Non Controversial Olympic Wins | Page 7 | Golden Skate

Non Controversial Olympic Wins

Baron Vladimir

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
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.

They gave her 78 points for a clean short program a month later, with the same planned layout from Sochi. They gave her 143 points in Sochi for a free programme with two underrotation calls and an edge call, and with less than 70 points in components, which she skated as a 16th skater after the short. Again, they gave her 73 points in components for a similarly performed free programme she skated as a leader after the short a month later. So hipothetically speaking, she could beat even Adelina if she skated clean, cause Adelina could not get more points than she already did (maybe a point more if that sloppy landing on a three jump combo didn't happen). But lets not speak hipothetically anymore :)
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
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.

Not holding his last position for long enough is why he didn't get a Level 4. He wasn't "lucky to get a level 3", you should learn the rules better. There was actually no rule in CoP at the time that said variations of position needed to be held for 2 rotations to count, at least not clearly. The wording at the time only explicitly talked about each type of basic position in spin combinations needing to be held for 2 rotations to count.

And it's inane to think in hypotheticals as to what Lambiel COULD do.

It isn't, because we are talking about how they should be scored under realistic scenarios, even a clear comparison like the exact LP Lambiel did at 2006 Worlds vs Plushenko at 2006 Olympics. Or again, what Lambiel did in the SP at the Olympics. I'm not sure why you keep trying to jump through hoops to deny that Plushenko was overscored or that other people were underscored. Like, how can you even defend the fact that he was given the highest transitions score of any competitor, while Savoie was given the lowest of the top 8.

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.

See, this is an inane hypothetical. Plushenko never did a multiple quad program after 2004 and he was skating first in the LP after leading the SP, and after coming back from injury. Why would he try to do a multiple Quad program? He would just assume he's unbeatable with the content he had against the field. It's a fine gameplan to have, but if competitors rise to the occasion and skate better, they deserve to be scored as such. Judging by merit, not reputation.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Not holding his last position for long enough is why he didn't get a Level 4. He wasn't "lucky to get a level 3", you should learn the rules better. There was actually no rule in CoP at the time that said variations of position needed to be held for 2 rotations to count, at least not clearly. The wording at the time only explicitly talked about each type of basic position in spin combinations needing to be held for 2 rotations to count.



It isn't, because we are talking about how they should be scored under realistic scenarios, even a clear comparison like the exact LP Lambiel did at 2006 Worlds vs Plushenko at 2006 Olympics. Or again, what Lambiel did in the SP at the Olympics. I'm not sure why you keep trying to jump through hoops to deny that Plushenko was overscored or that other people were underscored. Like, how can you even defend the fact that he was given the highest transitions score of any competitor, while Savoie was given the lowest of the top 8.



See, this is an inane hypothetical. Plushenko never did a multiple quad program after 2004 and he was skating first in the LP after leading the SP, and after coming back from injury. Why would he try to do a multiple Quad program? He would just assume he's unbeatable with the content he had against the field. It's a fine gameplan to have, but if competitors rise to the occasion and skate better, they deserve to be scored as such. Judging by merit, not reputation.

Lmao I have stated many times Plushenko was overscored. But no matter how much I dislike his programs, I do not try to crunch match, propose radical GOE/tech call changes, or deny that he should have won in 2006 and by a considerable margin. And people here know I dislike many things that are Plushenko-esque. That’s the difference between an objective judge... and other people. I strive to judge each skater as an absolute and worthy of absolute judging. No worries if not everyone sees it that way. 😜

As much as we dislike his overall skating he is unequivocally the 2006 Olympic champion and nothing will change my mind or delegitimize his win.

Also it’s not an inane hypothetical to suggest Plushenko could have done a second quad. I would have wagered that potentially happening more than Lambiel attempting an actual triple axel.
 

Skate88

Rinkside
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Hi again el Henry - it is so refreshing to know there are people out there who are intellectually honest!. Curry was the ultimate master of deep edges and flow and was a skater's skater. As you know, he and Toller were pretty much 180 degree opposites. But I recall at the time that Curry's win wasn't at all controversial. Toller was remarkably creative but was very uneasy to watch as he took such risks that you were not sure if he was really in control or not. I sensed that for him skating was an expression of an extremely complex personality so that it was sometimes difficult to see his skating because his outsize personality could get in the way. The two controversial wins that bug me terribly are Kerrigan and Boitano - the former who in my opinion unjustly got 2nd place, and in the second case, was to my mind clearly the overwhelming winner and did win but his win was somewhat subdued due to the raving Orser fans who did not understand. I did not get it why he got higher artistic marks than Boitano and probably never will understand- so it made me furious that people questioned Boitano's win. It was clearly technically superior and to my mind the artistic quality was equal to Orser. In that case, my favorite won but it is difficult for me to understand why Orser fans don't understand that win and consider it controversial. Had the artistic mark been the dominant then he would have won which I suppose it why all the bro ha had was about. As to Kerrigan, that was absolutely unbelievable to me. My mouth hung open in effect as I could not comprehend Baiuls win. Her skate was technically far below Kerrigans and her artistic stuff was a lot of arms....I try to be intellectually honest about that one but cannot come up with justification for Baiul's win - at least it was only by one tenth of one point !!! And later the East German judge Jan Hoffman said that he would have given the win to Kerrigan had he seen Bauils two footed combo. Sigh. Having seen both all these people in person, I can say that Kerrigan was stunning as was Boitano. His jumps were so high they nearly cleared the barrier and he travelled yards in air over the ice. He was so secure that you never had a moment's doubt that he would not fall. Same with Kwan. Anyway, in the end they all give us so much joy!!!
 

anonymoose_au

Insert weird opinion here
Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Country
Australia
I can't believe there's people in here, who, with a completely straight face, can downplay Plushy's 2006 win.

Or maybe I can...

If you ask me a lot of it has to do with the terrible commentary from Dick Button and co (seriously he got up on the wrong side of the bed on those competion days). If you listen to his commentary without watching Plushy's actual skate you'd think it was a complete mess. The words do not match the action. Funnily enough the commentators from the B.Esp guys, the Aussie commentator and even the Canadians did not agree with Dick and Co.'s lukewarm assessment of Plushy's abilities.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
I can't believe there's people in here, who, with a completely straight face, can downplay Plushy's 2006 win.

Or maybe I can...

If you ask me a lot of it has to do with the terrible commentary from Dick Button and co (seriously he got up on the wrong side of the bed on those competion days). If you listen to his commentary without watching Plushy's actual skate you'd think it was a complete mess. The words do not match the action. Funnily enough the commentators from the B.Esp guys, the Aussie commentator and even the Canadians did not agree with Dick and Co.'s lukewarm assessment of Plushy's abilities.

No shade, but his programs were a hot mess from a choreo/transitions/program composition standpoint and the NBC commentary about there “not being a program” is on point.... but he still deserved the win based on his execution and his closest competition not even holding a candle to him from a technical standpoint, both segments considered.
 

kolyadafan2002

Fan of Kolyada
Final Flight
Joined
Jun 6, 2019
I can't believe there's people in here, who, with a completely straight face, can downplay Plushy's 2006 win.

Or maybe I can...

If you ask me a lot of it has to do with the terrible commentary from Dick Button and co (seriously he got up on the wrong side of the bed on those competion days). If you listen to his commentary without watching Plushy's actual skate you'd think it was a complete mess. The words do not match the action. Funnily enough the commentators from the B.Esp guys, the Aussie commentator and even the Canadians did not agree with Dick and Co.'s lukewarm assessment of Plushy's abilities.

I didn't like his 2006 performance that much (I did find his return from injury inspiring however!)
But he was the winner of the night. He did two clean programs of high quality, and unequivocally deserved to win.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Lmao I have stated many times Plushenko was overscored. But no matter how much I dislike his programs, I do not try to crunch match, propose radical GOE/tech call changes

The issue here is you consider something "radical" when it is actually the normal, correct thing. It's not "radical" to give Plushenko a Transitions score down in the 6's, as one judge did. That's just accurate for what he put on the ice. With more objective scoring like that, the scores would be drastically different. If you dislike his program, then his component score should be significantly lower than competitors with better programs. That is the purpose of the second mark. The artistry and the un-listed elements matter. Your statement essentially echoes what ISU judges do - they are sheep and don't go out of a certain range in their scores from what they are told a certain skater "should" have.
 

Baron Vladimir

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
If you dislike his program, then his component score should be significantly lower than competitors with better programs. That is the purpose of the second mark.
Thats not the correct interpretation of the second mark (at least not in what second mark is today). If you dislike someones programme that only means you are too emotional and too subjective about it. You can't reduce or up someones components based just on your feelings and preconceptions about it.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Thats not the correct interpretation of the second mark (at least not in what second mark is today). If you dislike someones programme that only means you are too emotional and too subjective about it.

This is very wrong. If you dislike someone's program it means you disliked their choreography and interpretation, possibly their performance quality itself too, and maybe their transitions and skating skills as well (as a lack of those things might directly impact the overall choreography/interpretation). Skating is supposed to be emotional. The skater should be creating a feeling for the audience, they should be expressing something like any actor or performing artist would, and doing something meaningful with the music.
 

anonymoose_au

Insert weird opinion here
Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Country
Australia
The issue here is you consider something "radical" when it is actually the normal, correct thing. It's not "radical" to give Plushenko a Transitions score down in the 6's, as one judge did. That's just accurate for what he put on the ice. With more objective scoring like that, the scores would be drastically different. If you dislike his program, then his component score should be significantly lower than competitors with better programs. That is the purpose of the second mark. The artistry and the un-listed elements matter. Your statement essentially echoes what ISU judges do - they are sheep and don't go out of a certain range in their scores from what they are told a certain skater "should" have.

Fair enough to ding Plushy on transitions (I think they're overrated) but at Vancouver a judge actually had the gall to rank his SKATING SKILLS the 24th lowest. Like come on, I watched the 24th placed skater and let me tell you if that judge couldn't see the difference I don't know what to say about them.

Besides I'm not saying Plushy skated the best evah at Torino, but his technical content was far and away the most difficult. Most of the others didn't even try to match it and those who did fell.

It just seems the height of rudeness to make it sound like the judges just handed him a gold. Plushy worked hard for that win and was coming back from a serious injury. A little respect could be paid.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
One of the weird things about the 2010 scoring is several of the judges went too hard on him in the SP for Transitions (where he had more than in the LP), but then in the LP his marks got higher. It's just total reputation judging. There were conversations before the Olympics about "Plushenko needs to be marked down on Transitions", so some of the judges blindly followed that line of thinking, but then after he won the SP they no longer had the political comfort to grade so low.

I'm not sure where you got that info about his Skating Skills score though, none of the judges marked him 24th or anywhere close to it (one judge gave him a 7.0 in the SP; that was his lowest). It's just the Transitions component they hammered him on.
 

Baron Vladimir

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
This is very wrong. If you dislike someone's program it means you disliked their choreography and interpretation, possibly their performance quality itself too, and maybe their transitions and skating skills as well (as a lack of those things might directly impact the overall choreography/interpretation). Skating is supposed to be emotional. The skater should be creating a feeling for the audience, they should be expressing something like any actor or performing artist would, and doing something meaningful with the music.

It is important for a skater to create something, it is important for a skater to express something, it is important for a skater to do something to the music. So, it is important for all those things to exist in someones skating. How you feel about that something it's really not that important when it's come to the judging. Judges are looking for a degree of existence of some thing (written in the criteria), not for a degree of 'likability' of that same thing. People are allowed to like/dislike different things, there is no 'objective' criteria of what is/should be likable. It's like to claim how strawberries are not good because you (personally) don't like to eat them.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
The issue here is you consider something "radical" when it is actually the normal, correct thing. It's not "radical" to give Plushenko a Transitions score down in the 6's, as one judge did. That's just accurate for what he put on the ice. With more objective scoring like that, the scores would be drastically different. If you dislike his program, then his component score should be significantly lower than competitors with better programs. That is the purpose of the second mark. The artistry and the un-listed elements matter. Your statement essentially echoes what ISU judges do - they are sheep and don't go out of a certain range in their scores from what they are told a certain skater "should" have.

LOL, aren't you the first person to chirp that a judging protocol score doesn't necessarily mean it's correct? :laugh:

Care to point out when I said giving him a 6 for transitions is radical? I was talking ACTUAL objective scoring as it pertains to GOE or tech calls. And even those are subjective (e.g. one judge might think a skater did an element to match the music or had very good height on a jump whereas another might have thought it was off or had average height).

Regarding PCS, I disagree where judges use PCS as a means of holding down certain skaters and propping up others. Some might argue that Plushenko's programs even if perfect shouldn't place him anywhere near the podium just because of how bad the programs are - and I would agree with that statement IF his competitors actually brought it. But few ever got the goods together to beat him, or have the guts to go for difficulty they were capable of. But that didn't happen in the 2006 Olympics, and even to some extent in the 2010 Olympics with so many guys opting for an easier 3-3 in their SP instead of a 4-3, so they could stay in the hunt instead of push for the win. Lysacek was fortunate in that Plushenko's jumps in his FS were so sloppy that they negated the technical advantage he had built by doing quads - that coupled with having actual programs justified his win over Plushenko even though some saw it as controversial.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
One of the weird things about the 2010 scoring is several of the judges went too hard on him in the SP for Transitions (where he had more than in the LP), but then in the LP his marks got higher. It's just total reputation judging. There were conversations before the Olympics about "Plushenko needs to be marked down on Transitions", so some of the judges blindly followed that line of thinking, but then after he won the SP they no longer had the political comfort to grade so low.

I'm not sure where you got that info about his Skating Skills score though, none of the judges marked him 24th or anywhere close to it (one judge gave him a 7.0 in the SP; that was his lowest). It's just the Transitions component they hammered him on.

His transitions score went from 6.80 to 7.25 in the FS. That's hardly a drastic jump (0.45). The judges are also randomized so we can't even see which judges supposedly stopped grading low. I don't follow your line of thinking either. In one post you say it's not radical that a judge gives him a 6 as it's accurate for what he puts on the ice, and on the other hand you say the judges went too hard on him in the SP for Transitions? And then the panel judging him 0.45 higher from SP to FS somehow indicates them being sheep and marking him higher due to political comfort?!

Aside from that, please note that the SP and FS are two different programs. If judging were "consistent" in their scoring from a SP to a FS, then a skater doing the same thing from one program to another should theoretically receive the same scores and exactly 2 times the PCS points in the FS as they got in the SP, which we know isn't the case, because the FS gives a skater much more time/leeway to garner higher PCS marks (for example, a skater has the ability to show a greater variety of transitions, or a greater range of expression with multiple music changes). Several protocols show skaters getting more than double their SP PCS in the FS (unless they have a hot mess of a freeskate). And sometimes it happens because the skater's FS choice is better than their SP choice so higher PCS for the same quality of execution is higher.

I get if a skater goes clean in both programs and their skating skills are a 7.0 in the SP and suddenly jump to a 9.5 in the FS - that would be weird but doesn't happen too often.. but instances of weirdness do occur. Like Gold's PCS jump in her 2014 Olympic FS from her team event - 61.89 to individual event - 68.33 ... her SS/TR/PE/IN/CH magically went from 7.82/7.43/7.86/7.75/7.82 for a clean team FS to 8.57/8.25/8.61/8.64/8.64 for an individual FS with a fall. Different panel, sure, but that's a little more suspect since it's the exact same program performed days later and the 2nd time had a fall and yet everything went up considerably. Lipnitskaia's PCS also went up in spite of a clean team FS (69.82) and an individual FS with errors including a fall (70.06). And Mao's team SP PCS went from 33.82 to her nightmare of an individual SP getting 33.88.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
I don't understand why you are always twisting what someone said and then trying to change the subject. Your whole tangent about "skaters can get more than double the PCS in the LP as the SP" is very strange. Like, DUH, they can get that much, the LP has 2x the PCS values. However, it's not true that a LP gives a skater more ability to do transitions. They should be judged on a percentage basis, ie - a skater is capable of doing a higher number of transitions in the LP since it's longer, but that doesn't mean the program has a higher percentage of transitions as a whole. The running time of the LP is actually not 2x long as the SP, although since it does have a higher percentage of jumps in comparison, it roughly evens out.

So, now that we're past that, Plushenko's SP showed better transitions than his LP. Therefore, the non-factored score given by the judges to him should have been higher in the SP than the LP. Instead the opposite happened, and it wasn't by a small amount from those individual judges either, it was a full point or more higher. It's pretty obvious which judges were doing it with the way judging almost always works out, but regardless there is also insider info. Also, that thing you were talking about with Plushenko's technical edge (because of 1 Quad) - it's not some kind of impossibility for someone to score higher technically without a quad. The quad, on paper, was not even that much of a bonus back then, especially in 2006. It was only 3.5 potential bonus in the SP, in comparison to doing 3Flip instead. Arguably judges could take it upon themselves to self-correct that perceived imbalance of the rules, but that's a grey area.

It is important for a skater to create something, it is important for a skater to express something, it is important for a skater to do something to the music. So, it is important for all those things to exist in someones skating. How you feel about that something it's really not that important when it's come to the judging. Judges are looking for a degree of existence of some thing (written in the criteria), not for a degree of 'likability' of that same thing. People are allowed to like/dislike different things, there is no 'objective' criteria of what is/should be likable. It's like to claim how strawberries are not good because you (personally) don't like to eat them.

Someone's taste is inherent to their judging. That's how it works for the judging of anything artistic. The judge is determining if the program had good choreography or interpretation or performance quality. If they don't like those aspects the skater is showing, then the skater should be marked down. There is no way to judge "the degree of existence" of musical interpretation while separating it from the artistic integrity of the interpretation. If a judge thinks an arm movement a skater did was not good with the music, then that means the skater is not showing ideal musical interpretation to them. This is the whole point of having judges. Flailing about the ice and doing all kinds of random moves (aka, the sad direction modern skating has been going, aka Eteri skater programs) does not show a "degree of musical interpretation", it simply can not be measured like that. Now, while people have different taste, judges should have a high refinement of their taste. A valuable perspective. Unfortunately many of the sitting judges lack this.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
I don't understand why you are always twisting what someone said and then trying to change the subject. Your whole tangent about "skaters can get more than double the PCS in the LP as the SP" is very strange. Like, DUH, they can get that much, the LP has 2x the PCS values. However, it's not true that a LP gives a skater more ability to do transitions. They should be judged on a percentage basis, ie - a skater is capable of doing a higher number of transitions in the LP since it's longer, but that doesn't mean the program has a higher percentage of transitions as a whole. The running time of the LP is actually not 2x long as the SP, although since it does have a higher percentage of jumps in comparison, it roughly evens out.

So, now that we're past that, Plushenko's SP showed better transitions than his LP. Therefore, the non-factored score given by the judges to him should have been higher in the SP than the LP. Instead the opposite happened, and it wasn't by a small amount from those individual judges either, it was a full point or more higher . It's pretty obvious which judges were doing it with the way judging almost always works out, but regardless there is also insider info. Also, that thing you were talking about with Plushenko's technical edge (because of 1 Quad) - it's not some kind of impossibility for someone to score higher technically without a quad. The quad, on paper, was not even that much of a bonus back then, especially in 2006. It was only 3.5 potential bonus in the SP, in comparison to doing 3Flip instead. Arguably judges could take it upon themselves to self-correct that perceived imbalance of the rules, but that's a grey area.

:unsure: How do you know which individual judges gave “a full point or more higher” between the SP and FS, given that the judges were listed in random order in the protocols?
 

plushyfan

Record Breaker
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Country
Hungary
I don't find this to be a good comparison at all, and Rochette/Asada are already 2 different things. Many people feel Asada was underscored (and actually had higher jump difficulty, with a 3Axel+2Toe being seen as harder than 3Lutz+3Toe), and didn't deserve to be so far behind Yuna. As for Rochette, she did not have anything special about her skating to put her in the same league. Her spins, spirals, and footwork were all weaker, the same for her overall program and presentation. This is different from Lambiel compared to Plushenko, where the former had a superior program and spins over Plushenko. Rochette was just a nice, solid skater who did a clean performance. Lambiel was a landmark skater.



No, it's fair. The difference between 2Axel and 3Axel was only 4.2 points. With GOE consideration we can say Plushenko deserved a 5.2 point advantage over Lambiel on that element. Their other 7 elements in comparison are pretty much equal to me on the whole, so it's literally just the Axel that separates them technically. Once you factor in the PCS differential between the two of them (which I feel should have been essentially reversed from what the judges gave, favoring Lambiel by that amount instead of Plushenko by that amount), then yes that 5.2 point technical advantage of Plushenko's drops down to just about a 2.6 point lead for the whole program.



Savoie did not double both of his Lutzes (and Plushenko doubled a jump too), and not having a quad or 3 jump combo has virtually nothing to do with how far his PCS should have been ahead of Plushenko's. Savoie's skating vs Plushenko's in those LP's is like comparing Jason Brown vs Boyang Jin, if Boyang actually had less technical advantage instead! Yet the judges completely reversed it.



You've still missed the point. If Lambiel or Weir had skated completely clean Long Programs, they would have deserved to beat Plushenko at those Olympics. But instead, because of the very skewed SP scoring and because of the PCS thrown at Plushenko in the LP, it became literally impossible for anyone to beat him, with the way the judges were scoring. And that is WRONG.

Hey! :biggrin: If Stefan or another skater had been closer to Plushenko, he would have jumped another quad that was in his arsenal, he just didn't need it in the LP.. he could have won with lot of points without the second quad. So your counting is just a dream ...:p
 

Skater Boy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
The other thread got me thinking about non controversial Olympics wins. Obviously anyone can cry foul about anything (and some do) but in a general sense which wins do you think were pretty straight forward?

Two that come to mind for me are:

2018 - Alina

2010 - Yuna

Nothing hokey about these wins imo.

I think some would say alina's was controversial. The judges could have lowered her pcs a bit o raised Evgenia - and I mean a tiny bit and that is al lit would have taken. Some would argue Evgenia was far better pc wise.
 
Top