Michelle Should Have Won Bronze!!
- Thread starter WOW!
- Start date
I think Lori's analogy of painting by numbers in a straitjacket is a good one. What I miss is some simple but beautfiul moves that the skaters used to do, just for beauty's sake. Michelle's Charlotte, or moves in the field that really express the music. These things can't be so easily qualtified.
I thought the COP component scores would take care of this. The problem is that the skaters are so busy racking up points, there is literally no time (or space) to just skate to the music. Simple movement can be elegant, expressive and musical. But it might not garner points.
Torville and Dean come to mind. If you look at some of their programs now, they look simple in that they are not a sensory overload of trick after trick. But they aren't easy programs - they are extremely subtle, musical, and require real finesse. I don't know if COP can really measure that. We'll have to see.
I feel that Irina won fair and square and I am happy for her. But it is not my idea of beautfiul skating to see a bunch of (great) jumps and foot catches. Where is the body movement, musical expression, line and finesse? Sasha does much better in these areas. But neither has that "extra something" that Michelle brings to the ice when she is at her best. Can COP really judge or reward that? I don't know, but I hope Michelle keeps Spartacus (but gets new spins), and then gets a great LP with choreography that shows her unqiue ability and gets points. I do believe she can do it. Should be a great season.
I thought the COP component scores would take care of this. The problem is that the skaters are so busy racking up points, there is literally no time (or space) to just skate to the music. Simple movement can be elegant, expressive and musical. But it might not garner points.
Torville and Dean come to mind. If you look at some of their programs now, they look simple in that they are not a sensory overload of trick after trick. But they aren't easy programs - they are extremely subtle, musical, and require real finesse. I don't know if COP can really measure that. We'll have to see.
I feel that Irina won fair and square and I am happy for her. But it is not my idea of beautfiul skating to see a bunch of (great) jumps and foot catches. Where is the body movement, musical expression, line and finesse? Sasha does much better in these areas. But neither has that "extra something" that Michelle brings to the ice when she is at her best. Can COP really judge or reward that? I don't know, but I hope Michelle keeps Spartacus (but gets new spins), and then gets a great LP with choreography that shows her unqiue ability and gets points. I do believe she can do it. Should be a great season.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2003
kareliz said:
I think several men have proven this concept wrong. Lambiel, Buttle (several times over this year), Weir (also several times over this year) have proven that they can rack up points under this system AND skate beautifully to their music. Just because the ladies haven't necessarily stepped up as boldly as the men have doesn't mean it's not possible. I think it just hasn't happened yet in a big "World Wide" way. (but I think there are glimmers out there)
Your point about T&D is well taken. I would compare that level of subtelty to Weir's Otonal. The program in full form is point packed, but is brilliant when Johnny is totally "on" and hits every teeny weeny piece of timing and movement required to bring that program to it's fullest.
I also think the group of very strong, bold and powerful skaters deserve their due as well. While I would prefer watching a brilliant Weir or Buttle skate to a brilliant Plush skate, I respect what Plush's skating is about. I think it's about power, presence, strength, etc. Nothing subtle about it. I would consider Irina's style to be a bit similar to that. Raw power. They've been rewarded too with this system. And I think the system should reward different styles.
I don't know. Straight Jacket?? My bet is that Lori finds a way to construct at least a few really great programs that will fare well under COP for next season. (and collect her fee for that) Change is hard for everybody that has to deal with it first hand. But I would be shocked if Lori doesn't go with the flow, and remain at the top of the choreographic FS World - sans straight jacket.
DG
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
DoggyGirl, that was an intersting difference of interpretation that we just had about Audrey Weisiger's quote about "the value of the program" versus "just doing the tricks." I thought that Weisinger was saying, "Damn the CoP and its tricks, I am going to concern myself with the artistic merit of the whole program despite the CoP."
You interpreted as meaning, "Now that we have the CoP, we have to pay attention to the value of the whole program, not just the tricks (like we used to under 6.0 scoring)."
I am looking now at the context (it's in a Spotlight on Skating interview). I think you might be right as to Weisinger's intention.
Still, I think Kereliz has pinpointed the problem. Let's say you have a beautiful classic layback, in perfect Peggy Fleming "attitude" position (you are Angela Nikodinov, say). You work with your choreographer to place it in a context where it connects with natural flow with the rest of the program, where it reflects and highlights just the right musical motif -- in other words, it is just perfect, and the audience swoons with rapture.
But the CoP says, that's only a level one. What you have to do it stick your elbow out to the side, lean over in an awkward position, and hop from one foot to the other in the middle. This increases the "difficulty" to level two, so you get 3.7 points instead of 3.3 points.
I think that's the kind of thing that people are questioning under the colorful heading of "point-whoring." You really are sacrificing the integrity of the program for that extra four tenths of a point. And you are cheating the audience, IMHO. The only reason for watching the sport at all is for those heart-stopping moments like a Nikodinov layback.
Or a Slutskaya triple Lutz-triple loop.
Or a Michelle Kwan spiral. Look at the difference between Michelle's blah spirals in the LP, where she was trying to follow the CoP rule book for maximizing points, versus the breathtaking full rink COE signature Kwan smiral that was the highlight of her exhibition number.
Level 1. She should have grabbed her leg and slued it around in such a manner as to "affect the center of balance of her body," to follow the CoP guidelines.
Well, we'll see. I am overstating my position to try to make a point.
Anyway, good point about the men. If the men can do it, why not the ladies?
Mathman
You interpreted as meaning, "Now that we have the CoP, we have to pay attention to the value of the whole program, not just the tricks (like we used to under 6.0 scoring)."
I am looking now at the context (it's in a Spotlight on Skating interview). I think you might be right as to Weisinger's intention.
Still, I think Kereliz has pinpointed the problem. Let's say you have a beautiful classic layback, in perfect Peggy Fleming "attitude" position (you are Angela Nikodinov, say). You work with your choreographer to place it in a context where it connects with natural flow with the rest of the program, where it reflects and highlights just the right musical motif -- in other words, it is just perfect, and the audience swoons with rapture.
But the CoP says, that's only a level one. What you have to do it stick your elbow out to the side, lean over in an awkward position, and hop from one foot to the other in the middle. This increases the "difficulty" to level two, so you get 3.7 points instead of 3.3 points.
I think that's the kind of thing that people are questioning under the colorful heading of "point-whoring." You really are sacrificing the integrity of the program for that extra four tenths of a point. And you are cheating the audience, IMHO. The only reason for watching the sport at all is for those heart-stopping moments like a Nikodinov layback.
Or a Slutskaya triple Lutz-triple loop.
Or a Michelle Kwan spiral. Look at the difference between Michelle's blah spirals in the LP, where she was trying to follow the CoP rule book for maximizing points, versus the breathtaking full rink COE signature Kwan smiral that was the highlight of her exhibition number.
Level 1. She should have grabbed her leg and slued it around in such a manner as to "affect the center of balance of her body," to follow the CoP guidelines.
Well, we'll see. I am overstating my position to try to make a point.
Anyway, good point about the men. If the men can do it, why not the ladies?
Mathman
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2003
Hi MM!
Thank you as always for your very thoughtful response. I think part of this whole debate has to do with what as fans we are most interested in. I have to be honest and admit that I enjoy the "thrill of competition" side of things more, as a spectator. I think there are many people (and my mother is one of them LOL!) that most enjoy the beauty of a program. If those are two ends of the spectrum, I would guess that most of us are somewhere along the bar between the two.
I appreciate your point about a skater taking a lovely, top notch level 1 element, and potentially "uglying it up" in an effort to raise the difficulty. But I thing the real challenge, and "thrill" for me is seeing someone take a beautiful element, and make it more complex to raise the difficulty, with a result that is a spectacular element. We might see a bunch of REALLY ugly elements while this whole idea develops. But we are sure to see some really spectacular elements along the way too, and those are the ones I'm waiting on the edge of my seat for!!
DG
Thank you as always for your very thoughtful response. I think part of this whole debate has to do with what as fans we are most interested in. I have to be honest and admit that I enjoy the "thrill of competition" side of things more, as a spectator. I think there are many people (and my mother is one of them LOL!) that most enjoy the beauty of a program. If those are two ends of the spectrum, I would guess that most of us are somewhere along the bar between the two.
I appreciate your point about a skater taking a lovely, top notch level 1 element, and potentially "uglying it up" in an effort to raise the difficulty. But I thing the real challenge, and "thrill" for me is seeing someone take a beautiful element, and make it more complex to raise the difficulty, with a result that is a spectacular element. We might see a bunch of REALLY ugly elements while this whole idea develops. But we are sure to see some really spectacular elements along the way too, and those are the ones I'm waiting on the edge of my seat for!!
DG
I think the choreographers are complaining about COP b/c they now have to work harder. It's easy to choreograph a program with crossovers, a smiral to a crest of music and a simple layback. Now they have to think about footwork that matches the beat of the music, creating a spin that has several different positions and the skater is going to have to smile while changing a few postions in the spiral.
The guys are doing a better job b/c men are stronger than women so they can do more complicated footwork, better spins etc.
The guys are doing a better job b/c men are stronger than women so they can do more complicated footwork, better spins etc.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2004
Doggygirl said:
Absolutely. FS is in a path of evolution, and I have to say that I'm the type of person that enjoyes seeing the skaters elevating the sport while also raising the artistry, so I guess I'm of those in the middle of the spectrum. They are playing with the elements to get the better points out of them, and maybe some don't turn out as pretty as a simple element, but there are many skaters that take a simple element and with work elevate their level without compromising the beauty of it; and we also have skaters that have learned how to use the music they skate to and place the elements according to the music's demands, rather than just have background music while skating. I'm for sure waiting for those breathtaking elements and moments in the programs of the skaters.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2004
Doggygirl said:
Again a great example with Johnny Weir. I just love his programs because he is one of those skaters who listen to the music and answers to it with the elements. He answers to the demands of the music, and understands it so well to know where in the music he has to execute his elements. His programs have some of the most difficult tricks, but they look easier to execute because they are so well-blended with the music. Another case with a few ladies, probably a bit biased, but for me Sasha has the most beautiful spins, because she has the ability to make different shapes wityhout taking the beauty of the element, and she has proven that you can have variety of movements in the spirals and still get level 3. Joannie Rochette: she chose a difficult cut of music to the Firebird, but her choreography connected the elements so well that it didn't seem out of place, and her dance movement helped to make the transitions from element to element something beautiful. And how could I not mention Shen and Zhao, whom without a doubt have some of the most demanding programs in terms of technical elements, but there isn't a program in the past 2 or 3 years that looks bad. There movements on the ice, their transitions from element to element follows the music. You don't feel that the program is heavy with tricks, even when it is, because they use the music as their canvas to ellaborate their routines, and this is something they've been doing since Turandot, before the CoP.
What I mean to say is that it is possible to answer to the demands of the CoP in terms of getting the points, and at the same time also elevate their presentations without compromising their artistic and beauty of a routine, IMHO. It is about finding a balance between both, and that is what the sport of FS is about. Skaters have had to adapt to many changes, from double jumps, to triple jumps, to quads. Why not also do the same for the other elements?
The original thread statement
In answer to the original statement that Michelle Kwan should have won Bronze, my opinion is she got the placement she earned. She fell, skated tentatively, two footed jumps, missed secure jumps-in-the-bank and wasn't in top competitive form. One needs to compete a lot to be competitive with longevity in skating. Michelle performed at an all time low for her, while Kostner performed at an all time high for herself, as did Sasha Cohen and Irina Slutskaya (in many respects, this was one of her best ever).
In terms of CoP milking, I think the judges have to JUDGE the elements fairly. In the Mathman layback example, a Level 1 layback done to perfection should get GOE of +2 or +3, and the element can get 1.2 + GOE points. A Level 2 layback with GOE of 0 will only get 1.6 points. The judges get lazy and complacent, and see a fantastic layback like that and give a 0, or a tiny +1.
On paper it should work, but I adhere to "modified 6.0 version", where we now can go to 6.5 or so if you divide the TES and PCS by 10 each to get a rough approximation of where they correlate to the 6.0 system (same old judges, same old judging). All this CoP chatter is interesting, but the same as the old "base mark" idea in 6.0.
In answer to the original statement that Michelle Kwan should have won Bronze, my opinion is she got the placement she earned. She fell, skated tentatively, two footed jumps, missed secure jumps-in-the-bank and wasn't in top competitive form. One needs to compete a lot to be competitive with longevity in skating. Michelle performed at an all time low for her, while Kostner performed at an all time high for herself, as did Sasha Cohen and Irina Slutskaya (in many respects, this was one of her best ever).
In terms of CoP milking, I think the judges have to JUDGE the elements fairly. In the Mathman layback example, a Level 1 layback done to perfection should get GOE of +2 or +3, and the element can get 1.2 + GOE points. A Level 2 layback with GOE of 0 will only get 1.6 points. The judges get lazy and complacent, and see a fantastic layback like that and give a 0, or a tiny +1.
On paper it should work, but I adhere to "modified 6.0 version", where we now can go to 6.5 or so if you divide the TES and PCS by 10 each to get a rough approximation of where they correlate to the 6.0 system (same old judges, same old judging). All this CoP chatter is interesting, but the same as the old "base mark" idea in 6.0.
A number of people have mentioned Michelle's "magic," "heart," or "extra something" as not being rewarded by the COP. I became a fan of Michelle's skating during her "Aranjuez" season, so the following question has nothing to do with not being a fan of Michelle. My question is, "Should any judging system include "magic," "heart," or whatever you want to call it as a scored element?" If so, the powers that be could easily add "Magic/charisma/heart" as one of the component scores to the COP.kareliz said:
My only comment would be, "Live by the heart, die by the heart."
Personally, I've seen a number of great programs designed for the COP. I've seen a number that were the same thing the skater did under the 6.0. As for Lori Nichols comment, I have great respect for her as a skating choreographer. As a matter of fact, IMO, she choreographed the best pairs LP we saw by far--Totmianina & Marinin's. It's always hard getting used to a new system, especially when you've been working for so long and with such great sucess under the old. But IMO, if any choreographers in skating or gymnastic or synchronized swimming don't want guidelines and rules, they should get out of the competitive side of the sport. Jeff Buttle's choreographer, David Wilson, did a he!!uva job with Jeff's LP.
And let's not forget Michelle only lost the bronze by a very small margin and almost exclusively because of falls or deciding not do the 3loop. She also had two level 1 spins in the SP that could be upgraded to level 2 so easily and probably would have put her in 1st or 2nd after the SP.
And lest we forget that it was Michelle who suffered under the 6.0 system at the '98 Olympics when her Oly "Lyra Angelica," according to the judges who commented, "looked slow, flat, and safe," especially compared to her Nationals performance and also compared to Lipinski's ball of fire and 3lp/3lp.
I could cite many more "wha' happened?" results in ladies and other disciplines under the 6.0 system. One thing that tells me a lot is that the skaters like the COP. They can compete early in the season with a program and know what they need to work on.
Michelle is the most beloved skater on the planet and in her first experience with the COP, she finishes off the Worlds podium for the first time in a decade. Plus the COP is a b**** to learn, no doubt about it. No wonder so many skating fans are feeling like, "Off with the COP's head!"
Now don't you think you might feel differently when Michelle wins the OGM under the COP in Torino, which is exactly what I think she'll do? And with stunning, classic magical Michelle programs, too. JMO.
Rgirl
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
IMO, Michelle skated beautifully but one has to remember that it is a SPORT and not just a beauty contest. Carolina was on the ball that night with the high technical elements second only to Irina. Michelle in order to remain competitive has to do more than a 3-2-2. Sasha, too who also skated exceptionally well should get the message if gold is her aim that Irina has it over all of them. Anyone at this point in time has a lot of catching up to beat Irina in Torino. jmo.
Joe
Joe
Michelle
R GIRL you have a point. I never doubt Michelle. I dont think Michelle is 100% committed yet and hasnt really made up her mind to do the OLYS. Irina was 100% commited to winning Worlds and she did. ITA with most saying that the integrity of the programs are getting lost at this point and the emphasis will be on the tricks, Generic skating. Im afraid the programs will all look alike and it will be certain moves, spins etc. by all skaters. I respect all the skaters and believe they work hard each doing what they can Not all skaters can do bielmans or spin as Sasha can or jump as high as Irina but falling, popping out of jumps ,putting hands down, thudding on a jump and other things takes away from the quality of skating for me. I dont think it will bode well for the sport if mistakes such as these goes by and a good spin makes up for flawed skating. Not sure how the casual fan will respond to this. I want to see winning programs be like they use to be flawless or perfect. Irinas was great this yr. her FS that is. Somewhat empty in chor but still great she skated with everything in her and that was nice to see.
R GIRL you have a point. I never doubt Michelle. I dont think Michelle is 100% committed yet and hasnt really made up her mind to do the OLYS. Irina was 100% commited to winning Worlds and she did. ITA with most saying that the integrity of the programs are getting lost at this point and the emphasis will be on the tricks, Generic skating. Im afraid the programs will all look alike and it will be certain moves, spins etc. by all skaters. I respect all the skaters and believe they work hard each doing what they can Not all skaters can do bielmans or spin as Sasha can or jump as high as Irina but falling, popping out of jumps ,putting hands down, thudding on a jump and other things takes away from the quality of skating for me. I dont think it will bode well for the sport if mistakes such as these goes by and a good spin makes up for flawed skating. Not sure how the casual fan will respond to this. I want to see winning programs be like they use to be flawless or perfect. Irinas was great this yr. her FS that is. Somewhat empty in chor but still great she skated with everything in her and that was nice to see.
cianni said:
As much as I hate to agree with what you're saying, I have to. I don't think Michelle was 100% committed to winning worlds or to worlds either for that matter, as obvious by her Qual and Long. When I watched her long, I was just shaking my head because the performance was so unlike her. Afterwards when it ended, the program left me with a feeling of nothing, which hardly happens but then I don't care for Bolero so that may have played a part. Bolero is at the bottom when it comes to favorite performances of Michelle and Spartacus is right around there as well although I know that some people will disagree with me about Spartacus. I just hope she ditches Spartacas as she is with Bolero and come up with two new amazing performances with that ommph factor that neither this season possessed imo. Hoping to finally see Tango at last.
As for her being 100% committed to Turino, I seriously think she needs to be starting soon and I think she will be, considering it's less than a year away. So I don't see the reasoning as others do that she would seriously consider retiring especially when the time is fast approaching for Turino. I just hope this Worlds served as a serious wake up call because she needed a reality check if she knew what she was going to face next season and this is coming from a Kwan fan.
As for the system, I have some doubts about it but I'm willing to see how it fares out although it dismays me that the standard seems to be going lower due to it. This Worlds was one of the worst in my opinion with its mistake-ridden performances albeit there were a few highlights to be noted.
As for the topic, I wil empathatically state that Michelle did not deserve bronze. Even though it pains me that she's off of the podium for the first time after 9 or 10 years, I think this will bode well for her for next season. She really needed this lesson although I thought she had learnt it in Dortmund.
Last edited:
I was told right after the National that the Worlds is not that important to her now that she won the #9 US title. It was very important to her (not only in the sense of record tieing, there is other reason you might see at coming May in disscussion board). Now the worlds result shows. But I don't expect an off podium finish, IMO, neither team Kwan. Now she should know where she stands under the CoP.Kuchana said:
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2005
........................................................................Yep, Magic Heart not withstanding.millie said:
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
A new era?
The most successful figure skater of all time was Sonja Henie. That sport began in earnest in about 1900 and was discontinued in the early 1990s. In the sport of figure skating, you won championships and medals by tracing more accurate figures in the ice than anyone else.
The next phase I suppose could be called "performance skating." Over the last dozen years or so, you won by skating more beautifully than anyone else. Of course "beautiful skating" included beautiful technique on jumps, spins and moves in the field, as well as artistry, musicality and the ability to draw in the audience. Michelle Kwan was the outstanding athlete of this era.
At first I did not expect that the new judging system would have much effect on the sport. But these discussions have made me wonder if we really are entering a new era. Under CoP scoring, you win by amassing more points than anyone else. This absolutely is a paradigm shift.
People will do whatever they are rewarded for. Accruing points by itself does not preclude beautiful skating. For that matter, the CoP does not prevent you from going out there and tracing figures. But you won't win that way, as you did in the past.
So I am left with a lot of questions about the direction the sport is about to take. Will it go the way of gymnastics? Will the new judging system help or hurt skating's popularity? Will it provide incentive and opportunity for a resurgence of pro and show skating as an alternative?
Mathman
The most successful figure skater of all time was Sonja Henie. That sport began in earnest in about 1900 and was discontinued in the early 1990s. In the sport of figure skating, you won championships and medals by tracing more accurate figures in the ice than anyone else.
The next phase I suppose could be called "performance skating." Over the last dozen years or so, you won by skating more beautifully than anyone else. Of course "beautiful skating" included beautiful technique on jumps, spins and moves in the field, as well as artistry, musicality and the ability to draw in the audience. Michelle Kwan was the outstanding athlete of this era.
At first I did not expect that the new judging system would have much effect on the sport. But these discussions have made me wonder if we really are entering a new era. Under CoP scoring, you win by amassing more points than anyone else. This absolutely is a paradigm shift.
People will do whatever they are rewarded for. Accruing points by itself does not preclude beautiful skating. For that matter, the CoP does not prevent you from going out there and tracing figures. But you won't win that way, as you did in the past.
So I am left with a lot of questions about the direction the sport is about to take. Will it go the way of gymnastics? Will the new judging system help or hurt skating's popularity? Will it provide incentive and opportunity for a resurgence of pro and show skating as an alternative?
Mathman
I don't see the new scoring system hurting the popularity of fans who know of and about the CoP.......but the casual fan or interested viewers will be perplexed. My hubby couldn't understand how Jeff Buttle could come in second with two falls........he knows nothing of the scoring, only what he sees. He said if you fall in gymnastics, you're pretty much out of the running in that event.
I don't think true competitors get that same adrenaline rush they get during a competition versus a show performance. Some athletes "feed" off that rush. They get their inspiration from it, their motivation. I guess time will tell.....42
Similar threads
- Locked
