The Missing Gold Olympic Medal

[Tinymavy15]

After Oksana won the Olympic Gold she was indeed the best skater in the World at the time, atleast as far as amateur skaters go. Who was better? Nancy Kerrigan who never won a World or Olympic title even once in her career, and the closest she came was that night? Lu Chen who at that point had never finished higher then 3rd at a World or Olympic event. Surya Bonaly who after her dissapointing 4th place finish had neither a World title (best finish was 2nd behind Baiul the previous year) or an Olympic medal. Winning the Olympic Gold to go along with her previous years World title, did absolutely cement Baiul as the best female skater in the world, atleast on the amateur side.

In Tara's defence she too was both reiging Olympic and World Champion after winning her Olympic Gold medal, not to mention the previous years National Champion (of course dethroned by Kwan that year) and the 2-time GP final Champion. I can still see people thinking Kwan was the best skater in the world, but Tara certainly backed up that big win with other ones over the best.

Hughes is the one that applies to most.

yeah, but my point was that after they won OG, weren't on the scene anymore. they were the greatest female skaters of the time of the olympics perhaps, not in the years following. They were not "the one to beat."

 

[Tinymavy15]

Tara, OTOH, was quoted as saying that the only pressure she felt was a desire to prove wrong all the people who said that she couldn't do it -- and Sarah wasn't under any pressure to win because no one expected her to do it.

Goes to show you being the underdog is a good thing. I also think that both irina and sasha messed up in the freeskate becasue they were both the clear favorites, and they really were tied after the short. Shizuka was right there too, but nobody was talking about her so much. Everybody though it's gonna be Sasha or Irina. Same thing with Michelle in Salt Lake. the expecations of a country and actually the world is just too much.

 

[temujin]

I think that's what people are forgetting, is that winning the Olympics is tougher than winning worlds. The pressure at the Olympics is immense.

Of course, a skater who wins multiple worlds a la Kwan is greater than Hughes. But a skater who can win multiple world titles and an Olympic gold medal, is greater than a skater with just multiple world titles.

I feel that people are starting to devalue the Olympic gold because Kwan/or one of their favorites didn't win it. But I don't think that's right. It's tough to win the Olympics, especially I think when your the overwhelming favorite. Few skaters can stand up to this pressure, and those who do, deserve credit for it.

ITA.

The Olympics are definitely the most pressure packed competition a skater who enters as one of the favourites will ever face. In my opinion, the ability to come through under those circumstances is one sign of greatness. Other signs of greatness are a long distinguished career at or near the top, pushing the limits of the sport, etc... That's why I still consider Kwan one of the greatest skaters of all time and rank her above Hughes or Lipinski or Arakawa. But if Kwan had won an Olympic Gold medal, would rank her even higher? Absolutely. Similarly for Browning or any other athlete competing in an individual sport.

 

[Mafke]

Irina was definitely psyched out at Turin.

Let's no over-analyze this. I think it was a combination of two things:

Not leading after the SP (she usually skated her best LP's when she had a nice lead going into it). In many ways her LP in Turin was a lot like her LP in SLC. Had the SP been 1. Slutskaya 2. Kwan I think both skaters would have given much better performances in the LP. But ....

Bad reaction to the venue. Two of her worst LP performances were in Turin in the same building after very good SP's. I think it's entirely reasonable to at least hypothesize that she had a physical reaction (given her medical condition) to something in the building (that takes a couple of days to build up).

 

[Tonichelle]

I disagree with this a little bit re: Kurt Browning. Yes, he's had a great professional career and has grown tremendously in those years. But he had an exceptional amateur career before that too, winning four world gold medals. No small feat. And his Casablanca program really marked, IMO, a benchmark in men's freeskating.

I'm not saying he didn't have a great career, but he was IMHO severely lacking in the artistry through most of his competitive career... it really wasn't until 1993 with Casablanca that he really started to stand out as not just a great male athlete with a lot of charisma but also an artist. To me. I almost consider his Casablanca as a pro program just because it's a huge difference between that program and his past programs. But that's just me.

I didn't grow up watching Kurt, I jumped on that bandwagon after he'd found his niche in the pro world (fell in love with him because of his Serenade to Sonia). So I probably see it in a completely different light. *shrugs*

 

[gio]

Well Tinymavy, I agree with all you have said except on the part when you are saying that Shizuka was not a favourite and so she was not under pressure. She was a favourite, because in practice she was successfully (at least the commentators and in the forums people have said) doing 3/3 jumps. Even 3/3/3 jumps. She had many expectations from her country Japan. She had to proove that even without Mao, Japan could win. She won Worlds and had to proove it was not a fluke!! There were many pressures on her! She was tentative in the LP. She doubled a loop and didn't do any 3/3. Also in the SP she wanted to do a 3/3, but the landing of the Lutz wasn't good so she decided not to do it.
Definitely not an underdog!!!

 

[attyfan]

....

Not leading after the SP (she usually skated her best LP's when she had a nice lead going into it). In many ways her LP in Turin was a lot like her LP in SLC. Had the SP been 1. Slutskaya 2. Kwan I think both skaters would have given much better performances in the LP ....

ITA!!!!!

 

[RussianWinter]

I think Arakawa was under pressure at the 2006 Olympic Games, but it wasn't the same as it had been in 2005. She was the reigning World Champion heading into that season and the weight of that fact seemed too heavy for her. She underperformed almost all season and ended on a sour note at the Moscow Worlds.
The target really was on Slutskaya's back heading into Turino. She was the reigning World Champion and had coasted through the GP circuit that year (with the exception of the Final....which seemed more like a fluke at the time). She also was hungry to erase the painful memories of coming so close in SLC four years previously. Cohen also was targeted as the US hopeful. She had brilliant programs and everyone was waiting for her to finally deliver. Arakawa was considered "in the mix", but I don't feel as if she were considered a heavy favorite. She seemed just as shocked as anyone to be wearing Gold at the end of the evening. That lack of intense pressure seemed to allow her to skate with more fluidity and confidence than she had since Dortmund. She wasn't as technically perfect as she had been in 2004, but the grace, carriage, and command of the ice that propelled her to the World title was again on full display.

 

[Mathman]

I think we are confusing two different questions.

(a) Who has the most impressive collection of medals? and

(b) Who is the best skater?

The answer to (a) is quantative and objective.

Gillis Grafstrom won three Olympic gold medals and one silver. He is the greatest.

Dick Button won 2 Olympic gold medals and 6 world championships. He is number two...unless you are more impressed by

Ulrich Salchow, who won 10 world champioships to go along with his 1908 Olympic gold medal.

Of course you can always nitpick. You could say, for instance, that Dick Button got his medals only because the whole European figure skating infrastructure had been destroyed in World War II. North Americans had never won anything before in the first half century of figure skating competition, but all of a sudden here come the U.S. and Canadian champions skating in to fill the vaccuum. (Button and Barbara Ann Scott not only won the Olympics in 1948, they won Europeans, too. Why? There wasn't anyone else.)

But none of that matters. You win the medal or you don't. You either match Gillis Grafstrom's acheivement or you are relegated to lesser stature.

I am going to start a Gillis Grafstrom fan club.

Question (b) on the other hand -- who is the best skater? -- that is more a matter of opinion. Me, I like Kurt. I like Singin' in the Rain. I like Casablanca and Brick House. I regret that I don't have any tapes of Gillis Grafstrom, which might help me decide whether I think Grafstrom was a better skater than Browning

But then again, I also like Alexei Yagudin's Winter and Man in the Iron Mask.

Still, to me, Kurt Browning's total body of work is unmatched by any male skater, past or present. Just my opinion.

 

[bekalc]

.

II completely agree that an Olympic win is worth something and it's a tough achievement to accomplish. Where we part ways, however, is with the idea that someone who has won Olympics is "better" than someone who hasn't. If for no other reason than that I think luck has a huge amount to do with the Olympic win love both Yagudin and Browning. They both have their pluses and minuses. Browning is the better pro skater and the more versatile artist (the guy can skate successfully to anything), while Yagudin was a competitor extraordinare during his amateur career, and I firmly believe he'd still be skating amateur if it wasn't for his injury — he clearly loved it, thrived on the pressure and won Olympic gold. I just don't see the need to say one is better than the other.

Likewise, Witt was a great competitor, pulling it out when it mattered. She's also had an accomplished pro career, but of the two, I'd rather watch Kwan skate, and Kwan's past performances are the ones I re-watch with more frequency. They were both top of the heap during their respective eras.

I guess I just judge accomplishment more in terms of viewing enjoyment than in terms of number of medals won.

But I guess I view it as two different things. There is the show aspect of skating/ and then there's the competitive skater.

There are a lot of great show skaters like let's say Sasha Cohen who never won World titles. Not winning those things doesn't take anything away from Sasha's beauty on the ice, and I'd much rather see Sasha than let's say Tara..

But there is the sport aspect of skating, and it's the aspect of standing up to the pressure and putting it all out there when it counts...And the Olympic games is totally when it counts the most.

In that sense, if I have a skater who has won multiple world titles and Olympic title, in the competitive aspect of the sport. They are better...I'm not sure why there's any doubt there?

As for Yagudin, Give him some time, I think that he could better artistically as he gets older.

Browning was a great skater though, in fact I remember Alexei Mishin thought Browning was amazing and had him up as the idol for his young group. Kind of sad though, considering Browning hasn't had very nice things to say about Urmanov, or Plushenko.

 

[Tonichelle]

Browning was a great skater though, in fact I remember Alexei Mishin thought Browning was amazing and had him up as the idol for his young group. Kind of sad though, considering Browning hasn't had very nice things to say about Urmanov, or Plushenko.

:sheesh: I was rewatching my tape of the spring 2000 Ice Wars and thinking how great it was that no one had brought up the whole Browning/Urmanov thing in forever... I guess I thought too soon.

As for Plushenko, I haven't heard Browning's views... but Plushenko's skating leaves a lot of people cold... so it doesn't surprise me that Kurt has opinions as well. (He's as human as any other skating fan... he should be allowed to like the skaters as he pleases...)

 

[GoldMedalist]

As for Yagudin, Give him some time, I think that he could better artistically as he gets older.

??!?!?

Are we suddenly back in 1997 or something?

 

[bekalc]

??!?!?

Are we suddenly back in 1997 or something?

I think Yagudin's fine as an artist, I just meant he might skate to more different types of music etc...But as for mentioning the whole Browning/Urmanov thing. I don't know the history behind it. But I do last year, Browning mentioned that Russian skater (Olympic champion who hasn't done that much for skating) He then said that Yagudin had done things for skating.

I personally felt that Browning's words there were uncalled for. It wasn't a remark specifically about Urmanov's skating... First of all, it's not true that Urmanov is doing nothing for skating. From what i have heard Urmanov for quite some time has been working as a coach in Russia, and it's not like Alexei was welcomed on N. American tours with open arms. I would love for someone to ask Browning, how being a coach isn't giving back?

But in the case of in favor of medal counting, is once you start getting into things like well Browning is so much nicer to watch than Yagudin.. Then, you add in a whole new factor which I think goes behind the competitive aspect of this sport. For example, Browning stated that while Plushenko was clearly the winner of the Olympic games, if he had a touring show, he'd rather have Jeff Buttle in his show than Plushenko... Buttle's the one he'd rather watch, and ( can I say my mom agreed just by watching them skate. She didn't hear what Browning said. I tried to tell mom that Plushenko artistically is better than what he did in the Olympics, but she doesn't watch it that often.)

This is why I think there has to be a seperate factor for the competition/ and then the other factor.

 

[hockeyfan228]

It is very different to bring up examples of skaters who achieved alot of other great things along with winning the coveted Olympic Gold; like Fleming, Witt, Yamaguchi, Hamill, and still say the same thing.

All of these skaters with the exception of Yamaguchi competed when figures where critical to the final score, and the favorites could be held up regardless of how proficient they were in figures. Yamaguchi didn't hold up to pressure all that well, with two flawed jumps, but Ito succombed to it more.

It is not just recent memory or TV coverage that makes us remember Bauil, Lipinski, and Hughes. There were no figures when they competed, and they could jump over the favorites.

 

[Mafke]

when figures where critical to the final score, and the favorites could be held up regardless of how proficient they were in figures. Yamaguchi didn't hold up to pressure all that well, with two flawed jumps, but Ito succombed to it more.
It is not just recent memory or TV coverage that makes us remember Bauil, Lipinski, and Hughes. There were no figures when they competed, and they could jump over the favorites.

There were some anomalies here and there but I really don't think figures were judged any worse than free skating at the time. I think a more important factor was that most skaters (who continued to work at them) actually did get better at figures as they got older. This gave older competitors an advantage (and effectively kept out most of the youngest skaters).

The current emphasis on 3/3's and quads generally favors the young as most skaters get progressively worse at those as they get older. Witness Todd Eldredge in 2001 His overall skating skills were far superior to Yagudin and Plushenko at the time but he was only able to fish out a bronze cause he was too old to learn a quad.

 

[sillylionlove]

Well here is my thinking...I could care less whether you won a medal..if I like your skating I will like you, if I don't then I won't!!

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I don't think anyone is arguing that there are two sides to figure skating. There is the subjectivity of the Sport being judged, the results of which many people accept as gospel and others raise eyebrows. Where was that Caller sitting when he called an underrotation?, and why some judges marked her -1 and others gave her an assortment of pluses. What is it about these 'experts' that they are not in total agreement?

I believe there is good reasoning involved for those that don't accept the theory that the medals sum up the calibre of the skater. for me, it is the 'body-of-work'.

Joe

 

[Mathman]

I feel that people are starting to devalue the Olympic gold because Kwan/or one of their favorites didn't win it.

Yes, that is quite true. The logic is irrefutable.

(a) Michelle is the greatest!

(b) Michelle did not win an Olympic gold metal.

Therefore:

(c) You do not have to win an Olympic gold metal to be the greatest. Q.E.D.

Corollary: The whole Olympics is lame and stupid. :yes:

And the other side of the coin is this. Some people seem to take perverse pleasure in harping away on The Olympic Gold Medal And Who Doesn't Have One, tee hee, for no other purpose than to heckle Kwan fans.

OK, we've been heckled. Whatever.

 

[kittyjake5]

Mathman you have a knack for comedy. I needed a good laugh on this gloomy rainy aftertoon. Thank you!!

 

[capcomop]

One thing I hear often is something like : "well the Olympic Gold doesnt mean that much, I mean look at Kwan without an Olympic Gold, and look at Lipinski or Hughes, who has the better career and bigger legacy." To make such an argument though they have to dig up the least accomplished (especialy Hughes) Olympic Gold medalists in history to make a point which is a very deceiving way to potray it. It is very different to bring up examples of skaters who achieved alot of other great things along with winning the coveted Olympic Gold; like Fleming, Witt, Yamaguchi, Hamill, and still say the same thing.

Well then it makes just as little sense to only bring up those who achieved things on the way to gold medal and compare them! Compare even the last four ladies OGMedalist and Fleming, Witt, Hamill etc and you may conclude that something has changed. Going from those who were in the sport before they won making strides and some after even as professionals to those who came in grabbed the medal and left (it is too soon to tell with Arikawara) without making many positive ripples afterwards.
Most of the time I hear Kwan compared to those who won the OGM over her and so the comparison is valid. But even if you go back and compare her to Witt, Hamill et al I would have a hard time saying that Kwan has less of a legacy or has had less of an impact on the sport then those women all because she lacks an OGM.

I think there is a personality factor at play as well.
Back in Peggy's day there was a winner, brought to you by the single tv network that played such things and your local paper. An OGMedlist behaved in a certain way and the winner was expected live up to such expectations (think old Hollywood when the studio picked who you dated etc). The role was scripted and played.
Now days there is winner and all the others whose stories and words are spread through mutiple cable networks, print media and the Internet. Now people can look at how the winners and non-winners react and behave through every minute of the games and then in the parking lot and the parade grounds, and the night clubs etc, etc. The person is takign center stage more so then the medal.