Non Controversial Olympic Wins

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

I think every win (be it Olympic or other) will be controversial for somebody for a whole list of reasons:

1. They deserved to win but they were overscored.
2. They deserved to win but the margin with second place was too big.
3. The margin with second place was too small hence not convincing
4. They didn't have the most difficult program, played it safe
5. They had the most difficult program, but aren't strong on PCs
6. They didn't win both segments so not convincing enough
7. There's a hypothetical scenario where someone else could have gone clean and won so not convincing enough
8. They didn't win with the absolute best skate of their career
9. They used tactics people don't agree with (backloading, recycling programs)
10. They won on home ice so something fishy must have happened
11. Personally preferring the other skater/team's style/program so they should have won, technicals be damned
12. They don't have enough other titles to back their win

Am I missing something?

13. Marie-Reine Le Gougne

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

For me, pair 2002 is so non controversial, Elena and Anton should win by a mile. It has become a controversy only because of North American media.

And a controversy because one of the judges admitted to cheating in favour of the Russians.

It was also a controversy because the Canadians were clean and the Russians had a visible error in their FS. The two teams were seen as pretty much on par with each other (edge to the Russians choreographically, edge to the Canadians emotionally, IMO), so it came down to who was cleaner. Had Anton not messed up the landing of his double axel, the technical scores for the Russians would have likely given them gold without the 5-4 split and the ensuing scandal. I am in agreement that their programs as a whole were better constructed than the Canadians' programs, but the elements of the Canadians were cleaner. There were other super minor errors on the part of the Russians too - the catch of the twist being awkward, and the throws could have had better flow with balance checks on both of the landings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-ZuJfOz7g8


But Anton's obvious error was viewed by most people as the Russians having "left the door open", so long as the Canadians skated clean - which they did (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjY_LtNtVDc - you can hear Scott's commentary throughout... e.g. "throw triple loop and the gold is theirs" - and I don't think it was North American bias -- he probably legitimately assumed that a clean skate would beat a flawed skate ).

 

[Scott512]

For me, pair 2002 is so non controversial, Elena and Anton should win by a mile. It has become a controversy only because of North American media.

Exacticly! I agree with your assessment although I consider it a close competition for sure. the russophobia was deep even then and now it's even worse in America. NBC went absolutely crazy over this great Paris duel. Other media outlets as well which is not with the Olympics is supposed to be about.

But I thought this thread was supposed to be about non controversial Olympic golds. Speaking of 2002 I think Yagudins gold medal was certainly non-controversial.

 

[Ziotic]

For me, pair 2002 is so non controversial, Elena and Anton should win by a mile. It has become a controversy only because of North American media.

I have the exact opposite opinion.

It was very clearly a win for the Canadians, too bad corrupt Judges had to ruin it for them.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

But Anton's obvious error was viewed by most people as the Russians having "left the door open", so long as the Canadians skated clean - which they did (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjY_LtNtVDc - you can hear Scott's commentary throughout... e.g. "throw triple loop and the gold is theirs" - and I don't think it was North American bias -- he probably legitimately assumed that a clean skate would beat a flawed skate ).

Visible errors tended to be a lot more costly under 6.0, and it was unusual for a program with a noticeable error to beat a clean one among the very top contenders. But it was unfortunate that there was a lot of manipulation of the judging in that event. In addition to the problems with the LP judging, IIRC the judges were pressured to cap B&S's short program marks at 5.8 because they skated early in the event. Two judges actually put S&P ahead in that segment, which is insane giving that they fell out of their closing pose and B&S skated masterfully.

 

[Mathman]

... you can hear Scott's commentary throughout... e.g. "throw triple loop and the gold is theirs" - and I don't think it was North American bias --

I think that was part of the problem. Scott Hamilton was so obviously cheerleading for Sale and Pelletier that it made everyone think that all of "North American Media" were biased against the Russians.

My own feeling was that B&S were the superior team, but on this occasion it did seem to me that they skated with hesitancy throughout the LP, while S&P grabbed the bull by the horns. (I did not care much one way or the other about the double Axel -- to me, it was hardly noticeable even on replay and did not affect the program.)

I would have been content whichever way the judges placed them.

 

[Scott512]

I think that was part of the problem. Scott Hamilton was so obviously cheerleading for Sale and Pelletier that it made everyone think that all of "North American Media" were biased against the Russians.

My own feeling was that B&S were the superior team, but on this occasion it did seem to me that they skated with hesitancy throughout the LP, while S&P grabbed the bull by the horns. (I did not care much one way or the other about the double Axel -- to me, it was hardly noticeable even on replay and did not affect the program.)

I would have been content whichever way the judges placed them.

I like and admire Scott Hamilton a lot he has overcome a lot and his incredible career and life. But he was Cheerleading and you could hear it in his voice and it did upset me because I helped create this Snowball Effect against this awesome Russian pair. Skating cleaner doesn't mean you automatically win when the other pairs team has greater artistry and nterpretation. We've been through these arguments and disagreements in all four disciplines in various Olympics. That's not going to change. I just wish I was a better judging system because it seems like we've had as many or more controversy since 2002 then say the 18 years before that. But like I said that's not going to change. Those were two superb pairs teams I loved watching them go at each other but the aftermath against this wonderful Russian pair was appalling and galling. The Crazed way the US media what at this story was disgusting too.

 

[theharleyquinn]

I like and admire Scott Hamilton a lot he has overcome a lot and his incredible career and life. But he was Cheerleading and you could hear it in his voice and it did upset me because I helped create this Snowball Effect against this awesome Russian pair. Skating cleaner doesn't mean you automatically win when the other pairs team has greater artistry and nterpretation. We've been through these arguments and disagreements in all four disciplines in various Olympics. That's not going to change. I just wish I was a better judging system because it seems like we've had as many or more controversy since 2002 then say the 18 years before that. But like I said that's not going to change. Those were two superb pairs teams I loved watching them go at each other but the aftermath against this wonderful Russian pair was appalling and galling. The Crazed way the US media what at this story was disgusting too.

It was an American Olympics so some nationalism is to be expected, but Scott was very unprofessional. The playback of the pairs event (and to a lesser extent, the men's) is really unenjoyable to watch because of him.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Visible errors tended to be a lot more costly under 6.0, and it was unusual for a program with a noticeable error to beat a clean one among the very top contenders. But it was unfortunate that there was a lot of manipulation of the judging in that event. In addition to the problems with the LP judging, IIRC the judges were pressured to cap B&S's short program marks at 5.8 because they skated early in the event. Two judges actually put S&P ahead in that segment, which is insane giving that they fell out of their closing pose and B&S skated masterfully.

Oh absolutely. I would have without a doubt had S&P in 3rd after the SP with that fall. The fact they got 5.8s on the technical mark was outrageous. S&Z had an obvious spin issue, but their throw/lifts/twist were better and of course S&P's fall. I also found S&P's program to be rather cheesy, while S&Z's SP was exciting to watch.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

I like and admire Scott Hamilton a lot he has overcome a lot and his incredible career and life. But he was Cheerleading and you could hear it in his voice and it did upset me because I helped create this Snowball Effect against this awesome Russian pair. Skating cleaner doesn't mean you automatically win when the other pairs team has greater artistry and nterpretation. We've been through these arguments and disagreements in all four disciplines in various Olympics. That's not going to change. I just wish I was a better judging system because it seems like we've had as many or more controversy since 2002 then say the 18 years before that. But like I said that's not going to change. Those were two superb pairs teams I loved watching them go at each other but the aftermath against this wonderful Russian pair was appalling and galling. The Crazed way the US media what at this story was disgusting too.

Under the new IJS system no. But back in 6.0, if two teams were pretty much on par with each other, edge would go to whoever performed cleaner. Artistry is important in figure skating, however if you get people making mistakes while others go clean, the sport loses legitimacy because then you have to explain why a major error beats out a clean program when the teams are putatively "equals".

Greater artistry/interpretation is up to the person watching... I think S&P's interpretation in their LP was much better, and there was greater emotion and storytelling, but B&S' choreography/lines/highlights were better. It really was splitting hairs, so people assumed that whoever doesn't make an obvious error will be the victor. If B&S didn't have the obvious error, it could have still been a split (likely more in favour of B&S) but then you could chalk that up to both teams skating clean and B&S' artistry prevailing for the gold. But it didn't happen. Of course nationalism played a big role, but if Sale/Pelletier were Russian I would have still said they deserved to win.

 

[lesnar001]

It was an American Olympics so some nationalism is to be expected, but Scott was very unprofessional. The playback of the pairs event (and to a lesser extent, the men's) is really unenjoyable to watch because of him.

What did he say re: the men's event?
The only thing I remember was his statement that Yagudin was "conceding the LP" to Plushenko.
Which in and of itself seemed pretty bizarre.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

What did he say re: the men's event?
The only thing I remember was his statement that Yagudin was "conceding the LP" to Plushenko.
Which in and of itself seemed pretty bizarre.

Yeah, I don't recall what he said about the men's. Did he try to push for Goebel to place higher - because he could have had a point. Goebel didn't have the performance qualities of Yagudin or Plushenko, but he had 3 quads and his only issue was a stepout of a second 3A. Looking at his free program again, Goebel also had some lovely transitions like a spread eagle into a 3A and hydroblading into a 3L.

 

[kolyadafan2002]

What did he say re: the men's event?
The only thing I remember was his statement that Yagudin was "conceding the LP" to Plushenko.
Which in and of itself seemed pretty bizarre.

It wasn't that Bizarre in context. Plushenko had an extra 3A, and a more difficult program.

 

[Mathman]

It wasn't that Bizarre in context. Plushenko had an extra 3A, and a more difficult program.

I think that was what Scott was referring to. Yagudin deliberately watered down his program by omitting the second planned triple Axel. I think that Scott was saying that given the SP results, Yagudin was coasting a little, knowing that he had the gold medal in the bag no matter what Plushenko did.
Scott gave Goebel his due, in his hyper-excited Scott Hamilton manner , but he did not say that Goebel should have been placed ahead of either Yagudin or Plushenko in the LP despite the fine accomplishment of lamding three quads.

 

[Mathman]

It was an American Olympics so some nationalism is to be expected, but Scott was very unprofessional.

Nationalism, yes. But I don't think that American nationalism automatically extends to North American chauvinism. I never noticed that USA announcers had any particular enthusiasm for Canadian athletes. (And in fact, Shen and Zhou had a big US fan base throughout their career.)

I would have without a doubt had S&P in 3rd after the SP with that fall. The fact they got 5.8s on the technical mark was outrageous.

I read at the time -- I don't know if this is true or not -- that the ruling was that the fall out of the closing pose came after the program was officially over, so it was not held against the team in the scoring.

 

[theharleyquinn]

Nationalism, yes. But I don't think that American nationalism automatically extends to North American chauvinism. I never noticed that USA announcers had any particular enthusiasm for Canadian athletes. (And in fact, Shen and Zhou had a big US fan base throughout their career.)

It definitely doesn't automatically extend, but I find that 2002 was an Olympics where Scott strongly preferred the most American-adjacent (read: least Russian) medal contender (Sale/Pelletier, Yagudin who left Russia for the US to train and was very vocal about it) and had to let the audience know. There was certainly some nationalism wrapped up in his preferences.

 

[Blades of Passion]

The thing about Sale/Pelletier’s “fall” in the SP is that it very nearly looked like intended choreography, and was better choreography and interpretation than what the last pose beforehand would have been, so it’s kind of just a cute feature of the program; certainly under a less restrictive judging system where everything doesn’t need to have a binary black-or-white label put on it.

 

[Baron Vladimir]

It definitely doesn't automatically extend, but I find that 2002 was an Olympics where Scott strongly preferred the most American-adjacent (read: least Russian) medal contender (Sale/Pelletier, Yagudin who left Russia for the US to train and was very vocal about it) and had to let the audience know. There was certainly some nationalism wrapped up in his preferences.

I agree. It is certainly a big difference in his way of commentating comparing to for example NBC commentators of Sochi Olympics or PyeongChang.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Greater artistry/interpretation is up to the person watching... I think S&P's interpretation in their LP was much better, and there was greater emotion and storytelling, but B&S' choreography/lines/highlights were better. It really was splitting hairs, so people assumed that whoever doesn't make an obvious error will be the victor. If B&S didn't have the obvious error, it could have still been a split (likely more in favour of B&S) but then you could chalk that up to both teams skating clean and B&S' artistry prevailing for the gold. But it didn't happen. Of course nationalism played a big role, but if Sale/Pelletier were Russian I would have still said they deserved to win.

Under 6.0 and given how programs were judged at that time, it was surprising that S&P didn't win the LP. It wasn't an outrageous result to me (although, admittedly, I'm rarely outraged at competitive results) because B&S are so good, but it was inconsistent with how programs were assessed up to then. The subsequent overhaul to the scoring system that might have resulted in a B&S win now doesn't change that the 2002 victor should have been S&P.

 

[Scott512]

It was an American Olympics so some nationalism is to be expected, but Scott was very unprofessional. The playback of the pairs event (and to a lesser extent, the men's) is really unenjoyable to watch because of him.

I have liked Scott Hamilton for many years but the 2002 Winter Games were his high point as an analyst. It was too much of a cheerleader at those games but to be a cheerleader for people from Canada is a little bit perplexing.

Under the new IJS system no. But back in 6.0, if two teams were pretty much on par with each other, edge would go to whoever performed cleaner. Artistry is important in figure skating, however if you get people making mistakes while others go clean, the sport loses legitimacy because then you have to explain why a major error beats out a clean program when the teams are putatively "equals".

Greater artistry/interpretation is up to the person watching... I think S&P's interpretation in their LP was much better, and there was greater emotion and storytelling, but B&S' choreography/lines/highlights were better. It really was splitting hairs, so people assumed that whoever doesn't make an obvious error will be the victor. If B&S didn't have the obvious error, it could have still been a split (likely more in favour of B&S) but then you could chalk that up to both teams skating clean and B&S' artistry prevailing for the gold. But it didn't happen. Of course nationalism played a big role, but if Sale/Pelletier were Russian I would have still said they deserved to win.

It is a part of history and it changed figure skating scoring forever. But everything is still so confusing and if I go back and watch these two great pairs teams from the 2002 games I can make a case either way. But nothing I say or do is going to change history and what was done. I wish I could say scoring since the Salt Lake City games has gotten precipitously better. I just don't think I can say that. But it is what it is reality says this is a very difficult sport to judge.