Who should have won that gold! Top ten robberies

[skateluvr]

Mao's skating is beautiful from the blade up. She has every quality of a great and beautiful skater. It comes across on TV. When I saw the two performances, I felt Mao was underscored, Yuna overscored. Yuna, as one reviewer said back then is beautiful, from the waist up. Her big humongous jumps look mannish because she has those legs with no turn out and the flexed foot. This is her flaw. If she had beautiful legs like Miki, Kat, Sash, any number of women, Yuna would be perfect. No one has it all. I must say, Yuna-s leg line spoils things for me, but I might be more forgiving of her aesthetic flaw if I saw her in person. She really won that gold. Maybe the time/training that did not work on her turnout or pointed feet, is what let her concentrate on the CoP demand of correct edges and fully rotated triples. Funny, I'm no judge nor a skater, but I'd rather look at beautiful line, pointed toes that are not pefect edges or UR's as long as they are landed with flow. Anyone who values ballet and dance training loves a skater like Mao or Sasha. Someone who is more into the rotations being textbook will see Yuna and go wowee, big, rotated, huge 3x3's. Now this is a sport. Someone, who was it? said after the Olympics "Yuna Kim-beautiful from the waist up." Yuna does not have nice legs and feet. If she did have the nice spirals etc, people would say she was the best ever. Yuna is like half greyhound, her feet, and half dancer. Her upper body and that face are just beautiful. Yuna's big talent is her jumping. Everything else was a bit "awkward" as orser said. She had to learn and push her artistry. Those jumps came naturally. Her solid nerves of steel are her other gift. Although she was given total confidence by her all consuming mother. It takes a village to make a Yuna. Sometimes I see those jumps and think she was a steeplechasing horse in another life-a beautiful one (I love horses).

I can see why Frankel thought Mao was a prima ballerina who was robbed. She wasn't, and Mao did an amazing performance with what she was given. I don't care that she under rotatated her 3axels. SHe she stood up. Look at her...how many men do 2 3axels that well in a program? Well, no one wazrobbed in 2010. Mirai was perfect and she was the star of the show for me, and Flatt was wonderful. Joannie, despite her mistakes in the long skates with a beauty and a sophistication Mirai has not yet mastered. Maybe Mirai would have gotten 3rd had circumstances been different, but they were not. I think the podium was right.

Rachael Flatt was robbed of 5th tho, and so said the skating experts. And Johnny Weir was robbed of ? He was beautiful. No wonder we would rather watch skaters who came of age under 6.0

And Dai should have won this past year. Nice should have been Dai's gold. Rant over!

 

[Mathman]

This discussion of balletic influences in skating is very interesting to me. The two terms i hear the most are "turnout" and "pointed toes." I Googled them both so i could understand what it being referred to.

Here is "turnout"

http://0.tqn.com/d/dance/1/G/f/0/-/-/tendufirst.jpg

Well, you can't do that while skating unless you are doing a spread eagle.

Here are pointed toes.

http://img.ehowcdn.com/article-new/ehow/images/a04/9h/1n/point-toes-hard-ballet-800x800.jpg

You can't do that in skating boots at all. So these terms remain puzzling to me when dance experts like Emily Frankel refer to them.

 

[SGrand]

This discussion of balletic influences in skating is very interesting to me. The two terms i hear the most are "turnout" and "pointed toes." I Googled them both so i could understand what it being referred to.

Here is "turnout"

http://0.tqn.com/d/dance/1/G/f/0/-/-/tendufirst.jpg

Well, you can't do that while skating unless you are doing a spread eagle.

Here are pointed toes.

http://img.ehowcdn.com/article-new/ehow/images/a04/9h/1n/point-toes-hard-ballet-800x800.jpg

You can't do that in skating boots at all. So these terms remain puzzling to me when dance experts like Emily Frankel refer to them.

I find turnout and 'pointed toes' usually more evident on female skaters because you can clearly see turnout in any sort of spiral (arabesque position, with the leg to the back). It is the difference between having your knee facing the ice/ground and it facing away from you (turnout) without opening up from the hip. It's very difficult, but from an aesthetic point of view, it's so much more attractive. With pointed toes, it always bothers me that for skaters the word 'toe' is used as you clearly can't point them in huge, stiff skates, but what you can do, and again, it's just that little bit extra that extends the line and looks 'pretty', is point at the ankle more or less. If you've ever seen a dancer with only his/her toes pointed, it's ugly, you need to stretch and lengthen at the ankle as well.
Hope this clarifies and doesn't just confuse the matter. Sorry to veer OT.

 

[guanchi]

This discussion of balletic influences in skating is very interesting to me. The two terms i hear the most are "turnout" and "pointed toes." I Googled them both so i could understand what it being referred to.

Here is "turnout"

http://0.tqn.com/d/dance/1/G/f/0/-/-/tendufirst.jpg

Well, you can't do that while skating unless you are doing a spread eagle.

Here are pointed toes.

http://img.ehowcdn.com/article-new/ehow/images/a04/9h/1n/point-toes-hard-ballet-800x800.jpg

You can't do that in skating boots at all. So these terms remain puzzling to me when dance experts like Emily Frankel refer to them.

I, too am puzzled by this skating/ ballet comparison- having watched quite a bit of ballet on YT and developing more interest, I only see some superficial similarities.

As for turnout, I believe it is related to your flexibility at the hip joint/flexor. It must be developed early, and some have it more than others. You might see turnout in a layback spin, esp. watch Katherine Healy, NN Nam or Caroline Zhang, when their free leg, knee, and foot stay parallel to the idea with great delay, like the tip of a curved turbine blade, it is always "lagging". The knee and foot should not point down. Kwan, Kim never had great laybacks in the free leg, but even Mao, who supposedly had great layback, never really did.
Also in a classic camel, the free leg has the same quality with the foot like the whale's tail, not shark's tail- at the side, but only as a function of the hips flexibility, not because you're twisting you're knee to get a nice foot position. Czisny has a nice camel, but again, I see nothing really balletic about it.

As for pointed toes, why do people bother??? You can semi-point them, but you ain't never gonna get them even close to arches in ballet. Goolge Svetlana Zakharova or Alessandra Ferri- their arches are super flexed, almost "banana" feet, even too extreme almost for ballet, but you get the picture. When I watched Michelle skating, I did not see a pointed-feet skater, nor did I even care. Her skating makes these silly notions irrelevant.

 

[guanchi]

Also, given that skating is a sport and scored, unlike ballet, why not make a comparison to gynmastics, a sport which is also scored.
Pointed feet are important in gymnastics- watch the parallel bars and their feet when doing giant swings- pointed. Balance beam- keep your feet pointed girls. Floor???- some pointiness is nice. Vault- just land on your feet, pointy not. Same as skating.

So I would say that what people prefer aesthetically in skating is not really "balletic", but "gymnastic". Doesn't make skating, nor gymnastics any less important, demanding, nor "artful" as ballet, or any other form of dance.

 

[SGrand]

Also, given that skating is a sport and scored, unlike ballet, why not make a comparison to gynmastics, a sport which is also scored.
Pointed feet are important in gymnastics- watch the parallel bars and their feet when doing giant swings- pointed. Balance beam- keep your feet pointed girls. Floor???- some pointiness is nice. Vault- just land on your feet, pointy not. Same as skating.

So I would say that what people prefer aesthetically in skating is not really "balletic", but "gymnastic". Doesn't make skating, nor gymnastics any less important, demanding, nor "artful" as ballet, or any other form of dance.

Turnout is of course due to flexibility in the hips, but also about learning to use your inner thigh muscles as well as your core. These all need to be strengthened, and yes, the earlier the age, the better (although like super pointed toes, it can sometimes be more of a hinderance and lead to early injury so they have to be careful; I never like seeing super young dancers who are insanely flexible, it scares me to think of them later in life and it can also cause a lack of control). When a skater does an arabesque position, I always look at where their back and head is positioned, I never want to see their upper body lower than their hips. And I also hate when a leg is lowered before the upper body has a chance to begin 'coming up', it just breaks the line and is not good form and muscle control. It's nit-picky, but I don't even think of it for just balletic or 'ice princess' skaters, you can be very athletic and master these things.

I agree that it's like gymnastics where pointed feet etc. are very important in that sport since it is one of the finishes in many positions. Just looks more attractive and you probably won't have the same 'form' deductions that a gymnast with inflexible or flexed feet will get. Think Nastia Liukin, who along with Lilia Podkopayeva has some of the best feet, they are just plain gorgeous to watch. They're not going to save you when you fall or make huge mistakes though.
ETA: I don't think 'pointed toes' are quite as important in figure skating though, mostly due to the fact that skates do not permit it. What is quite evident though is when a skater has super flexed feet and not even remotely trying to stretch and lengthen. That just bugs me lol. But to each their own, I have to come to terms that skating is not dancing by any stretch of the imagination

 

[gkelly]

I think there are two different kinds of reasons why one might want, or not want, turnout or pointed feet in skating (and gymnastics, for that matter).

One is technical. Some moves require the feet to point in opposite directions to accomplish -- spread eagles and Ina Bauers obviously, and also outside mohawks and some choctaws -- and it's much easier and safer to accomplish what the feet need to do if the turnout happens primarily from the hip joint rather than just from the knees and ankles. Not everyone is anatomically able to achieve 180-degree turnout, and therefore not everyone will be able to achieve an outside spread eagle no matter how much they stretch and strengthen the hip muscles.

Other skating moves require the hips to be turned in to accomplish them most effectively, or in some cases at all. For example, scratch spins don't work the hips the same way that ballet pirouettes do. Air positions for rotational jumps need to be tight and not have the knee turned out (unless you're Midori Ito). Various one-foot turns and loops work better with the free leg and hip square or turned in.

Pointing the foot is one way of controlling the amount of tension and stabilizing the placement of the free leg, e.g. with the free foot close to the ankle and not making an aesthetic statement, to control rotation in turns and jumps, or in extended positions like camel spins. Also jump takeoffs and landings need to roll through the foot, roll through the blade with the front part near the toe leaving the ice last and returning first, so that involves some toe point.

If pointing the free foot helps to control the move, it's good technique.

Fundamentally, the point of skating is to direct the blades through the use of the body, so the body positions that allow the blades to do what they need to do are good technique. Sometimes free leg postures that are reminiscent of ballet are helpful to executing the skating move, sometimes they're detrimental, and sometimes they're optional.

The other kind of reason to turnout the hips or point the feet is aesthetic. Extended lines and turned-out positions, performed with energy and good alignment, are often more attractive than neutral or default positions. Whenever the technique of a move benefits from turnout and/or toe point, it will usually look nicer if the skater really commits to the turnout or toe point rather than executing it halfheartedly. If the technique of a move allows for optional variations of position, ballet-inspired turned-out and pointed positions are often an aesthetically pleasing option.

And ballet has certainly inspired skaters from Jackson Haines and Charlotte Oelschlagel to the Protopopovs and John Curry, and beyond. But it's not the only source of inspiration or the only "right" way to skate aesthetically.

Programs with music and choreography choices that aim to replicate classical ballet on ice or to make some of the same aesthetic points that many ballets make would benefit more from borrowing traditional ballet body shapes and movement qualities. Programs with different music and themes would benefit from choosing movement styles and shapes appropriate to those themes. Whatever the skater (choreographer) chooses, executing the positions clearly is preferable.

So whatever training allows the skater the requisite body control, alignment, strength, and flexibility to do so is beneficial. Most ballet techniques will benefit skating if applied appropriately. So would a number of other integrated body disciplines.

 

[Victura]

Anyone who values ballet and dance training loves a skater like Mao or Sasha. Someone who is more into the rotations being textbook will see Yuna and go wowee, big, rotated, huge 3x3's. Now this is a sport. Someone, who was it? said after the Olympics "Yuna Kim-beautiful from the waist up." Yuna does not have nice legs and feet. If she did have the nice spirals etc, people would say she was the best ever. Yuna is like half greyhound, her feet, and half dancer. Her upper body and that face are just beautiful. Yuna's big talent is her jumping. Everything else was a bit "awkward" as orser said.

It's funny that people thought Kim's forte was her upper body. As someone who does value ballet training, I've always felt like she had a tendency to collapse her upper body. She does hit some pretty positions, but overall, I've always thought her core and posture in the shoulders and back were somewhat lacking. Just my two cents. What gorgeous jumps though!

 

[Olympia]

I think that turnout and pointed toes are only two aspects of ballet. The fluidity of the back, the carriage of the upper body (including how the head and neck are aligned), and the extension of the limbs from the core are perhaps even more important. (Please bear with me, because I don't have dance training, so I'm probably garbling the descriptions. Anyone who does have expertise on this, feel free to weigh in at any time!) A ballet-trained skater, or one trained in contemporary dance, will move with more fluidity and hold more beautiful positions while skating. In that regard, I do think that Mao has the advantage over Kim. Now, that's not all that makes beautiful skating, of course. Sasha Cohen had a lot of that beauty of line, extension, and flow, but her blade work was not as smooth as it should have been. The less flexible Michelle was far superior in terms of edging and stroking. But dance training has been a big part of what makes, for example, Russian and Soviet pairs skaters so much more solid in terms of technique than generations of Americans and Canadians, especially the men.

To say we should use gymnastics as a measuring stick instead of ballet isn't really applicable, because I strongly suspect that whatever makes gymnastics elegant is also based on ballet. While gymnasts may not have hours of ballet training every week, I'm fairly sure that whatever extension moves or flexibility they develop results from exercises that were adapted from dance. I'm also sure that if this does happen, it happens more in Russia than anywhere else. Why wouldn't they use that advantage over competitors, since they have such a powerful ballet tradition? (Again, I'm not talking from expertise, just from observation. Feel free to straighten me out on this!)

 

[plushyfan]

You are right. Before We watch the competitions live , We should be cautious. I watched both of them live.

Even Kurt Browning and Scott Hamilton didn't recognize Yuna's true talent before they watched her competition Live. TV is very manipulative and even deceptive.

It is always easier said than done. That's why Most of judges are from ex-competitive skaters.

It is more difficult to perform to music like Gershwin Concerto or Lyra angelica which is not so dramatic or not much emotional.



And I would trust the real Professional's opinion who watched the game live more than amateurs who pretend to be professionals. I don't know if they watch the game live or not.

I think professionals have eyes to perceive talents that we amateurs cannot see,because they have gone through the process not only by head but by their own body unlike us.




Like Robin Cousins , Alexander Zhulin, Philippe Candeloro and tons of Champions.
You know? They all told those words after they saw the competition Live ,not on TV.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/02/27/us-olympics-figure-skating-yuna-idUSTRE61Q09320100227

"If someone asked me who they should look at (across the generations) I would say Janet Lynn, Dorothy Hamill, Katarina Witt and definitely Yuna. There isn't a move Yuna makes that doesn't give her points," said Cousins.



http://www.sovsport.ru/gazeta/article-item/373172

“This girl is perfection itself! On ice she can play any character.” – Philippe Candeloro, two-times Olympic medalist in men figure skating, told me in a mixed zone after the competition was ended.

After Vancouver Candeloro also said that Plushenko should have won. Do you believe him in this case?:agree:

 

[EricRohmer]

Look at Yu-Na's ina bauer going into the 2Axel-2Toe-2Loop combination, for example. That move actually goes against the music and has no impact. It was simply a "transition".

Actually, I thought the ina bauer matched well with flowing piano notes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8akfCowZ94&t=1m15s

Having said that, I think Yuna's Lark Ascending & Arirang were built better than this program.

 

[seniorita]

This is very close to my feelings. I wish Michelle would have won in 1998 and Irina would have won in 2002. There were somethings so unfinished and unsettled forever. If they were under CoP, Michelle and Irina would definitely have been lost. But under 6.0, they should have been able to win. I so wish they had.

you think if Cop was in 1998 and 2002 Tara and Hugues would have won? I havent done the breakdown of marks, but I would think Hugues had awful jump technique and a fall in Cop would not be a big problem for Michelle, also I would think Michelle and Irina would deserve much higher pcs, more legend status and personality on ice. Anyway wishful thinking

 

[christinaskater]

1998 Olympic games- Michelle Kwan
1994- Olympic games- Nancy Kerrigan

 

[blue dog]

you think if Cop was in 1998 and 2002 Tara and Hugues would have won? I havent done the breakdown of marks, but I would think Hugues had awful jump technique and a fall in Cop would not be a big problem for Michelle, also I would think Michelle and Irina would deserve much higher pcs, more legend status and personality on ice. Anyway wishful thinking

They may or may not have. remember, those girls would've been training under the new system, so I'm sure with their overwhelming desire to win the Olympics, both would've fixed their problems.

or, since both were prone to flutzing and underrotating (Sarah attempted only one lutz in her free skate), they may have succumbed to another skater at Nationals.

 

[Bluebonnet]

you think if Cop was in 1998 and 2002 Tara and Hugues would have won? I havent done the breakdown of marks, but I would think Hugues had awful jump technique and a fall in Cop would not be a big problem for Michelle, also I would think Michelle and Irina would deserve much higher pcs, more legend status and personality on ice. Anyway wishful thinking

It's just a feeling. I've never calculated them in details. CoP emphasizes technicals more and presentation is only 30%, while in 6.0, presentation is 50%. With Michelle and Irina's mature style, they were able to overcome the lack of jump contents if the judges were willing to give it to them. It was within the judges' power to do so in 6.0 but not in CoP, I think. Anyway, it's a dead horse which has been beaten a hundred times like you said.

One thing I cannot agree with the previous several posts. Nancy Kerrigan did not deserve the gold. She was robotic. I'm so glad that Oksana Baiul won.

And I think Brian Boitano was the right winner in 1988.

 

[lavender]

Michelle Kwan 1995 Worlds and 1998 Olympics. There is even a case to be made for the 2002 Olympics for Michelle.

I agree and I think Michelle should have come in 2nd in the long program which would have given Michelle the gold. Plus I think Sarah short program should have put her further down in the standings. Just my opinion but doesn't matter anymore

I think Nancy should have won over Oksana and I was more of an Oksana fan than Nancy.

 

[pangtongfan]

I will 10 per discipline:

2000 Worlds- Maria should have been 2nd in the long program and thus won the gold medal instead of Michelle Kwan overall.

2001 Worlds- Angela Nikidinov and Maria Butyrskaya both should have been above Michelle Kwan in the short program, and thus Irina won the gold medal instead of Michelle Kwan overall. Hughes deserved about 8th in the short program, thus having no chance of a medal.

2002 Olympics- Irina should have won the short program clearly and thus should have won the gold over Hughes overall. Hughes also deserved about 7th in the short program, bumping her down to bronze or lower.

1994 Olympics- Nancy deserved gold, Lu Chen silver, Oksana Baiul bronze at best.

1993 Worlds- Surya Bonaly deserved gold, Lu Chen silver, Oksana Baiul bronze at best.

1996 Worlds- Lu Chen should have won gold over Michelle Kwan.

1996/2002 Grand Prix finals- Slutskaya should have won over Michelle in 1996, Michelle over Irina in 2002, basically trading gold and silver at these 2 events.

1990 Worlds- Trenary should have been 7th or 8th in the short program, and thus Midori Ito won overall with her vastly superior LP.

2008 Worlds- Kim deserved to win the LP by a wider margin, and the gold ahead of Asada, while silver medalist Kostner should have been 5th.

2008 Nationals- Ashley Wagner should have won ahead of both Flatt and winner Nagasu.


Now onto pairs:

1995 European- Kovarikova & Novotny should have won over Woetzel & Steuer

1995 Worlds- Shishkova & Naumov should have won over Kovarikova & Novotny

1996 Worlds- Shishkova & Naumov who came 4th should have won.

1997 Worlds- Eltsova & Bushkov should have won over Woetzel & Steuer

1997 Grand Prix final- Kazahkova & Dmitriev should have won over Woetzel & Steuer

2001 Grand Prix final- Berezhanaya & Sikharulidze should have won over Sale & Pelletier

2001 Worlds- same as above

2006 Worlds- Zhangs should have won over Pang & Tong, it was a trade off for the Olympics where Pang & Tong deserved silver and the Zhangs 5th.

2010 Olympics- Pang & Tong deserved gold over Shen & Zhou. Their SP was 4 points lower than Worlds for an identical performance which cost them the gold despite winning the LP.

1990 Worlds- Selezneva & Makarov who finished 4th deserved the gold.



Now onto the men:

1994 Olympics- Elvis Stojko should have won over Alexei Urmanov

1995 Worlds- Todd Eldredge should have won over Elvis Stojko

1997 Grand Prix final- Todd Eldredge should have won over Elvis Stojko.

1997 Worlds- Todd Eldredge should have won the short program and thus won gold overall ahead of Elvis Stojko who was 4th in the short program (note in situations like this and the 2000 Worlds between Butyrskaya and Kwan I dont care about the differences in long programs, if the results of each program should go a certain way and the factored placings come out that way, that is the just result).

1998 Grand Prix final- Todd Eldredge should have won over Ilia Kulik and Elvis Stojko.

1998 Worlds- Alexei Yagudin should have been 3rd in the long program behind Zagarodniuk, thus giving Eldredge the gold.

2009 Worlds- Patrick Chan deserved the gold over Evan Lysacek.

2010 Olympics- Daisuke Takahashi deserved the gold over Evgeny Plushenko and Evan Lysacek.

2011 Grand Prix final- Daisuke Takahashi deserved the gold over Patrick Chan.

2011 Worlds- same as above.



Lastly the dance:

1986 Worlds-1988 Worlds- Klimova & Ponomarenko deserved every gold instead of Bestiamanova & Bukin. Give B&B their token gold at the 85 Worlds I guess.

1991 World- Usova & Zhulin deserved gold over Klimova & Ponomarenko and the Duchensays.

1994 Europeans/1994 Olympics- Usova & Zhulin deserved gold, Torvill & Dean Silver, and Gritschuk & Platov bronze at both events.

1997 Worlds- Krylova & Ovsiannikov deserved gold over Gritschuk & Platov, or atleast to win the FD.

1999 Worlds- Anisinna & Peizerat deserved gold over Krylova & Ovsiannikov

2001 Worlds- Anissina & Peizerat deserved gold over Fusar Poli & Margalio

2002 Worlds- The FD results should have been 1. Drobiazko & Vanagas, 2. Bourne & Kraatz, 3. Lobacheva & Averbuhk and thus the overall results would have been flipped to that as well.

2010 Grand Prix final- Virtue & Moir should have won gold over Davis & White.

2011 Canadians- Weaver & Poje CLEARLY and beyond any doubt should have easily won gold over Crone & Poirier.

 

[pangtongfan]

Shen & Zhou btw were overmarked in all their Olympics. Were lucky to get bronze in 2002 ahead of Totmianina & Marinin, Ina & Zimmerman, and Petrova & Tikhonov with that lame free skate in 2002. Did not deserve to beat Pang & Tong in 2006. Were lucky Pang & Tong had such a low short program score that kept them below Shen & Zhou overall in 2010. Deserved the gold in 2002 and 2006, hahahahahahahaahahaah is all I have to say to that.

 

[Bluebonnet]

2010 Olympics- Daisuke Takahashi deserved the gold over Evgeny Plushenko and Evan Lysacek.

I can live with this result; or Plushenko gold, Takahashi silver, and Lysacek bronze; or even Plushenko gold, Lysacek silver, and Takahashi bronze. Just can't stand a quadless Olympic gold medalist. It's not personal to Lysacek.

 

[Skater Boy]

They may or may not have. remember, those girls would've been training under the new system, so I'm sure with their overwhelming desire to win the Olympics, both would've fixed their problems.

or, since both were prone to flutzing and underrotating (Sarah attempted only one lutz in her free skate), they may have succumbed to another skater at Nationals.

Or not even tried the triple triple; I think Sarah at Salt Lake was at her peak, the top; that is best she could do or else there would have been a fall somewhere along.