Right, I think you agree with me then. Again, I want the emphasize that I like Angela Wang's skating a ton and hopes that she can prove me wrong, but consistency matters in this sport.
State of American Ladies: 2012-13 Season
- Thread starter R.D.
- Start date
Right, I think you agree with me then. Again, I want the emphasize that I like Angela Wang's skating a ton and hopes that she can prove me wrong, but consistency matters in this sport.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2003
Not surprised Alissa withdrew from NHK. I'm not sure how much it will benefit her to compete at Nationals, unless she really is fully recovered, and that seems unlikely. If she does compete, she'll come in cold, with no real competition experience on the season, against girls who will have competed 2 to 4 events and built up some momentum. I'll be surprised if Alissa gets the same kind of PCS gifting as in the past--remember, the judges have current GP winners/medalists to support this year. I think Alissa's chances of making the World team are low. And if she bombs at Nationals, it won't help toward making the Olympics next year.
- Joined
- May 19, 2011
She had a "good rebound" in that she had an excellent SP at COR after tanking at SC. But TBH I was disappointed in her FS. It scored better but she only did one extra triple than SC. As it is, three or four triples is enough to win you a medal this year...
As for Alissa pulling out of NHK, I'm not surprised. I don't know what to expect from her at nationals this year. Her chances at making the world team this year were gutter low anyway but having nationals be her first competition is going to be even worse. Even if she does pull off a great performance, I can't see the federation naming her to the team again...not after last year.
Last edited:
all this talk about reputation judging depresses me. i want to see the judges score what is on the ice at nationals, and not penalize anyone, even one of my least favorite skaters, for not having built up any 'credibility' or 'consistency' in advance.
because if you think about it, how many competitions does it take to 'establish' consistency? 2? 3? a whole season? how about 3 good and 1 bad? 2 good, 1 bad, is overall bad, because the *most recent* one is bad? or 1 good, 1 bad, then 1 good is ok, because the most recent competition constitutes a 'trend'?
look at the excitement over christina gao at skate america. if 1 good competition does it for christina gao, why didn't JGP croatia re-write anybody's impression of angela?
what constitutes a good competition? say, let's suppose... 1 good SP and 1 middle-of-the-road LP, which won because most everybody else splatted? how do you rate, say, leah keiser, who won her first JGP, but at her 2nd JGP, skated a long program that was nowhere near her best? how about hannah miller--she was thought to be miss consistency going into her 2nd JGP, she even beat gracie gold at 2012 skate detroit! is she an inconsistent skater now, because she messed up 1 element in her JGP croatia short program? in angela's 2012 US nationals short [which chuckm termed 'disastrous'], she messed up 1 jump--just like hannah at JGP croatia.
how about a skater who gets a big score at one competition, and then at the next competition, for jumps of about the same quality (no obvious skids, 2 footed, no errors that the naked eye can see) is sitting in the kiss and cry exclaiming 'what!?' when the scores for her apparently successfully completed jumps go up--because these scores are about 20 points below what she'd expected, thanks to all the downgrades? is she now a lesser skater? an inconsistent rotator? god forbid!
maybe each skater should carry a reputation score into each competition, like the level of difficulty of each dive in the diving competitions, and the skater's score will be multiplied accordingly. this way at least fans would know what the actual raw value on the ice of the performance was... before the judges added their reputation / consistency bonus
i hate reputation judging, have hated it since i began watching seriously in 1992. if czisny is one of the two who skated best at nationals, the judges should give her the scores she deserves and not pretend that she didn't skate as well as ashley wagner and one of the others who have 'impressed.' same applies for christina, angela, agnes, mirai, leah, hannah, courtney hicks, samantha cesario, everybody!
in the past i have disagreed with the nationals judges [i even disagree with this year's easterns and pacific coast sectionals, though I have no horse in those races], so probably this year my sense of 'fair' will also not jive with theirs. i find it discouraging, however, when people say things like they hope [i'm paraphrasing here] czisny is never sent to worlds again.
if the fairly-scored, justly-chosen two go to worlds, and the US ends up with 2, 1, 0 olympic spots in ladies, so be it. fair judging would restore my faith in cosmic justice, although clearly that's not required for me to continue watching... as long as angela and mariah haven't yet switched to pairs or quit skating for college... LOL
to AlexRus: angela has already proven to me that she's a good skater. she can skate a program without any jumps and i'd still watch (in fact, i'd prefer it). i understand and respect that other people--wise, knowledgeable people--define 'good' skating differently.
to kwanatic: angela said in the recent icenetwork article [i'm paraphrasing again] that she just wants to skate two solid programs, and is not focusing on the placements, because the placements are not up to her [in contrast to hannah miller who targeted finishing 7th or 8th at nationals], so i think she's read the writing on the wall. i just hope she doesn't quit skating for college before she fixes all the faults i find in her skating... LOL... and becomes as good as i believe she can be...
because if you think about it, how many competitions does it take to 'establish' consistency? 2? 3? a whole season? how about 3 good and 1 bad? 2 good, 1 bad, is overall bad, because the *most recent* one is bad? or 1 good, 1 bad, then 1 good is ok, because the most recent competition constitutes a 'trend'?
look at the excitement over christina gao at skate america. if 1 good competition does it for christina gao, why didn't JGP croatia re-write anybody's impression of angela?
what constitutes a good competition? say, let's suppose... 1 good SP and 1 middle-of-the-road LP, which won because most everybody else splatted? how do you rate, say, leah keiser, who won her first JGP, but at her 2nd JGP, skated a long program that was nowhere near her best? how about hannah miller--she was thought to be miss consistency going into her 2nd JGP, she even beat gracie gold at 2012 skate detroit! is she an inconsistent skater now, because she messed up 1 element in her JGP croatia short program? in angela's 2012 US nationals short [which chuckm termed 'disastrous'], she messed up 1 jump--just like hannah at JGP croatia.
how about a skater who gets a big score at one competition, and then at the next competition, for jumps of about the same quality (no obvious skids, 2 footed, no errors that the naked eye can see) is sitting in the kiss and cry exclaiming 'what!?' when the scores for her apparently successfully completed jumps go up--because these scores are about 20 points below what she'd expected, thanks to all the downgrades? is she now a lesser skater? an inconsistent rotator? god forbid!
maybe each skater should carry a reputation score into each competition, like the level of difficulty of each dive in the diving competitions, and the skater's score will be multiplied accordingly. this way at least fans would know what the actual raw value on the ice of the performance was... before the judges added their reputation / consistency bonus
i hate reputation judging, have hated it since i began watching seriously in 1992. if czisny is one of the two who skated best at nationals, the judges should give her the scores she deserves and not pretend that she didn't skate as well as ashley wagner and one of the others who have 'impressed.' same applies for christina, angela, agnes, mirai, leah, hannah, courtney hicks, samantha cesario, everybody!
in the past i have disagreed with the nationals judges [i even disagree with this year's easterns and pacific coast sectionals, though I have no horse in those races], so probably this year my sense of 'fair' will also not jive with theirs. i find it discouraging, however, when people say things like they hope [i'm paraphrasing here] czisny is never sent to worlds again.
if the fairly-scored, justly-chosen two go to worlds, and the US ends up with 2, 1, 0 olympic spots in ladies, so be it. fair judging would restore my faith in cosmic justice, although clearly that's not required for me to continue watching... as long as angela and mariah haven't yet switched to pairs or quit skating for college... LOL
to AlexRus: angela has already proven to me that she's a good skater. she can skate a program without any jumps and i'd still watch (in fact, i'd prefer it). i understand and respect that other people--wise, knowledgeable people--define 'good' skating differently.
to kwanatic: angela said in the recent icenetwork article [i'm paraphrasing again] that she just wants to skate two solid programs, and is not focusing on the placements, because the placements are not up to her [in contrast to hannah miller who targeted finishing 7th or 8th at nationals], so i think she's read the writing on the wall. i just hope she doesn't quit skating for college before she fixes all the faults i find in her skating... LOL... and becomes as good as i believe she can be...
Last edited:
all this talk about reputation judging depresses me. i want to see the judges score what is on the ice at nationals, and not penalize anyone, even one of my least favorite skaters, for not having built up any 'credibility' or 'consistency' in advance.
because if you think about it, how many competitions does it take to 'establish' consistency? 2? 3? a whole season? how about 3 good and 1 bad? 2 good, 1 bad, is overall bad, because the *most recent* one is bad? or 1 good, 1 bad, then 1 good is ok, because the most recent competition constitutes a 'trend'?
look at the excitement over christina gao at skate america. if 1 good competition does it for christina gao, why didn't JGP croatia re-write anybody's impression of angela?
what constitutes a good competition? say, let's suppose... 1 good SP and 1 middle-of-the-road LP, which won because most everybody else splatted? how do you rate, say, leah keiser, who won her first JGP, but at her 2nd JGP, skated a long program that was nowhere near her best? how about hannah miller--she was thought to be miss consistency going into her 2nd JGP, she even beat gracie gold at 2012 skate detroit! is she an inconsistent skater now, because she messed up 1 element in her JGP croatia short program? in angela's 2012 US nationals short [which chuckm termed 'disastrous'], she messed up 1 jump--just like hannah at JGP croatia.
how about a skater who gets a big score at one competition, and then at the next competition, for jumps of about the same quality (no obvious skids, 2 footed, no errors that the naked eye can see) is sitting in the kiss and cry exclaiming 'what!?' when the scores for her apparently successfully completed jumps go up--because these scores are about 20 points below what she'd expected, thanks to all the downgrades? is she now a lesser skater? an inconsistent rotator? god forbid!
maybe each skater should carry a reputation score into each competition, like the level of difficulty of each dive in the diving competitions, and the skater's score will be multiplied accordingly. this way at least fans would know what the actual raw value on the ice of the performance was... before the judges added their reputation / consistency bonus
i hate reputation judging, have hated it since i began watching seriously in 1992. if czisny is one of the two who skated best at nationals, the judges should give her the scores she deserves and not pretend that she didn't skate as well as ashley wagner and one of the others who have 'impressed.' same applies for christina, angela, agnes, mirai, leah, hannah, courtney hicks, samantha cesario, everybody!
in the past i have disagreed with the nationals judges [i even disagree with this year's easterns and pacific coast sectionals, though I have no horse in those races], so probably this year my sense of 'fair' will also not jive with theirs. i find it discouraging, however, when people say things like they hope [i'm paraphrasing here] czisny is never sent to worlds again.
if the fairly-scored, justly-chosen two go to worlds, and the US ends up with 2, 1, 0 olympic spots in ladies, so be it. fair judging would restore my faith in cosmic justice, although clearly that's not required for me to continue watching... as long as angela and mariah haven't yet switched to pairs or quit skating for college... LOL
to AlexRus: angela has already proven to me that she's a good skater. she can skate a program without any jumps and i'd still watch (in fact, i'd prefer it). i understand and respect that other people--wise, knowledgeable people--define 'good' skating differently.
to kwanatic: angela said in the recent icenetwork article [i'm paraphrasing again] that she just wants to skate two solid programs, and is not focusing on the placements, because the placements are not up to her [in contrast to hannah miller who targeted finishing 7th or 8th at nationals], so i think she's read the writing on the wall. i just hope she doesn't quit skating for college before she fixes all the faults i find in her skating... LOL... and becomes as good as i believe she can be...
To be clear I am NOT advocating for reputation judging or some sort of consistency bonus in said judging.
My only point was to explain, from where I sit, why Angela might have not received as much attention as Gracie despite having 3-3 under her belt and very lovely skating. Look at how posters completely ruled Gracie out after ONE poor competition. The fact is that people will take notice more after a few good strings of competition, which was the case for Gracie last season. If Angela, for example, finished well in the SP to be in the final group and did that awesome FS, you would be hearing all sorts of "Angela's the future of figure skating," sort of what we heard form Christina Gao circa 2010. Also Gao's hype post-Nationals didn't only come from her National's performance but a solid JGP season that included a bronze medal at JGPF. That's why I say that if Angela performs to her highest potential and gets a medal and perhaps even WIN (though Radinova will be tough competition), she will get all sorts of buzz, which will provide momentum for her at Nationals.
unless buzz came from something i intentionally ingested, i don't especially care for it. that's just reputation judging in yet another guise.
angela shouldn't need buzz to get a decent score if she skates well, just like czisny shoudn't, haley dunne shouldn't, joelle forte shouldn't. a good skate by itself ought to do it, for ANYBODY. even the once in a lifetime skate nobody not even the skater's mother expects to be replicated ever again. JUST SCORE WHAT THEY SEE--that's what i ask of the judging panel.
i understand why people are excited about gracie. i am too. maybe she will develop into into a taller version of ekaterina gordeeva...with huge triple jumps.
and i see plenty of gao gushing just from skate america this year. i am not referring to gao gushing from way back when.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
The judges are human, so even if they aren't intentionally "reputation" scoring I'm sure they have the skater's history in the back of their mind. The more famous skaters also get a more enthusiastic response to their programs, which may cause the judges to think the performance was better than it might have been.
I believe reputation helps when the famous skater makes mistakes and gets the bump in PCS to be put ahead of another clean skater. A lot of times what we see is that if a skater can put herself in the final group (like Kaetlyn in SC) anything can happen. So someone like Angela could do that if she hits her 3/3 and does everything else well. The important thing for her is to have one of the highest TES so she can't be held down too far on her PCS scores.
I believe reputation helps when the famous skater makes mistakes and gets the bump in PCS to be put ahead of another clean skater. A lot of times what we see is that if a skater can put herself in the final group (like Kaetlyn in SC) anything can happen. So someone like Angela could do that if she hits her 3/3 and does everything else well. The important thing for her is to have one of the highest TES so she can't be held down too far on her PCS scores.
Yup. Just like I'm not getting excited over Gao just because of SA, I didn't completely discount Gold after SC. In fact, both reactions just seem
to me...I mean, jump the gun much? :think:Same with those who think Wagner's such a solid rock after just one up season... (to her credit, she's typically been consistent, but that was while she was still climbing to the top nationally)
I keep hearing about this Angela Wang- not sure who she is, although the name sounds somewhat familiar- think I remember her from last year's nationals.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2012
Honestly, though, I expect score inflation for all of the frontrunners--Ashley, Gracie, Alissa, Mirai, Agnes, and possibly Christina and Caroline.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2012
Not to mention competition from the top of the US scene--Ashley and Gracie, anyone?
You will get the typical National "background" score inflation of ~10 pts for all (relative to what they would get internationally). However- and this is where I make my point- some seem to get a bigger "boost" than others. *cough*Czisny 2009, Flatt 2010 & 2011, Czisny 2012
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2009
I'm more surprised at how PCS can suddenly tank for skaters when they don't skate well. Nina Jiang got PCS of like 50 for her FS at Nationals and then 35 at sectionals....and it wasn't like her FS at the last Nationals was that great, her TES was actually about the same. So really, had she gotten the PCS she had at Nationals at sectionals, her FS score would have been around 90 instead of 75 and she would have beaten Morgan and made it to Nationals. I know Jiang has been struggling this season, at a number of events, but is she really 15 PCS points worse than she was last January?? Somehow I doubt it.
The issue I more have regarding reputation judging is that domestically, it can put skaters on unequal footing. Like I recognize Vanessa Lam skated 2 clean programs at sectionals and has yet to do that at her internationals, but her 177+ score seems a bit like overkill for someone without a 3-3, 3s, or true 3lz who skates fairly slow and jumps about 2 inches off the ice. I recognize her spins and steps are good but, I feel like the same skates on the JGP would get her a score in the low 160s honestly, as her PCS are usually in the 5s at her junior internationals.
And for the men it's worse, Scott Dyer who finished 6th at PACs with a score in the 160s had a good FS at Nationals last year and suddenly got PCS in the 70s and a 207 score total, and then he beats Josh Farris, who has some of the highest international scores among even the senior men, by 10 points, 6 points in FS PCS alone. Jason Brown and Josh Farris both competed at the JGPF a few weeks before Nationals, Jason had a clean FS and Josh's had a few sizeable mistakes, they both received 69 for PCS, then at Nationals, neither skates a great FS, but Josh's is at least ambitious with a decent quad attempt and two completed triple axels, while Jason fell 3 times and did not attempt a quad or triple axel, and the outcome is that Josh's PCS are 65 while Jason's are 74. So did Josh's skating really regress 4 PCS points worth between the JGPF and Nationals? What's worse is that Nationals is known to be inflated, and it's not like his JGPF was a slam dunk either. And as for Jason, a 5 point increase for a 3-fall skate compared to a beautiful clean one that won him the JGPF? I just like don't understand. You can argue that Josh skating in an early group hurt, but Dyer also skated in that warmup group and got a score way bigger than he'd ever seen before, and Dornbush skated in the first group and got a score way too high for what he put out. And as for Jason being in the penultimate group, the judges had no problem hammering Max and Keegan for their mistakes in the FS and knocking the PCS way down from the SP where they both skated well, but Jason can fall 3 times and still get PCS inflation? It's so annoying how USFS adjusts the PCS scores to hold up skaters they like and hold back skaters they don't. Caroline Zhang has NEVER gotten any PCS favors at Nationals either while Rachael Flatt was the first lady to break the 200 mark...
The issue I more have regarding reputation judging is that domestically, it can put skaters on unequal footing. Like I recognize Vanessa Lam skated 2 clean programs at sectionals and has yet to do that at her internationals, but her 177+ score seems a bit like overkill for someone without a 3-3, 3s, or true 3lz who skates fairly slow and jumps about 2 inches off the ice. I recognize her spins and steps are good but, I feel like the same skates on the JGP would get her a score in the low 160s honestly, as her PCS are usually in the 5s at her junior internationals.
And for the men it's worse, Scott Dyer who finished 6th at PACs with a score in the 160s had a good FS at Nationals last year and suddenly got PCS in the 70s and a 207 score total, and then he beats Josh Farris, who has some of the highest international scores among even the senior men, by 10 points, 6 points in FS PCS alone. Jason Brown and Josh Farris both competed at the JGPF a few weeks before Nationals, Jason had a clean FS and Josh's had a few sizeable mistakes, they both received 69 for PCS, then at Nationals, neither skates a great FS, but Josh's is at least ambitious with a decent quad attempt and two completed triple axels, while Jason fell 3 times and did not attempt a quad or triple axel, and the outcome is that Josh's PCS are 65 while Jason's are 74. So did Josh's skating really regress 4 PCS points worth between the JGPF and Nationals? What's worse is that Nationals is known to be inflated, and it's not like his JGPF was a slam dunk either. And as for Jason, a 5 point increase for a 3-fall skate compared to a beautiful clean one that won him the JGPF? I just like don't understand. You can argue that Josh skating in an early group hurt, but Dyer also skated in that warmup group and got a score way bigger than he'd ever seen before, and Dornbush skated in the first group and got a score way too high for what he put out. And as for Jason being in the penultimate group, the judges had no problem hammering Max and Keegan for their mistakes in the FS and knocking the PCS way down from the SP where they both skated well, but Jason can fall 3 times and still get PCS inflation? It's so annoying how USFS adjusts the PCS scores to hold up skaters they like and hold back skaters they don't. Caroline Zhang has NEVER gotten any PCS favors at Nationals either while Rachael Flatt was the first lady to break the 200 mark...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2005
I have to ask, have you actually SEEN Jiang's skate from Mids this year? I know you like her skating, but perhaps it's VERY justified that her PCS is much lower. PCS is NOT a fixed number (as much as the ISU would like to pretend it is), it's like ordinals in the old 6.0 system where the judges are ranking skaters based upon program execution.
PCS at Nationals tends to be higher than internationally and the final (and penultimate) groups tend to be higher than the other groups. That is typically because the final two groups tend to be the *best* skaters in the nation (otherwise they wouldn't be in those groups), so the PCS tend to be higher than interationally because it's really a RELATIVE score, not something you can compare other than within the current competition. Zhang doesn't get the "same level of Nationals inflation" because her skating skills, etc must really bother the judges and they can't in good conscience "boost it".
I've talked to many judges in this sport in the US at all levels (trial judges with no appointments and Bronze test appointment all the way to World Championship level appointment) and those I have spoken to do not intentionally boost or hold a skater down based on "reputation". They pride themselves on being objective and trying to score what they see on the ice at that competition. Trouble is, for PCS, judges have differing opinions on what they will score high in a particular category based on their background, preferences, and experiences. It's in a skater's best interest to be as well rounded and appealing to various judges' likes in the same way it was under 6.0. If the chief referee gets to choose who gets tapped on the shoulder for an event, OF COURSE you will have panels which *appear* to be homogenous in their scoring because the chief ref at an event will pick judges whose background and preferences are similar to his/her own because it's easier to work with folks you have common ground with. One of the great things USFS does is try to mix up those who get tapped on the shoulder for various panels at Nationals (ie, different sections mixed together, different judges, etc).
I am sure grossano can chime in if he chose to do so with a similar type of response. I think you are all taking "reputation scoring" way to far and are putting way to much thought and discussion into something that judges try very hard NOT to do. Yes, judges will watch practices but they are trying to get a feel for overall grouping of skaters because it's really hard in those couple minutes after the skater is done to rank otherwise.
PCS at Nationals tends to be higher than internationally and the final (and penultimate) groups tend to be higher than the other groups. That is typically because the final two groups tend to be the *best* skaters in the nation (otherwise they wouldn't be in those groups), so the PCS tend to be higher than interationally because it's really a RELATIVE score, not something you can compare other than within the current competition. Zhang doesn't get the "same level of Nationals inflation" because her skating skills, etc must really bother the judges and they can't in good conscience "boost it".
I've talked to many judges in this sport in the US at all levels (trial judges with no appointments and Bronze test appointment all the way to World Championship level appointment) and those I have spoken to do not intentionally boost or hold a skater down based on "reputation". They pride themselves on being objective and trying to score what they see on the ice at that competition. Trouble is, for PCS, judges have differing opinions on what they will score high in a particular category based on their background, preferences, and experiences. It's in a skater's best interest to be as well rounded and appealing to various judges' likes in the same way it was under 6.0. If the chief referee gets to choose who gets tapped on the shoulder for an event, OF COURSE you will have panels which *appear* to be homogenous in their scoring because the chief ref at an event will pick judges whose background and preferences are similar to his/her own because it's easier to work with folks you have common ground with. One of the great things USFS does is try to mix up those who get tapped on the shoulder for various panels at Nationals (ie, different sections mixed together, different judges, etc).
I am sure grossano can chime in if he chose to do so with a similar type of response. I think you are all taking "reputation scoring" way to far and are putting way to much thought and discussion into something that judges try very hard NOT to do. Yes, judges will watch practices but they are trying to get a feel for overall grouping of skaters because it's really hard in those couple minutes after the skater is done to rank otherwise.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
I kind of agree with this. I generally don't think reputation scoring is intentional. But then I go back and look at some of Rachel Flatt's programs at Nationals during her peak and her PCS marks were astronomical for what she put out there. Most of us here disagreed with the marks, and it seemed like an intentional effort to promote a skater whom the USFSA knew would deliver the technical content in international competition.
- Joined
- May 19, 2011
I think this is the most crucial part.
Regardless of how objective/impartial/unbiased the judges claim to be, the point is they know who the front-runners are before the competition even begins. In 2010, Rachael was Miss Consistent...everyone else was a bit of a toss up. I honestly feel that Rachael's ticket to Vancouver was set prior to nationals that year. Similarly, this year I think it's Ashley whose ticket is stamped for worlds this year. I truly believe that even if she has an off day at nationals, she'll still make the team. If someone clearly outskates her she'll probably end up 2nd...but she'll be on the team, just like Alissa made the team last year. She should have been 3rd or possibly 4th BUT b/c of her reputation with the judges (which had grown quite a bit the previous year) she was the best bet for that 2nd spot. The thought was even if she had an off night, she'd do well enough to place top 10...no one could have predicted that epic sized meltdown.
As for Angela, if she skates her programs like she did in Croatia, I think her shot at the top 5 is pretty good.
R.D., here. Educate yourself!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx2qm--ZMWA - SP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqqvxzPuTHM - FS
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
I like Angela but I wish some of our ladies would take more risk with their choreography and music choices. It seems everyone just skates to pretty music. There a "sameness" to a lot of these programs, and I think that makes it harder for the lesser known skaters to stand out. Harding's 1991 LP, Kwan's 1996 LP, and Wagner's 2012 LP were far more interesting and brought a lot of attention to these skaters.
:think: Then, what if you have a skater who has a disastrous practice but then comes back to nail the program when it counts? And vice versa?
I still believe that rep scoring exists. Maybe it's not intentionally done, or a conscious decision made to do so, but there's no other way to explain the drastic swings in PCS for Osmond at SC and Gold at COR...
- Joined
- May 19, 2011
I think a lot of skaters nowadays lack originality in their music choices and choreography. The classics are great but there are millions and millions of songs out there and so many different styles.
That's why I'm so proud of Akiko this year. Her music choices this year for both the SP and LP are very different and rarely used. I wasn't as big a fan of her Kill Bill program but I think a solid performance of it will change my mind, and her Cirque FS is absolutely gorgeous.
The reason the warhorse pieces get used so frequently is b/c they're familiar. The judges know them and the audience knows them; it's easier to sell someone on something they're already sold on. It takes work to open someone's mind and get them to accept something unconventional or different. Newer skaters go with well known pieces and styles b/c they need to win over the judges and it's easier to do that when they follow the "guidelines".
At times you get choreographers who can take an overused piece of music and breathe new life into it, but that only works if the skater is good enough to pull the choreography off. Ashley's Black Swan and her S&D this year are good examples of that. The choreography is nice but it's her delivery of it that really makes it sparkle.
That's why I'm so proud of Akiko this year. Her music choices this year for both the SP and LP are very different and rarely used. I wasn't as big a fan of her Kill Bill program but I think a solid performance of it will change my mind, and her Cirque FS is absolutely gorgeous.
The reason the warhorse pieces get used so frequently is b/c they're familiar. The judges know them and the audience knows them; it's easier to sell someone on something they're already sold on. It takes work to open someone's mind and get them to accept something unconventional or different. Newer skaters go with well known pieces and styles b/c they need to win over the judges and it's easier to do that when they follow the "guidelines".
At times you get choreographers who can take an overused piece of music and breathe new life into it, but that only works if the skater is good enough to pull the choreography off. Ashley's Black Swan and her S&D this year are good examples of that. The choreography is nice but it's her delivery of it that really makes it sparkle.
Last edited:
