Non Controversial Olympic Wins | Page 5 | Golden Skate

Non Controversial Olympic Wins

theharleyquinn

Medalist
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
I don't think we can fault the judges in 1988. Elizabeth Manley rightly won the free skate, and 7 of the 9 judges agreed that she was the best.

But she was behind both Katarina Witt and DebiThomas in both figures and the short program,so winning the LP would not have been enough even if all the judges were unanimous (which they almost were). The only thing that could have helped Manley is if Thomas (or Midori Ito) had been placed ahead of Witt in the short program.

I would've put both ahead. The real mystery of 88 is whether the figure placements were really correct. That ladies event is a real puzzle to reach other results given what the figures were.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Lambiel's 2Axel was beautiful, high and airy and clean, he was actually underscored on GOE there (they gave him more points for his opening 2A in the LP, when that one was a little tilted in comparison, unreliable judging as usual). He didn't need to match Plushenko's score on the 3Axel to deservedly beat him, far from it. Simply doing a decent 3Axel was easily enough to put Lambiel ahead for me. His PCS did not deserve to be lower than Plushenko's simply because he did a 2A, that's not the purpose of PCS. It would have made Lambiel's mesmerizing SP even more exciting if he did a 3A, but it wasn't much of a detriment to me.



Lambiel's 3Lutz was better than Plushenko's and it was indeed quite effortless. He had an amazing entry and got more distance on the jump, with ballon in the air and more speed and strong edging on the exit. Plushenko wins on the combo jump, but similar to the theoretical 3A comparison, Lambiel did not need to beat him on that element to deserve to beat him overall.

While Lambiel's transitions into his lutz were nice as was the lofty trajectory, I actually prefer Plushenko's overall - especially the control on the landing that allows him to flourish with his arms. It looks incredibly effortless - moreso than Lambiel's 2A. I'm also not a fan of the "mule arm" Lambiel has on the takeoff of his lutz, but to each their own.

We can agree to disagree, but Lambiel's double axel was very stalked ... he just does casual easy stroking and a long RBO glide going into it - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNW4h2wTmak&t=42s. It looks like he intended to do a 3A, but opted to do a 2A instead and didn't bother changing the choreo to reflect that, so it just looked like a telegraphed 2A... when normally that long of a setup into a 3A is a bit more acceptable. I get that it might have been a gametime decision to play it safe, but at the Olympics in senior men's if you're going to do a double axel it should be more difficult/be more integrated into the choreography than that and he's certainly talented enough a skater to have put some transitions into it (like his second 2A in his FS), or at least extend the flourish on the exit of that to show that it was intentionally a 2A. Even some of the commentators were confused at his "inability" to do a 3A, when really he was deliberately doing just the double.

Also, like it or not, it is a fact that easier content means a program is easier to execute, and having easier content diminishes the overall performance - especially in a competition setting like the Olympics -- you can't tell me that a program with all single/double jumps has the same impact or impression as the same program but with triples/quads. And let's not pretend that the judges won't notice if you downgrade to a double axel. The 3A is a standard in men's skating - especially if you're vying for the podium. Even Jong In Han (PRK) who placed last in the 2006 Olympics SP went for and landed the 3A (and a nice one at that!).
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
To this day I firmly believe that Kaetlyn Osmond should have won in 2018. She was handicapped from the start because everyone went in with the assumption that the battle for gold was between the two Russians and she was never truly considered.

I also argue that Carolina Kostner should have been the rightful gold medallist in 2014, with Kim second and Sotnikova third. Kim was good, and certainly deserved to win in 2010, but in 2014 Kostner had the magic.

I realize both of these are unpopular opinions. For the purposes of this thread, I'm astonished that anyone would suggest Zagitova's win wasn't controversial. Even if you disagree with me, there was a very loud contingent who argue to this day that Medvedeva should have won gold in 2018. And of course 2014 ladies is one of the most hotly debated results in history.


I love Osmond, but Zagitova totally won fair and square. She optimized what she needed to win. The other ladies were welcome to try that (including Medvedeva who was arguably capable of it), but they did not. Osmond's jumps were miles bigger and better than the Russians, but she did make some errors. If Osmond went jump for jump with the Russians from a layout perspective, and went clean, then a case could be made for her winning (especially given Zagitova + Medvedeva's crazy high PCS), but those 2 Russians were in a league of their own in that particular competition, IMO.

I don't get why people are using scoring gaps as a means of calling a win controversial. In the cases of Kim in 2010 and Plushenko in 2006 it is absolutely negligible given their margins of victories. Sure, the judges could have kept the scores 5 points closer, but then people would call it controversial for not being 6+ points closer. :rolleye: Those are both solid, well deserved victories - and in both cases the margins of victories were also largely attributed to them skating pretty much cleanly while their main rivals on paper failed to peak.

I mean, why does it matter if Plushenko had a 10 point lead after the SP? He was the only one who did both the quad and triple axel, and he ended up winning by 27 points. The programs were meh, but it's a sport and he got the elements done. Kim won by 23 points and no matter how much you cull her PCS or GOE, the win is unquestionably hers, so why does it matter if she had considerable lead after the SP (which she, like Plushenko, skated cleanly with complete difficulty)?
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Also, like it or not, it is a fact that easier content means a program is easier to execute, and having easier content diminishes the overall performance

No it really doesn't. That's not what performance or choreography or interpretation is. Doing a more difficult technical element might make a performance more exciting, but not always. It depends on the exact timing and execution and expression of the skater. When people want to do a certain element, and fail to do it, there tends to be at least a subtle sense of failure that creeps into their body language. However, that is not always the case, and there are many cases where "easier" content in fact looks better or is more musical, especially with non-jump elements.

you can't tell me that a program with all single/double jumps has the same impact or impression as the same program but with triples/quads.

Straw-man argument. Doubling one jump in a program is not the same as the entire program having easy jump content. Beyond that, there is a very real musical and conceptual consideration for doing a Double instead of a Triple. Rotating less frantically might well be a better reflection of the music at that point in time and for the program as a whole. The way a 3-2 combo can look so elegant and relate a sense of layering, as opposed to the sameness of a 3-3 combo, for example. And, yes, if a skater is pouring their heart and soul into a performance with only single axels and double jumps (which was in fact the case of many beautiful performances in history), that performance can leave a bigger impression, or the same level of impression. It's inherently never the exact same program, because every movement from a skater matters, and big beautiful double jumps that a skater is committing to and giving expression to, might well be better than a triple jump program where they are continually breaking their expression or body form, or losing flow on landings.

For example, when Mao Asada did a lovely 2Axel+2Toe combo at 2010-2011 Japanese Nationals in her "Visions of Love" program, that moment of the program was better than it ever was all the times she went for a 2Axe+3Toe combo instead. It relayed ease and delicacy, as opposed to the more forceful/labored look that was always conveyed by the 2Axel+3Toe. The latter is worth more technical points, but was the inferior artistic execution. This is the essential duality that is constantly in play with a competitive artistic sport.

We can agree to disagree, but Lambiel's double axel was very stalked

He didn't lose much speed or look worried or stop all body motion going into it. I wouldn't call that "very stalked". Everybody in the competition had only simple step/gliding before their axel and I don't particularly mind that anyway, as it shows off the arc of the jump; nice clear edges and pattern. His music and choreography did not specifically call for a 3A to me. The mood was mysterious and exploratory. He did a very nice jump and it was before his bigger Quad combination to come, so it wasn't anticlimatic.

I mean, why does it matter if Plushenko had a 10 point lead after the SP?

As already said, it creates an undeserved sense of security for him and a feeling of uneasiness for the other competitors (same for his component scores in the LP). Kind of like the oppression of unbalanced capitalism, wherein those who happen to be given more money for whatever reason (often unfair reasons), are continually given advantages over those with less, simply because they already have more. Who knows how differently others would have skated if they felt they actually had a chance to win.
 

rain

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 29, 2003
I love Osmond, but Zagitova totally won fair and square. She optimized what she needed to win. The other ladies were welcome to try that (including Medvedeva who was arguably capable of it), but they did not. Osmond's jumps were miles bigger and better than the Russians, but she did make some errors. If Osmond went jump for jump with the Russians from a layout perspective, and went clean, then a case could be made for her winning (especially given Zagitova + Medvedeva's crazy high PCS), but those 2 Russians were in a league of their own in that particular competition, IMO.

Kaetlyn's jumps were all of a much higher quality, except for the lutz, on which she had a step out — the one and only mistake in either program. She was way undervalued in terms of GOE and PCS when compared to the Russian ladies. Her skating skills were far, far superior. I really don't want to attract an argument with the users, but Zagitova's PCS were an utter joke, from her bent over posture to the fact that no movement was ever finished. And that's disregarding the awful choreography.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
As already said, it creates an undeserved sense of security for him and a feeling of uneasiness for the other competitors (same for his component scores in the LP). Kind of like the oppression of unbalanced capitalism, wherein those who happen to be given more money for whatever reason (often unfair reasons), are continually given advantages over those with less, simply because they already have more. Who knows how differently others would have skated if they felt they actually had a chance to win.


Yes, the judges gave Plushenko generous marks, but he was also the only skater contending for the podium who actually delivered in the SP. The sense of security was primarily attributed to his competitors caving (or playing it safe) and leaving such a gap. It's not Plushenko's fault that in 2006 the competition was abysmal - in the SP, all of the guys under-executed or played it safe, giving him a considerable lead.

Only 6 guys went for a 4T in the SP. Plushenko was the only one to land his, do a 3A, and go clean. Sandhu opened with a good 4T+3T but then singled the axel and messed up his lutz, taking himself out of it. Joubert did a 4T+2T. Lambiel had a 4T+3T (which wasn't ideally executed) and opted to do a 2A which killed his base value. Min Zhang landed the best 4T+3T but had a double axel, like Lambiel, which negated the benefit of doing a quad. And Chengjiang Li fell on his quad.

Then you get to the FS where it was a hot mess express across the board where everyone was fighting for 2nd or 3rd - even removing Plushenko's SP margin, they were still all non-factors for Plushenko, and he extended his 11 point lead to 27 points.

Both the silver and bronze medalists had a fall in their FS. The silver medalist had no triple axe in either program (and a slew of errors) and the bronze medalist doubled the loop (after a SP where they had a 3A fall and poor lutz). If anyone gave him the false sense of security it wasn't the judges but the other skaters failing to execute - which of course isn't Plushenko's fault. The judges nailing Plushenko more on PCS after the SP would have made absolutely no difference to his sense of security because technically he smoked the other guys, and they did him every favour by dumbing down difficulty or failing to execute key elements well.

If anything the result, it might have given Plushenko a false sense of security going into 2010 thinking that he could beat anyone there as long as he executed his jumps, regardless of the quality of programs, because he was the only one reliably landing both the quad and triple axels in that competition too.
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Lambiel and Weir both "delivered" in the SP in 2006. Again, Plushenko was scored 11.6 points ahead of Lambiel, and really I would have it more like 2.6, as Lambiel had superior spins and connections and range of movement. 9 points is a massive difference! Weir should have been more like 4-5 points back rather than 10.5, he also had a better choreographed program than Plushenko, and mainly just lacked the Quad (which was actually only a 3.5 point base advantage for Plushenko back then). While it could be argued that Plushenko deserved more credit for the jumps, and the system didn't reward jump difficulty enough at the time, it can also be argued he got too much credit for his spins, doing almost no variations and just relying on weaker "half sit" positions and back entrances to rack up points.

And as for the LP, Plushenko was scored a staggering 30 points ahead of Matt Savoie, and actually I would have scored those performances close to each other, more than a 25 point differential from what they actually received! It's absolutely criminal the PCS they were given, Savoie is out there doing one of the most soulful programs ever with the best transitions ever, while Plushenko is doing his jump drill program with less transitions than anyone else. It's an amazing case study of how wrong the judging can be and how much of an undeserved point gap can be created with the scoring system.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Kaetlyn's jumps were all of a much higher quality, except for the lutz, on which she had a step out — the one and only mistake in either program. She was way undervalued in terms of GOE and PCS when compared to the Russian ladies. Her skating skills were far, far superior. I really don't want to attract an argument with the users, but Zagitova's PCS were an utter joke, from her bent over posture to the fact that no movement was ever finished. And that's disregarding the awful choreography.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Their actual jumps themselves (from a technique/height/distance/speed/impression) had inferior quality to Osmond's, but Zagitova/Medvedeva played to the GOE with transitions and arm positions. Zagitova's choreography was contrived but again it was chocked full of transitions and whatnot to play to the system. And of course, the backloading garned extra points too. Had Osmond landed her lutz and had better spins, I'd be more inclined to say Osmond was robbed. But Zagitova was foot perfect technically speaking so even dropping her PCS would still have her ahead of Osmond in my books. I will say, while I wasn't a fan of Zagitova and Medvedeva's choreo, I wasn't blown away by Osmond's program either which still felt very measured in some parts too and it looked like she was thinking instead of performing. It's fine because everyone does that at the Olympics (focusing on delivering) and rarely at that level do you get a skater like Kim who is emotionally into her program while executing all the difficulty cleanly and effortlessly.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Lambiel and Weir both "delivered" in the SP in 2006. Again, Plushenko was scored 11.6 points ahead of Lambiel, and really I would have it more like 2.6, as Lambiel had superior spins and connections and range of movement. 9 points is a massive difference! Weir should have been more like 4-5 points back rather than 10.5, he also had a better choreographed program than Plushenko, and mainly just lacked the Quad (which was actually only a 3.5 point base advantage for Plushenko back then). While it could be argued that Plushenko deserved more credit for the jumps, and the system didn't reward jump difficulty enough at the time, it can also be argued he got too much credit for his spins, doing almost no variations and just relying on weaker "half sit" positions and back entrances to rack up points.

And as for the LP, Plushenko was scored a staggering 30 points ahead of Matt Savoie, and actually I would have scored those performances close to each other, more than a 25 point differential from what they actually received! It's absolutely criminal the PCS they were given, Savoie is out there doing one of the most soulful programs ever with the best transitions ever, while Plushenko is doing his jump drill program with less transitions than anyone else. It's an amazing case study of how wrong the judging can be and how much of an undeserved point gap can be created with the scoring system.

Lambiel delivered the same way Joannie Rochette or Mao Asada delivered in 2006. Clean program, with the elements done as planned, but the leader completed greater difficulty leading to a comfortable margin after the SP. Re: delivering -- If Chen or Hanyu did only triples in their SP when they were capable of doing quads, they would be "delivering" a clean skate but not "delivering" their best.

It's not like Weir was incapable of doing a quad. Here he is in the Torino practice doing them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOr8_naE81Q
Lambiel also did a 3A at Europeans 2006 less than a month before the Olympics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkMYSnxUoJI

They "delivered" clean SPs but they did not deliver what they were capable of. They played it safe while Plushenko went all out. And playing it safe left tons of points on the table, as well as gives the impression of inferiority to a skater who does the difficulty. And as mentioned, even with reduced difficulty neither Weir or Lambiel them were perfect in all of their elements either. Plushenko delivered what he needed to ensure a win, Lambiel and Weir delivered what they felt would keep them in the final flight and in the running for a medal.

And 11.6 to 2.6? :unsure: Come on. We all know that you're hugely biased towards Lambiel but even that is a bit too blatant. I prefer Lambiel's skating way more than Plushenko's but I wouldn't have had them that close. I would have definitely pushed Lambiel's PCS above 80, and maybe docked Plushenko's PCS to about 87/88. But to put those two performances less than 3 points apart - well, that's something, lol. Can't wait to see what you do with the 2010 Olympics Re-scoring! :laugh:

Matt Savoie is a wonderful skater too and had a pretty great skate, but he had no quad, doubled both lutzes, and singled a toe loop, and failed to do a 3 jump combo. He did deserve greater GOE on his jumps IMO, given some of the transitions and good quality, and much higher PCS, but he also left a lot of points on the table.


Bottom line: there is nothing controversial about Plushenko's 2006 Olympic win. And anyone who is calling it controversial because the points could have been a little closer just are trying to find something to concoct a controversy. Lambiel and Weir were welcome to try 3A/quad, and they deliberately opted not to. That's on them, not the judges and not Plushenko.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
... And that's disregarding the awful choreography.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

I actually liked Zagitova's choreography just fine. To me the first half was not without interest, and the program ended in a blaze of fireworks.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Speaking of 2006, I would say that there was nothing remotely controversial about Navka and Kostomarov's win in ice dance. Belbin and Agosto did well in the free dance but were only 6th and 4th in the CD and the OD. Delobel and Schoenfelder had some buzz going in and got 2nd in the free dance., but again were too far behind after the first two segments (7th and 4th).
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
Lambiel delivered the same way Joannie Rochette or Mao Asada delivered in 2010. Clean program, with the elements done as planned, but the leader completed greater difficulty leading to a comfortable margin after the SP.

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.

And 11.6 to 2.6? :unsure: Come on. We all know that you're hugely biased towards Lambiel but even that is a bit too blatant.

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.

Matt Savoie is a wonderful skater too and had a pretty great skate, but he had no quad, doubled both lutzes, and singled a toe loop, and failed to do a 3 jump combo. He did deserve greater GOE on his jumps IMO, given some of the transitions and good quality, and much higher PCS, but he also left a lot of points on the table.

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.

Lambiel and Weir were welcome to try 3A/quad, and they deliberately opted not to. That's on them, not the judges and not Plushenko.

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.
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
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.

This is incorrect. At the time, the base value of a 3Z+3T was 10.0 points and the base value of a 3A+2T was 9.5 points. http://www.isuresults.com/results/owg2010/owg10_Ladies_SP_Scores.pdf

Not to mention, while a 3A is way harder than a 3Z, by just doing a 2T on the end of it, the combination didn't have the impact that Kim's opening 3Z+3T, and that was reflected in the GOE. Kim's combination got 12.00 points with GOE, Asada's got 10.10 points.

The point I was making is that Rochette like Weir had lower content and "delivered" but it was lower content so she was far back of Kim. If Rochette had done a 3Z+3T (which I don't think she ever landed, but even a 3Z+2L would have been better) her TES would have been higher and I'm sure her PCS as well as the overall performance would have been more "maxed out"/impressive/complete, whatever you want to call it. Similarly had Asada done a 3A+3T, she would have been significantly closer to Kim. In the FS she didn't do a 3S and opted for a 2A. And she really messed up by not going for a 3Z which even with a flutz would have scored almost on par with the 3T that she singled. It's astonishing actually that Asada managed to win the Olympic silver medal (thanks to her triple axels) while avoiding 2 jump types - the lutz and the salchow.

Plushenko should have been nailed harder by the judges on PCS, but Weir and Lambiel (and the others) didn't go guns blazing against the best technician when it's a points game. Their game plan in the SP wasn't to win - it was to stick around for a medal. The only way they could have beaten Plushenko is if they brought better jump content and he imploded technically (the best he gave them was doubling his flip, which is still less of a points difference versus one 3A turned into a 2A, let alone 3).... as soon as he got the quads and axels out of the way and they showed up without a quad/3A they were fighting for the podium at that point. It didn't matter how great anyone else's skating was because they had given up points by choosing not to do what they were capable of or failing to execute their planned content as well as they could have.

If Lambiel wanted to win, he needed to go for the triple axels or hope that Plushenko would not show up. Plushenko did show up - and laid down his score in the first flight as the second skater --- way earlier than Lambiel skated. So if Lambiel truly wanted to make a bid for gold, he should have gone for broke. Same thing going into the FS - Lambiel was back by 11 points, and he opted to go in with two 2As instead of two 3As which could have made up that deficit. But it was clear he was playing for silver at that point (and almost didn't even get that). He is actually fortunate that Lysacek had a horrendous SP burying him in 10th and Buttle had a fall in both programs, otherwise he could have not made the podium, let alone actually challenged Plushenko for gold.
 

yume

🍉
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 11, 2016
The points rewarding system was just poorly made back than, and that's why they changed it after the Olympics. And do you know how they came to the conclusion the points system is wrong. They just factored Yuna components with the ones it was used to factor men components and realize that in their system Yuna would also win men free program, not just without a quad, but without a triple axel and also without aditional jumping element in the programme. So yeah, it was all about GOE back then, i mean, too much about it. And as a reaction, they made Base Value more important after that Olympics.
Yup virtually beating guys with unclean judges scores is something.

More than that, she was the only skater, not lady but skater, able to get 18 points of GOEs and 9s on many components. And she got almost the same points at 2013 worlds with a different system (she's probably the only skater who never needed TR in and out + arms in the air or insane flexibilty to get maximum GOE).
The issue was that she wasn't prone to URs and her elements were very well rewarded while her main opponents were prone to URs (which were automatic downgrades, TES killers), inconsistents and were getting low GOEs. Yuna was the perfect skater for the perfect era. The changes about calls really benefited her since we can see how the level of difficulty dropped for the other skaters during the two last seasons of the 2006-10 quad. Even with costly mistakes she was winning programs against cleaner skaters, because her GOEs were cosmic.
The issue was more the competition than the system as she got rewarded the same 3 years later. 0,5 points on a jump can't beat someone with that GOEs. Even with harder tech it would have been difficult to beat her.
Same with Kostornaya now. Her layouts overall are less difficult than Trusova's but she still can beat her because she's outscoring her by far on GOEs and pcs. The only difference is that Kostornaya is facing a far more competitive field and is winning thankss to her conistency (way more consistency than Kim).
 

Blades of Passion

Skating is Art, if you let it be
Record Breaker
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Country
France
This is incorrect. At the time, the base value of a 3Z+3T was 10.0 points and the base value of a 3A+2T was 9.5 points. http://www.isuresults.com/results/owg2010/owg10_Ladies_SP_Scores.pdf

OMG, listen to what was written! I said many people felt the 3Axel+2Toe should have a higher base value than 3Lutz+3Toe, not that's how it was in the scoring system. Regardless, even just going by the rules on paper, it was still felt by many people that Asada was scored too far behind Yuna. Their base value difference of 0.5 points is tiny, and the GOE given to Yuna can be argued as too generous. There are things Asada was better at (flexibility in the spirals and intricacy of the footwork sequence) that were not reflected in the scores.

The only way they could have beaten Plushenko is if he imploded technically, and as soon as he got the quads and axels out of the way it was over - it didn't matter how great anyone else's skating was

And again, that is only bad judging. Plushenko's skating was not great enough to deserve such a buffer, and he negated the benefit of doing the Quad by doubling out on his Flip later in the program. Lambiel without a 3Axel would have deserved to outscore Plushenko technically in the LP if he skated clean, and his superior PCS would put him that much further ahead. Even with 1 small mistake in addition to no 3Axel, such as the performance Lambiel gave at 2006 Worlds, I think that would be enough for Lambiel to deserve to win the whole competition. Weir skating like he did at 2005 Nationals also would have been enough in my book for him to deservedly beat Plushenko. 1 Quad should not automatically beat every other consideration. We saw that thinking play out in 2010, and the quality the guys in 2006 had over Plushenko (if they skated great), was higher than the amount of quality Lysacek had over Plushenko 2010.
 

Baron Vladimir

Record Breaker
Joined
Dec 18, 2014
Yup virtually beating guys with unclean judges scores is something.

More than that, she was the only skater, not lady but skater, able to get 18 points of GOEs and 9s on many components. And she got almost the same points at 2013 worlds with a different system (she's probably the only skater who never needed TR in and out + arms in the air or insane flexibilty to get maximum GOE).
The issue was that she wasn't prone to URs and her elements were very well rewarded while her main opponents were prone to URs (which were automatic downgrades, TES killers), inconsistents and were getting low GOEs. Yuna was the perfect skater for the perfect era. The changes about calls really benefited her since we can see how the level of difficulty dropped for the other skaters during the two last seasons of the 2006-10 quad. Even with costly mistakes she was winning programs against cleaner skaters, because her GOEs were cosmic.
The issue was more the competition than the system as she got rewarded the same 3 years later. 0,5 points on a jump can't beat someone with that GOEs. Even with harder tech it would have been difficult to beat her.
Same with Kostornaya now. Her layouts overall are less difficult than Trusova's but she still can beat her because she's outscoring her by far on GOEs and pcs. The only difference is that Kostornaya is facing a far more competitive field and is winning thankss to her conistency (way more consistency than Kim).

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.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Lambiel without a 3Axel would have deserved to outscore Plushenko technically in the LP if he skated clean ...

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."
 

CanadianSkaterGuy

Record Breaker
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
OMG, listen to what was written! I said many people felt the 3Axel+2Toe should have a higher base value than 3Lutz+3Toe, not that's how it was in the scoring system. Regardless, even just going by the rules on paper, it was still felt by many people that Asada was scored too far behind Yuna. Their base value difference of 0.5 points is tiny, and the GOE given to Yuna can be argued as too generous. There are things Asada was better at (flexibility in the spirals and intricacy of the footwork sequence) that were not reflected in the scores.



And again, that is only bad judging. Plushenko's skating was not great enough to deserve such a buffer, and he negated the benefit of doing the Quad by doubling out on his Flip later in the program. Lambiel without a 3Axel would have deserved to outscore Plushenko technically in the LP if he skated clean, and his superior PCS would put him that much further ahead. Even with 1 small mistake in addition to no 3Axel, such as the performance Lambiel gave at 2006 Worlds, I think that would be enough for Lambiel to deserve to win the whole competition. Weir skating like he did at 2005 Nationals also would have been enough in my book for him to deservedly beat Plushenko. 1 Quad should not automatically beat every other consideration. We saw that thinking play out in 2010, and the quality the guys in 2006 had over Plushenko (if they skated great), was higher than the amount of quality Lysacek had over Plushenko 2010.

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. Like, it's clear that you understand when points are gained and lost.

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.

As for 2006 Worlds, minus qualifying, Lambiel's SP of 77.41 and FS of 156.58 = a total of 233.99. In the SP he erred on two jumping passes (foot down on the 3A, super low on his quad so could only manage a 2T; also a lean on his 3Z cost him GOE). The FS he URed his opening 3A (which was a costly deduction at the time) and erred on his loop. It was certainly way better than the hot mess that managed to win Worlds 2005, and he had a fantastic qualifying round. But still it was a score that Plushenko would have easily beaten.

No 1 quad should not automatically beat every other consideration, and in 2010 I definitely do not have Plushenko as the winner. But in 2006 he destroyed everyone based on his own skating, and the others' inability to deliver or even attempt layouts that could challenge him.
 

rain

Record Breaker
Joined
Jul 29, 2003
I actually liked Zagitova's choreography just fine. To me the first half was not without interest, and the program ended in a blaze of fireworks.

I did find the backloading problematic as a viewer, but more important to me was the poor execution of the vastly over-cluttered choreography. As I said, she spent the entirety of both of her programs bent at the waist (and no tutu makes that attractive — and judges should be able to see beyond this kind of blatant smoke and mirrors), none of the movements were held or finished because she was too busy racing to the next one. It made the whole look clunky and paint-by-numbers. There was zero feel for the music or expression of it. The judges have been pretending she's some great artist ever since, which just continues to blow my mind. I hope that should she indeed come back as she has expressed is her plan, we see some evolution of her skating. She wasn't without talent and grit, and I'd love to see that potential realized.
 

flanker

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 10, 2018
Country
Czech-Republic
I did find the backloading problematic as a viewer, but more important to me was the poor execution of the vastly over-cluttered choreography. As I said, she spent the entirety of both of her programs bent at the waist (and no tutu makes that attractive — and judges should be able to see beyond this kind of blatant smoke and mirrors), none of the movements were held or finished because she was too busy racing to the next one. It made the whole look clunky and paint-by-numbers. There was zero feel for the music or expression of it. The judges have been pretending she's some great artist ever since, which just continues to blow my mind. I hope that should she indeed come back as she has expressed is her plan, we see some evolution of her skating. She wasn't without talent and grit, and I'd love to see that potential realized.

Time for other angle of view, it seems :)

There were accents for the whole time of the performance, elemets matched the rhythm and the program overally responded to how this part is choreographed in the actual DQ ballet. However, I was rewatching Osmond's Swan Lake just three days ago and I was surprised how much it doesn't look like a Swan Lake at all. If it weren't for the costume and music, IMO it would be any generic program, well executed (apart from the Lutz mistake, that was costly)), but without any impression.
 
Top