Non Controversial Olympic Wins

Baron Vladimir said:

We agree on many points. But you can say that in Sochi and after it, the system was maybe too oriented on the Base Value, contrary from Vancouver where was too oriented on GOEs. And they've changed the system again, for the way how it is today. ISU just want to find the perfect balance between the BV of the elements (how hard it is to do them) and the quality (the execution and the look) of them. And one system will be suitable to one skater, the different one will be better for another.

Click to expand...

Personally i just see that in Sochi, TP needed glasses for some skaters.
Sotnikova scoring that high in the short program, getting the best TES, while she had the weakest layout of the top 6, shows how GOEs (and pcs) were more important than BV.
Usually quality wins over quantity/difficulty. At least that's what i see.

To come back to this topic, Yuna's win is unquestionable. It's just the gap that was too big imo. Mao made errors but even without the pop and the dowgrade the gap would have probably been 12-14 points. Which imo is too much for clean programs against clean programs and Mao having the highest overall BV.
Only a system with compulsory figures would have given a chance to a clean Mao.

yume said:

To come back to this topic, Yuna's win is unquestionable. It's just the gap that was too big imo. Mao made errors but even without the pop and the dowgrade the gap would have probably been 12-14 points. Which imo is too much for clean programs against clean programs and Mao having the highest overall BV.
Only a system with compulsory figures would have given a chance to a clean Mao.

Click to expand...

Yeah, even if skating clean, Mao wouldn't win in Vancouver!? But I think 'clean' Mao would win in Sochi. She would certainly be in 1st after the clean short (she presented at Worlds that year), and by skating in top 6 and without UR on 3T, her TES in the free would be 3 points higher, as her components too, so her free score would be on Adelina level, and 1st overall

Baron Vladimir said:

...her TES in the free would be 3 points higher, as her components too, so her free score would be...

Click to expand...

But that didn't happen.So where's the "controversy"?

Mathman said:

But that didn't happen.So where's the "controversy"?

Click to expand...

I was just saying how the system in Vancouver didnt favor Mao (or Plushenko) and how she would probably win in another system. To me there was nothing controversial in somebodys win, but i would argue that the system in which they won is more/less controversal. The COP system from Vancouver is controversal to me, for example, which i explained by pointing out how Yuna with her layout would win even men free. Then in Sochi, men were wining medals with many failled quads. Another controversal COP? :scratch3: Todays COP may work the best, we will see...

Baron Vladimir said:

Yeah, even if skating clean, Mao wouldn't win in Vancouver!? But I think 'clean' Mao would win in Sochi. She would certainly be in 1st after the clean short (she presented at Worlds that year), and by skating in top 6 and without UR on 3T, her TES in the free would be 3 points higher, as her components too, so her free score would be on Adelina level, and 1st overall

Click to expand...

Naaaah. She would have gotten more calls

Hi - my first post here. I saw Shen and Zhao win in person in 2003. That was one of the most non controversial wins I think other than the fact that the only judge who gave the Russians the win was of course....you guessed it...(no way to prove it but the guy in question was a Russian judge from before they kept it secret...) Anyway, I also witnessed the crash in practice when Shen fell attempting a throw quad and it was clear she was injured and everyone groaned - a collective "OH NO!". From that moment on she had the support of almost everyone due to her courage. The last minute of the final skate was deafening and the arena actually shook. It was so loud that they couldn't hear their music. I have never seen anything like it. It felt scary because the ovation was so enormous that you actually wondered if the building could take it! The skate was flawless and emotionally gave you goose bumps. I am sure the only people in the arena who had a moment's thought that it was controversial were the 2nd place team or people who weren't looking. I'll never forget it. As for controversial which is not this topic, but someone above mentioned that most are non controversial except a few and 1994 ladies was one - I agree. Kerrigan lost by one tenth of one point...with a far superior technical skate and a very debatable (in my opinion she was much better than Baiul) artistic skate. Oh well....!

Baron Vladimir said:

I was just saying how the system in Vancouver didnt favor Mao (or Plushenko) and how she would probably win in another system. To me there was nothing controversial in somebodys win, but i would argue that the system in which they won is more/less controversal. The COP system from Vancouver is controversal to me, for example, which i explained by pointing out how Yuna with her layout would win even men free. Then in Sochi, men were wining medals with failled quads. Another controversal COP? :scratch3: Todays COP may work the best, we, will see...

Click to expand...

I think that has more to do with the quality of Kim's skate versus the very poor quality of the men's field in Sochi. The fact that Yuzuru won was not controversial, IMO because everyone was bad - the fact that he won with such a sloppy FS was controversial though. I can't recall if it was Tarasova or someone who said none of them deserve medals?

IMO, Yu Na would have beaten Mao even under a different system. Kim executed her jumps with incredible quality - Mao did most of hers cleanly but they were very measured and clinically done.

I also think Kim's programs matched her personality much more. Mao felt like Tarasova completely "Russa-fied" her. Her programs were way too grandiose for her style and with errors in her FS it became that much more apparent. I'm a huge fan of Mao, and while kudos to Tarasova to getting her in form to execute a three 3A competition, her lack of a 3-3 in either program negated the benefit of those triple axels, along with in the FS her opting to do a 3T and 2A instead of a 3Z (even if a flutz) and 3S also giving up points (and of course compounded by her singling the toe loop).

Kim gave off the impression that nobody could beat her and her confidence and artistry were there. As soon as the elements started falling apart for Mao the program became strained like she was hanging on for silver (and indeed Rochette did come close to beating her in the FS and even overall). Bottom line is Kim was perfect and unbeatable... and Mao needed to skate much better to even come close to matching her, and even if she were clean it still would have been hard because Kim was artistically way better in both programs. 100% uncontroversial.

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

IMO, Yu Na would have beaten Mao even under a different system.

Click to expand...

With the COP rules from Vancouver and their skates from that Olympic, she would. But if you simply combine scores from Short Programme Mao performed that same year at Worlds and her free programme from Sochi, she is ahead of Yuna in total scores. I personally think she would be ahead of Adelina too if she was clean at Sochi, because skating in the last group would boost her GOE and components a little bit (as its always the case). But Adelina had a home nation boost on her side (as its always the case too), so my conclusion of that may be doubtable. Also, with the exactly same performances from Vancouver, Pluschenko would beat Lysacek with Sochi COP. You can do the math.

Baron Vladimir said:

If you simply combine scores from Short Programme Mao performed that same year at Worlds and her free programme from Sochi, she is ahead of Yuna in total scores. I personally think she would be ahead of Adelina too, if she was clean at Sochi, because skating in the last group would boost her GOE and components a little bit (as its always the case). But Adelina had a home nation boost on her side (as its always the case too), so that my conclusion may be doubtable. Also, with the exactly same performances from Vancouver Pluschenko would beat Lysacek with Sochi COP. You can do the math.

Click to expand...

Yup Mao had much better layouts in Sochi than in Vancouver. Clean she would (should) have been unbeatable. But UR calls were her nemesis sadly. I don't think there are many competitions where she didn't get an UR call. I bet TP was pushing the UR button even before the landing.

And even in the last group her pcs would have been lower than Kim, Sotnikova and Kostner.

Skate88 said:

Hi - my first post here. I saw Shen and Zhao win in person in 2003. That was one of the most non controversial wins I think other than the fact that the only judge who gave the Russians the win was of course....you guessed it...(no way to prove it but the guy in question was a Russian judge from before they kept it secret...) Anyway, I also witnessed the crash in practice when Shen fell attempting a throw quad and it was clear she was injured and everyone groaned - a collective "OH NO!". From that moment on she had the support of almost everyone due to her courage. The last minute of the final skate was deafening and the arena actually shook. It was so loud that they couldn't hear their music. I have never seen anything like it. It felt scary because the ovation was so enormous that you actually wondered if the building could take it! The skate was flawless and emotionally gave you goose bumps. I am sure the only people in the arena who had a moment's thought that it was controversial were the 2nd place team or people who weren't looking. I'll never forget it. As for controversial which is not this topic, but someone above mentioned that most are non controversial except a few and 1994 ladies was one - I agree. Kerrigan lost by one tenth of one point...with a far superior technical skate and a very debatable (in my opinion she was much better than Baiul) artistic skate. Oh well....!

Click to expand...

Thank you for posting and sharing your experiences, Skate88. Post long and post often!

Why, thank you el Henry! I tend to be too verbose though . I have watched every world and Olympic championships since 1968 and attended 3 worlds and about 5 US Nationals in person and was lucky enough to see most of the greats starting in the early 70s through around 2005 skating person in exhibition or in competition.Have seen many Practices, which are more interesting than the actual competition in my view. I think of myself as a fan of the sport in the way that a lot of guys are football fans and know all the stats. As most skating fans are , I am very opinionated but try to keep an open mind! I find that my greatest difficulty is in viewing a skaters quality without considering their personality. In addition I have such a strong view on the proper leg position for a lay back that it’s hard for me to view any ladies skating performance with an L shaped dogleg as anything but inferior! I also miss Dick Button very much. For all his sometimes callous remarks 90% of the time he knew exactly what he was talking about and valued the most beautiful things about Skating. He understood that the ability to rotate above the ice has nothing to do with Skating. It’s important overall but the quality of edge and the actual skating is what really matters or used to anyway! I see no value in multiple quadruple jumps. Surely a couple is enough especially when a skater sacrifices good Skating in order to achieve jumps. Sorry for being off topic for this thread so I’ll stop now with the thought that if anyone wants to see true heartfelt skating, you have only to watch Janet Lynn skating to Afternoon of a Faun. I rest my case in her mesmerizing epic performance.

Skate88 said:

Why, thank you el Henry! I tend to be too verbose though . I have watched every world and Olympic championships since 1968 and attended 3 worlds and about 5 US Nationals in person and was lucky enough to see most of the greats starting in the early 70s through around 2005 skating person in exhibition or in competition.Have seen many Practices, which are more interesting than the actual competition in my view. I think of myself as a fan of the sport in the way that a lot of guys are football fans and know all the stats. As most skating fans are , I am very opinionated but try to keep an open mind! I find that my greatest difficulty is in viewing a skaters quality without considering their personality. In addition I have such a strong view on the proper leg position for a lay back that it’s hard for me to view any ladies skating performance with an L shaped dogleg as anything but inferior! I also miss Dick Button very much. For all his sometimes callous remarks 90% of the time he knew exactly what he was talking about and valued the most beautiful things about Skating. He understood that the ability to rotate above the ice has nothing to do with Skating. It’s important overall but the quality of edge and the actual skating is what really matters or used to anyway! I see no value in multiple quadruple jumps. Surely a couple is enough especially when a skater sacrifices good Skating in order to achieve jumps. Sorry for being off topic for this thread so I’ll stop now with the thought that if anyone wants to see true heartfelt skating, you have only to watch Janet Lynn skating to Afternoon of a Faun. I rest my case in her mesmerizing epic performance.

Click to expand...

A fellow traveler:agree:

I first fell in love with skating watching a tiny black and white TV and Janet Lynn. Of course, Toller came along shortly after for my viewing pleasure and stole my skating heart:luv17: (as is evidenced by the avatar), leading me to a life-long preference for the men's discipline. Sadly, circumstances did not really permit in person attendance of big events, but I love hearing the stories from others. And I am also not a fan of revolutions in the air simply for the sake of revolutions; figure skating has so much more to offer:yes:

And that's why it's so significant that I think John Curry was not controversial. I was such a Toller fangirl, at the time I was upset he did not place higher. But looking back on it, the right decision was made

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

It's so weird that you acknowledge the benefit of a quad being negated by doubling a flip for Plushenko, but when it comes to Lambiel you fail to acknowledge the significance of having 3 double axels instead of any triple axels.

Click to expand...

I don't fail to acknowledge that? Lambiel didn't NEED any Triple Axels to deservedly win, if he skated clean (the same as someone like Weir would not NEED the Quad). He especially did not need 3 Triple Axels across his SP + LP, with his multiple Quads and multiple Triple-Triple combos in his LP - he was always going to do at least 1 Double Axel because the jump slot needs to be filled, the same as Plushenko's original version of his Godfather program. Plushenko only went for 1 Quad and had heavily frontloaded jumps; Lambiel's planned jump layout was worth significantly more than Plushenko's, and he additionally has the benefit of his spins. Therefore, even without the 3Axel, Lambiel's LP is already on par technically with a clean Plushenko, and then Plushenko doubled his Flip, putting himself in the hole as compared to a clean Lambiel without a 3Axel.

This doesn't even get into the PCS gap that should have existed between them if Lambiel skated very well! Hence why I say that Lambiel with no 3Axel and a small mistake on another jump deserves to win those Olympics. Plushenko was not safe, were the judging not so ridiculously biased towards him. There were clear deficiencies in his skating that simply got overlooked, and luckily for him (assuming a world where it's a level playing field), the other guys made too many mistakes.

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

Plushenko could have been 5 points behind Lambiel after the SP and he still would have had nothing to worry about given Lambiel was shying away from triple axels.

Click to expand...

At least do the math, this is crazy. Lambiel only loses 4.2 points for not doing 3Axel and, as I just described, Lambiel's LP with no 3Axel is already a technical match for a clean Plushenko. Not to mention the PCS! But yeah, how nice for Plushenko to know the judges would just hand him the highest scores even if other people gave better performances.

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

As for 2006 Worlds, Lambiel's FS was 156.58. It was a score that Plushenko would have easily beaten.

Click to expand...

Why do you only talk about scores on paper? Those. Scores. Are. WRONG!™ The extent of it can be debated, but for me Lambiel's 2006 Worlds LP deserves to beat Plushenko's 2006 Olympics LP (and that's also without the extra +2Lo combo Lambiel did at the Olympics). Let's have a scoring panel for those performances and see what people think.

Mathman said:

Still, I don't see how any amount of "the result might have been different if someone had skated better" translates into saying that the win was "controversial."

Click to expand...

Ah, but that's the thing: because of the bad judging, the result wouldn't have been different if someone skated better. The judges already gave Plushenko the win no matter what. In a sport like figure skating especially, it creates further unfair advantage when a message has been sent out that nobody else is "allowed" to win. It's an emotional abuse and affects the ability to perform. In essence, everyone else is told they are only allowed to sit at the back of the bus, while Plushenko is given special privileges because of the color of his...medals. Hopefully we all understand why that's not good for society.

Baron Vladimir said:

Todays COP may work the best, we will see...

Click to expand...

The current CoP gives too many points to Triple and especially Quad jumps via GOE (and with bad GOE guidelines), and not enough to other elements. The footwork rules suck too, as does having a SP setup with 1 required monster footwork and nothing else besides the jumps/spins. Spiral sequences need to come back as an option, and we need shorter footwork sequences that emphasize a clear dance concept, musicality, speed, and fluidity.

As I pointed out, Lambiel loses more than 4.2 points for a 2A because of GOE once you factor in GOE.

Lambiel's 2A pass got 3.87 points in the SP, and 3.59/4.30 points in the FS. A total of 11.76

Plushenko's 3A pass in the SP alone got 9.36 points in the SP. And the 8.93 points in the FS and on the 3A+2T the GOE was 1.29, so the axel portion of it scored almost 9 points too. He scored almost 27 points from axel jumping passes.

At least do the math, indeed.

I talk about scores on paper because that's what happened. Not what occurs in our own fan-tasy worlds. As much as you or I preach what should be correct or not, that's just theorizing on an alternate reality. Thankfully you have the 2010 Rescoring thread where you are welcome to give Lambiel and Takahashi all the +3's and 10.00's you want and dock Lysacek/Plushenko's GOE and PCS as much as you want. But as much as some would love to crunch the numbers to favour the skater they prefer and deduct the skater they don't like, that doesn't change what actually happened.

As for 2006 Worlds Lambiel vs. 2006 Olympic Plushenko, in the FS it would have been no competition, unless someone were to give Lambiel 9's across the board and +3's for all his spins, and drop Plushenko's PCS into the low 70s and give him 0's across the board for his jumping passes. But nobody in their right mind would be as biased as that, would they?

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

As I pointed out, Lambiel loses more than 4.2 points for a 2A because of GOE once you factor in GOE.

Click to expand...

No he doesn't, there was no difference in GOE factoring between 2A and 3A.

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

Plushenko's 3A pass in the SP alone got 9.36 points. And the 8.93 points in the FS and on the 3A+2T the GOE was 1.29, so the axel portion of it scored almost 9 points too. He scored almost 27 points from axel jumping passes.

Click to expand...

You're making an arbitrary comparison. Lambiel does not need to score the same GOE on axels to meet Plushenko technically. He can get GOE's elsewhere, for example his solo Quad could pull a high GOE, and he in fact scored a little higher on his 4T+3T+2Lo at Olympics than Plushenko did.

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

I talk about scores on paper because that's what happened.

Click to expand...

That doesn't mean it's how things should be, which is what we are talking about here (follow the topic please)! If observers never disagreed with scores/calls/rules then there would never be controversy! Your line of argumentation is like saying "I will agree with any law that gets passed, since it happened officially on paper." It flies in the face of logic. Something is not correct simply because it was written on paper, and you can't just keep using this as some kind of bible when it suits you, but then ignoring it the times you disagree!

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

Thankfully you have the 2010 Rescoring thread where you are welcome to give Lambiel and Takahashi all the +3's and 10.00's you want

Click to expand...

I need to ask you to not use straw-man arguments (every day, it seems). That's not anywhere close to my assessment, I place Lambiel significantly lower in 2010 than the judges did and I don't give Takahashi a +3 anything or even a mid-9 on any PCS.

CanadianSkaterGuy said:

As for 2006 Worlds Lambiel vs. 2006 Olympic Plushenko, in the FS it would have been no competition, unless someone were to give Lambiel 9's across the board and +3's for all his spins, and drop Plushenko's PCS into the low 70s and give him 0's across the board for his jumping passes.

Click to expand...

Nope, not even close. Plushenko being at 78 PCS and Lambiel at 84.5 would already be enough to give Lambiel the win, going exactly by every other score the judges gave. Again, you really need to see the math better, and stop doing these crazy misdirections. Lambiel was indeed unscored on his spins, though. He got barely above 0 GOE on two of them, and they were good spins! The judges were quite stingy on those GOE's back then and he also got a couple wonky level calls. Overall, he lost 2 points on spins from what a more accurate assessment would be...and that's with no +3 GOE's. He also had the weird (wrong) GOE assessment on his clean axel at the start, simply because of it being dropped from a 3A to a 2A.

So I watched 2002 ladies again.

I need someone to help me and explain!

What was Michelle Kwan thinking with a much easier program than Sarah?

Sarah did two triple combos, both of them loops. Was that not worth as much back then? It seemed like Michelle would have been beaten on just BV alone.

Was it very different then?

I only seriously followed scoring etc after Alina and Zhenya in 2018 so now I'm fascinated with the scoring looking back.

Blades of Passion said:

You're making an arbitrary comparison. Lambiel does not need to score the same GOE on axels to meet Plushenko technically. He can get GOE's elsewhere, for example his solo Quad could pull a high GOE, and he in fact scored a little higher on his 4T+3T+2Lo at Olympics than Plushenko did.

Click to expand...

Sure, his solo quad COULD pull high GOE, but in 2006 (the FS where he scored a little higher on his 4T+3T+2L - a whopping difference of 0.14... 15.50 to 15.36) he had a messy second quad with hand down/stepout/almost a fall. Not to mention he had a wonky loop, and fell on his 3Z. And his spins weren't as good as he could do them, particularly his 2 spins after the 3S+2T which were slower and had fewer rotations and were less centred (he's lucky to have gotten a level 3 on the last one too given he didn't hold the last position for 2 full rotations). So, while you can muse all you want about Plushenko giving up points on a 2F, you're completely ignoring the slew of technical errors (along with giving up points by opting for 2A instead of 3A) that put Lambiel way behind.

And it's inane to think in hypotheticals as to what Lambiel COULD do. If you want to play with hypotheticals about what Lambiel could do, we could say that Plushenko could have easily added a 2nd quad toe widening the gap between him and the field (including Lambiel) even further. Lambiel had not many (I'm trying to remember even if he had any?) clean freeskates in his career, and often downgraded his 3As to 2As.

Baron Vladimir said:

But if you simply combine scores from Short Programme Mao performed that same year at Worlds and her free programme from Sochi, she is ahead of Yuna in total scores.

Click to expand...

I do not give much weight to this sort of argument. If Michelle Kwan had skated as well at the 1998 Olympics as she did at U.S. Nationals, she would have won. But she didn't. (Still pretty good, though).

If Sasha Cohen had skated as well as she did in the 2004 Campbell's Soup cheesefest she would have won some world championships.

If you take any skater's best short program and add it to their best long program, the result is better than any of their actual competition results.

You are missing my point Mathman

Baron Vladimir said:

Yeah, even if skating clean, Mao wouldn't win in Vancouver!? But I think 'clean' Mao would win in Sochi. She would certainly be in 1st after the clean short (she presented at Worlds that year), and by skating in top 6 and without UR on 3T, her TES in the free would be 3 points higher, as her components too, so her free score would be on Adelina level, and 1st overall

Click to expand...

She definitely would have been closer to the podium. A win is still questionable because even with no URs, it's hard to say if the judges would give her the PCS needed to beat Sotnikova. Let's remember that it was in Russia and they were pushing hard for a Russian win. Even with a "clean" freeskate (partially due to being in an earlier FS flight due to a bad SP) her PCS didn't even clear 70. She MIGHT have won though if she did an SP with 3A, 3F+3T, 3L or 3A, 3F+3L, 3Z (even a flutz like in her FS amounting to 5.4 points) because that would have likely given her 80 points.

It is a bit infuriating to think that to win Sochi over Sotnikova, Mao theoretically needed a 4 triple SP and an 8 triple LP because of how hosed on PCS she was.

Re your earlier point about Asada's jump layout in 2010 vs 2014, in 2014 if her jump layout was a 3A, 3F+2L, 3L (hypothetically) that would have scored higher than her 3A+2T, 3F, 2A layout in 2010 .. even higher BV if she did a 3-3. Her 2014 FS base value even with just one triple axel would have been higher because she added in a 3-3 combo, had a 2A+3T and put the 3S and 3Z back in there. So I would say Mao's layouts definitely leveled up from 2010 to 2014 even if she had one less 3A planned in 2014.