Good for her. She wasn't better than Kwan. Slutskaya was wildly overpraised as a successor to Kwan because of her performance at the 2000 GPF. She NEVER skated as well as that during any competition thereafter and the performance wasn't as good as Kwan's best performances to begin with. Her "artistic reneissance" was massively overstated.
Irina in her prime was technically superior to Kwan if both were at their best. Her jumps, spins, and even footwork were all superior, and she skated with more power and speed. And while her "artistry" wasnt very good, her presentation which is what the 2nd mark was, was actually quite strong. Not better than Michelle's but it didnt have to be to win since she was superior technically on a good day.
She had a phenomonal 1996, better than any Lysacek ever had, stop trying to downplay it.
Nah, no year is better than one that includes winning the Olympic Gold, the prize Kwan always wanted to win and the only reason she stayed in the sport so long. Do you seriously think Kwan wouldnt trade her 1996 to have Evan's 2006 Oly Gold included? And I never said Michelle's 1996 wasnt phenomenal and that she wasnt dominant in that season, other than the ridiculous standards you hold Lysacek and Yamaguchi to that you must go undefeated (Kwan did not) and you must win the big event decisively by a clear marging (which Kwan again did not). You claimed falsely she went undefeated and I pointed out that you were wrong.
She continued that streak by winning every competition she entered, until the LP at 1997 Nationals. Despite her struggles in the later part of the 1997 season, she was still considered to be by far the best if she skated her best.
This if she skated her best nonsense is meaningless. Kwan's biggest edge over her competitors was usually her consistency. Alot of her main rivals who could have beaten her over the years like Slutskaya, Cohen, Chen, Bobek, cracked under pressure often. Well Tara's biggest weapon was that she was even more consistent than Michelle, hence why she regularly beat her in important events at ages 14 and 15. Tara was clearly the top skater of 1997 since she beat Kwan in the 3 biggest events both were in together in a row- U.S Nationals, Grand Prix final, and Worlds. To deny otherwise is foolish.
Kwan only lost one competition in each of the 1998, 1999, and 2000 seasons. She placed 2nd at the ones she lost and was always considered to be the best if she skated her best (aside from maybe 2000 Worlds but I disagree with that sentiment). Yes, that is dominance.
Kwan lost the biggest events of the year in both 1998 and 1999. That is not dominating.
That is like saying a tennis player who doesnt win the Grand Slams that year is dominant.
And since you like to qualify Evan's wins Kwan had to come from 3rd after the short to win both Nationals and Worlds in 2000. 2000 Nationals many felt she was gifted the title on reputation with her sluggish performances, and 2000 Worlds where she skated brilliantly she still was gifted the title (using the line of reasoning you did for Evan's wins that is) by Butyrskaya and Slutskaya both making major errors in the long program.
Lysacek, on the other hand, ONLY won Worlds in 2009, he lost multiple times in 2010, and he was not considered the absolute favorite for any event. He was never dominant, even if he did win the 3 biggest titles in the year long period from 2009 Worlds to 2010 Olympics.
It is pretty silly to say Lysacek did not dominate 2009-2010 then say Kwan dominated 1998-2000. Lysacek won the Olympics, Worlds, and the Grand Prix final in 2 years. Kwan from 1998-2000 won 2 Worlds, so less important titles in a 3 year span than Evan in a 2 year span, yet she was dominant those 3 years and he wasnt those 2 years? Please.
Hardly desperate. It speaks to the way Kwan was undefeated at competitions that were considered very significant within the Professional World, not just cheesefests.
So the ridiculous Pro Am events which Cinquanta put in place just to get rid of professional skating altogether (and succeeded and now the sports popularity is going down the drain under his watch so backfired on him) which only lasted a year or two, where Kwan was mostly competing against eligible retired old ladies who couldnt even do all the triples is now more important than actual ISU events?
And this isnt desperate/
Especially since several of those performances were 7-Triple programs. Kwan's performance of "Ariane" at the 1998 World Pro would have absolutely trashed Maria Butyrskaya at 1999 Worlds and Kwan went into 1999 Worlds as the undisputed, nobody-is-even-close-to-her favorite. She WAS the dominant fixture of Women's Figure Skating.
As I mentioned already Slutskaya at her best would have won the 2000 and 2001 Worlds. Maria at her best would have also won the 2000 Worlds. Cohen at her best would have won the 2003 and 2004 and 2005 Nationals over Kwan and probably the 2003 Worlds had she skated her best. Ito at her best might have won the 96 Worlds. Chen would have for sure won the 96 Worlds if she hadnt bombed the rest of the season leading up to it which cost her her favorites status. Lipinski would have probably won the 98 Worlds over Kwan (who fell) had she skated. Does any of this matter? Of course not, Michelle skated the best of anyone at those events (well other than maybe 96 Worlds) so rightfully won. Maria skated far and away better than Michelle at the 99 Worlds so fully deserved to win, whereas Michelle won a controversial silver after being held up in the short program. So Michelle could produce her best in an event against where she by rights shouldnt have even been eligible (it was a disgrace seeing people like Kwan, Shen & Zhou, and Yagudin at the World PRO Championships) against women with 3 max, 2, 1, or 0 triples, but couldnt when it really mattered at Worlds of the Worlds that year? Oh well better luck next time.
Centennial On Ice was not a real part of the competitive season. It was like Marshalls or Campbells and didn't have much meaning. Individual Grand Prix events may have weaker fields, but they are more important.
Hogwash. Centennial On Ice was 10x the legitimacy of an event for an "eligible" skater as the now falsely named and soon to be extinct as a result World Pros and other cheese pro ams Kwan competed in throughout the 98-99 season. If you actually followed skating you would realize the event attracted some of the strongest fields of the whole season.
No, I never said Kerrigan got 5.9's when she bombed. YOU should read my post, since your reading comprehension has failed you again. What I said was her weak performances (which characterized her entire season lead up to Worlds) got 5.9's.
No that is not what you said, and you are still wrong. No 5.9s here either:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eh_uYYfQ3w
The only events she got 5.9s in were her only Nationals and a Pro Am event (and contrary to what you believe pro ams against 30 and 40 year old women are far less important for eligible skaters than various events that now compose the current Grand Prix).
Yet again you try to connect two unrelated things. Mirai being talked about as underscored doesn't at all prove Joannie was overscored. People looked at Mirai's performance and said "Wow, she was clean and had awesome spins and extensions and a big smile, I wonder if she was undermarked." The point differences aren't the most important thing (you're looking only on paper, what a surprise). Asada was considered on a higher level over both of them because of her record-making Triple Axels. People mostly ignored Asada's mistakes later in the program, even though they were incredibly costly in terms of the points. That's why there isn't much debate about who deserved Silver between Asada and Joannie.
1. Nearly everyone at the time said Joannie was overscored. Even most Canadians who post on various skating forums.
2. Nearly everyone at the time said no way Joannie should have been that close to Mao in points in the end.
Yes in addition to those things that Nagasu was underscored.
Dube & Davison would have been 2 points behind Pang & Tong (who didn't skate their best, considering their Death Spiral was called as Level 1) without the fall. They would have still been behind Z/Z (who the judges were coming down on) as well. That doesn't sound off.
You are assuming no additional points at all in GOE and PCS without a fall which is frankly stupid, especialy the way the judges were scoring in Vancouver. They were ahead of Mukhortova & Trankov with comparable mistakes which is also a far cry from the rest of the season.
I'm not contradicting myself at all, you simply fail to understand what I am saying. I downplayed the time violation because I don't believe it was as damaging to the scores Kwan received as the momentum she lost from her poor skate in the qualifying round. The judges could have just barely slapped her on the hand for the time violation if they wanted to but instead they seriously marked her down. It wasn't her best performance regardless (the way she skated the program the year before was better) but the fact that she went clean and was out of the top 3 was something that had never happened to her before.
So you say Kwan was clean, then she wasnt clean because of the time violation (which is what I said all along anyway), and now again she was clean. Make up your mind please. :scowl:
Either way it doesnt matter to my original point. Kwan did not need a triple-triple to win the LP at those Worlds unless Cohen skated cleanly and everyone knows Sasha was going to mess up in the LP. She did not need it to beat Shizuka as proven by that with a doubled 2nd triple lutz she barely lost the LP on the closest split to Shizuka with 2 triple-triples. And she certainly did not need it to beat junior phenom Ando who was not even a seriousu consideration for the title (for a medal maybe).
Ando wasn't considered as poorly as you state either. Listen to both the U.S. and British commentary of her SP. They were very appreciative and thought Ando had a lot of confidence in her performance and a GREAT scratch spin (where on earth has that spin gone for Ando, I wonder). Dick Button even called her Layback "very pleasant". It is very likely that Ando would have received massive scores in the LP if she skated clean with a Quad and two 3-3's.
Ando received 5.5s and 5.6s for presentation at those Worlds. They werent magically going to go up to the 5.8s she needed to win the LP with just a quad salchow (which she would have needed to win the LP even with 6.0s for technical merit). The SP was better for the completely unartistic and raw 2004 version of Ando since her flaws of ghastly posture, not so good basics, lack of quality and pitched forward landings on many of her jumps, were not as evident in the short program. Similar to how Slutskaya's flaws are less exposed in a short program, but Slutskaya is a far better skater than 2004 Ando was. In the LP the same commentators you refer to were far less complimentary about Ando.
Incorrect, she was still practicing them. She wasn't PLANNING to do it in the LP, although in retrospect it's debatable whether she would have beaten Michelle and Shizuka without a 3-3 considering the way they skated at those respective competitions. Nobody was expecting Michelle and Shizuka to skate that well. That's why Cohen was the favorite for both of those titles after the SP.
Sasha skated a very subpar and rather weak LP at Worlds and still took 3 judges off Shizuka. Had she skated cleanly without a 3-3 she would have dusted Shizuka without a problem. Shizuka did not have even close to the rep of Cohen and Kwan, the way the judges viewed her was nothing like how they viewed her after winning Worlds. The only way she was going to beat them at the 2004 Worlds was to blow them out of the water which she did (in reality, not the judges scores) in the LP at those Worlds.
You're not looking at things in the moment. The judges might have ultimately decided that a 6-Triple Kwan with no 3-3 was better than Shizuka with multiple 3-3's, or Miki with a Quad + multiple 3-3's, or a clean Cohen with no 3-3, but Kwan herself did not know that before skating the LP (and she needed to win the LP + have someone beat Cohen as well in order to win the title). She was coming from behind and there was absolutely NO guarantee that her artistry would hold her up. She DID objectively need to do a 3-3 to have a chance at Gold if others skated their best. But, unlike earlier in her career, she didn't attempt it. Which, yes, is a sign that she was technically past her prime.
She did not plan 6 triples. She planned 7. And had she not doubled the second triple lutz, which was essentialy a fluke as she was still regularly landing it, she would have ended up with 7. So stop with this 6 triple nonsense, that was never the plan. She planned 7, and all she did not plan was the triple toe-triple toe which she only did about 6 times after 1997 (keeping in mind this is someone who skated almost another decade, and considering her undefeated 02-03 season was in her prime atleast another 6 years).
Wrong. She was considered to be potentially more talented than Michelle, and everyone wanted to see her achieve a legendary level of artistry, but her Long Programs in 2003 and 2004 did not surpass Kwan's. Again, look at the artistic marks Cohen received for a perfect performance of Swan Lake vs. the artistic marks Kwan received for Tosca. More importantly, look at the way people talked about those performances and how much people talk about them now.
The only time Cohen skated Swan Lake cleanly under the 6.0 system was at the post Worlds Cheesefest and she received 6.0s for presentation for it. At Nationals she had a bad fall and another two footed jump and still received a 6.0 for presentation (the rest all 5.8 or 5.9). So given that you would have to be delusional to think had she skated cleanly it wouldnt have rained 6.0s for her at those Nationals. Kwan was able to receive all those 6.0s since she skated brilliantly and flawlessly after Cohen had already fallen and messed up. At Worlds she skated even worse than Nationals (despite not falling) and still got almost all 5.9s for presentation. And the rest of the year she was competing under COP, but was crushing everyone on the active circuit at the time (which by choice did not include Kwan yes) in PCS. So your comment on the marks makes no sense. I agree her 2004 LP did not live up to her full artistic potential but it was still a winner had she skated it cleanly. You keep bringing up Dick and Peggy which is funny since they praised and gushed on Sasha's skating and her "artistry" more than any other skater during this period, including even Michelle who they loved.
Kwan by that point didnt have any real edge on Sasha other than a big edge in jump consistency and superior basic skating skills. Sasha had superior spins, superior flexability and positions on spirals (despite this being Kwan's biggest trump card), excellent footwork in the mid 2000 years, and was just as musical and even more polished.
). You're not looking it in the right way either. Michelle Kwan was the person everyone said "if she skates her best, she will win." Her personal bests were the undisputed bar for the sport. She had long stretches of being undefeated as well and then would just get beaten once in a season. Kristi was NOT thought of that way during her amateur career.
And well-deserved for the dominant skater of Europe from 1992 to 1995. 
