes anything to speak of. Meh steps too.
Cohen: *er hem* WHAT ARE YOU WATCHING, PEOPLE?! I wish she'd vary her speed better with the music, and also that her steps were fuller (and done with better edges), but she manages to establish a narrative in this SP. Like how she enters her first jumping pass, and then puts steps into the 3F right after it to reflect the music building in intensity, and then switches to her spiral sequence followed by layback when she's at a more introspective section of the music. Her positions are obviously perfect in her spins and spirals, but also her jumps, actually, even if she shouldn't be getting huge credit for those.
Kwan: She somehow managed to be tentative in this SP, but I still love how she ends, lol. A lot of the depth is lost because of how she does the steps here, but the spiral is still joyful and the sit spin still works. Not a great showing overall by her standards, she still has great command despite the flaws, but she should be winning the presentation, and I'd place it behind Cohen (or place her as equal anyway). Her jumps aren't that great here either, I think the 3F was obviously UR.
Slutskaya: This program isn't good. I like the one-foot step as a nugget, but the frontloading and the rest does absolutely nothing for the choreography as a whole. I think she wins on jumps and decent spins, but everything else isn't that great, even if all is present. Pretty solid though, especially on technique.
I ranked them as: 1. Cohen 2. Slutskaya 3. Kwan 4. Hughes (w/o regard to how it works under 6.0)
LP:
Kwan: This is probably my sentimental favorite Olympic performance (behind Lu's 1998 LP, but that one's actually good) You can pretty much feel her disappointment after her 3F mistake. She's still so festive and shows such great skating skill. This isn't great choreography, but still shows nice detail in her layback spin for instance. There is a solidity in her skating that hasn't been seen since. Should be taking a big hit on the tech score.
Slutskaya: This is just bad choreography (and she performs it badly... she's better at worlds). There's a lot of build up and phrasing being outright ignored, like with her final moments in the 3T set up. The ending makes no sense at all. Her gesturing is unnatural. There's a certain cynicism and desperation and anger to this song that she tries to capture with that gesturing I guess, but she fails. It's obviously also not technically that great, with her 3F mistake.
Hughes: This to me is the best program of the event, in terms of choreography. I love the way she opens with that 2A, like landing on a flowery field with that music. This program seems very Yuna Kim-esque, which is funny because Gracie Gold also did a Daphnis et Chloe program that I thought was Yuna Kim-esque her spins are yet again great, and I thought both her +3Lo were rotated which gets great credit from me, even though the jump quality isn't great at all.
Cohen: This program is a bit more obvious to me than her SP, but I still like how she claps - I think it adds character. Still great use of extension and she has real fire in her skating, and amazing spins. I do think she did something pretty close to 3Lze+3T<<, but I might let it go to a 3Lze+3T< There's such attack to all of her positions, even in the way she lands her jumps, and her musicality is remarkable. Again should be taking a hit on tech score, but her presentation score should be high.
I ranked them as: 1. Hughes 2. Kwan 3. Cohen 4. Slutskaya
SP:
Hughes: I think the program is lacking. The only thing that stands out to me is the opening with her gazing down at the ice and doing short spirals, which are then recalled towards the end of the program, but held much longer and covering more ice. Technically, I think she has very nice spins (a very CoP-esque flying camel
) and a great 2A, but not the greatest spiral sequence, nor are her other two passes anything to speak of. Meh steps too.Cohen: *er hem* WHAT ARE YOU WATCHING, PEOPLE?! I wish she'd vary her speed better with the music, and also that her steps were fuller (and done with better edges), but she manages to establish a narrative in this SP. Like how she enters her first jumping pass, and then puts steps into the 3F right after it to reflect the music building in intensity, and then switches to her spiral sequence followed by layback when she's at a more introspective section of the music. Her positions are obviously perfect in her spins and spirals, but also her jumps, actually, even if she shouldn't be getting huge credit for those.
Kwan: She somehow managed to be tentative in this SP, but I still love how she ends, lol. A lot of the depth is lost because of how she does the steps here, but the spiral is still joyful and the sit spin still works. Not a great showing overall by her standards, she still has great command despite the flaws, but she should be winning the presentation, and I'd place it behind Cohen (or place her as equal anyway). Her jumps aren't that great here either, I think the 3F was obviously UR.
Slutskaya: This program isn't good. I like the one-foot step as a nugget, but the frontloading and the rest does absolutely nothing for the choreography as a whole. I think she wins on jumps and decent spins, but everything else isn't that great, even if all is present. Pretty solid though, especially on technique.
I ranked them as: 1. Cohen 2. Slutskaya 3. Kwan 4. Hughes (w/o regard to how it works under 6.0)
LP:
Kwan: This is probably my sentimental favorite Olympic performance (behind Lu's 1998 LP, but that one's actually good)
You can pretty much feel her disappointment after her 3F mistake. She's still so festive and shows such great skating skill. This isn't great choreography, but still shows nice detail in her layback spin for instance. There is a solidity in her skating that hasn't been seen since. Should be taking a big hit on the tech score.Slutskaya: This is just bad choreography (and she performs it badly... she's better at worlds). There's a lot of build up and phrasing being outright ignored, like with her final moments in the 3T set up. The ending makes no sense at all. Her gesturing is unnatural. There's a certain cynicism and desperation and anger to this song that she tries to capture with that gesturing I guess, but she fails. It's obviously also not technically that great, with her 3F mistake.
Hughes: This to me is the best program of the event, in terms of choreography. I love the way she opens with that 2A, like landing on a flowery field with that music. This program seems very Yuna Kim-esque, which is funny because Gracie Gold also did a Daphnis et Chloe program that I thought was Yuna Kim-esque
her spins are yet again great, and I thought both her +3Lo were rotated which gets great credit from me, even though the jump quality isn't great at all.Cohen: This program is a bit more obvious to me than her SP, but I still like how she claps - I think it adds character. Still great use of extension and she has real fire in her skating, and amazing spins. I do think she did something pretty close to 3Lze+3T<<, but I might let it go to a 3Lze+3T< There's such attack to all of her positions, even in the way she lands her jumps, and her musicality is remarkable. Again should be taking a hit on tech score, but her presentation score should be high.
I ranked them as: 1. Hughes 2. Kwan 3. Cohen 4. Slutskaya
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
It makes perfect sense, why do you frame it from a "US standpoint" only? He didn't want Kwan to win, with that performance. He felt Sarah was by far the best and additionally he was involved in the creation of her program, which means he's going to feel the most amount of pride if she were to win, and also likely would benefit from a professional standpoint, with that calling card of "my advice resulted in someone becoming Olympic Champion."
People would easily understand Kwan with a fall winning overall, she was the biggest name in skating and there was the simple explanation of "Hughes was too far behind in the SP." Maybe Russians wouldn't like it, but plenty of commentators were calling out Slutskaya's performance as being uninspired, insipid, and lacking in quality. It's not as if such a thing was unprecedented either. Berezhnaya/Sikharulidze had falls in both of their programs in 1998 and still beat reigning world champions Wotzel/Steuer, and then at 1999 Worlds they fell again and beat a "perfect" Shen/Zhao. Kwan herself with her 1999 Nationals LP that had a fluke fall would have deserved to outright win the 2002 Olympics; her skating when at its absolute peak really was good enough to deserve that buffer in comparison.
Expanding on what I wrote earlier, it's a spirited performance with some great highlights, but the overall program and interpretation is too basic. How positive or negative that sounds is going to differ in terms of who we are comparing to. Compared to Slutskaya, whose program/performance was lacking in every area, Cohen is inhabiting a character better, hitting musical accents better, showing more full-body movement, and showing better carriage throughout and better individual segments of choreography.
Compared to Kwan though, there is less detail, less introspection, and also a greater disparity in basic skating ability. Kwan is able to mix body gestures, facial expression, and blade work into a more layered package. The segment of movement after Kwan's first lutz shows this very well - she is able to elegantly showcase a bravura moment but then immediately transition into something softer, while relaying a sense of story. Her arms and hands are constantly moving in an intricate, personal mode of expression; detailed with good line all the way through the fingertip and having nuance in how she places them. Her body and head softly undulate in time with her legs and arms. While doing this, she is able to effortlessly glide on her blades and do steps and a crisp 3-turn into a deep edge hold, with a flying camel emerging directly and naturally right out of these movements.
That type of expression and movement continues after Kwan's spin, and she adds toe positions and short spirals and new arm positions and movements that expand upon the phrasing being expressed. It continues to be written on her face as well. After her axel jump, I love how smoothly she raises her free leg in a brief fan spiral position, with her hands raised up and arched and full spread, then delicately coming forward as a large O spread across her face and then recedes into a more solemn expression, going with a new phrase of the music that now sounds more haunting. Her upcoming mistake on 3Flip actually mirrors the music beautifully, she doesn't go down hard and comes up slowly, and then goes right into a unhurried layback, all of this creating an extended moment of sadness and elegant determination to push onward through a life that is being met with some kind of shrouded oppression.
Soon afterward in Kwan's trademark spiral, I love how she continues to ride the edge right into the entrance to a spin, and how with just a couple steps after that spin she effortlessly transitions into a gentle backward charlotte, echoing the recent spiral and closing out this soft section of music with a truly elegiac and majestic position that feels like a string binding everything together that came beforehand, bringing a chapter to a close, encasing a sacred jewel into its own pouch. The music and tempo pick up and we are lead into a difficult jump that has come later in the program than what any of the other competitors attempt. Kwan's program has more variance of emotion and acceleration throughout than what anyone else did. Cohen stayed on more of a singular level in both skating and expression, she seemed to constantly be saying "aren't I pretty, aren't I a firecracker" instead of drawing out the underlying tragedy and complete inner monologue of the music.
Then there is Hughes, who delivered the most purely beautiful and inspired performance of anyone here. Kwan had some superior aspects to her skating (although not in absolutely every area; Hughes had a couple of better spin positions), but the performance did start somewhat lukewarm and felt a bit more perfunctory in the end than her absolute best programs. Sarah felt like she was melding into the music throughout, she really personified the feeling of a young person blossoming, there was a gorgeous innocent beauty to it, mixed with the excitement of discovery. There was a good amount of refinement and detail and variance to the program, even if it wasn't the absolutely highest. The way she immediately settles into the performance with those lilting opening movements and a lovely 2Axel with a well-extended and held landing, is an apt example of how well the whole thing goes.
I do not know what you mean by "different expectations".
By different expectations I mean the competitors were trying to skate under a different system, so it's difficult to hold the performances up to another criteria. Possibly we could still do it though, it could be a fine comparative exercise. I think my own CoP ruleset would be most fitting for that kind of exercise, because the rules I have there come from a more organic perspective and do take into consideration many aspects of how people were skating during this era.
I think she could have gotten away with no calls at all. The 3Sal+3Loop combo is the real question mark and it comes down to a very close inspection of exactly where you want to consider those jumps as taking off and landing. I think it's fair to say they are both 1/4 short, very borderline, but just enough to count. It helps that the overall combo was smooth looking.
Yes, your words on Kwan vs Cohen capture why I placed Cohen third. It's much more obvious, "sassy" choreography, whereas Kwan transforms bits of the music into a festivity that I think works perfectly (even though the program overall could be much better).
I'll comment on more later, but yeah, Sarah's 3S+3Lo was the only one I had a doubt on - I WOULD call it though.
). For the time being, I just made a PCS rescore thread: https://www.goldenskate.com/forum/s...op-6-Women-at-the-2002-2006-and-2018-Olympics
I'll comment on more later, but yeah, Sarah's 3S+3Lo was the only one I had a doubt on - I WOULD call it though.
Well, maybe you can TP that and the rest of us can score it since you are most familiar (if you want you can ask me to input values into an Excel sheet but I really don't know how that one works of course
). For the time being, I just made a PCS rescore thread: https://www.goldenskate.com/forum/s...op-6-Women-at-the-2002-2006-and-2018-Olympics- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
If Inman was so invested in Sarah winning over Kwan, then why did he mark Hughes 4th in the SP and put Kwan in 1st? He could have put Slutskaya ahead of Kwan which would have put Kwan in 2nd, ensuring that Hughes could win over Kwan if she beat her the FS. http://www.icecalc.com/events/owg2002/results/SEG003.HTM. I get him not wanting Kwan to win the FS with his scores but it's weird to chalk up his 3rd place ordinal for Kwan as wanting Hughes to win with the program he contributed to - plus he could have even put Kwan in 4th behind Cohen as other judges did. Kwan fell (and Inman wasn't the one to make her fall) - so he was just being fair about it and put Hughes 1st (rightfully so) and Slutskaya (who didn't fall) 2nd. But if you want to theorize as to Inman's mindset and crunching the numbers in realtime so a skater whose program he contributed to (not sure how exactly he contributed to her free skate, do you have a source?) won, by all means go ahead. I'm not sure why he would ever try to leverage Hughes' win for professional purposes as he was on the panel itself and would come across as biased for being a decider in Hughes winning over Slutskaya -- THAT would be a professional no-no (I mean, people flayed Alla Shekovtseva for hugging Sotnikova after her win). It stands to say even Inman he contributed to Hughes' program he was still judging everyone objectively and fairly and not judging as a matter of pride and furthering his own professional clout, and his ordinals reflect that. Here's him and the other judges talking about it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/23/...t-at-last-the-judges-are-able-to-explain.html
Anyone could have changed the outcome, including the United States judge, Joe Inman. ''That's what I've been told, but I don't even think about that,'' said Inman, who ranked Hughes first, followed by Slutskaya and Kwan. ''I'm judging the free skating. If I thought about anything else, that's wrong. This is what she deserves for this certain performance. I don't know what the other judges are doing. But I knew what I had to do. I knew why I did what I did. Michelle and Irina both had problems connecting steps. Irina was better in the spins. Irina was better in the jumps. That's what did it for me between Irina and Michelle.''
Speaking of the SP, I fully believe that Slutskaya's SP should have been higher than Kwan's. Kwan won on a 5-4 split but Slutskaya's technical elements were much better. Her jumps were bigger, her 3Z+2L was harder than Kwans 3Z+2T (not to mention had less of a flutz). Kwan's flip was really iffy, blade takeoff from slipping off the pick, and on a lean and even looked UR. Michelle's layback was pretty but Slutskaya's was faster and showed greater flexibility. Slutskaya's footwork was also much harder all done on one foot and with better edges than Kwan's (who had good speed but the tail end of the sequence looked half done, especially the spread eagles). Slutskaya's flying camel was harder by virtue of being a camel spin and an upwards-facing variation whereas Kwans flying sit (even with the excellent death drop) was in a basic sit position. Kwan's spiral was lovely but the last position wasn't held long enough and Slutskaya held her spiral positions longer in general; Slutskaya back spiral and then turning forward to a forward spiral was also harder because of having to maintain speed. I would have definitely had Slutskaya ahead in the SP. However I also would have had Sasha in 1st ahead of both of them (I wish she had brought her confidence and attack to the FS, but the nerves were there and after the costly fall she lost her fire a bit for me).
Explaining Kwan with a fall winning over a "clean" Slutskaya - who wasn't far behind enough to win would be difficult to explain. You can say it was slow/uninspired/etc. but that is subjectivity - whereas it is a fact that Kwan fell. If Slutskaya was placed behind Kwan then yeah, I can understand her being salty about losing to someone who fell and them winning gold while you got bronze. I had Kwan in 2nd in the FS, and if the SP results stayed the same it would have won gold (but I also had Kwan in 3rd in the SP so on my scorecard Hughes would have still won). I also think Hughes winning is a better 'result' for the legitimacy of the sport of figure skating as it was a "champion worthy" performance.
Kwan being the biggest name is a terrible reason to justify her winning overall - not to mention, suggesting that contradicts your earlier assertion for Sasha that popularity/how established a skater was shouldn't matter when it comes to how they are assessed/placed. Slutskaya beat Kwan twice that season - having also won her 3rd-straight GPF (over Kwan all 3 times) and had 4 Euro titles and 3 World medals to her name (soon to be followed by her 1st World title over Kwan, right after the Olympics - in fact, she beat Kwan all 4 times they faced off in the 2001-2002 season); Hughes was the reigning World/GPF bronze medalist and beat both Kwan and Slutskaya at 2001 Skate Canada... so it's not like either of these two were unknown names in skating. While there were precedents at Worlds of people falling and still winning, the Olympics are different - the world is watching and when people already think your sport is rigged as it is, to have an athlete (even a "celebrity" like Kwan) stumble and win over cleaner skaters delegitimizes the sport from a global standpoint. It's why Pairs ended up being the real 2002 scandal.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
This isn't entirely correct. Inman could have helped Slutskaya win, as the split between her and Sarah was 5-4. He alone could not have helped Kwan win, as she was behind both Sarah and Irina 6-3.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
I placed Hughes 5th and 1st.
Cohen
Slutskaya
Kwan
Suguri
Hughes
Hughes
Kwan
Slutskaya
Cohen
Suguri
Placements:
1 Hughes 3.5
2 Kwan 3.5
3 Slutskaya 4.0
4 Cohen 4.5
5 Suguri 7.0
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
Ah right right - I see now it was a 6-3 split between Slutskaya and Kwan (Kwan's ordinals made me think that a judge flipping her from 3rd to 2nd would have switched her and Slutskaya but Kwan needed two judges more to flip in favour of her over Slutskaya in the free). But in the SP, Inman could have flipped his ordinal to put Kwan 2nd in the SP if he actually wanted to better Hughes' shot of beating Kwan as BOP theorized.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
Because he was actually judging the skating and wasn't just totally corrupt. I don't think he was particularly "invested" in her winning either, just saying in the situation of a close case arising, it personally benefited him the most if she won. The two things don't have to be mutually exclusive either. He can legitimately think Hughes deserved to win the competition based on how much better she was in the LP, and at the same time subconsciously want her to win.
Trying to make a case for Slutskaya over Kwan on spirals?!? Slutskaya did NOT hold the positions longer, she is in spiral position for a total of 8 seconds between 3 positions, compared to 9 for Kwan between 3 positions, and Kwan did more than just 3 positions. It's also not accurate to say Slutskaya's first two positions (held for 5 seconds total) were more difficult than Kwan's first two spirals that were directly connected while doing the edge change (held for 7+ seconds), who also had better extension. Kwan's last position was perfectly fine, there was no rule about needing to hold every position and she had already done enough. I was talking about that recently, before CoP there were spiral positions in the sequences that were used in a more spontaneous fashion, to flash an interesting choreographic shape.
I never said Kwan should win because of her prestige, only that the majority of audiences would be accepting of her winning even with a fall, because of how invested they were in her over the years and how the competition played out. Simply comparing the performances, the difference in artistry making up for the fall is very explainable and something that many people agreed with. Slutskaya had a boring skate that didn't engage audiences as much and she didn't deliver the tech content either, so it's not hard think she should be placed lower.
This is irrelevant to how the Olympics should be judged, but Slutskaya winning the GPF that season was a total joke. She didn't even skate better technically in their last LP's and yet 4/7 judges still put her ahead because of "momentum" and bias, while the other judges deservedly had her in 3rd. Slutskaya shouldn't have won the GPF the previous season either.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
I mean, there's nothing to indicate that we shouldn't take his word when he explains the reasoning behind his choice. You don't have to agree, but too many people on here suspect cheating before accepting that reasonable people can disagree on a result, or prioritize certain program qualities over others. None of us here look at these programs unbiasedly, nor do the judges. But they do their best to be objective, and I wish more people on here could as well.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
So you're suggesting that Inman put Slutskaya ahead of Kwan because he subconsciously wanted Hughes to win? I can't tell if you are saying he was being corrupt or wasn't being corrupt as you keep saying contradictory things.
And yes, doing a turn on a foot between spirals is immensely more difficult and riskier than a change of edge. And Slutskaya's back spiral holding the leg was done for longer longer and covered way more distance than Kwan's back spiral. If you've ever skated yourself, you would know that doing an edge change is easier than doing a turn which can lose momentum and speed when you and don't have the other foot push off for speed -- which is what made Slutskaya's one foot footwork and spiral sequence so difficult. Another differentiator is that Kwan's edge change spiral and back spiral were both done on the same foot, whereas Slutskaya showed the ability to do prolonged spirals on both the left and right foot. I also appreciated Slutskaya's graceful arm movements while doing her spirals instead of just a static arms like so many spirals, and showing strength and speed and control. Even at the end of her back spiral she does that 3-turn to show that she still has speed and control, which punctuated the sequence better than Kwan's forward spiral that was barely held. The only technical aspect of Kwan's spiral sequence that was better than Slutskaya's is is that her initial spiral position was held longer than any spiral position Slutskaya did which was indeed difficult. I'm not saying Kwan's wasn't an exquisite or hard sequence sequence - it's her signature move and it was clearly a highlight and from an artistic standpoint it highlighted the music better than Slutskaya, but from a purely technical standpoint, Slutskaya's spiral sequence was harder overall. Slutskaya's it takes greater control and leg strength, and there is more inherent risk in doing a turn instead of an edge change. Interestingly, laterSlutskaya did a Bielmann Spiral with an edge change herself later on.
Similar threads
- Sticky
