- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
The Times, They Are A Changing.
Is A Quad Really Necessary for the Men?
- Thread starter Joesitz (RIP)
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
But it is not just about the one jump. It doesn't matter if any of the skaters lands one or even two quads if they go on to pop or fall on the rest of their triple jumps.
Look at the first man to land two quads in one program...who was it? Zhengxin Guo - he managed it at a world championships and also i think at the Nagano winter games. Where did he finish there? 8th place.
The guy swho have quads have to hit them and the rest of their jumps otherwise a clean performance from skaters with a full set of triples will beat them. It's never just about one element.
Ant
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
The program components play a role, too. It is popular to notice that the PCSs often seem to track the TESs, but that's not written in stone.
At Worlds, Verner hit two quads, a triple Axel, two Lutzes, loop, and Salchow (he fell on his flip). This gave him higher tech than either Lambiel or Joubert, and would have beaten Takahashi, too, if he had hit the flip.
But artistically his program basically consisted of, "Wow, I hit that quad, I guess I'll try another one! Wow, I hit that, too! Guess I'll try a Lutz!"
Lambiel beat him by 6 points in PCSs.
Editied to add: This, however, is jockeying for position within the quad club. Verner got higher PCSs than any non-Quadling except Buttle, and he almost matched Buttle, too.
At Worlds, Verner hit two quads, a triple Axel, two Lutzes, loop, and Salchow (he fell on his flip). This gave him higher tech than either Lambiel or Joubert, and would have beaten Takahashi, too, if he had hit the flip.
But artistically his program basically consisted of, "Wow, I hit that quad, I guess I'll try another one! Wow, I hit that, too! Guess I'll try a Lutz!"
Lambiel beat him by 6 points in PCSs.
Editied to add: This, however, is jockeying for position within the quad club. Verner got higher PCSs than any non-Quadling except Buttle, and he almost matched Buttle, too.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
Buttle and Lysacek only showed one time that a World medal can still be won without a quad, and that was at the horrible mess of a 2005 Worlds. That will probably never happen again. In fact that is the only year it has happened since Eldredge won the bronze at the 2001 Worlds without a quad. The silver and bronze medal performances of Buttle and Lysacek were such that you would have to go back all the way to the 1989 Worlds, to find a Worlds that they even might still win silver and bronze with the same performances. For Lambiel you would have to go back to the 1998 Worlds (where pre-mature Yagudin won with a subpar performance) to find a Worlds he might have won with the same performance.
At the 2005 Worlds you had Plushenko withdrawing, Joubert turning in his worst free skate of his whole career (I cant think of one worse and he has had other bad ones), and Weir very injured for the event. Lambiel popped 3 triples into singles into the free skate and still won going away by 16 points. He could have taken out every quad, fallen atleast once more, and still won probably. With the increasing depth in the mens events, you almost certainly will not get an event that drops anywhere near that standard, even if there are alot of problems, ever again.
Lysacek's bronze medal performance would have been very lucky to even make the top 10 at the 2004 Worlds. I have never seen such an enormous dropoff from one years Worlds to the next. The 4th and 5th place performances of Lambiel and Weir at the previous years Worlds would absolutely blow Lysacek's bronze medal performance from the 2005 Worlds out of the water.
Dont think the 2005 Worlds is a barometer skaters can still win World medals without a quad. That event was an aberration, not a reference point.
Of course Weir had never landed a quad in competition, so if you're considering him a threat had he been uninjured, you'd have to consider him a quadless threat, supporting the hypothesis that a quad is not necessary.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
Lysacek's Bronze medal winning performance from 2005 shouldn't have even won Bronze that year. 
hwell:
hwell:- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
Fair enough, but if Plushenko had not withdrawn (extremely unlikely occurence) he could have beaten any of Buttle, Lysacek, or a healthy Weir with about 5 falls probably. Then you have Joubert, who after the short program would have been a lock for the silver over Buttle, Lysacek, or Weir, with only a very bad performance for him, but he went far below a very bad skate to an unthinkably bad performance. Basically it was a hugely unlikely occurence that Plushenko would withdraw, and Joubert would do the worst free skate of his life. That is what it took for any of those guys to come into play in that years field. Yet that years field even was post-Goebel/Honda and pre-Takahashi/Oda/Verner as threats. Buttle and Lysacek won their medals strictly by accident that year.
You will never see a quadless performance on a mens podium at Worlds again. The 2005 Worlds was an anomoly based on a weakened field which was both after/before certain skaters as forces, and one of the worst skated events in history. God the fact Lysacek with second rate style, spins, footwork, and programs, and mistakes, in addition to not having a quad, won a medal is sufficient to show how those Worlds was an all time low for mens skating. This year Lysacek at Worlds with quads in both programs, fairly minor mistakes, and improved style and look, was not even close to a medal further reflecting my point. Lysacek's performances from the 2005 Worlds would have placed him about 10th at this years Worlds, but he has improved alot since then and is doing quads now so he takes 5th instead, still down from 3rd of 2005 even with a much improved standard. Buttle's performances from this years Worlds were about the same as 2005 Worlds, so he goes down from 2nd to 8th. There is no point in even considering what it took to medal at the historicaly bad 2005 Worlds to what a skater can or cant medal with.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
Lysacek's Bronze medal winning performance from 2005 shouldn't have even won Bronze that year.
He won the bronze strictly by accident that year. It was performances barely top 10 worthy (if that)in most other years. However it was a massacre of an event, with past stars injured/nearing retirement, the hands down pre-event favorite pulling with a serious injury (Plusenko) despite having a medal sewn up with even a mediocre watered down performance with that injury, other injuries to top contenders, some disaesters from noteables, he won the bronze by accident. You would have to go back to the 1989 or 1990 Worlds to find a year he could have won bronze with the same performances "maybe". Of course if you take into account the chronological advances in skating, and the standards of the time, it would then become the worst medal performance since the 1986 Worlds.
He won the bronze since the judges saw no better alternative I suppose. As ordinary as he was, there wasnt anything they saw better in that years trainwreck. Who do you think should have won the bronze? I am thinking with him winning the bronze it was a like "well who else".
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
No truer words were ever said, but the consensus of forum posters sees the winner as a Quad King. We have 5 in the Club right now - mark me, One of them will win the Worlds in Gothenberg. (they would be Plushenko, Joubert, Takahashi, Li, and Lambiel.)
The three candidates for membership in the Quad Club are . Verner, v.d.Perren and Lysacek each of whom must hit them with ease in at least three major ISU tournaments.. Other hopefuls in the future (if there is time) are Weir, Oda, Buttle, and some of the new names like Patrick Chan, Carrierre, etc.
However, there will be falls, two ft landings, missed combos, pop ups, and if any of those happen, it will dampen the rest of the program because we, and maybe the judges, will be looking for reasons to put down a skater(s).
Joe
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
I don't know if judges are looking for a chance to put them down. I think it's just that if you are sprawled out on the ice after a fall or lurching around trying to save a bad landing, then for that portion of the program at least, you are not skating your choreography, you are not interpreting the music, you are not doing any transitions, you are not displaying any skating skills -- so naturally the Program Components will suffer along with the tech.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
If you will notice on my quad summary from the 2000 Worlds - 2007 Worlds, of the 30 medalists at those 10 Worlds and Olympics, only 3 did atleast try a quad. 2 of them were Buttle and Lysacek at that historicaly poorly skated 2005 Worlds, which is the only reason either of them were on the podium at all. The other one was Todd Eldredge at the 2001 Worlds, a guy who was the true epitome of the "all around skater", skated absolutely perfectly, yet was still marked below Yagudin's sloppy performance (injured) with multiple mistakes just because he landed a shaky quad-triple combination, for the silver. Only a 4th medalist out of those 30, since 2000 Worlds at a World or Olympic event, did not land a quad, that was Buttle at the 2006 Olympics.
Furthermore there are only 9 top five finishers, 9 out of the 50 top five finishers at those last 10 Worlds or Olympics, that did not land a quad.
So there is absolutely nothing that indicates a skater is capable of medaling without a quad today. The depth of the mens field is such now, with enough strong contending skaters, that even a poorly skated event would not come close to reaching the hideous depths of the 2005 Worlds, which is where you had that rare occurence. The quad facts I posted indicate that a skater will be hard pressed to be in the top 5 without atleast standing up a quad or more.
Furthermore there are only 9 top five finishers, 9 out of the 50 top five finishers at those last 10 Worlds or Olympics, that did not land a quad.
So there is absolutely nothing that indicates a skater is capable of medaling without a quad today. The depth of the mens field is such now, with enough strong contending skaters, that even a poorly skated event would not come close to reaching the hideous depths of the 2005 Worlds, which is where you had that rare occurence. The quad facts I posted indicate that a skater will be hard pressed to be in the top 5 without atleast standing up a quad or more.
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2006
I think that to get the highest technical scores yes a quad is an absolute nessecity but if you are an all around skater that makes up those things in the PC section then its not a nessecity.
However, a lower skater to ever get a chance to get up there needs really one or two quads to really make a statement.
However, a lower skater to ever get a chance to get up there needs really one or two quads to really make a statement.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
Johnny Weir. For me, his LP was the second best of the night and his SP was undermarked as well.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
OK. Sounds reasonable. I remember being surprised his short program score was not higher, even with the fall which costs him an automatic 4 points, but I did not check out all his levels. I assumed he lost points in the free program by not maxing out his jump base value, but other then that it seemed low.
The problem is that judges often mark the PCs in accordance with the TES. So a quad would probably up the Skating Skills, choreograpahy and transitions and sometimes put together, as are choreography and performance/execution, so often the PCS get inflated... if they were used properly, yes, Jeff Buttle could probably be on the podium without the quad.
Kypma
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
I dont see PCS as dictated by your quad(s). Takahashi gets similar PCS in programs he does a quad to those he doesnt. Lysacek is getting similar inflated PCS now after getting the quad to what he was before having a quad, they did not become even more inflated.
I think people just want to think that because they think certain skaters like Plushenko or Joubert are overscored on PCS and want to believe that is due to their quads. It isnt, the judges judge like them alot. Buttle would be challenged by Joubert on the PCS, and beaten by Plushenko convincingly on them, even without a quad. Not neccessarily that I feel that it should be that way, but the judges would have it that way regardless.
I think people just want to think that because they think certain skaters like Plushenko or Joubert are overscored on PCS and want to believe that is due to their quads. It isnt, the judges judge like them alot. Buttle would be challenged by Joubert on the PCS, and beaten by Plushenko convincingly on them, even without a quad. Not neccessarily that I feel that it should be that way, but the judges would have it that way regardless.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
The two skaters who seem to get consistent high marks in program components regardless of their tech scores are Lambiel and Buttle.
At 2007 worlds, Jeffrey was 13th in tech in the LP (behind such notables as Bradley, Davydov and Berntsson), but 3rd is PCS. This gave him a happy medium of 8th overall.
The only other top skater who ought to be in this class but isn't, is Weir. Weir should be able to skate a fine program with a couple of great triple Axels (no quad), and score high program components. But the last two years it seems like he has been dispirited and has not brought home the bacon in either category.
At 2007 worlds, Jeffrey was 13th in tech in the LP (behind such notables as Bradley, Davydov and Berntsson), but 3rd is PCS. This gave him a happy medium of 8th overall.
The only other top skater who ought to be in this class but isn't, is Weir. Weir should be able to skate a fine program with a couple of great triple Axels (no quad), and score high program components. But the last two years it seems like he has been dispirited and has not brought home the bacon in either category.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
But with all that, you will be the first to say (and others) that he missed his 3A, so the quad doesn't count, or he does a 3A, but he still needs a quad. am i correct?
The other points in your post are subjective to the eye of the beholder. They really can't be quantified. So after it is all over you can look at the protocols and agree with the subjectivity of the judges PCS scores as if they were inspired by a Supreme Being.
He without opinion can throw the first stone. Levels schmevels.
Joe
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
All praise to Johnny Weir. But he doesn't have a Quad in competition and that's what this discussion is all about. I think you need it for gold, silver, and bronze.but that's jmo.
Joe
Joe
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Not exactly. What I have said in the past about this is just that if a skater does both a quad and a triple Axel, he has a built-in advantage in tech scores over a skater who does one but not the other.
To me, that's just common sense. Which would you rather have, 7.5 points (3A), 9.0 points (4T) or 16.5 points (both)?
Whether it is proper for the judges to lower the program component scores (skating skills, choreography, etc.) when skaters make technical mistakes, that's another question. To me, falls and other obvious boo-boos do take away from the overall effectiveness of the presentation.
Although... Sasha's 2006 Olympic LP is a good example of a skater overcoming early mistakes and pulling the program back together for a strong finish. I had no problem with her receiving high PCSs for her skate.
