So is the COP/6.0 disagrement due to a generation gap?

[Tennisdrive]

So I read the article, Figure skating-Dwindling fan numbers worry skaters and scanned through the responses, and noticed that some people love the COP and some hate it...I was wondering if this was due to a generation gap...

I began watching figure skating in 1992, Albertville -- Kristi Yamaguchi. I remember thinking it was so cool a pretty little Asian whose name was Kristi (My favorite cousin who I idolized at the time was named Kristi too) was skating for our country. It was so exciting when she won. I loved everything about Kristi's skating...her glittery gold outfit, her pretty smile, her big hair. I was hooked...Sure her skating wasn't as intricate at it is now, but something about it made it so special. I began following Michelle post 1993 Nationals...so fourteen of my twenty-two years I've been a figure skating fan. For those of you have been following figure skating as long as I have, or perhaps longer, do you miss the 6.0 system and really dislike the COP? Perhaps I have a vision of what figure skating should be like, and with the COP, the vision is blurred...or perhaps I'm just addicted to the sequins of years past!

[Sparks]

Short answer, NO.

BTW, Kristi skated in the 1992 Olympics in France, not Norway.

[berthesghost]

So I read the article, Figure skating-Dwindling fan numbers worry skaters and scanned through the responses, and noticed that some people love the COP and some hate it...I was wondering if this was due to a generation gap...No.

We have people on both sidesof the fence who are about the same age.
...Sure her skating wasn't as intricate at it is now, but something about it made it so special...15 years later and Kristi's Oly Lp still blows me away. It was jam packed with triples and so many transitions and MIFs.. just breathtaking. Compare it to something like Irina's awful spanish thing at Torino, and it's makes COP programs seem like a resting exercise.

[ScrappyTheOwl]

To try to answer the question I think you're trying to ask ...

I'm 20 and I've been a fan since I was about 4 years old ... though I didn't become a real hardcore fan until I was about 9 years old (shortly before Michelle won her first Worlds).

When I competed, I competed under 6.0.

I hate 6.0, and prefer CoP. Originally I liked it as the "lesser of two evils" but now I outright love CoP, kinks and all. That's me in a nutshell.

I can see why people older than me might have a harder time with such a huge system change (placement to points), though ... but I really don't think age has anything to do with it.

[Lisa Seye]

I look at it more like a beauty versus brawn kind of thing or if you will art versus sport. Sports such as track basketball etc measure time, distance, baskets. Art cannot really be measured since it is in the eye of the beholder. Figure skating is a melding together of art and sport: artistry, passion, grace, beauty, etc mixed together with athleticism, power, speed, etc.
There is never really any "good" way to measure the artistry of skating which I like to call performance sport (versus performing arts). You have the fans of CoP who like quantifiable numbers and enjoy that aspect of it. Then you have fans of the artistic and nonmeasureable side of figure skating. Each system "tries" to place a number on artistry, but cannot really do it. 6.0 ued a placement system whereas CoP uses points. Yet CoP IS a placement system in that skaters can get scores in which the judges place the skaters where they think they should be. The answer to measuring the sport aspect of it is to give a point here for this move and give a point there for that move. The answer to measuring the artistry of it will never be solved because I think you cannot break down bits and pieces of art and assign point values to it. But that is just my opinion. I value both aspects of FS, but the artistry is what has kept me coming back, not the athleticism.

[aaronts]

for me, it's both artistry & athleticism. & i'm learning more & more that people of opposing views are going to constantly try & find a way to state their opinion as fact. i'm sure i do it. it's human to a degree. what some feel is artistry, i think is crap & visa versa.

yet something, not age, has made me weary. i just deleted the last of US Nationals, Japanese Nationals & 4CCs off of my Tevo w/o recording permanently. it's the 1st time in a decade i haven't recorded Nationals. frankly, i'm not even sad at the reality. i'm sad at the idea of it.

but if COP doesn't soften up & god forbid gets any more complex, it IS going to be a generation gap issue & not even a gap amongst fans, cause there won't be many. older skaters will get sick of bothering to learn new tricks & the younger ones will find it second nature, just like text messaging, MTV & myspace~

[Lisa Seye]

I hear what you are saying. Don't get me wrong. I definitely appreciate the athleticism. But I appreciate more the artistry that can make the atheticism appear so effortless, as it is a simple part of the program and takes no effort at all to do it. If it looks like a struggle, it begins to lose appeal to me. If the athleticism is transformed into a beautiful and uncomplicated move, I can appreciate it that much more.

[moskva]

So I read the article, Figure skating-Dwindling fan numbers worry skaters and scanned through the responses, and noticed that some people love the COP and some hate it...I was wondering if this was due to a generation gap...

I began watching figure skating in 1992, Lillehammer, Norway -- Kristi Yamaguchi. I remember thinking it was so cool a pretty little Asian whose name was Kristi (My favorite cousin who I idolized at the time was named Kristi too) was skating for our country. It was so exciting when she won. I loved everything about Kristi's skating...her glittery gold outfit, her pretty smile, her big hair. I was hooked...Sure her skating wasn't as intricate at it is now, but something about it made it so special. I began following Michelle post 1993 Nationals...so fourteen of my twenty-two years I've been a figure skating fan. For those of you have been following figure skating as long as I have, or perhaps longer, do you miss the 6.0 system and really dislike the COP? Perhaps I have a vision of what figure skating should be like, and with the COP, the vision is blurred...or perhaps I'm just addicted to the sequins of years past!


well, people who oppose the CoP with a vehemence that belies a wistful attachment to the years past, do have a certain...geezerness about them :silly not that there's anything wrong with that :P

[Lisa Seye]

LOL Moskva, If I am a geezer and only seven years older than you, better watch out that the arthritis does not start creeping in to your bones. :P :P

Just kidding. Is geezerness a word? LOL

[Dragonlady]

I think that some people are more adaptive to change than others. I also think that the manner in which CoP was introduced to the general public plays a large part in how it's perceived.

In Canada, we received a lot of help from our commentators, two of whom took the ISU course and are certified technical specialists (Tracy Wilson and Debbi Wilkes), in understanding the system and how it works. Skate Canada also went out of their way to educate the coaches and choreographers so Canadian skaters have done well under the new system.

In the US, the opposite happened. TV commentators railed against the system on every broadcast, didn't explain it other than to say it was too complicated and robbing the sport of artistry, etc. The USFSA did a very poor job of preparing the skaters and coaches for CoP so US skaters were missing the podium by the narrowest of margins for stupid reasons, like not using all of their jump/combo windows.

The rest of the skating world has accepted CoP and moved on. In the US, people are still ranting about it. Thank you Dick Button.

[moxie]

I'm a geezer (going back to 1960 as a skating fan) who misses the magic of that rare 6.0 score, and wishes that CoP scores could somehow be displayed with more drama, so that the audience could watch for a certain score and cheer for it.

But, no matter how scores are counted and displayed, I really love that CoP has gotten rid of the factored-placement system. A skater wins simply if he/she is the highest scorer in the SP & LP combined. We don't have to wait and see if placements are affected by Skater B beating Skater C or whatever.

As far as the artistry issue: I think that skaters who are artists as well as athletes find a way to express that, no matter what the scoring system is.
I think we've already seen improvement in programs this year over programs in the first 2 years of CoP, and that it will continue to evolve.

Speaking only of the ladies, we have so many wonderful ones who are just now coming onto the Senior scene. I really think we have to give it another 2 years before we can really judge CoP vs. 6.0.

[Nitts]

I think that some people are more adaptive to change than others. I also think that the manner in which CoP was introduced to the general public plays a large part in how it's perceived.

In Canada, we received a lot of help from our commentators, two of whom took the ISU course and are certified technical specialists (Tracy Wilson and Debbi Wilkes), in understanding the system and how it works. Skate Canada also went out of their way to educate the coaches and choreographers so Canadian skaters have done well under the new system.

In the US, the opposite happened. TV commentators railed against the system on every broadcast, didn't explain it other than to say it was too complicated and robbing the sport of artistry, etc. The USFSA did a very poor job of preparing the skaters and coaches for CoP so US skaters were missing the podium by the narrowest of margins for stupid reasons, like not using all of their jump/combo windows.

The rest of the skating world has accepted CoP and moved on. In the US, people are still ranting about it. Thank you Dick Button.

I don't think it's fair to blame Dick Button for the "US" ranting about CoP. What proof do you have that only people in the US don't like CoP? I'm sure there are a few from every country, and not everyone in the US doesn't like CoP.

Also, Sasha Cohen dominated under CoP, so it's not as if the US was as behind as some are trying to say. I think the main complaint was that sloppy skates were winning programs. Falls, two footed landings, boring programs with the same moves to gain points. People complained about 6.0 and they complain about CoP, but if you complain about CoP it's because you're from the US and need to accept it? I'm not buying that.

[shellyfan]

I don't have a strong opinion about COP vs 6.0. I never much understood 6.0 except that it was probably the most subjective scoring system in all of sports and I like the movement toward more objectivity.

COP starts with the premise that judges are either dishonest,incompetent or both so the ISU requires lots judges to offset each other's incompetence and/or dishonesty. COP's dependence on video and computer technolgy makes it extremely expensive to administer and seems to require a long learning curve just at a time when the sport is running out of money.

Everyone seems to buy into the concept COP is incomprehensible to fans while fans the world over understood the 6.0 system. I think it has more to do with familiarity than comprehension.


But, no matter how scores are counted and displayed, I really love that CoP has gotten rid of the factored-placement system. A skater wins simply if he/she is the highest scorer in the SP & LP combined. We don't have to wait and see if placements are affected by Skater B beating Skater C or whatever.People are still confused about how in SLC Sarah jumped from 4th to first over Michelle and Irina and how after Michelle and Irina skated Michelle could only get gold or bronze, silver was impossible. That was an absurd situation! I too am glad we are done with the placement hooey.

I like the cumulative point totals in COP. I like skaters getting personal bests while placing 12th. The goal should be to simplify COP. Reduce the number & categories of elements. Admit to a subjective overall grade of execution for the skate. Throw out outlier scores and fire the judges that award them.

A Commission independent of federations should certify judges and pay them and grade them and sanction them when incompetent.

I disagree the scoring system kept people away from 4CC -- in the past it had always been a second tier event with few National medalists going. It was two weeks after Spokane and most traveling fans in the US would pick Nats over 4CC's any day. Naturally fans from Asia and Japan would find it tough to pick 4CC over Worlds or even the closer Asian games. The other "continents" really don't have traveling fans. Europeans is in Europe -- duh! So fans of European skaters like Kostner, Joubert etc are going there.
The fact no one went to 4 CC is due to stupid scheduling, lack of information as to who was going to be there and eastern US fans not being likely to make two cross country trips in two weeks for skating. Had I known in December Shen and Zhao were competing for possibly the last time in the US I might have tried to go. But no national medalists from Japan certainly made it easy to pass this one up.

[ScrappyTheOwl]

You know the whole artistry vs. athleticism thing ... different strokes for different folks. I see artists internationally (Mao Asada, Yu-Na Kim, Stephane Lambiel, Jeff Buttle, Shen & Zhao, etc.), national artists (Johnny Weir, Alissa Czisny, Bebe Liang, etc.) and national ones coming up through the rinks (Jeremy Abbott, Caroline Zhang, Mirai Nagasu, etc.).

People are going to see what they want to see. Me? The only people I considered worth watching (artistically) from mid-1998 to 2002 were Michelle Kwan and Alexei Yagudin (I didn't really like Cohen's skating, though I did love Rach, until she started competing under CoP; I didn't watch much dance or pairs back then, so that's my impression on singles). I was so disenchanted with skating for such a long time ... things were getting boring to me, I was sick of the placement politics, and I thought things needed to change. But you know what? When CoP was first announced, I hated the idea. It's something that had to grow on me, too. And now I'll always defend the system itself ... I have no problem playing the devil's advocate to the majority. In fact, I think I'm quite happy in my little corner :P


I don't think it's fair to blame Dick Button for the "US" ranting about CoP. What proof do you have that only people in the US don't like CoP? I'm sure there are a few from every country, and not everyone in the US doesn't like CoP.

Also, Sasha Cohen dominated under CoP, so it's not as if the US was as behind as some are trying to say. I think the main complaint was that sloppy skates were winning programs. Falls, two footed landings, boring programs with the same moves to gain points. People complained about 6.0 and they complain about CoP, but if you complain about CoP it's because you're from the US and need to accept it? I'm not buying that.

There are three reasons one can assume non-American countries have accepted CoP:
1) It finally gives their athletes a chance. We're seeing athletes win titles/earn higher placings whose very country would have prevented a win under 6.0.
2) The growing popularity of skating in other countries. This certainly hasn't happened becaused people are ticked about CoP.
3) Regarding the commentary issue DargonLady was talking about -- listen to a non-American broadcast versus an American broadcast. The non-American commentators are CLEARLY comfortable talking about CoP, POINT things out, know what they're talking about (unlike, for example, Dick Button, who said during Nationals a skater WOULD get the second jump in her combo downgraded because the FIRST jump was a flutz), and do a superb job communicating these things to their audience without sounding like anything other than a sports commentator.

That's why I prefer obtaining EuroSport versions of competitions -- the guy/guys actually talk about skating the whole time and are very informative.


I don't have a strong opinion about COP vs 6.0. I never much understood 6.0 except that it was probably the most subjective scoring system in all of sports and I like the movement toward more objectivity.

COP starts with the premise that judges are either dishonest,incompetent or both so the ISU requires lots judges to offset each other's incompetence and/or dishonesty. COP's dependence on video and computer technolgy makes it extremely expensive to administer and seems to require a long learning curve just at a time when the sport is running out of money.

Everyone seems to buy into the concept COP is incomprehensible to fans while fans the world over understood the 6.0 system. I think it has more to do with familiarity than comprehension.

People are still confused about how in SLC Sarah jumped from 4th to first over Michelle and Irina and how after Michelle and Irina skated Michelle could only get gold or bronze, silver was impossible. That was an absurd situation! I too am glad we are done with the placement hooey.

I like the cumulative point totals in COP. I like skaters getting personal bests while placing 12th. The goal should be to simplify COP. Reduce the number & categories of elements. Admit to a subjective overall grade of execution for the skate. Throw out outlier scores and fire the judges that award them.

A Commission independent of federations should certify judges and pay them and grade them and sanction them when incompetent.

I disagree the scoring system kept people away from 4CC -- in the past it had always been a second tier event with few National medalists going. It was two weeks after Spokane and most traveling fans in the US would pick Nats over 4CC's any day. Naturally fans from Asia and Japan would find it tough to pick 4CC over Worlds or even the closer Asian games. The other "continents" really don't have traveling fans. Europeans is in Europe -- duh! So fans of European skaters like Kostner, Joubert etc are going there.
The fact no one went to 4 CC is due to stupid scheduling, lack of information as to who was going to be there and eastern US fans not being likely to make two cross country trips in two weeks for skating. Had I known in December Shen and Zhao were competing for possibly the last time in the US I might have tried to go. But no national medalists from Japan certainly made it easy to pass this one up.

Very well-written post. I, too, wish the international system would drop high and low GOEs/scores. Personally, I think they should drop the TWO lowest and the TWO highest for each skater. Gets rid of the anomalies everyone complains about (such a single +2 amidst lots of 0s that MAY not even end up counted). They already drop 3 random GOEs/scores, what difference would 4 non-random ones make? Might be significant, but it'd work perfectly with the system, and could be done by a computer without having to reveal the judges.

[jaylee]

There are three reasons one can assume non-American countries have accepted CoP:
1) It finally gives their athletes a chance. We're seeing athletes win titles/earn higher placings whose very country would have prevented a win under 6.0.

Oh, I really second this statement. It's one of the things that I'm grateful to CoP for (more on that in a second), for the sake of skaters such as Yu-Na Kim.

She is the only elite skater from South Korea. Her federation has no power internationally at all, unlike long-established powers like USA and Russia. It was only because of CoP that she managed to make the podium at Skate Canada. And because she paired that 3rd place finish with a win at TEB, she made it to the GPF, where she won. That gives her credibility going into Worlds, and it all started at Skate Canada, where in SPITE of the fact that the judges really lowballed her on PCS, her TES scores were enough to carry her to the podium (as she deserved).

Because Yu-Na understands CoP and maximizes her skating under it, she's a contender at every international event, and her PCS scores have crept up every time. I think that it would have taken her a lot longer to become a "known" name under 6.0.

Back to the generation gap, I don't think so. I think people spend too much time blaming CoP for issues like declining ratings/popularity of skating when there are larger reasons involved.

If, for example, USFSA had secured a primetime deal for the US Nationals, we wouldn't have to worry about how CoP is affecting skating's popularity. Primetime coverage of figure skating, especially for Nationals, is how you expose the sport to millions of new fans, and you *need* new fans to keep it going.

If the US had a star equivalent to either Michelle or Sasha right now with a "wow" factor, then we wouldn't be blaming CoP. If you compare the 1-2 punch of Michelle/Sasha in the recent years to Kimmie/Emily, I'm afraid there's no comparison. Kimmie has improved artistically but she has not fully ripened yet (at least I hope she hasn't peaked). If you compare Emily to the personal best scores of all the international ladies, I think she sneaks in at number 9, and that just says it all. But regardless of whether Emily and Kimmie were skating under 6.0 versus CoP, that wouldn't transform them into better skaters than they are now.

[lavender]

for me, it's both artistry & athleticism. & i'm learning more & more that people of opposing views are going to constantly try & find a way to state their opinion as fact. i'm sure i do it. it's human to a degree. what some feel is artistry, i think is crap & visa versa.

yet something, not age, has made me weary. i just deleted the last of US Nationals, Japanese Nationals & 4CCs off of my Tevo w/o recording permanently. it's the 1st time in a decade i haven't recorded Nationals. frankly, i'm not even sad at the reality. i'm sad at the idea of it.

but if COP doesn't soften up & god forbid gets any more complex, it IS going to be a generation gap issue & not even a gap amongst fans, cause there won't be many. older skaters will get sick of bothering to learn new tricks & the younger ones will find it second nature, just like text messaging, MTV & myspace~

ITA aaronts. This is not a generational gap. Also who likes COP but a few people. Seems to me the people who are satisfied with COP are few. I think COP has a good basis and I wouldn't mind it if it didn't take away passion, encourage cookie cutter programs, etc. Maybe I just haven't run into those people and I know people of all ages. The few creative in-betweens may look a little different then they do the footwork, spins and spirals and they all look the same. If only COP or the people using COP penalized skaters who do spins and spirals and obviously haven't mastered what they are doing. Maybe skaters will learn how to do some of the movements and make them look beautiful and effortless. I do like that complete jumps are counted, underrotation is downgraded and that the short is counted more but I don't think that jumps you fall on should be credited at all. There's positives in COP but imo it's just being used in a way that's just frustrating.


If the US had a star equivalent to either Michelle or Sasha right now with a "wow" factor, then we wouldn't be blaming CoP.

I also think this is the main reason of falling tv ratings. I'm sorry but the skater they are promoting (Kimmie) comes off boring for some reason and her skating doesn't wow much. IMO her skating reflects her personality...sorry.

I've also taped over all of the competitions of the last 2 seasons. I didn't bother to watch 4CC or tape it.

[YankeesSuck01]

The COP isn't the biggest problem IMO. The judges using the cop to cheat and not having to answer for it is what makes me annoyed.

The COP isn't great by any means IMO but if they fixed the PCS inflation and stopped giving people points for falling because they twisted 3 times this code might work. There are too many places to hide cheating in this code for me to ever believe in it.

[skatez]

Well, if the COP/6.0 disagreement was due to a generation gap I would certainly be in favor of 6.0 because I remember being a fan when Carol Heiss won gold !

Personally, I think COP is a change for the better. There is still opportunity for judges to cheat but it is a lot more difficult to make the cheating effective - more numbers, more judges, and the random selection of scores.

What I do not like about COP is the current point values and I think we can blame a lot of that on the US not getting with the program early enough. To me the first iteration of COP was aimed directly at giving high scores to Irina Slutskaya - the whole Biellman thing is ludicrous - it's a flexibility move that has nothing to do with quality of skating and doing it half a dozen times in a performance does not demonstrate good technical or artistic skills.

If the US had taken a more aggresive approach during the design of COP, we might have seen some of the beautiful Michelle moves and skills given an equally high ranking and COP performances that are far more inspiring.

COP will change - the question to me is whether it will change fast enough for the next generation of skaters to learn really good skating skills. I would like to see a solid edge given more points; spins rated more on centering and speed than on multiple changes of position; outside edge spins eliminated or reduced to one per performance ( they are truly ugly to watch); falls given zero points or assumed to be nothing higher than a double ( getting credit for completed rotation with no landing is pretty hard for the public to understand); and a reduction in the number of categories that are graded ( since the judges seem to rank them all the same anyway).

And where do they count command of the ice? I know at Nationals I had to search the warm up groups to find Sasha but I knew the minute Michelle took the ice even if I wasn't watching the entrance. No one else in the US comes even close to that kind of presence except Weir and Lysacek.

I think is what is missing in figure skating today - that command and confidence. Perfect programs. And you don't get that when you are changing positions 6 times in one spin; counting seconds in a spiral; doing a change of edge that wobbles; trying a 3Axel or quad or 3-3 that you can only land 40% of the time to get those rotation points; and making sure that every second you are on the ice you are doing something that will get max points.

[clarivan12]

YankeesSuck01--I am in total agreement with you!!! While I applaud any skater that attempts a quad, triple axel or 3x3's combos, if you can not land it or have no attentions of landing it, why get points for trying. If you take a math, science, english or music test, you will attempt to get the answers correct or for music, perform in perfectly but when it comes down to it from my experience, if you do not get it right, you get NOTHING!!!! I can not every recall taking a trig test and getting it completely wrong and the teacher saying, well, you attempted to answer it so I will give you partial points. If that was the case, then why study for a test at all. You know you are always going to get something and get by.

Yes, I am probably exaggerating a bit but I think you get the picture. Falls should be worth nothing no matter how well executed the take off and rotations were. It is a failed element--no way around it.

Ok, I must get off of my rant. I am in Sterling, VA right now for business ( a promotion to corporate) and looked at apts all morning and am frazzled so I needed to take a break by coming here!! Thanks for listening!!! Long live the days of beautiful and technical skating.

[aaronts]

well, one of the main reasons the ISU gave for instituting a new judging system was cheating & COP is not resolving that. PCS is the placeholder that was supposed to be wiped out.

2 examples of blatant cheating IMO: Plushy's scores at the last Olys. yes, he may very well have been the best, but why then inflate his PCS in every category when there are certain areas he absolutely did not do better than other skaters? they thought he was the best & made sure he stayed there - where's the difference between doing that w 6.0? also, Kimmie's 3/3 from Nationals SP this year was cheated. it was made even more obvious by the fact that they kept showing hers versus Flatt's in slow-mo. they then had the nerve to downgrade Flatt's & show an incomplete slo-mo the night of the LPS to try & explain why Kimmie's was counted & Rachel's wasn't, as if the fans left watching aren't intelligent enough to figure it out for ourselves. to top it off, they have access to instant replay & had every chance to get it right - a luxury of COP & the times. in addition to these, there are countless other instances where the judging is suspect, even under COP.

what so many fail to realize is that 6.0 was made to account for items like COE spirals or spins, difficult jump entrances & footwork, well-balanced programs, etc.. i've said it more than once, if there's a reason Michelle didn't see higher scores at '00 Worlds w such an impressive LP, it's because she front-end loaded it more than any LP of hers i can remember. i'm sure that issues like line, extension & telegraphing were reasons why Irina was placed behind Michelle many times when both skated their bests. it's not as if 6.0 can suddenly be turned into a big old political game like some imply. the tools are still there w COP, don't fret.

what i'd love for supporters of COP to do, is go back the last 5 years under 6.0 & tell me how differently the top 5 placements would have been placed under 6.0. i haven't bothered myself, but i'd love to see how much change, if any, we'd see.

what i'd like to see from COP: 1) better usage of GOEs in both directions. skaters who excel need the credit, those that have not mastered a move they attempted should be severely scored down (so as to keep it out of a program until it is mastered). 2) no anonymity. 3) limits on edge changes in spinning (this, IMO, is the only way to bring back some of the pure spinning from the past). 4) i'm about this close to suggesting skaters reusing programs that have been used any time over the last 2 seasons get an instant deduction (nothing major, but enough so that it's going to require second thought). 5) no credit for falls. while i realize that the landing is not the only part of a jump, landing it is really the only part anyone cares about. it should NOT be counted IMO. a step out, 2 feet & the like should in fact receive some credit IMO.

what i love about COP: downgrades for incomplete jumps. i love the "idea" of GOEs. i love rewarding higher points for jumps landed later in a program. the fact that TES is very mathematical & there for the athlete to see as concrete. i love how PCS is broken down in theory.

my last word before i get down off of my saltbox: judges need to be paid. judges need to be banned for life if caught cheating. an independent organization needs to oversee judging & be able to hold ANYONE accountable~

[clarivan12]

I sing praises to Aaronts!!! Great ideas!!!


I vote for Aaronts to rewrite THE COP for future seasons. Get to it buddy!!!! The new season is coming upon us!!!!!

[michelle2006]

I'm 17, and I don't like the CoP. There you go, no generation gap here.

[Kathy Sullivan]

This issue is quite polarized, and it is interesting to hypothesize the reason for that polarity. Age and difficulty with change is certainly one possibility, but those arguments don't hold up well. I for one do not like the kind of programs that COP creates. They are too left brained for me. I don't like counting which I find myself doing all the time now. The spiral sequence starts and I know exactly what to expect, my brain immediately starts counting 1...2...3..., then the spin starts and my brain starts going 1...2...3..., I can't help but attend to and focus on the parts of the program. And skaters can't minimize what they do poorly. They have to do all those spirals even if I have to wince through them. And bielmans - oh good grief I won't even go there. I don't want to see ugly even if it is difficult, it just isn't pleasing or entertaining to watch. I also can not wrap my brain around getting high points for difficult jumps that end in a fall. I would much rather watch, and think a skater is better, if they can execute a perftect double, than if they complete the 3 rotations for a triple and then fall. As a viewer my brain says you either complete the jump or you can't do it. Always admired how MK could double a jump when she knew she couldn't get out the triple, rather than fall. Saved the program and was in total control. I wince every time I see skaters get huge scores after falling all over - don't care if they win - I don't enjoy watching. And to me if they were really good - they would have sensed they couldn't make the jump and downgraded it - while landing the downgrade perfectly. If your going to do the difficult jumps in my book then you best well land them. Programs under 6.0 were much more unpredictable and my brain focused on the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. Skaters could maximize on their strengths, and minimize their weaknesses. The spiral and other moves were done to in correspondence to the phrasing of the music and my brain was free to relax and enjoy the ride. People do really processes things differently and I really believe those who enjoy all the counting, process differently that those who enjoy the music and skater acting as one without structure of movement being imposed artifically. And there is no bigger thrill than seeing a beautiful program, supported by that validation of the perfect 6.0. The same thing happened to my enjoyment of gymnastics. Never forget the perfect 10.0 scores for those perfect routines of Nadia and those that followed her. Soon after they changed the system to points I lost interest - the routines changed - and even though I'm told they are much more difficult - they just don't grab my interest. Interestingly the other day I accidently came upon a collegiate gymnastic tournament that included several of the former members of the national team. In this meet routines were still scored on the 10.0 system - Never watched collegiate gymnastics before but watched this one and Courtney Koupets got a perfect 10.0 on the bars - I got that same joy out of that routine that I did out of Nadia's 10.0 and Michelle's 6.0 routines.

But the main objection I have to COP is that it represents such a "bait and switch" as regards to the problem it was suppose to fix. It was the crooked judges that produced the scandal at SLC. The solution - a complicated change in scoring that has had us all running in circles trying to decipher it, only to really realize that it certainly did not fix the problem it was intended to fix. Hello - the judging is still annonymous - that is the problem - no one has to be accountable. Reminds me of what has happened since 911 in this country. Osama Bin Laden blows up the twin towers and 5 years later we've invaded Iraq and destroyed Sadam - hello Bin Laden's still out there and we rarely hear his name. Sometimes I'm at awe at how stupid those in power think we really are.

[ScrappyTheOwl]

But the main objection I have to COP is that it represents such a "bait and switch" as regards to the problem it was suppose to fix. It was the crooked judges that produced the scandal at SLC. The solution - a complicated change in scoring that has had us all running in circles trying to decipher it, only to really realize that it certainly did not fix the problem it was intended to fix. Hello - the judging is still annonymous - that is the problem - no one has to be accountable.

You're mistaken in a few areas:

1. Your use of the world "still" -- judging was not anonymous under 6.0, and IS anonymous under the international CoP.

2. Judges and callers are accountable. Judging is only anonymous to the public, and to the federations. The ISU can see exactly who gave each mark and when. Judges who give marks way out of line with the rest of the judges (and callers who give bad calls) are disciplined.

3. The whole POINT of CoP being created was to reduce accountability of the JUDGES to their FEDERATIONS. If the federations can't see their judges' marks, they can't fix competitions. THAT is the problem that occured in SLC during the pairs competition (with the French judge being told by her federation to give her "vote" [1st place] to the Russians) and THAT is the problem CoP has removed from the equation.

[Arch]

2. Judges... who give marks way out of line with the rest of the judges (and callers who give bad calls) are disciplined.

Really? Does anyone know if ANYONE has been held accountable to date? I'd love to hear of any judge or caller summoned (out of the numerous events already done under CoP), as I don't believe that there hasn't been any mark way out of the average or any wrong call that has been made since CoP was introduced. Thanks!

[Katty52]

yet something, not age, has made me weary. i just deleted the last of US Nationals, Japanese Nationals & 4CCs off of my Tevo w/o recording permanently. it's the 1st time in a decade i haven't recorded Nationals. frankly, I'm not even sad at the reality. I'm sad at the idea of it.

the younger ones will find it second nature, just like text messaging, MTV & myspace~

I too deleted these events off my Tivo without recording them for my library. I just find the programs to repetitious. Great post Aaronts


I think the main complaint was that sloppy skates were winning programs. Falls, two footed landings, boring programs with the same moves to gain points. People complained about 6.0 and they complain about CoP, but if you complain about CoP it's because you're from the US and need to accept it? I'm not buying that.

Nitts, with the 6.0 system skaters knew that when they two footed or fell the were more then likely not to make the podium but now look out we can just throw sloppy skating out there and they come from 6th to 1st.


I also think this is the main reason of falling tv ratings. I'm sorry but the skater they are promoting (Kimmie) comes off boring for some reason and her skating doesn't wow much. IMO her skating reflects her personality...sorry.

I've also taped over all of the competitions of the last 2 seasons. I didn't bother to watch 4CC or tape it.

Lavender, I agree with you that Kimmie is boring and she may be able to do a triple axle but I though the ISU was looking for a new face to promote and not just a USA face that when she did the 3axel they looked the other way when Kimmie under-rotated the axle at Worlds 06 and gave her credit. This is so unfair too other skaters.

I think this is why I have lost interest in most events.

Great Thread!!

[bihemisphere]

I don't think it's the age gap. We just see the world differently. Left brain people are analytical, logical, practical, objective, and tend to see trees in the forest. Right brain people are imaginative, creative, subjective, and see the forest instead of trees. Sometimes I'm more towards to the left, and sometimes to the right. But in the figure skating forest, no one has ever touched my heart like Michelle Kwan. What I've perceived from her skating creates a different kind of revolution inside that cannot be defined as single, double, or triple. COP or not, she is truly special. :)

[Dragonlady]

Also, Sasha Cohen dominated under CoP, so it's not as if the US was as behind as some are trying to say. I think the main complaint was that sloppy skates were winning programs. Falls, two footed landings, boring programs with the same moves to gain points. People complained about 6.0 and they complain about CoP, but if you complain about CoP it's because you're from the US and need to accept it? I'm not buying that.

Sasha dominated under CoP because she had a Russian coach who understood the system and how to work it. Weir also did well initially and for the same reason, but Johnny's refusal to maximize his jumping windows has cost him medals.

The reason I say that Americans are having a harder time accepting the system is because the majority of complaints about CoP come from American posters. And not conicidentally, I think, the American commentators are the only commentators who have publically railed against it. Sloppy skates would have won anyway because no one was skating clean at that time and CoP was not to blame for that. Lambiel and Buttle had problems skating clean before CoP.

As for American skaters, Don & Hunt missed two medals and a trip to the GP Final because they only had 12 elements in their FS while the rest of the pairs were doing 13. If they had added a level 1 death spiral to the end of their program, they would have won two bronze medals on the GP circuit and gone to the GP Final.

Jordan Brauninger missed a medal at Jr. Worlds because he didn't add a 2T on to the end of any of his jumping passes, or raise his hand in a spin. Either would have done it for him. If he had done either, he would have been the bronze medalist at Jr. Worlds. If he had raised his hand in two of his spins and done the extra combo, he would have won the silver medal. Jordon was monitored by USFSA officials before going to Jr. Worlds. He was told to cut his hair and put sleeves on his costume.

I have lots and lots of examples of how poorly prepared the American skaters were initially. At. Jr. Worlds we were furious watching Jordan skate. He was so much better than either the Russian or the French skaters who got the medals.

[aaronts]

3. The whole POINT of CoP being created was to reduce accountability of the JUDGES to their FEDERATIONS. If the federations can't see their judges' marks, they can't fix competitions. THAT is the problem that occured in SLC during the pairs competition (with the French judge being told by her federation to give her "vote" [1st place] to the Russians) and THAT is the problem CoP has removed from the equation.

ok, whatever you say Scrappy. sure, it could go this way. or federations can still influence their judges w/o fear that the public will know about it. even IF the judge were to be disciplined, what's at stake for the federation?

to me, this is a bit like taking away sober drivers' licenses because drunk drivers might be out & kill us. it's hardly the best option~

[katydid411]

I don't think the original poster means age when they say "generation gap", I think they mean generation as in how long you have been watiching skating. Like, I have heard commentators say that up and coming skaters are having an easier time adjusting to the new system because they weren't so used to the 6.0 system, whereas more experienced skaters were having difficulty adjusting to having to make their programs in a whole new way.

I, myself, have been watching skating since 1994 Olympics and I AM having trouble with COP. It has nothing to do with my age... but I do think it has to do with how long I have been watching skating. I am used to seeing skaters tell a whole story on the ice, not just tick off complex elements. My family/friends who only watch skating every four years would probably love COP because it awards/penalizes individual jumps which is the only thing they understand. They don't know how to look for the whole picture. Several people have mentioned left v right brained... I consider myself very left-brained (very logical, analytical, etc) except when I listen to music and/or watch skating.. I don't want to analyze and count and care how many times someone changes their edges.... I just want to enjoy!! I am also sick of hearing how wonderful it is that some skater did a COE spiral.... hello Michelle did that for years and no one seemed to cared... why should I now care that somebody else does it?

I hope this rambling makes sense.

I am proud to be a member of the OLDER generation of viewers who understood the 6.0 system!

[Kathy Sullivan]

I don't think it's the age gap. We just see the world differently. Left brain people are analytical, logical, practical, objective, and tend to see trees in the forest. Right brain people are imaginative, creative, subjective, and see the forest instead of trees. Sometimes I'm more towards to the left, and sometimes to the right. But in the figure skating forest, no one has ever touched my heart like Michelle Kwan. What I've perceived from her skating creates a different kind of revolution inside that cannot be defined as single, double, or triple. COP or not, she is truly special. :)

I totally agree.

[katydid411]

Aaronts post #20 and Kathy Sullivan's post #23 are KWANDERFUL!!!:bow :bow :bow

[trpls4me]

first of all Im sorry for another COP thread....I really am lol....I just wanted to share a couple of my thoughts...

Im getting kind of tired of hearing people complain about it. I know it has problems, and I know that theres a lot of things about it that take away from the beuty of the skating under the old 6.0 judging...but thats over, and were totally stuck with the COP no matter what because I can garantee you they would never change back to the 6.0 system.

I know you would rather see a beautifully executed layback with a beautiful, fast and strong basic position and simple beautiful arms...and I can garantee you that the skaters would rather DO a beautifully simple layback like that too...but you just can't get by with moves like that anymore. And in a way that bad, because doing the more positions is obviousley harder on your body,and you obviousley have to be more flexible to do them.

But its really good in some ways, this is from a skaters point of view, honstly its FUN for the skaters to work on the new and more difficult positions. yes its a pain (literally and figuratively lol) because you have to do them exactly right and hold them just long enough and follow all the absurd rules that they have now, but in the skaters minds it really is a positive thing.

Most athletes typically love a challenge, and if youre especially driven you will do whatever it takes to get to the top no matter what. So learning all these positions and doing the harder spiral sequences and stuff, is almost just like a fact of life for the skaters now. Its just soemthing you have to do and you know that if youre doing it you feel good because you know it will help you sore higher. (duh lol)

I think now is just a good time to try to be a teeny bit less picky when youre watching skating, because everyone is trying to adapt to the new rules and its hard to figure it all out in a way thats attractive haha but I dunno I just know that when I watch skating now if a sit spin looks a little akward or something I just kind let it roll off my back and try to enjoy the rest of the skating because Its so much harder to do the stuff in the programs now.

I understand if you dont think skating is like, as aritstic as it was before that makes sense, but I think it will most definitly get better over the years. I mean the judging system is taking a while to totally feel normal you know, but I think it really will serve its prupose in the following years. like, I am certain that eventually we will start seeing the more well rounded champions and the best part is the more skaters that are growing up with these rules, the more comfortable the moves will be for them and the better they will be too because all the skaters are always pushing each other to do harder and prettier stuff.

the skaters that are the best are the ones who you don't even notice that they are doing the ten positions in their spins and stuff, like they are so practiced that it all just blends together and we will be able to enjoy more beautiful (kind of) simple classic skating performances like weve seen in the past..I guess what Im trying to say is that the quality will come with the more years this system is used.:)

I hope that all made sense, Im really sorry this was so long, and Im also sorry if this topic is old now. I havnt been on in a while to keep up with peoples opinions and everything but I hope that most of you can understand what Im saying. anyway thanks to anyone who read this and Id love to hear what people think about it:)

[moxie]

Alissa mentioned in her new journal entry that she likes CoP. I think we can look to skaters like her to really work this system in years to come to produce a program that meets the rules and yet is still beautiful.
At least, I hope so.

[Krista]

I hate code of points. won't shut up about it. and I think its not going to get better until enough people are not complacent and stand up and say something as well. Frankly if COP doesn't go away or if it isn't improved, figure skating can say goodbye to my viewership and probably many others.

anyone who doesn't like it, all i have to say is PFFFFFFFFFPBT!!!!!!!!! :P :lol

[berthesghost]

oops, darn double posts

[berthesghost]

Sasha dominated under CoP because she had a Russian coach who understood the system and how to work it. Weir also did well initially and for the same reason, but Johnny's refusal to maximize his jumping windows has cost him medals.

The reason I say that Americans are having a harder time accepting the system is because the majority of complaints about CoP come from American posters. And not conicidentally, I think, the American commentators are the only commentators who have publically railed against it. Sloppy skates would have won anyway because no one was skating clean at that time and CoP was not to blame for that. Lambiel and Buttle had problems skating clean before CoP.

As for American skaters, Don & Hunt missed two medals and a trip to the GP Final because they only had 12 elements in their FS while the rest of the pairs were doing 13. If they had added a level 1 death spiral to the end of their program, they would have won two bronze medals on the GP circuit and gone to the GP Final.

Jordan Brauninger missed a medal at Jr. Worlds because he didn't add a 2T on to the end of any of his jumping passes, or raise his hand in a spin. Either would have done it for him. If he had done either, he would have been the bronze medalist at Jr. Worlds. If he had raised his hand in two of his spins and done the extra combo, he would have won the silver medal. Jordon was monitored by USFSA officials before going to Jr. Worlds. He was told to cut his hair and put sleeves on his costume.

I have lots and lots of examples of how poorly prepared the American skaters were initially. At. Jr. Worlds we were furious watching Jordan skate. He was so much better than either the Russian or the French skaters who got the medals.Thank you for illustrating so clearly everything that's wrong with COP.

It's a very sad day for a sport when clearly inferior skaters are rewarded top honors simply because they raised a hand during a spin.

And the Oscar goes to Madonna, not because she can act, but because unlike Meryl Streep, she took direction from her husband, which everone knows is more difficult.

Oy vey, the sport's going to hades in a COP hand-basket.

[berthesghost]

Well, I'm so sick of hearing colonists complaining about the king.... like it or not, the tax on tea is here to stay, so just get over it!

[Dragonlady]

Anyone who thinks that skaters didn't get credit for failed attempts under 6.0 is dreaming in technicolour. In the SP, unless a man attempted a quad, even if he fell, he was placed behind skaters who did a 3/3, even a lutz/triple. In the LP, a skater who fell on a quad attempt was placed higher than skaters who didn't try one, if the attempt was deemed "creditable"

For the ladies, unless a skater was attempting a 3Z in the combo, her base mark was low enough that she didn't make the final flight, even if a skater two footed their lutz, because the base mark for programs without the lutz was set so much lower than with.

On paper, failed attempts got no credit, but in practice they got just as much, if not more credit than they do under CoP. Men who don't do quads or even attempt them are getting much better placements if they land all of their other jumps and 3A's as well. Johnny Weir placed 5th at his first Worlds without a quad or a 3A. That would never have happened under 6.0.

[Kathy Sullivan]

Anyone who thinks that skaters didn't get credit for failed attempts under 6.0 is dreaming in technicolour. In the SP, unless a man attempted a quad, even if he fell, he was placed behind skaters who did a 3/3, even a lutz/triple. In the LP, a skater who fell on a quad attempt was placed higher than skaters who didn't try one, if the attempt was deemed "creditable"

For the ladies, unless a skater was attempting a 3Z in the combo, her base mark was low enough that she didn't make the final flight, even if a skater two footed their lutz, because the base mark for programs without the lutz was set so much lower than with.

On paper, failed attempts got no credit, but in practice they got just as much, if not more credit than they do under CoP. Men who don't do quads or even attempt them are getting much better placements if they land all of their other jumps and 3A's as well. Johnny Weir placed 5th at his first Worlds without a quad or a 3A. That would never have happened under 6.0.

Well I guess you know more about that than me, but then why is it considered very bad strategy to double a triple - as opposed to going for the triple and falling. I hear this over and over. And it sure seems as though skaters under COP are aiming for going for those difficult jumps and falling rather than self-correcting and downgrading them if they are "off."

It also seemed to me that under 6.0 the short program actually counted "required" elements. So yeah if a skater missed an all important downgrade, fall, or double-foot on one of the "required" elements they paid mightly. The scoring for the LP seemed to reward the programs without falls more than the comparable program with falls. That is, for expample if MK completed 5 triples and doubled a 6th, seemed she would easily beat Sasha completing 5 triples with a fall. Could be wrong but with all else being equal in terms of other elements the reverse would be true under COP if Sasha completed the 3 rotations before she fell.

Which brings me to another question I have about COP. What exactly is the purpose of the short program? I always thought under 6.0 the SP was to demonstrate the all important technique and artisty of the basic "requirements." If a skater didn't do that well then they had little to no chance to win - as the requirements were essential - the LP reflecting how much breadth and beauty and additional technique one could bring to the ice, above and beyond the essentials. With COP the SP seems just like a short LP. The "requirements" aren't so crucial at all - can mess up bad in the SP and still win. and the LP seems to have just as many requirements. And you just add them together. And in both the SP and the LP under COP we see the same four positions in the spiral, and the same positions in the spins - heck I can't even tell the difference in the footwork. The LP just has more of it and more jumps. Seems to me either the purpose of the SP has changed dramatically. So is the purpose of the SP under COP just to give the skaters two chances to skate so there is more data? Why not just eliminate it.

[moxie]

In 6.0, the SP placements too frequently came down to one element: the jump combination. A skater with great spins but a less difficult combo had no chance against a skater with horrid spins but a more difficult combo.
At least under CoP, judges MUST count spins and footwork.

[Dragonlady]

Thank you for illustrating so clearly everything that's wrong with COP.

It's a very sad day for a sport when clearly inferior skaters are rewarded top honors simply because they raised a hand during a spin.

I agree with what you're saying to a point BG, but how is that any didfferent than Tim Goebel winning the bronze medal at the Olympics over better skaters just because he could do a quad, or Tara beating Michelle because she did a 3L/3L? Inferior skaters win events over superior skaters all of the time, because the inferior skaters landed more jumps or the better skaters had a bad day.

Under CoP, Michelle wins the OGM in Nagano.

[Lisa Seye]

Thank you for illustrating so clearly everything that's wrong with COP.

It's a very sad day for a sport when clearly inferior skaters are rewarded top honors simply because they raised a hand during a spin.

And the Oscar goes to Madonna, not because she can act, but because unlike Meryl Streep, she took direction from her husband, which everone knows is more difficult.

Oy vey, the sport's going to hades in a COP hand-basket.


:clap :clap

I would also like to say that is is not just Americans who dislike the system or like the system. There are plenty who do like it.
However, that said, when I look at the emails I get from Sonia regarding CoP and how it can be changed effectively, I can see the number of people she copies the email to and there are plenty of folks from differing countries included in this email (folks of a similar viewpoint) including some on the forum, coaches, officials, commentators, etc. So it seems a little unfair and biased to keep on pointing out the idea that Americans do not have a mind of their own thanks to Dick Button. I would never say that Canadians cannot think for themselves.
Furthermore, Sonia's "diatribes" do not suggest that we need to abolish CoP. She has made very specific suggestions on how to improve it and make it a better system. The suggestions are well thought out as one would expect from someone of her vast knowledge and experience within the figure skating world, a knowledge and mind worthy of respect. Even Dick himself has suggested that change can be made to improve the system to make it less constipated. So in his rants against CoP, he does advocate improvements to it, not abolition of it. It is not Dick and America against CoP. It is a movement for improvements. Surely we do not think the system is perfect and has no room for improvement? That suggests a closed minded way of thinking. Open minded is to say that it is not soup yet. That is what all the complaints are about. CoP is not soup and needs further refinement to become something which I would want to eat. As it is, I do not like it. It is too raw.
If you would like to read about some of Sonia's ideas with an open mind, go here and read "Ideas for Change" in her writings section.

http://www.soniabianchetti.com/writings_ideas.html

[Lisa Seye]

Please go and read my post in the "generation gap thread". I just made it. LOL. Post number 39

[skatefan20]

Alissa mentioned in her new journal entry that she likes CoP. I think we can look to skaters like her to really work this system in years to come to produce a program that meets the rules and yet is still beautiful.

Unless she changes coaches, she'll definitely be working this system - gettin' -3's on those GOEs...jumpwise. ;)

[kittyjake5]

Lisa you are looking very pretty this morning.

[Lisa Seye]

Why thanks. I feel pretty, oh so pretty.....
Silly is more like it. Well I just had to stick up for the mindless Americans, LOL. I am so silly :P

[Louise1991]

...but thats over, and were totally stuck with the COP no matter what because I can garantee you they would never change back to the 6.0 system.wrong! we're only stuck with it if we want to keep watching. we can always choose to stop watching which is what i've done.

[kittyjake5]

Well I just had to stick up for the mindless Americans, LOL. I am so silly :P

I am glad you did and I do not think you are silly.

[gatzbee]

u know, DL, that is an interesting point u make in your last post :). i think CoP COULD work, but it needs a lot of fixing. but didn't johnny place his highest placement at worlds during his 1st outing when 6.0 was still there?

i think CoP should give no credit to falls, for starters. and the LP does look like a long SP! it would be great to REQUIRE low level spins in the SP at least. so that we don't lose the beauty of simple moves in skating...

[MKsmiral]

Alissa mentioned in her new journal entry that she likes CoP.

Of course she does. She can still score points even though she's inconsistent with her jumps (and doesn't need to do the full set of triples). I recall Evan Lysacek saying that the new system is great because you can "totally tank" on the jumps and still score well. Sorry, but this is ridiculous IMO. Still receiving points for falls, missing combos and not being penalized, etc. And I hate what the IJS has done to spins with it's quantity over quality agenda and skaters repeating the same positions a million times in a program - it's boring. Every time a skater does that COE sit spin I cringe - yuk!

P.S. - this is nothing against Alissa; she's a lovely skater; my issue is w/ the scoring system.

[taf]

Great thread so far, except for the insults. Isn't it interesting that people who prefer CoP feel free to insult those who dont'? Geezers, uninformed, Americans...

For the record, much of the outcry from many US commentators was not against the idea of CoP, it was because:

1. the ISU had no history of trying to fix the cheating problem...there were hand-slaps for cheaters, there was punishment for whistle-blowers, there was punishment for the French judge, there was no inquiry into who she made a deal with. There was no reason to believe the CoP band-aid was going to fix those problems & sure enough, it hasn't.

2. the ISU wanted to rush CoP into use before it was ready...and with many rules the US & other federations didn't like....anonymous judges, point count skewed for certain skaters or certain types.

3. Never judge ANYTHING by Dick Button. The man is senile and should not be allowed to speak on camera. There have been plently of commentators who like CoP..or the idea of it if changes were made.

6.0 wasn't perfect, neither was OBO, and CoP will never be either. It could be the closest to the perfect scoring system if changes were made. There have been some pretty good suggestions on this thread. In addition to those that aaronts made, I would add:

1. don't throw out any random marks-throw out high & low
2. 1/2 the judges (7) judge TES & 1/2 judge PCS
3. Get rid of Speedy & anyone in bed with him & split the ISU-have 2 presidents-one for figure & one for speed skating-and don't share TV revenue from figure skating with speed skating.

I don't think the scoring preference is due to a generation gap. I have been watching skating for over 40 yrs & I wouldn't oppose CoP if it was structured better. Right now it has more problems than 6.0 did IMO.

[Dream Again]

Actually, we're not "stuck" with anything. The fans have every right to stop watching figure skating on tv and to stop attending figure skating events if they so choose. Fans buy the tickets to attend these events and have all the control on whether tv ratings rise or plummet. Speedy may have all the power in the ISU's decision-making but this is not some stupid dictatorship where skating fans have to abide by his rules or else.

[Sparks]

Good post, taf. :hug
It's the application of the COP system rather than the system itself that is awful....In Sparks' world, there would be a lot of changes made to the current application of COP. I would start with this:

...CoP should give no credit to falls, for starters. and the LP does look like a long SP! it would be great to REQUIRE low level spins in the SP at least. so that we don't lose the beauty of simple moves in skating...
....too bad $peedy won't listen to us. :grump

[mr pru]

as usual miss taf....excellent post.....:clap

[Dragonlady]

Well I guess you know more about that than me, but then why is it considered very bad strategy to double a triple - as opposed to going for the triple and falling. I hear this over and over. And it sure seems as though skaters under COP are aiming for going for those difficult jumps and falling rather than self-correcting and downgrading them if they are "off."

It is not bad strategy to double a triple in the LP (see comments below for reasons why it's a bad idea in the SP), but it is bad strategy to pop a jump rather than going for it. Doubles score more points than rotating a triple and falling. A triple salchow is worth 4.5 points but if the skater falls, she loses -3 on GOE and -1 on total score, so she would only receive .5 for the triple with the fall. A doubel salchow is worth 1.3 points and the skater might receive +GOE if it's done well, so doing the double is definitely the better idea. Popping the jump (turning an intended triple into a single) is a very, very bad idea because you get no points to speak of.


It also seemed to me that under 6.0 the short program actually counted "required" elements. So yeah if a skater missed an all important downgrade, fall, or double-foot on one of the "required" elements they paid mightly. The scoring for the LP seemed to reward the programs without falls more than the comparable program with falls. That is, for expample if MK completed 5 triples and doubled a 6th, seemed she would easily beat Sasha completing 5 triples with a fall. Could be wrong but with all else being equal in terms of other elements the reverse would be true under COP if Sasha completed the 3 rotations before she fell.

Two points here: A missed element in the SP is an automatic -3 on GOE. If the skater doubles a required triple jump, that element is scored -3 regardless of how well the double was done, so in that sense, it would be better to attempt the triple and fall, but this is only applicable to the SP. In the LP, if MK completed 5 triples and doubled a 6th, she would receive more jump points than the skater who completes 5 triples with a fall, but if the skater had all level 4 elements on their spins and footwork and MK had only level 1 and 2 spins and footwork and fewer transitions, yes it is possible that the program with the higher non-jump elements would score higher but I emphasize that the non-jump elements and program would have to be very much better for the skater with the lesser jump content, and I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.


Which brings me to another question I have about COP. What exactly is the purpose of the short program? I always thought under 6.0 the SP was to demonstrate the all important technique and artisty of the basic "requirements." If a skater didn't do that well then they had little to no chance to win - as the requirements were essential - the LP reflecting how much breadth and beauty and additional technique one could bring to the ice, above and beyond the essentials. With COP the SP seems just like a short LP. The "requirements" aren't so crucial at all - can mess up bad in the SP and still win. and the LP seems to have just as many requirements. And you just add them together. And in both the SP and the LP under COP we see the same four positions in the spiral, and the same positions in the spins - heck I can't even tell the difference in the footwork. The LP just has more of it and more jumps. Seems to me either the purpose of the SP has changed dramatically. So is the purpose of the SP under COP just to give the skaters two chances to skate so there is more data? Why not just eliminate it.

Well even under CoP, in order to win after bombing the SP, your opposition has to skate very poorly in the LP and you have to skate lights out. For example, under 6.0, Alyssa Ciszy would be the US Women's Champion this year, and she bombed the SP. However, because Kimmie and Emily didn't bomb the LP, Alyssa wasn't able to completely overcome the point deficit after the SP she finished third.

Under 6.0 Cynthia Phaneuf was able to come back from her 9th place finish in the SP at 4CC and win the silver medal, so it wasn't impossible to medal after messing up the SP, just unlikely.

I do agree that under CoP, while there are no "required elements" per se other than one combo and an axel jump, the 7 jumping windows, three allowable combos including one 3-jump combo, 4 spins and two footwork passes allowed pretty much makes these the required elements for the LP for the women. Johnny Weir has been consistently off the podium at big events because he doesn't use all of his available jumping passes and combos and had no quad prior to this season. Of course it could be argued that without a quad he wouldn't have been anywhere near the podium under 6.0 either.

As for the sameness of the elements, the skaters were always doing the same spiral sequence in the SP and the LP and the same spins because that's a lot of elements to learn to do well so repeating them made it more likely that the skater would do them well. What's different is that everyone at the top levels is now doing similar spiral sequences and spins - the changes of edge and position and so we notice it more.

There are things about CoP I would like to see changed too. I would like a well done basic spin or spiral sequences which go from one end of the rink to the other without losing speed to get more points. I would certainly like to see the cheating judges bet banned for life. It makes me angry every time I see Yuri Balkov sitting on any judging panel, given his history.

I was also one of those people who thought that CoP would turn skating into even more of a jumping contest that it already was, and so I was pleasantly surprised that non-jump elements are well-rewarded. I'm thrilled that footwork and choreography are back and I'm seeing the quality of skating from top to bottom improving at the events I attend. Fans who only watch skating on TV have very little idea of how badly skating skills, spinning and footwork were eroding because they only saw the top skaters.

The past four years have been the "period of adjustment" for CoP as skaters, coaches and choreographers have learned what they will need to know to win under this system. This season has seen a resurgence in more artistic programs and the junior kids coming into seniors with nothing but CoP experience is having a huge impact on the sport.

The system isn't perfect, but it's a far sight better than what we had.

[Kathy Sullivan]

Thanks for your reply DL. Your explanation of the double vs the fully rotated fall on a triple really is different than I have read in other analysis, and if your account is true, well it makes a lot more sense.

I still am not sure though why we even still have a SP. When figures went south they just eliminated them. The SP still seems just like a shorter LP.

Maybe COP is good for skating and maybe over the next few years with modifications, I will see that. But at present the programs created under COP seem so very different to me, and really lack something I miss about the programs I have been watching the last 15 years, and my brain processes them in a way I don't enjoy. Most of the time I am dissapointed in the results with this inner conviction that standings are wrong and the best skates didn't win.

I also wonder how COP can be adjusted to bring musicality back to the performances. I realized that this season I couldn't tell you what ANY of the skaters skated to - except for Evan because he's done it so much. With skaters having to garner points by performing elements based on time, how will we ever again see skater and music flow as one. I was watching MK's performance of Lyra during which she was executing slow by today's standards camel spin. I was at first struck by the slowness of it, given COP programs, but then lulled into its beauty because like a metronome it was perfectly timed to the phrasing of the music. As I watched more I realized that all her movements - from her hands to the timing of spins to the bursting through of her magnificent spiral was perfectly phrased to the music. I am not a musician so I don't know how to describe it but she had mastered the art of starting and flowing through moves, even jumps, on the upbeat, downbeat, and rythm at exactly the right time. It truly was like the music was playing through her body. It think this quality is in part what separated her performances from other great skaters and in part represents that quality of what people refer to as "drawing you in." Although most skaters tried to do this and I knew the scores that most of the major players were skating to. Music was incoporated as part of the skate. Under COP it seems like some noise in the background. Like the music played during the floor routines in gymnastics. How will that ever be recaptured when skaters have to perform elements for 3 seconds each?

[Krista]

Actually, we're not "stuck" with anything. The fans have every right to stop watching figure skating on tv and to stop attending figure skating events if they so choose. Fans buy the tickets to attend these events and have all the control on whether tv ratings rise or plummet. Speedy may have all the power in the ISU's decision-making but this is not some stupid dictatorship where skating fans have to abide by his rules or else.

exactly :clap

and I've barely watched any skating this season. I think the major things I've watched are Nationals, and Ill probably watch worlds.

Pro skating I still enjoy, when it isn't a cheese "tribute" show to some singer.

[Krista]

Why thanks. I feel pretty, oh so pretty.....
Silly is more like it. Well I just had to stick up for the mindless Americans, LOL. I am so silly :P

:D

Well said Lisa, good original post :)

[taf]

Actually, we're not "stuck" with anything. The fans have every right to stop watching figure skating on tv and to stop attending figure skating events if they so choose. Fans buy the tickets to attend these events and have all the control on whether tv ratings rise or plummet. Speedy may have all the power in the ISU's decision-making but this is not some stupid dictatorship where skating fans have to abide by his rules or else.

Yes, let's throw the baby out with the bathwater. If some silly set of rules was ruining football, they could hear American men screaming from here to Europe! As FS fans, we ARE stuck with what the ISU is dictating these days. What are we supposed to do, say "well that's ok, I don't have to enjoy my past-time anymore, I'll just find something else I like"?



As for the sameness of the elements, the skaters were always doing the same spiral sequence in the SP and the LP and the same spins because that's a lot of elements to learn to do well so repeating them made it more likely that the skater would do them well. What's different is that everyone at the top levels is now doing similar spiral sequences and spins - the changes of edge and position and so we notice it more.

(snip)The system isn't perfect, but it's a far sight better than what we had.

I never thought there was a sameness about the programs under 6.0 even though many people were doing the same element, esp in the SP. Everyone tended to emphasize whatever they did well. Now unless elements are heavily rewarded under CoP, no one has time to do extras. They have to get in that donut spin, that beillmann, that human pretzel combo spin, or that COE spin or spiral.

And as far as CoP being better than what we had before, everyone doesn't seem to share your opinion.


Thanks for your reply DL. Your explanation of the double vs the fully rotated fall on a triple really is different than I have read in other analysis, and if your account is true, well it makes a lot more sense.

I still am not sure though why we even still have a SP. When figures went south they just eliminated them. The SP still seems just like a shorter LP.

Maybe COP is good for skating and maybe over the next few years with modifications, I will see that. But at present the programs created under COP seem so very different to me, and really lack something I miss about the programs I have been watching the last 15 years, and my brain processes them in a way I don't enjoy. Most of the time I am dissapointed in the results with this inner conviction that standings are wrong and the best skates didn't win.

I also wonder how COP can be adjusted to bring musicality back to the performances. I realized that this season I couldn't tell you what ANY of the skaters skated to - except for Evan because he's done it so much. With skaters having to garner points by performing elements based on time, how will we ever again see skater and music flow as one. I was watching MK's performance of Lyra during which she was executing slow by today's standards camel spin. I was at first struck by the slowness of it, given COP programs, but then lulled into its beauty because like a metronome it was perfectly timed to the phrasing of the music. As I watched more I realized that all her movements - from her hands to the timing of spins to the bursting through of her magnificent spiral was perfectly phrased to the music. I am not a musician so I don't know how to describe it but she had mastered the art of starting and flowing through moves, even jumps, on the upbeat, downbeat, and rythm at exactly the right time. It truly was like the music was playing through her body. It think this quality is in part what separated her performances from other great skaters and in part represents that quality of what people refer to as "drawing you in." Although most skaters tried to do this and I knew the scores that most of the major players were skating to. Music was incoporated as part of the skate. Under COP it seems like some noise in the background. Like the music played during the floor routines in gymnastics. How will that ever be recaptured when skaters have to perform elements for 3 seconds each?

Exactly Kathy. You just described what used to make skating (and esp Michelle) special.

[taf]

Actually, we're not "stuck" with anything. The fans have every right to stop watching figure skating on tv and to stop attending figure skating events if they so choose. Fans buy the tickets to attend these events and have all the control on whether tv ratings rise or plummet. Speedy may have all the power in the ISU's decision-making but this is not some stupid dictatorship where skating fans have to abide by his rules or else.

Yes, let's throw the baby out with the bathwater. If some silly set of rules was ruining football, they could hear American men screaming from here to Europe! As FS fans, we ARE stuck with what the ISU is dictating these days. What are we supposed to do, say "well that's ok, I don't have to enjoy my past-time anymore, I'll just find something else I like"?


As for the sameness of the elements, the skaters were always doing the same spiral sequence in the SP and the LP and the same spins because that's a lot of elements to learn to do well so repeating them made it more likely that the skater would do them well. What's different is that everyone at the top levels is now doing similar spiral sequences and spins - the changes of edge and position and so we notice it more.

(snip)The system isn't perfect, but it's a far sight better than what we had.

I never thought there was a sameness about the programs under 6.0 even though many people were doing the same element, esp in the SP. Everyone tended to emphasize whatever they did well. Now unless elements are heavily rewarded under CoP, no one has time to do extras. They have to get in that donut spin, that beillmann, that human pretzel combo spin, or that COE spin or spiral.

And as far as CoP being better than what we had before, everyone doesn't seem to share your opinion.


Thanks for your reply DL. Your explanation of the double vs the fully rotated fall on a triple really is different than I have read in other analysis, and if your account is true, well it makes a lot more sense.

I still am not sure though why we even still have a SP. When figures went south they just eliminated them. The SP still seems just like a shorter LP.

Maybe COP is good for skating and maybe over the next few years with modifications, I will see that. But at present the programs created under COP seem so very different to me, and really lack something I miss about the programs I have been watching the last 15 years, and my brain processes them in a way I don't enjoy. Most of the time I am dissapointed in the results with this inner conviction that standings are wrong and the best skates didn't win.

I also wonder how COP can be adjusted to bring musicality back to the performances. I realized that this season I couldn't tell you what ANY of the skaters skated to - except for Evan because he's done it so much. With skaters having to garner points by performing elements based on time, how will we ever again see skater and music flow as one. I was watching MK's performance of Lyra during which she was executing slow by today's standards camel spin. I was at first struck by the slowness of it, given COP programs, but then lulled into its beauty because like a metronome it was perfectly timed to the phrasing of the music. As I watched more I realized that all her movements - from her hands to the timing of spins to the bursting through of her magnificent spiral was perfectly phrased to the music. I am not a musician so I don't know how to describe it but she had mastered the art of starting and flowing through moves, even jumps, on the upbeat, downbeat, and rythm at exactly the right time. It truly was like the music was playing through her body. It think this quality is in part what separated her performances from other great skaters and in part represents that quality of what people refer to as "drawing you in." Although most skaters tried to do this and I knew the scores that most of the major players were skating to. Music was incoporated as part of the skate. Under COP it seems like some noise in the background. Like the music played during the floor routines in gymnastics. How will that ever be recaptured when skaters have to perform elements for 3 seconds each?

Exactly Kathy. You just described what used to make skating (and esp Michelle) special.

[moskva]

Great thread so far, except for the insults. Isn't it interesting that people who prefer CoP feel free to insult those who dont'? Geezers, uninformed, Americans...

lighten up, dude. it was not meant as in insult, but as a small dose of mischievous ribbing. trust me, if i had wanted to insult, there would have been no two ways about it. :D

[moskva]

The COP isn't the biggest problem IMO. The judges using the cop to cheat and not having to answer for it is what makes me annoyed.

The COP isn't great by any means IMO but if they fixed the PCS inflation and stopped giving people points for falling because they twisted 3 times this code might work. There are too many places to hide cheating in this code for me to ever believe in it.

those r all valid points, YS01. ur post really cristalizes the argument against the CoP. it sure is not perfect, but i do believe it's an imporvement on the 6.0 system of yore. the problem that many people have with it can be boiled down to poor pr. the CoP was sold to us as the panacea against cheating judges, and then we see that in reality it's far from being fool-proof. i think that's what gets to most people, that it was sold to us as something it clearly is not. it leaves u feeling let down. however, there is a kernel of useful in there somewhere, and with some - considerable - modifications, the sytems can be made to work as advertised. for that, anonymous judging has to go. secondly, there needs to be a heftier deduction for falling, so that skaters would not be buttle'ed, that is, getting credit for falling on fully rotated quads. ;)

another problem that peole have with the CoP is that it's a brain child of cinquanta. they transfer their disdain and scorn for him onto the system he belabored. well, people like that should get over it. cinquanta may be all the horrible things people say he is, but cop should not be condemend alongside him merely by association.
so there u have it, my garbled and utterly tangential defense of the CoP. :D

[Dream Again]

Yes, let's throw the baby out with the bathwater. If some silly set of rules was ruining football, they could hear American men screaming from here to Europe! As FS fans, we ARE stuck with what the ISU is dictating these days. What are we supposed to do, say "well that's ok, I don't have to enjoy my past-time anymore, I'll just find something else I like"?

You have the freedom to do whatever you want, just like anybody else. My response was a general comment to the original poster who started the thread that "fans are 'stuck' with COP, like it or not", before that thread was combined with this thread. That poster made it seem like skating fans who dislike COP had no alternative but to be stuck with the system, which is not true. The fans have every right to stop watching skating and to stop attending ISU competitions . . . fans do have a way out and a way to get their message across that they are not pleased with Speedy's system. For many people on this forum, their "past-time" was watching and cheering for Michelle Kwan, not figure skating, so obviously there has been a lack of interest this season and these people have not found skating enjoyable and have stopped watching, which they have every right to do if they want.

[moxie]

For many people on this forum, their "past-time" was watching and cheering for Michelle Kwan, not figure skating, so obviously there has been a lack of interest this season and these people have not found skating enjoyable and have stopped watching, which they have every right to do if they want.

And this likely would have happened for this group of fans, whether the judging system was CoP or 6.0.

If Michelle were competing this year, it would be under CoP. And fan interest would have been as high as ever. Perhaps even higher, because it would have been so interesting to see how she would have designed a high-scoring CoP program that was still "very Michelle."

[Revolennon]

I'm 23 and I've been a hardcore fan since I was 10. I started getting into figure skating around 91 or 92. I definitely prefer 6.0. I feel like all beauty has been lost with COP, and along with it the possibility of a truly classic, brilliant performance. It's all just a bunch of dot connecting now. The soul of figure skating has been taken away.

[taf]

You have the freedom to do whatever you want, just like anybody else. My response was a general comment to the original poster who started the thread that "fans are 'stuck' with COP, like it or not", before that thread was combined with this thread. That poster made it seem like skating fans who dislike COP had no alternative but to be stuck with the system, which is not true. The fans have every right to stop watching skating and to stop attending ISU competitions . . . fans do have a way out and a way to get their message across that they are not pleased with Speedy's system. For many people on this forum, their "past-time" was watching and cheering for Michelle Kwan, not figure skating, so obviously there has been a lack of interest this season and these people have not found skating enjoyable and have stopped watching, which they have every right to do if they want.


And this likely would have happened for this group of fans, whether the judging system was CoP or 6.0.

If Michelle were competing this year, it would be under CoP. And fan interest would have been as high as ever. Perhaps even higher, because it would have been so interesting to see how she would have designed a high-scoring CoP program that was still "very Michelle."

As one who loved the sport long before Michelle, and now even more because of Michelle, just not watching anymore is not a option I care to consider. Even though I knew I would miss her, I always thought skating would do fine without Michelle....I've seen the sport weather the retirements of many great skaters in the past. With 4 disciplines, there was always someone who came along and made the sport better.

My problem is not with the lack of Michelle (well, not in this context)...this day had to eventually come. It comes to all skaters. My problem is what has happened to FS....and we ARE stuck with it for now. However, I believe that change will happen...someday people will wake up & realize how much Speedy hates FS..and how jealous of its popularity he is..and that he wants to kill it..and they will revolt and change the rules and throw him out. lol

[lavender]

People that fall a lot like COP. This is why Sasha liked COP.


As one who loved the sport long before Michelle, and now even more because of Michelle, just not watching anymore is not a option I care to consider. Even though I knew I would miss her, I always thought skating would do fine without Michelle....I've seen the sport weather the retirements of many great skaters in the past. With 4 disciplines, there was always someone who came along and made the sport better.

My problem is not with the lack of Michelle (well, not in this context)...this day had to eventually come. It comes to all skaters. My problem is what has happened to FS....and we ARE stuck with it for now.

ITA but for me I'm not going to stick with skating if it stays like this. It hurts and I do come to tears when I think how the beauty of this sport is almost nil. Now I truly dislike Speedy but the only way I can imagine him getting out is if he retire or God forbid he pass away. Maybe miracles can happen and he will leave since I don't think he wants to be the person who ruin skating although he doesn't care a lick about it.

[BmcC102]

A couple of things I want to point out:

1. Johnny Weir did have a triple axel at his first worlds... in fact, he had it for quite a while before that and won Jr. worlds in 2001 with it.

2. Dick Button was actually all for the COP system at first because it forced skaters to be creative to get points-- he later changed his tune because he was noticing (like some of us here) that everyone was ending up doing the same moves, just to get points.

3. Susie Wynn and other commentators have never really outwardly bashed the system, so for someone on here to say "American commentators" when they really just mean Dick Button is a generalization and unresearched.



I am for COP, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be further reformed... One of my biggest problems with it is with spins. Multiple revolutions and 5 bad positions shouldn't "trump" a fast, centered spin with 1 or 2 difficult, but beautiful positions in my book. ALSO, why is the beillmann allowed in the layback spin? There is no arch in the back.... Just can the beillmann from that move, please? :)

[BmcC102]

I'm 23 and I've been a hardcore fan since I was 10. I started getting into figure skating around 91 or 92. I definitely prefer 6.0. I feel like all beauty has been lost with COP, and along with it the possibility of a truly classic, brilliant performance. It's all just a bunch of dot connecting now. The soul of figure skating has been taken away.

You are right about the "soul" being lacking recently under COP.

I think that COP does allow for the "soul" to come out, but skaters haven't been going for this as much as it used to. We'll see what happens at worlds though; I have hope!

[Lisa Seye]

Well CoP was Speedy's way of addressing the judging scandal in Salt Lake. When he at first denied there ever was a scandal and then investigated the French connection but never did anything regarding the Russian connection. Anywho, when he could no longer deny that there was a judging scandal, instead of addressing the problem of cheating judges, he changes the scoring system and makes it even more anonymous for the cheating judges to still cheat. Furthermore, the passing of the CoP system was also brought about by his own fraud against those voting for it in the ISU. They were told over and over and over that it was not a vote for a new rule but a proposal to look into a new judging system. Finally after the ISU voting yes for a "proposal", Speedy enters it as a rule that the CoP was passed to the amazement of those who voted yes for a proposal and not a rule. SOOOO the system that is supposed to bring about change and get rid of fraud was riding on the big fraud elephant in the first place. So what does that say about CoP that in order to implement it Speedy had to trick ISU office holders into voting for it? Then you have SPeedy himself who comes from the speed skating ranks and with an equal number of council members from each side (figure skating and speed skating) with Speedy breaking all ties, give the clear advantage to speedskating to continue propping up their sport off the backs of figure skating dollars. As long as the figure skating side is dominated by the speedskating side I cannot see a good future for figureskating unless those in power actually do something about corruption within their ranks. The poor athletes have no say so about the future of their chosen sport.

[lavender]

2. Dick Button was actually all for the COP system at first because it forced skaters to be creative to get points-- he later changed his tune because he was noticing (like some of us here) that everyone was ending up doing the same moves, just to get points.

I too was excited about COP but not now. As I continue to say, COP has good basics but they aren't using it in the right way.

[ScrappyTheOwl]

Well CoP was Speedy's way of addressing the judging scandal in Salt Lake. When he at first denied there ever was a scandal and then investigated the French connection but never did anything regarding the Russian connection. Anywho, when he could no longer deny that there was a judging scandal, instead of addressing the problem of cheating judges, he changes the scoring system and makes it even more anonymous for the cheating judges to still cheat.

*sigh* It's not cheating/fraud itself that was the issue, it's the TYPE of cheating/fraud.

The problem in SLC wasn't judges cheating of their own accord (and there will NEVERNEVERNEVER be a way to completely stop this -- as long as humans judge and not sophisticated robots involving skaters having to wear sensors all over their bodies to be picked up and whatnot cheating will ALWAYS occur), it was that federations were threatening and controlling judges from their nations.

Under 6.0, the judges weren't anonymous; each placement from each judge was explicit. They simply had every right to judge however they saw fit. As such, federation meddling was undetectable. Until of course, it came out ...

CoP was created to alleviate that federation pressure on judges -- if judging is anonymous, federations can't see their judges marks. If federations can't see their judges marks, they can threaten and coerce those judges all day long, but they'll have no idea what marks their judges actually give. Since the judges know their federations won't see their marks, it makes things a lot easier for the judges to give the scores they actually want to give. Makes it easier to make the RIGHT decisions, and not heed to federation pressure.

And in doing all this, CoP has improved exactly the situation it was created to improve.

[Lisa Seye]

Well they could have done this "anonymous to all" with the 6.0 system and why trick the ISU into voting for it?
Futhermore, while I am not suggesting we go back to 6.0 (we must go forward) I see nothing wrong with a placement system in that it compares the skaters against one another and judges one to be the best. There has to be a comparison. Otherwise there will be no winner.
Also, selecting random judges scores does not get rid of bloc judging, if the bloc is big enough, it can make a difference and then of course no one will ever know about it.
Also, the random scores can make a difference in the final outcome. So one is left to wonder "I could have won gold if a different random draw were selected."
But again I come back to the issue of why did Speedy have to lie to get the NJS passed?
A lie does not beget a truth.

The ISU is full of corruption and will never be free of it in my lifetime.


So while CoP might be the greatest thing since sliced bread in some eyes, it still reeks of rottenness. When I go to the store to buy a bag of apples and I see a rotten one in the bag, I put the whole bag back and find one that is clean through and through.

[skatesindreams]

Well they could have done this "anonymous to all" with the 6.0 system and why trick the ISU into voting for it?
Futhermore, while I am not suggesting we go back to 6.0 (we must go forward) I see nothing wrong with a placement system in that it compares the skaters against one another and judges one to be the best. There has to be a comparison. Otherwise there will be no winner.
Also, selecting random judges scores does not get rid of bloc judging, if the bloc is big enough, it can make a difference and then of course no one will ever know about it.
Also, the random scores can make a difference in the final outcome. So one is left to wonder "I could have won gold if a different random draw were selected."
But again I come back to the issue of why did Speedy have to lie to get the NJS passed?
A lie does not beget a truth.

The ISU is full of corruption and will never be free of it in my lifetime.


So while CoP might be the greatest thing since sliced bread in some eyes, it still reeks of rottenness. When I go to the store to buy a bag of apples and I see a rotten one in the bag, I put the whole bag back and find one that is clean through and through.

Lisa,

:clap :clap :clap.

[aaronts]

*sigh* It's not cheating/fraud itself that was the issue, it's the TYPE of cheating/fraud.

The problem in SLC wasn't judges cheating of their own accord (and there will NEVERNEVERNEVER be a way to completely stop this -- as long as humans judge and not sophisticated robots involving skaters having to wear sensors all over their bodies to be picked up and whatnot cheating will ALWAYS occur), it was that federations were threatening and controlling judges from their nations.

Under 6.0, the judges weren't anonymous; each placement from each judge was explicit. They simply had every right to judge however they saw fit. As such, federation meddling was undetectable. Until of course, it came out ...

CoP was created to alleviate that federation pressure on judges -- if judging is anonymous, federations can't see their judges marks. If federations can't see their judges marks, they can threaten and coerce those judges all day long, but they'll have no idea what marks their judges actually give. Since the judges know their federations won't see their marks, it makes things a lot easier for the judges to give the scores they actually want to give. Makes it easier to make the RIGHT decisions, and not heed to federation pressure.

And in doing all this, CoP has improved exactly the situation it was created to improve.

sorry Scrappy, i still don't buy that one. here i'm posting my own quote from earlier in the thread:

"ok, whatever you say Scrappy. sure, it could go this way. or federations can still influence their judges w/o fear that the public will know about it. even IF the judge were to be disciplined, what's at stake for the federation?

to me, this is a bit like taking away sober drivers' licenses because drunk drivers might be out & kill us. it's hardly the best option"

really, while i fully understand the reasoning behind it, it's certainly not a solution or even a partial fix. we all know that something as simple as a fraction of a point can change an outcome. not everyone cheating will have to cheat big to cheat. my take is that federations can still influence judges just as they always have. in order for the ISU to get involved & discipline the judge, they have to see blatant cheating. & that's if we can trust the ISU. i firmly believe that a paid independent council has to review all judging & report from there. the ISU has done nothing to prove, IMO, that it's any good at handling cheating.

we'll have to agree to disagree on this one~

[BmcC102]

Good post, Aaronts.

[YankeesSuck01]

*sigh* It's not cheating/fraud itself that was the issue, it's the TYPE of cheating/fraud.



Sorry but IMO it doesn't matter what kind of cheating goes on. In gymnastics they used to have this thing (I think they still might not sure) where if your score was a lot lower or higher then the rest of the field you had to get in their range. Skating needs something like that.

[Lisa Seye]

Well they could have done this "anonymous to all" with the 6.0 system and why trick the ISU into voting for it?
Futhermore, while I am not suggesting we go back to 6.0 (we must go forward) I see nothing wrong with a placement system in that it compares the skaters against one another and judges one to be the best. There has to be a comparison. Otherwise there will be no winner.
Also, selecting random judges scores does not get rid of bloc judging, if the bloc is big enough, it can make a difference and then of course no one will ever know about it.
Also, the random scores can make a difference in the final outcome. So one is left to wonder "I could have won gold if a different random draw were selected."
But again I come back to the issue of why did Speedy have to lie to get the NJS passed?
A lie does not beget a truth.

The ISU is full of corruption and will never be free of it in my lifetime.


So while CoP might be the greatest thing since sliced bread in some eyes, it still reeks of rottenness. When I go to the store to buy a bag of apples and I see a rotten one in the bag, I put the whole bag back and find one that is clean through and through.


Lisa,

:clap :clap :clap.


However since we already have the bag of rotten apples, we have to make due with what we have. ;)

[ScrappyTheOwl]

Well they could have done this "anonymous to all" with the 6.0 system and why trick the ISU into voting for it?
Futhermore, while I am not suggesting we go back to 6.0 (we must go forward) I see nothing wrong with a placement system in that it compares the skaters against one another and judges one to be the best. There has to be a comparison. Otherwise there will be no winner.
Also, selecting random judges scores does not get rid of bloc judging, if the bloc is big enough, it can make a difference and then of course no one will ever know about it.
Also, the random scores can make a difference in the final outcome. So one is left to wonder "I could have won gold if a different random draw were selected."
But again I come back to the issue of why did Speedy have to lie to get the NJS passed?
A lie does not beget a truth.

The ISU is full of corruption and will never be free of it in my lifetime.


So while CoP might be the greatest thing since sliced bread in some eyes, it still reeks of rottenness. When I go to the store to buy a bag of apples and I see a rotten one in the bag, I put the whole bag back and find one that is clean through and through.

I'm seriously the wrong person to talk to about this. I hate placement systems so much I wish they were something living/breathing so that I could stab things into them. Seriously.

And I'm one of those unfortunate people who thinks the ends justify the means, so if Speedy lied or mislead voters to get CoP into place (though even after introduction, the system was never official until a season after use, but that's another story), I'm not going to be complaining ...


sorry Scrappy, i still don't buy that one. here i'm posting my own quote from earlier in the thread:

"ok, whatever you say Scrappy. sure, it could go this way. or federations can still influence their judges w/o fear that the public will know about it. even IF the judge were to be disciplined, what's at stake for the federation?

to me, this is a bit like taking away sober drivers' licenses because drunk drivers might be out & kill us. it's hardly the best option"

really, while i fully understand the reasoning behind it, it's certainly not a solution or even a partial fix. we all know that something as simple as a fraction of a point can change an outcome. not everyone cheating will have to cheat big to cheat. my take is that federations can still influence judges just as they always have. in order for the ISU to get involved & discipline the judge, they have to see blatant cheating. & that's if we can trust the ISU. i firmly believe that a paid independent council has to review all judging & report from there. the ISU has done nothing to prove, IMO, that it's any good at handling cheating.

we'll have to agree to disagree on this one~

And how exactly would you suggest we attempt to COMPLETELY remove cheating? Should we lock all the judges up in solitary confinement watching judging tapes in a secret house on a deserted, undiscovered island where they have no contact with humans until they sit in front of skaters?

And you will NEVER find judges independent of federations -- unless you're looking on Mars.

I believe CoP has improved the situation and relieved a significant amount of pressure on judges by their federations, even if it hasn't completely removed it, based on practices by specific nations.


Sorry but IMO it doesn't matter what kind of cheating goes on. In gymnastics they used to have this thing (I think they still might not sure) where if your score was a lot lower or higher then the rest of the field you had to get in their range. Skating needs something like that.

That would certainly be a change I could get behind. It would make scoring take longer, though, 'cause I'm sure there would need to be reviews everytime a GOE was more than 2 off the rest of the judges or something.

At the present, the ISU disciplines judges who give marks wildly off the rest of the judges. But I suppose it is more fair for the skaters if they can resolve this problem during the actual competition. The time issue may prevent this from ever happening, though -- have you seen the gymnastics competitions, lately? It takes like 10 friggin' minutes to get a score because they're always having to conference ... (and they don't use computers, for some asinine reason).

[uncchristine99]

All I have to say is... if you're a great skater, you'll be rewarded under any scoring system.

[Dragonlady]

Sorry but IMO it doesn't matter what kind of cheating goes on. In gymnastics they used to have this thing (I think they still might not sure) where if your score was a lot lower or higher then the rest of the field you had to get in their range. Skating needs something like that.

Skating does have that and every season a handful of judges are disciplined for it. I realize that this forum doesn't post every ISU communication coming down the pike, but some of the forums I belong too are quite thorough about these things so I find out about them because I'm fairly anal about following up on cheating issues.

While I certainly agree that the ISU has done little to punish the cheaters and I'll add, a whole lot to punish the whistle blowers, I do think the anonymous judging and random sekret komputer have eliminated block judging which was the biggest source of the problem. OTOH, if it hasn't how would we know?

[skatesindreams]

All I have to say is... if you're a great skater, you'll be rewarded under any scoring system.

I don't know about that; look at what happened to Michelle at 2005 Worlds.

[berthesghost]

Perhaps COP just doesn't have big enough of a menu to choose from. When was the last time we saw a split/triple jump combo? What about a mazerka, or a simple wally? Where have all the Russian splits gone to? The Ina Bower seems to be on a "endangered species" list. Remember when Boitano and Wylie would dod those wonderful spread eagle sequences?

[Dragonlady]

Perhaps COP just doesn't have big enough of a menu to choose from. When was the last time we saw a split/triple jump combo? What about a mazerka, or a simple wally? Where have all the Russian splits gone to? The Ina Bower seems to be on a "endangered species" list. Remember when Boitano and Wylie would dod those wonderful spread eagle sequences?

When you're quoting moves that skaters were doing 15 and 20 years ago, it's both unreasonable and unrealistic to blame their demise on CoP. If anything, CoP is RESTORING these kinds of moves which skaters stopped doing because the 6.0 system wasn't rewarding anything but triple jumps.

Michelle was the last skater prior to CoP to do transition moves and inbetween elements with detailed choreography and she stopped doing them because Irina powered around the rink at top speed jumping, and beat her.

CoP is not the death of transitions, but rather their salvation.

[missmarysgarden]

Yankeessuck - The "score range" rules are still in use in the Junior Olympic Program in the US. But they have been "relaxed" considerably.

The old rules: The Head Judge's system is controlling. Each judge's score must be within "X" tenths of a point depending on the Judge's Score. 9.5 to 10 - .1; 9.0 to 9.45 - .2; 8.5 to 8.95 - .3; 7.5 to 8.45 - .5; below 7.5 - 1.0 I might be off a little on the last two; that changed 12 years ago.

The new rules: The AVERAGE is controlling. Allowable Range: 9.5 to 10 - .2; 9.0 to 9.45 - .3; 8.0 to 9.45 - .5; anything below is 1.0 tolerance. To compute, add all scores, divide by the number of scores. This average score controls the allowable range. If any score is outside the range, there is a conference to resolve the outlier. Sometimes the outlier is the correct score because that judge noted a deficit that was missed by all the other judges. Usually the outlier has made an error, which is discovered in the conference review.

Elite allowable range used to be the same - or similar. In the new Code, the range was eliminated. All scores count, and the counting score is the average. However, if the Chair of the Technical Committee determines that any judge is inconsistent in their application of rules, the will be issued a "Yellow Card" (its handed to them on the floor, right during competition, as a warning. If the unacceptable judging, whether incompetent or cheating, continues, the judge is given a "Red Card" and removed from the competition, and replaced by the Alternate. They may then receive a temporary suspension, or expulsion, at the decision of the full Committee.

A caveat - I haven't read the minutes of the proceedings for months, and everything is subject to change - but unless that rule has been modified, the scores could be "9.4, 9.35 9.35, 9.8, 9.45, 9.4 - and all scores would be added, divided by 6, and that would be the score. The 9.8 judge might well receive a Yellow Card.

[berthesghost]

When you're quoting moves that skaters were doing 15 and 20 years ago, it's both unreasonable and unrealistic to blame their demise on CoP. If anything, CoP is RESTORING these kinds of moves which skaters stopped doing because the 6.0 system wasn't rewarding anything but triple jumps.

Michelle was the last skater prior to CoP to do transition moves and inbetween elements with detailed choreography and she stopped doing them because Irina powered around the rink at top speed jumping, and beat her.

CoP is not the death of transitions, but rather their salvation.
Correction: COP has the potential to maybe be the salvation in the future.

Remember, Irina "powered around the rink at top speed jumping" under COP and got even bigger scores and more titles than under 6.0. If anything, Plushy started deleteing things under COP.

If LPS were empty from 2000 to 2004, they're still empty in 2007. When is the COP massiah expected to deliver us from boredom? :bow

[ScrappyTheOwl]

I don't know about that; look at what happened to Michelle at 2005 Worlds.

What do you mean what happened? She placed 3rd in both the short program and the long program, which were appropriate placements given her difficulty and performance/execution levels. It was unfortunate she had one of her worst ever QRs, there.

2005 Worlds PROVED Michelle could compete under CoP.


Perhaps COP just doesn't have big enough of a menu to choose from. When was the last time we saw a split/triple jump combo? What about a mazerka, or a simple wally? Where have all the Russian splits gone to? The Ina Bower seems to be on a "endangered species" list. Remember when Boitano and Wylie would dod those wonderful spread eagle sequences?

I agree with DragonLady, here -- whereas only a handful of skaters have done transitional elements in the last twenty years, nearly every skater is making an effort to use them now.

I've actually seen quite a few Mazurkas and walleys over the last couple years -- a few Pairs teams (and a few singles skaters) have used Mazurkas to connect 2As in sequence to other jumps, and I've seen some great walley use (i.e. Lysacek's walley right into his Triple Lutz). And we're seeing great spread eagle use, as well -- many skaters are performing spread eagles right into Axels, which is very difficult and interesting to see.

Ina Bauers were never really that common -- there were people who did some poor ones (feet in the proper position, but back barely 45 degrees back), but thankfully the only people doing them now are people who can ACTUALLY do them.

I do have to say, though, that the "sequences" of moves in the field you're thinking of always bothered me. They always interrupted the program for me, since they felt like just a "throwaway" part or a resting part. Rather than see a lot of moves in the field all at once, I prefer to see them dispersed throughout the program. Which is, of course, rewarded by the Transitions mark under CoP.


Remember, Irina "powered around the rink at top speed jumping" under COP and got even bigger scores and more titles than under 6.0.
Irina skated at her peak under CoP. She dealt with the illnesses and inconsistency prior to 2004-2005, which was easily the best season of her life. If she would have skated like that in any one 6.0 season, she would have won everything then, too.

[Dragonlady]

Irina skated at her peak under CoP. She dealt with the illnesses and inconsistency prior to 2004-2005, which was easily the best season of her life. If she would have skated like that in any one 6.0 season, she would have won everything then, too.

To this I would also add that Irina increased her transitions and the difficulty of her entrances into both her spins and her jumps under CoP. At 2005 Worlds I noted, with great sadness, that Irina had more transitional moves and more choreography than Michelle, and that's something I didn't think I would ever say.

[kittyjake5]

To this I would also add that Irina increased her transitions and the difficulty of her entrances into both her spins and her jumps under CoP. At 2005 Worlds I noted, with great sadness, that Irina had more transitional moves and more choreography than Michelle, and that's something I didn't think I would ever say.

That may be true but as we know now Michelle was fighting injuries at the time and that may have had something to do with her having less transitions and choreography in her programs. JMO

[missmarysgarden]

Actually, I think in her last two years, Irina just filled up space with a lot of "pseudo choreography". JMO, of course.

[taf]

What do you mean what happened? She placed 3rd in both the short program and the long program, which were appropriate placements given her difficulty and performance/execution levels. It was unfortunate she had one of her worst ever QRs, there.

2005 Worlds PROVED Michelle could compete under CoP.

Michelle was severly undermarked in the SP & Irina & Sasha were both severely overmarked. Both of them had 2 jump errors (one serious), plus Sasha wobbled on her edges & Irina traveled on her spins. You say Michelle's difficulty was lower, but what about performance/execution? Michelle was clean, they weren't.

2005 in Moscow was prejudged IMO & no one was going to take the Gold except Irina. (No one expected Sasha to stand up, and she didn't disappoint.) I think Michelle was being punished for not doing the season, but now we know she was battling injury....and we know that skating insiders have known about it for a couple of years, which is really pretty rotten when you think about it. I'll bet when Stephane gets to Worlds they won't be punishing him for sitting out the season.


Irina skated at her peak under CoP. She dealt with the illnesses and inconsistency prior to 2004-2005, which was easily the best season of her life. If she would have skated like that in any one 6.0 season, she would have won everything then, too.

She did skate like that during the 6.0 days...the only thing different was that her jumps were a little more consistant. But there was no improvement on style, telegraphing, connection to the music.... I don't believe she would have been beating Michelle in her prime with the kind of performances she did in 2004-2006.

[Dragonlady]

2005 in Moscow was prejudged IMO & no one was going to take the Gold except Irina. (No one expected Sasha to stand up, and she didn't disappoint.) I think Michelle was being punished for not doing the season, but now we know she was battling injury....and we know that skating insiders have known about it for a couple of years, which is really pretty rotten when you think about it. I'll bet when Stephane gets to Worlds they won't be punishing him for sitting out the season.

I know it's not popular to say it here, but Michelle's programs in 2005 were technically weak, her spins were all very low levels and while her SP was clean, it wasn't a great program either technically nor in terms of presentation. It's much, much easier to skate clean when you're not doing all that much to begin with. It is a tribute to how well she skated that she placed 3rd iin both the SP and the LP. Had she not bombed the qualifying, she would have been on the podium.

Both Sasha and Irina had much more difficult programs and both of them deserved their placements.

[missmarysgarden]

Irina ran up most of her points by jacking her foot up over her head in rather ugly line, in every spin and every spiral, usually with both hands gripping against the strain - to cover up the fact that she was too out of condition to hold her leg up above horizontal on its own. So lets just not go there.

[RA5CViggie]

All I have to say is... if you're a great skater, you'll be rewarded under any scoring system.

That ain't what Matt Savoie heard!

[kittyjake5]

I know it's not popular to say it here, but Michelle's programs in 2005 were technically weak, her spins were all very low levels and while her SP was clean, it wasn't a great program either technically nor in terms of presentation. It's much, much easier to skate clean when you're not doing all that much to begin with. It is a tribute to how well she skated that she placed 3rd iin both the SP and the LP. Had she not bombed the qualifying, she would have been on the podium.

Both Sasha and Irina had much more difficult programs and both of them deserved their placements.

I have to disagree. The above is just your opinion and I don't agree with it. You never use JMO or IMO. "It's much, much easier to skate clean when you're not doing all that much to begin with" is really a snarky remark to say about Michelle's 2005 SP. IMO it was excellent.

[ScrappyTheOwl]

I have to disagree. The above is just your opinion and I don't agree with it. You never use JMO or IMO. "It's much, much easier to skate clean when you're not doing all that much to begin with" is really a snarky remark to say about Michelle's 2005 SP. IMO it was excellent.

Michelle's program was very nicely skated ... it just wasn't difficult enough to compete with Irina and Sasha's programs at that point in time -- had she skated in 2005-2006, I'm sure we would have seen higher levels from Michelle.

[Dragonlady]

I have to disagree. The above is just your opinion and I don't agree with it. You never use JMO or IMO. "It's much, much easier to skate clean when you're not doing all that much to begin with" is really a snarky remark to say about Michelle's 2005 SP. IMO it was excellent.

No, it's not just my opinion. It was the judges' opinion too and for the purpose of competitive skating, theirs is the only one that matters.

Despite the fact that Michelle is hands-down the best skater of her generation, she scored very low in the PCS scores because she did little to demonstrate those skills, so her skating skills scores were much lower than they could have been, her scores for transitions were low, as were her choreography scores.

From 2002 forward, it was pretty obvious that there was something wrong with Michelle - her jump content dropped, her choreography was stripped, her practice time was cut, as was her competition schedule. I realize that it's the policy of some posters to defend everything that Michelle has done to their last dying breath, but her programs don't begin to approach her pre-2002 programs in either difficulty or execution. That's not snarking, that's reality.

Now even a Michelle operating at 85% or 75% is better than most skaters on the planet, but by 2002 she was down to 5 not completely reliable triples and very few in-betweens and even Michelle, operating at 66% cannot win competitions.

[taf]

DL-it is very difficult for a die-hard fan to admit any part of your above statement is true.....but let's just say for the sake of argument that you are 100% right....the scoring in the SP was still off....why such high marks for Sasha & Irina with their errors? Ok, put Michelle 3rd (if you must) but don't jack up the other two so high. They made mistakes, so don't give them sky-high TES. IMO they didn't deserve the big gap they put between themselves and the other skaters.

And it's a joke to give high choreography/interpretation marks to either of them. Sasha is totally disconnected from both the music & the audience when she skates so her "interpretation" is identical in every program. (I don't mean this as a bash, she is an exquisite skater but I have never been able to be "swept away" during any of her programs.) And Irina powers around the ice, her speed is never varied, and her idea of choreography are things like stabbing herself, hand-on-hip-and-arm-in-air, or tearing her hair. She also telegraphs so bad that any mood she might try to establish would be totally broken every time she jumps. Except I have never seen her establish a mood (with the exception of an exhibition once to Schindler's List).

[kittyjake5]

Michelle's program was very nicely skated ... it just wasn't difficult enough to compete with Irina and Sasha's programs at that point in time -- had she skated in 2005-2006, I'm sure we would have seen higher levels from Michelle.

Thank you Scrappy.

[mr pru]

wonderful thread...everyone has contributed such interesting comments...

[kittyjake5]

No, it's not just my opinion. It was the judges' opinion too and for the purpose of competitive skating, theirs is the only one that matters.

Despite the fact that Michelle is hands-down the best skater of her generation, she scored very low in the PCS scores because she did little to demonstrate those skills, so her skating skills scores were much lower than they could have been, her scores for transitions were low, as were her choreography scores.

From 2002 forward, it was pretty obvious that there was something wrong with Michelle - her jump content dropped, her choreography was stripped, her practice time was cut, as was her competition schedule. I realize that it's the policy of some posters to defend everything that Michelle has done to their last dying breath, but her programs don't begin to approach her pre-2002 programs in either difficulty or execution. That's not snarking, that's reality.

Now even a Michelle operating at 85% or 75% is better than most skaters on the planet, but by 2002 she was down to 5 not completely reliable triples and very few in-betweens and even Michelle, operating at 66% cannot win competitions.


Well DL there are a lot of masked insults in your above posts. Thank goodness for the ignore button.

[Sparks]

What taf said...
:clap

[ScrappyTheOwl]

DL-it is very difficult for a die-hard fan to admit any part of your above statement is true.....but let's just say for the sake of argument that you are 100% right....the scoring in the SP was still off....why such high marks for Sasha & Irina with their errors? Ok, put Michelle 3rd (if you must) but don't jack up the other two so high. They made mistakes, so don't give them sky-high TES. IMO they didn't deserve the big gap they put between themselves and the other skaters.

And it's a joke to give high choreography/interpretation marks to either of them. Sasha is totally disconnected from both the music & the audience when she skates so her "interpretation" is identical in every program. (I don't mean this as a bash, she is an exquisite skater but I have never been able to be "swept away" during any of her programs.) And Irina powers around the ice, her speed is never varied, and her idea of choreography are things like stabbing herself, hand-on-hip-and-arm-in-air, or tearing her hair. She also telegraphs so bad that any mood she might try to establish would be totally broken every time she jumps. Except I have never seen her establish a mood (with the exception of an exhibition once to Schindler's List).

Irina's PCS got the hometown advantage, that's for sure.

The *single* error Sasha made was the shaky edge/bobble and aborting a spiral on her spiral sequence, and she was appropriately dinged for it (mostly 0 GOEs, one -1, one +1, and one anomalous +2), in comparison to her typical straight +3 range.

As for the part I bolded, please keep in mind your personal opinion may not/most likely will not reflect that of the judges.

And a little Scrappy-esque breakdown:

Base Values:
Irina: 29.8 points
Sasha: 29.5 points (-0.3 disadvantage off Irina)
Michelle: 28.8 points (-1.0 disadvantage off Irina)

GOEs Awarded:
Irina: 2.70 points (0.7 disadvantage off Michelle)
Sasha: 2.79 points (0.61 disadvantage off Michelle)
Michelle: 3.40 points

**What This Says:
The judges CLEARLY saw Michelle as having the cleanest execution of the 3 girls, and Irina had the worst.

TES
Irina: 32.50 points
Sasha: 32.29 points (-0.21 off Irina) [had Sasha had the same BV as Irina, she would have earned 32.59]
Michelle: 32.20 points (-0.09 off Sasha; -0.30 off Irina) [had Michelle had the same BV as Irina, she would have earned 33.20]

Now ... the only point I want to make with this is that despite the errors of Irina and Sasha, it was still possible for Michelle to place 3rd based on her lower difficulty. And the closeness of all these things nearly leveled out to put all three girls TES within 0.30 of each other.

[We can argue about PCS until we're blue in the face (and nobody will agree, and it'll turn into a huge deal so I'm saying straight up I'm not going to get involved in it), but that's not what I'm talking about here. Just the technical side of things -- since the errors Irina and Sasha had versus the clean program Michelle offered was brought up.]

[lavender]

Just what we need now.

[Dragonlady]

Well DL there are a lot of masked insults in your above posts. Thank goodness for the ignore button.

I just love how people are always trying to look for "hidden insults" in anything someone posts on this forum that doesn't slaver over Michelle's skating like every thing she has every done is perfection itself.

I consider Michelle first and foremost an athlete and a human being, not some beyond perfect paragon who has never had an off-day or made a single mistake in her life. Michelle has acknowledged her mistakes on those occasions when she didn't skate well and I especially recall her comments at 2005 Worlds about how nervous she was and what a learning experience it had been.

Athletes are human beings and I chose to discuss athletic performances as talking points for discussions, not as some quasi-religious experience that can never be spoken about with anything other than reverence and awe. Those who can't handle that notion, will probably be happier if they do put me on ignore.

[jaylee]

My biggest problem with COP is with the PCS, which more often than not is used as placeholders. The judges seem to have difficulty giving out PCS scores that are actually reflective of a skater's skills in the different categories on a consistent basis. I'm not saying they are ALWAYS wrong, but if the whole idea of COP was to bring objectivity into the scoring system...well, TES works, PCS does not.

If you need examples, look at Plushenko, Oly 2006. Should he have been in first, you bet. Should he have had those ridiculously high PCS marks compared to his competitors, I think not.

Look at Kimmie Meissner. I (personally) think her best LP performance this season was at Skate America. Now compare the PCS from that to her performance at 4ccs. Though her TES score at Skate America was higher (she popped her second triple/triple at 4ccs), and IMHO her performance/execution at SA was superior or at least around the same level, at 4ccs her PCS went up *significantly* in every category - almost 4 points. Did her skating skills, choreography and interpretation really change that much in that time? Not in my opinion. So what caused the difference?

Nothing, except the judges use PCS as a placeholder. What merits a 6, as opposed to a 7, as opposed to an 8? There's so much fluctuation that makes comparing events to each very difficult. For a supposedly objective system, that much fluctuation is...bad. At least with 6.0 you had a ceiling. Now, judges are free to go wild with PCS scores. (And no, I'm not arguing to go back to 6.0. Just pointing out my own problem with CoP.)

Look at Sasha's 2006 Worlds LP. Disaster. DISASTER. And yet she got the highest PCS scores of the night, enough to keep her in 3rd. Her Performance/Execution score was second only to Kimmie's. Some judges gave her 8's. GIVE ME A BREAK. It was one of her worst performances ever.

Michelle's 2005 Worlds performance were not the best of her career, I'll readily concede that. There are a lot of reasons for that, maybe it was nervousness at competing under COP, maybe it was her very significant injuries that she didn't reveal. I'm not arguing about her placement behind Irina/Sasha, but should her PCS scores have been as far behind them as they were? I do not believe so, and I do not give the judges the benefit of the doubt since PCS has always been a problem. In spite of her disastrous qualifying round, and her alleged lack of difficulty/choreography, I still believe that she deserved to be on the podium in 3rd, but the judges pushed her too far down in PCS in relation to Irina and Sasha. And that's not fair. Worlds 2005 showed that Michelle was still an elite skater under CoP, but it also showed that the judges could and would push skaters up and down through PCS however they pleased.

[taf]

Great post jaylee. That's what I was trying to say about 2005 Worlds.

[QUOTE=Dragonlady;275987]I consider Michelle first and foremost an athlete and a human being, not some beyond perfect paragon who has never had an off-day or made a single mistake in her life.[QUOTE]

So is Jeff Buttle, but no one reading your posts would realize that.

We all gush over our favorites...you do it too. Frankly, I consider him goofy looking with his mouth hanging open all the time. But I would never go to a Jeff Buttle forum & post that.

Not everyone who reveres Michelle (not idolizes her or deifys her) & enjoys her skating is viewing her with rose-colored glasses. We can see when she messes up & we can see her (few) flaws. (lol) So when we think she deserves better marks than what she got, it could just be that we have the ability to be a fan and also have an opinion on skating at the same time. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

It is so insulting for Michelle fans to have our opinions dismissed, as though our opinions are somehow tainted, and that we can't possibly be as objective as fans of other skaters. Better wordsmiths than I have (such as Kirk Wessler) have called Michelle "the greatest skater of her generation", among other superlatives. Why shouldn't she have fans who thinks she's the greatest thing on skates? That doesn't mean we think she's a goddess come to earth or a paragon.

[vive_la_reine]

It is so insulting for Michelle fans to have our opinions dismissed, as though our opinions are somehow tainted, and that we can't possibly be as objective as fans of other skaters. Better wordsmiths than I have (such as Kirk Wessler) have called Michelle "the greatest skater of her generation", among other superlatives. Why shouldn't she have fans who thinks she's the greatest thing on skates? That doesn't mean we think she's a goddess come to earth or a paragon.Well said taf. As far as putting one ignore-DONE! And a long time ago too, not because of the accused condescending reason. No...just because. :silly

[Dragonlady]

[QUOTE=Dragonlady;275987]I consider Michelle first and foremost an athlete and a human being, not some beyond perfect paragon who has never had an off-day or made a single mistake in her life.[QUOTE]

So is Jeff Buttle, but no one reading your posts would realize that.

We all gush over our favorites...you do it too. Frankly, I consider him goofy looking with his mouth hanging open all the time. But I would never go to a Jeff Buttle forum & post that.

I never posted that Michelle looked goofy. I posted that her program didn't have a lot of choreography and had easier elements than the skaters who beat her and that the PCS scores reflected that. For that I was accused of having "masked insults" in that post. Big difference.

I freely acknowledge my biases and my favourites. I don't pretend that Jeff skates perfectly either even if I wish he could. But I also don't take extreme offense when anyone says he had an off day or points to areas that need improvement.

[Dragonlady]

I consider Michelle first and foremost an athlete and a human being, not some beyond perfect paragon who has never had an off-day or made a single mistake in her life.

So is Jeff Buttle, but no one reading your posts would realize that.

We all gush over our favorites...you do it too. Frankly, I consider him goofy looking with his mouth hanging open all the time. But I would never go to a Jeff Buttle forum & post that.

I never posted that Michelle looked goofy. I posted that her program didn't have a lot of choreography and had easier elements than the skaters who beat her and that the PCS scores reflected that. For that I was accused of having "masked insults" in that post. I said nothing insulting at all but Kittyjakes was so keen to take offense that I said anything that she had to pretend I had posted insults.

You taf, go further and then say that I'm dimissing the posts of everyone who likes Michelle's skating which is again, not true. I like Michelle's skating. She the only singles skater I have ever watched who can make the hair on the back of my neck stand on end.

I freely acknowledge my biases and my favourites. I don't pretend that Jeff skates perfectly either even if I wish he could. But I also don't take extreme offense when anyone says he had an off day or points to areas that need improvement.

[IceSkate98]

hmmmm! I didn't read in any of Dragonlady's posts where she mentioned anything ugly about Michelle much less the word, 'goofy' or someone's 'mouth hanging down'. It's sort of like putting words in someone's mouth when no such thing was even suggested.

By the way, Dragonlady, I totally agree with you about Michelle. She's about the only skater I ever watched that's made the hair on the back of my neck stand on end, too. Thanks for posting that. You made my day. :)

[ScrappyTheOwl]

So is Jeff Buttle, but no one reading your posts would realize that.

We all gush over our favorites...you do it too. Frankly, I consider him goofy looking with his mouth hanging open all the time. But I would never go to a Jeff Buttle forum & post that.

Hee. I believe I posted something here once about how creepy his "Joker Grin" is... I guess I'm not the only one annoyed by it.

[Louise1991]

I just love how people are always trying to look for "hidden insults" in anything someone posts on this forum that doesn't slaver over Michelle's skating like every thing she has every done is perfection itself.

I consider Michelle first and foremost an athlete and a human being, not some beyond perfect paragon who has never had an off-day or made a single mistake in her life. Michelle has acknowledged her mistakes on those occasions when she didn't skate well and I especially recall her comments at 2005 Worlds about how nervous she was and what a learning experience it had been.

Athletes are human beings and I chose to discuss athletic performances as talking points for discussions, not as some quasi-religious experience that can never be spoken about with anything other than reverence and awe. Those who can't handle that notion, will probably be happier if they do put me on ignore.what do this post and CoP have in common?

they are both a "Crock of Poop'.

the hidden insult in the above is not so much at Michelle as it is against anyone who disagrees with you--you are saying that anyone who disagrees is engaging in a quasi-religious experience that can never be spoken about with anything other than reverence in awe. in other words, you consider your and only your opinion only the right and honest opinion and anyone who disagrees is some sort of Michelle Moonie.

why don't you just leave MKF on the high horse you rode in on?

[taf]

I never posted that Michelle looked goofy. I posted that her program didn't have a lot of choreography and had easier elements than the skaters who beat her and that the PCS scores reflected that. For that I was accused of having "masked insults" in that post. I said nothing insulting at all but Kittyjakes was so keen to take offense that I said anything that she had to pretend I had posted insults.

You taf, go further and then say that I'm dimissing the posts of everyone who likes Michelle's skating which is again, not true. I like Michelle's skating. She the only singles skater I have ever watched who can make the hair on the back of my neck stand on end.

I freely acknowledge my biases and my favourites. I don't pretend that Jeff skates perfectly either even if I wish he could. But I also don't take extreme offense when anyone says he had an off day or points to areas that need improvement.

No, you didn't say Michelle looks goofy. I said that about Jeff. Your snarks are more subtle. Saying "her program didn't have a lot of choreography and had easier elements than the skaters who beat her" is not an insult or a snark. It had more choreography than Irina's IMO but it is true that her levels weren't as high.

I think you really do like Michelle's skating but you do take potshots at her quite often, I suspect to annoy the fans here. And you quite often dismiss most of the opinions posted here as coming from misguieded uber-fans of Michelle's.

No one would take offense if Michelle had an off day and you said so. It's the way you point out things that you think need improvement. And your opinion is really not more valid than other people here. Having a daughter who skates does not make anyone an expert. Some of the most mis-informed people I have ever met are skating parents. I have never met one parent who knew anything close to what I (or the average poster here) know about the sport. And I've met quite a few elite skaters' parents.

[mr pru]

'bout time for the sheriff in town to shut this one down....

[moxie]

I have never met one parent who knew anything close to what I (or the average poster here) know about the sport. And I've met quite a few elite skaters' parents.

Oh, wheee!
Now we get to argue about who knows and/or cares more about skating:
skating fans who post on MKF or parents of elite skates?

But, wait: Aren't there parents of elite skaters who also are skating fans who post on MKF?

And aren't there skating fans who, after posting for years on MKF,
became parents of children who are now skaters?

There are so many possibilities and I am so confused ...

[YankeesSuck01]

So much hate for Michelle at the board named for her. Every time Heather leaves town it seems stuff like this happens.

Dragonlady,
Go to Jeffery Buttlel's board and say the stuff about him that you said about Michelle and tell me how well that goes over. Doesn't matter what part of the board you make these comments at fact remains this is a Michelle KWAN message board.

:gphug for everyone .;)

[moxie]

Folks in this thread have gotten a little annoyed with each other, but I have not seen "hate for Michelle" expressed in this thread or anywhere else on this board.

Not even close.

[moskva]

let us not tell posters where they can post, shall we? Dragonlady is entitled to have her opinion stated on this board, especially since she does so with much flair, insight, and a healthy respect for the rules of the english language, qualities that many of her opponents sorely lack. i don't agree with taf, for example, but i always enjoy reading her posts, for the wit and wordsmithship of it. the board will be so much the poorer without passionate, and yes at times opinionated, posts of skating aficionados like dragonlady or taf. even if at times it's difficult to appreciate the post, let's at the very least try to appreciate the poster.

[Lisa Seye]

Oh, wheee!
Now we get to argue about who knows and/or cares more about skating:
skating fans who post on MKF or parents of elite skates?

But, wait: Aren't there parents of elite skaters who also are skating fans who post on MKF?

And aren't there skating fans who, after posting for years on MKF,
became parents of children who are now skaters?

There are so many possibilities and I am so confused ...


Moxie,
That's Kwanfused. :P
Yes we should not argue about who knows more, because there will always be those who think they know more than everyone else. This may be the crux of the problem, which brings us back to topic. There are advocates of each judging system and that is great. We will all just have to agree to disagree AND to not think the other is an illiterate ill-informed idiot (enough "I" words for ya, lol) just because they disagree.
I vow not to think so. Matter of fact, even though I am not a big fan of CoP as is it today, I still ask Scrappy to give me some breakdowns and possible scenarios. I can respect that Scrappy knows the ins and outs, and that is cool.

[ScrappyTheOwl]

I vow not to think so. Matter of fact, even though I am not a big fan of CoP as is it today, I still ask Scrappy to give me some breakdowns and possible scenarios. I can respect that Scrappy knows the ins and outs, and that is cool.

Aw, thanks :hug

I'm always happy to annoy everyone with my CoP love :silly

[taf]

Oh, wheee!
Now we get to argue about who knows and/or cares more about skating:
skating fans who post on MKF or parents of elite skates?

But, wait: Aren't there parents of elite skaters who also are skating fans who post on MKF?

And aren't there skating fans who, after posting for years on MKF,
became parents of children who are now skaters?

There are so many possibilities and I am so confused ...

Sorry, you're right. Giving birth DOES make DL's opinion more valid than anyone else's. I stand corrected.

[moxie]

Sorry, you're right. Giving birth DOES make DL's opinion more valid than anyone else's. I stand corrected.

I said no such thing. My point was that being a skating parent and being a skating fan are not mutually exclusive. As such, the opinion of one is not more valid than opinion of the other. DL's opinion is not more valid (but also not less valid) than anyone else's here.

Actually, in the context of this board I would consider the opinion of the very newest skating fan to be equally valid, because it would offer a perspective that likely would be different than that of those who have followed the sport for decades. Whether or not she had ever given birth would be irrelevant.

[moxie]

Moxie,
That's Kwanfused. :P


Of course, of course. I stand kwarrected. Yikes, that just doesn't work the cool way that Kwanfused does.

[Dragonlady]

Before this thread is closed, I would just like to personally thank taf and YankeesSuck for providing the examples to prove my point which is that if you dare say anything that anyone could consider not to be in praise of Michelle you will be subject to the most outrageous personal attacks imaginable.

Taf, how you extrapolated that my comment that Michelle did not deserve to win Worlds 2005 based on the content of her program into some ridiculous comment about my opinion not being valid just because I gave birth has to qualify as the the most unintentionally funny post I have ever read. I have this mental image of you sputtering in rage as you posted it.

Along the way you chided me for my posting style, accused me of dissing every poster on the board, and took numerous personal swipes at me. Thank you for the laughs. You're a pip.:lol

[IceSkate98]

Moxie,
That's Kwanfused. :P
Yes we should not argue about who knows more, because there will always be those who think they know more than everyone else. This may be the crux of the problem, which brings us back to topic. There are advocates of each judging system and that is great. We will all just have to agree to disagree AND to not think the other is an illiterate ill-informed idiot (enough "I" words for ya, lol) just because they disagree.
I vow not to think so. Matter of fact, even though I am not a big fan of CoP as is it today, I still ask Scrappy to give me some breakdowns and possible scenarios. I can respect that Scrappy knows the ins and outs, and that is cool.

Lisa, kudos and hats off to you! :hug

Scrappy, I don't know you that well, but I'm an older female that's also kwanfused about CoP. So I may be asking you all kinds of questions (and hoping you won't mind being bugged to death!) :bow

[jaylee]

Taf, how you extrapolated that my comment that Michelle did not deserve to win Worlds 2005 based on the content of her program into some ridiculous comment about my opinion not being valid just because I gave birth has to qualify as the the most unintentionally funny post I have ever read.

I don't think that anyone was arguing that Michelle deserved to win Worlds 2005. Of course she did not deserve to win, especially since she fell in the LP and had that poor QR. The issue was whether she should have won the short program and whether or not her PCS scores were too low.

I'll have to stand by my comment that her PCS scores were not accurate. I wouldn't argue with the belief that at that particular competition and given the performance in the LP, Michelle should have had slightly lower PCS scores than Sasha and Irina, but I think most of the edge that Sasha and Irina had over Michelle should have been accounted for in the TES, and her PCS scores were too low because judges were pushing her down and Irina up. Should I call this the Plushy effect? When there's someone that the judges really want to win, they'll push his PCS scores way, way high for that person, to make it impossible for anyone else to catch up and to "send a message" to remaining competitors. And they'll push down the biggest rival without just cause (Michelle in the short program) or punish them far more than necessary (Michelle in the long). There was no just cause for pushing Michelle down that far, IMHO. CoP is not supposed to be a placeholder system...the points matter. And it was less than half a point that cost Michelle a spot on the podium.

When I went back and reviewed the scores for Worlds 2006, I just got even madder at seeing Sasha's PCS. Her LP performance was slow and sloppy (and she obviously hadn't been training, hence her similarly disastrous QR) and was riddled with errors, yet she got the highest PCS of the night. Sure, falls are supposed to be penalized in TES, but her PCS should still have reflected the quality of her performance in the separate categories, which was far from her best and should have been average scores, if not poor. What exactly were the 8s for? Flexibility and extension are not PCS categories; she was *off* that night and the program got worse throughout.

Sasha received the highest PCS because she was in the position that Irina had been in 2005--she was the favored one, the one the judges wanted to win, and they'd give her the PCS she needed to stay ahead, PCS that she didn't deserve. Unlike Irina though, she didn't hold up the TES end of the bargain (3 or 4 clean triples?!?). The judges' ridiculously high PCS scores kept her in 3rd, while they kept Michelle out (wrongfully) in 4th at Worlds 2005. To be fair, maybe Sasha would have been 3rd anyway without such high PCS scores--we'll never know, because too many judges gave her too high marks, including 8s.

What kind of a message does Sasha's performance send to skaters, anyway? That if you want 8s in PCS, you should skate like she did? *shudder* Sasha's a pretty skater, but that performance was a mess.

Comparing Sasha/Worlds 06 to Michelle/Worlds 05 is very interesting. Both had poor QRs, solid short programs, and a fall in the long. But Sasha's LP was far worse than Michelle's--yet her PCS were still ridiculously high, while Michelle's were ridiculously low. That's what troubles me about CoP.

[lavender]

I couldn't get over skating skills....no way is Michelle below Sasha.
She's also better than the pumping back Irina.

[Krista]

Comparing Sasha/Worlds 06 to Michelle/Worlds 05 is very interesting. Both had poor QRs, solid short programs, and a fall in the long. But Sasha's LP was far worse than Michelle's--yet her PCS were still ridiculously high, while Michelle's were ridiculously low. That's what troubles me about CoP.

yep :clap

As far as choreography, I suppose that is in some way subjective. Michelle skating across the ice or even doing a crossover, looks so much more beautiful than half of the "in between" bleh that many skaters do. Its about quality, not quantity.

Also, I don't question whether DL likes Michelle. She's been a long time poster here. I didn't find her comments that inflammatory, although at a Michelle Kwan board, pointing out something from years past, when we can't even see Michelle skate at the moment, is a bit like kicking someone when they're down. I don't think that was her intention though. Just my 2 cents.

[Dragonlady]

I couldn't get over skating skills....no way is Michelle below Sasha.
She's also better than the pumping back Irina.

Sasha has always been way over-marked for skating skills and I've always objected to her marks in the department. Flexibility does not counter weak edges and wobbling into jumps, but the judges have opted to reward her with the highest levels for skating skills ever seen under this system. She received high skating skills marks even when skating at a snail's pace and skating poorly.

As for Sasha's LP AT 2005, I thought this was the best LP she ever did. I don't remember it being slow or poorly done at all. Maybe I'm mis-remembering but I recall it to be the closest to a winning freeskate Sasha has ever done.

Regarding PCS, I have noted that PCS marks are always tied to level of difficulty. You will get higher PCS marks if you are doing all level 3 and 4 elements than you will if you are doing level 1 and 2 elements. Again, I don't think this is right, but I am aware that this is the way it is.

Intially, it was thought that skaters could opt for a well-done simple spin and gain GoE points for it rather than a poorly done complicated spin. In practice, the judges seldom award +GoE for any level 1 elements regardless of how beautifully they're done. Add this to the list of things I would like to see changed under CoP. Had Michelle competed under CoP prior to 2005 Worlds, she would have had enough experience to know this. This is not a criticism, but rather an observation.

Regardless of whatever mistakes were made, at the end of the day, it was not Michelle's SP or LP marks that kept her off the podium, it was her disastrous qualifying round that put her in a hole from the get go.

[jaylee]

As for Sasha's LP AT 2005, I thought this was the best LP she ever did. I don't remember it being slow or poorly done at all. Maybe I'm mis-remembering but I recall it to be the closest to a winning freeskate Sasha has ever done.

I was referring to Sasha's PCS marks for her LP at Worlds 2006. It was indeed slow and sloppy, yet she got the highest overall PCS marks at that competition that were in no way deserved. My point was that she got these vastly inflated PCS marks because the judges favored her, just like they gave inflated PCS to Irina at Worlds 2005. Irina however at least got the highest TES; so while I don't care that her PCS scores were the highest, I just don't think they should have been as high as they were in each of those categories.

Sasha's TES at Worlds 06 was, what, 5th best? It's incredible that she got the highest PCS of that night, because she did some of her worst skating ever in each of the sub-categories, while other skaters did far better.


Regardless of whatever mistakes were made, at the end of the day, it was not Michelle's SP or LP marks that kept her off the podium, it was her disastrous qualifying round that put her in a hole from the get go.

Her QR did indeed put her into a hole, but she worked hard enough to get out of it. The judges just refused to recognize it. Though you may think her program was watered down, her TES in the long was still 3rd best. But her PCS didn't appropriately reflect this in relation to everyone else.

In Worlds 2006, The judges were all too happy to help Sasha with PCS in the short and the long after her disastrous QR. In worlds 2005, the judges were all too happy to keep Michelle down in the short and the long after her disastrous QR.

And my point is, PCS is not fairly judged.

[Lisa Seye]

with PCS being used as gasp a placeholder!

[Dragonlady]

H*ll has frozen over when I defend Sasha's marks, but at Worlds 2006 she did have all level 3 and 4 elements which tends to keep PCS scores high.

Michelle had the 3rd highest TES scores at Worlds, but her non-jump elements were all level 1's and 2's and the judges will not reward skaters with high PCS scores unless you're doing higher level elements to demonstrate those skills. Like I said, I may not like it, but I understand that this is what they consistently do. That, coupled with the stripped down choreography would give the judges all the excuses they needed to keep the PCS scores low. Even having said that, Michelle would have scored nearly 120 points had she not fallen on the salchow and two footed the second lutz.

One of the things we have consistently noted when the skaters are doing comparable jump elements, placements will come down to the non-jump elements. You really needs those level 3's and 4's to make the podium at the big events.

[taf]

Before this thread is closed, I would just like to personally thank taf and YankeesSuck for providing the examples to prove my point which is that if you dare say anything that anyone could consider not to be in praise of Michelle you will be subject to the most outrageous personal attacks imaginable.

Taf, how you extrapolated that my comment that Michelle did not deserve to win Worlds 2005 based on the content of her program into some ridiculous comment about my opinion not being valid just because I gave birth has to qualify as the the most unintentionally funny post I have ever read. I have this mental image of you sputtering in rage as you posted it.

Along the way you chided me for my posting style, accused me of dissing every poster on the board, and took numerous personal swipes at me. Thank you for the laughs. You're a pip.:lol

Thank you for proving my point. You keep rephrasing & exaggerating my posts & then ridiculing my POV. You do post in a condenscending way to anyone who disagrees with you, as though you are some kind of expert and the last word on any subject, which is why I mentioned that the only credential you have that may not be shared by everyone here is that you have a skating kid. And you're welcome for the laugh (but you knew exactly what I meant). BTW I never said Michelle should have won Worlds 05. Even I, deranged fan that I am, didn't believe that.

jaylee made what I thought was a valid point regarding Michelle at Worlds 05 vs Sasha at Worlds 06. I thought this was a discrepancy of the way PCS is used...thanks for setting me straight.

[jaylee]

H*ll has frozen over when I defend Sasha's marks, but at Worlds 2006 she did have all level 3 and 4 elements which tends to keep PCS scores high.

But the judges who give out PCS don't decide what elements are level 1, 2, 3 or 4, right? The judges strictly focus on GOE and PCS. Aren't levels and jump ratifications decided by the technical callers, as they focus on counting the revolutions and seconds that a position is held?

And don't forget, Sasha had the second-highest mark in Performance/Execution for Worlds 06, over multiple skaters who were clean and who had high level elements as well...it's mind-boggling.


Michelle had the 3rd highest TES scores at Worlds, but her non-jump elements were all level 1's and 2's and the judges will not reward skaters with high PCS scores unless you're doing higher level elements to demonstrate those skills. Like I said, I may not like it, but I understand that this is what they consistently do.

I don't like that either, so I agree with the sentiment in your statement.

But if PCS is not supposed to factor in how well or how poorly you did a jump (already accounted for in TES), then why should it factor in how good a spin or spiral you did, especially in a category like interpretation? Michelle got dinged in PCS because she didn't grab her skate and twist into an ugly position at the end of her beautiful spiral? I can't say I agree with that.

And if PCS was truly consistently based on the level of difficulty of elements, justifying Sasha's PCS marks at Worlds06...well, I just took a look at 4ccs 2007. Alissa had three level 3 elements, three level 4 elements. Emily had 5 level 3 elements, and one level 4. Alissa's PCS score: 53.61; Emily's 56.53. That's not even close.

In the area of PCS, CoP simply defies logic.

[berthesghost]

Alissa had three level 3 elements, three level 4 elements. Emily had 5 level 3 elements, and one level 4. Alissa's PCS score: 53.61; Emily's 56.53. That's not even close.

In the area of PCS, CoP simply defies logic.Well, I've never given birth to an elite skater, so I have no idea why someone who skates like Emily gets the PCS she does. I'm told that it's because she has strong edges, speed and flow, but those same people tell me Sasha has none of these and gets even higher PCS. All in all, it is very entertaining watching COP defenders twist themselves into Beilmanns of logic. :silly

[lavender]

Sasha's 2005 worlds was the best???? Well, that's pretty sad when she had a hand down on one jump, a fall out and couple of wobble jumps. I've seen Sasha skate better....maybe not at worlds.

[Dragonlady]

My understanding is that the judges are aware of the level of the element before they award GOE, so while the judges don't give out levels, they do know what they are which I think factors into PCS marks. It's the only explanation which makes sense since it happens so consistently.

As for Sasha's marks for awful performances, I can remember being furious at her ridiculous PCS at Skate Canada the first season CoP came in. There is no way she should have won that freeskate since her program was skated slowly, with no spark, no combination, no lutz, and no real level of performance at all, while Shizuka went clean with a beautiful 3Z/3T which was fully ratified and garnered +GoE. I think one of the judges gave Sasha a 9 for skating skills. I wouldn't have given her a 6 for that skate.

The ISU says they're addressing the PCS scores, and they did try having separate technical and PCS panels at one of the comps this season (Nebelhorn?), but more does need to be done, IMO. One argument has been that the skater is doing the same choreography from event to event and has the same skating skills, why should the scores change that much? The answer to that is of course, that everyone has good days and bad days and the level of performance shifts, why don't the scores reflect these differences?

I'm still having problems thinking that either Solkalova or Meier would be deserving of higher PCS marks than Sasha even on her worst day, although I'm mortified to be again, defending Sasha's marks.

[kwanette]

I love this thread! It's filled with humor, missfacts, corrections, hyperbole..fabulous....Michelle and I are on her couch getting fat and lazy eating potato chips! Rach on!

[vive_la_reine]

...Michelle and I are on her couch getting fat and lazy eating potato chips! Rach on!Sounds like fun. Can I join you and can we move the fat and lazy eating potato chip-phase to the beach where we can work on a suntan at the same time? :wink

[berthesghost]

Sounds like fun. Can I join you and can we move the fat and lazy eating potato chip-phase to the beach where we can work on a suntan at the same time? :winkWhaaa!?! Fat and at the beach! You're just to liberated for me GinnySmith. :silly

[iceman]

Never understood why Michelle went to 2005 worlds with only level 1 and 2 non-jump elements. Did she and Raphael just not understand cop? Hard to believe. Or did they underestimate how rapidly other skaters were getting into it. Also, when the committee went to watch her skate in order for her to get on the Torino Olympic team, she still had some from the group telling her she needed to upgrade her spins. Mystifying that she and Raphael would not have realized that on their own.

[YankeesSuck01]

Before this thread is closed, I would just like to personally thank taf and YankeesSuck for providing the examples to prove my point which is that if you dare say anything that anyone could consider not to be in praise of Michelle you will be subject to the most outrageous personal attacks imaginable.


You're welcome.

Seriously though explain to me where this is an attack? If you can't handle this make sure you stay out of the baseball thread during the regular season.lol


Dragonlady,
Go to Jeffery Buttle's board and say the stuff about him that you said about Michelle and tell me how well that goes over. Doesn't matter what part of the board you make these comments at fact remains this is a Michelle KWAN message board/

[RA5CViggie]

Never understood why Michelle went to 2005 worlds with only level 1 and 2 non-jump elements. Did she and Raphael just not understand cop? Hard to believe. Or did they underestimate how rapidly other skaters were getting into it. Also, when the committee went to watch her skate in order for her to get on the Torino Olympic team, she still had some from the group telling her she needed to upgrade her spins. Mystifying that she and Raphael would not have realized that on their own.

I guess they were just retarded, weren't they? The skating gods didn't like it so they decided to punish MK with career-ending injuries. That's what she gets for being a fat, lazy CoP failure, isn't it? That's what all her critics think.

[moxie]

There exists a strong possibility that Michelle had injury issues as early as 2005, which might have prevented her from adding all the bendy moves she needed to raise her levels to 3 and 4.

There also exists the possibility that she and her coach decided on a CoP strategy of doing lower-level elements with a high degree of excellence, in the belief that she would pick up many GOE points (it wasn't obvious at that point that judges weren't awarding much GOE for lower levels).

Note (in case it isn't obvious): This is not a criticism.

[vive_la_reine]

but by 2002 she was down to 5 not completely reliable triplesThis is NOT accurate. Michelle completed 6 triples at the:

2002 Grand Prix Final (2nd LP)
2002 Nationals LP
2002 Worlds QR (including a 3T/3T)
2002 Worlds LP
2003 Nationals LP
2003 Worlds QR
2003 Worlds LP
2004 Nationals LP
2004 Campbells International Classic LP

In 2002, she completed 6 triples 4 times, and post 2002, she completed 6 triples 5 more times. If you take this as a percentage of the events in which she competed, it's not exactly being "down to 5 not completely reliable triples by 2002." :irked

P.S. You can refer to Heather's Jump statistics page for Michelle's triple count:

http://www.heatherw.com/mk/jump/bytriples.htm

[Dragonlady]

Sorry - there is a typo - that should read by 2005.

[kwanette]

This is NOT accurate. Michelle completed 6 triples at the:

2002 Grand Prix Final (2nd LP)
2002 Nationals LP
2002 Worlds QR (including a 3T/3T)
2002 Worlds LP
2003 Nationals LP
2003 Worlds QR
2003 Worlds LP
2004 Nationals LP
2004 Campbells International Classic LP

In 2002, she completed 6 triples 4 times, and post 2002, she completed 6 triples 5 more times. If you take this as a percentage of the events in which she competed, it's not exactly being "down to 5 not completely reliable triples by 2002." :irked

P.S. You can refer to Heather's Jump statistics page for Michelle's triple count:

http://www.heatherw.com/mk/jump/bytriples.htm


GinnySmith, thanks so much for the "FACTS". I love the word "FACT"...it is my second favorite word beginning with "F"....after "FLUTZ", of course.

You're pretty.:hug

[lavender]

I think Michelle had that hip problem at least by 2003. If you see her lean on her leg/hip like she's checking something right before she skated at Nationals.

[Dragonlady]

I think Michelle had that hip problem at least by 2003. If you see her lean on her leg/hip like she's checking something right before she skated at Nationals.

My best guess is that it's the reason she abrubtly stopped working on the 3/3 in the 2001/2002 season. 2000/2001 was the last season Michelle skated a 7 triple program. 2001/2002 was the last season she skated the full GP circuit. She did Skate America in 2002 only because Sarah pulled out.

Michelle has always been really smart about not over-doing things. Maybe by 2003 she had reached the point where it was getting harder to hide. I do know that not long after she and Frank parted ways, Frank Carroll was overheard to say that there was "hip surgery in Michelle's future".

[skatesindreams]

Thanks, Ginny, for your contributions to this thread!

We may never know precisely what Michelle was dealing with after 2002. However, she certainly "coped" with her challenges magnificiently!

[berthesghost]

Sorry - there is a typo - that should read by 2005.Still doesn't make much sense. Did you mean that in practice, at home, her triples were failing her? Because she only competed in two events in 2005, and if you add up all the jumps she attempted total at both nats and worlds, she landed the majority of them. So what exactly is "unreliable", less than 99.99% success rate?

[kwanette]

Didn't MK land a 3/3 in the Worlds QR at 02 Worlds? Was that a seven triple or a six triple program? I can't kount.

[nymkfan51]

Didn't MK land a 3/3 in the Worlds QR at 02 Worlds? Was that a seven triple or a six triple program? I can't kount.

It was a 6 triple program, kwanette ... she doubled the loop, but did land a 3T/3T.

[kwanette]

It was a 6 triple program, kwanette ... she doubled the loop, but did land a 3T/3T.

Thanks, nymkfan51.

[Dragonlady]

Still doesn't make much sense. Did you mean that in practice, at home, her triples were failing her? Because she only competed in two events in 2005, and if you add up all the jumps she attempted total at both nats and worlds, she landed the majority of them. So what exactly is "unreliable", less than 99.99% success rate?

In 2005, Michelle competed at Nationals and Worlds, but she also competed in the USFSA cheesefests.

At Worlds, 2005 she 2-footed the second lutz and fell on the salchow, completing 4 clean triples. In qualifying, she completed 2 clean triples. She hadn't attempted a loop in at least a couple of years (not surprising given her hip problems), and hadn't landed a second lutz all season.

Prior to 2001, Michelle was the most reliable 7 triple skater in history and still holds the record for the most 7-triple programs ever skated. From 2001/2 to 2002/3 she dropped to a very reliable 6 triples and in 2003/4 to 5 triples and they became less reliable. I believe at 2005 Nationals, she landed 4 clean triples, and had problems with her second lutz.

Yes, Michelle landed the majority of her jumps in 2005, but this is a skater who prior, to 2001/2002 very seldom missed a jump. If it wasn't obvious that something was really wrong with Michelle prior to 2005, it certainly was watching her performances at Nationals and Worlds.

In terms of her jumps, Michelle's technique has always been so close to perfect, which is why she so seldom fell, so watching her struggle with her jumps in 2005 was really difficult. It was just shocking to see her having problems on her jumps. The only other skater I've ever seen with jump mechanics that good is Nobunari Oda, and he seldom falls either.

I could go on for days about the beauty of Michelle's jumps, in her prime - speed into the jump, good spring, nice air position, clean landing with good runout. Heavenly!

[vive_la_reine]

Still doesn't make much sense. Did you mean that in practice, at home, her triples were failing her? Because she only competed in two events in 2005, and if you add up all the jumps she attempted total at both nats and worlds, she landed the majority of them. So what exactly is "unreliable", less than 99.99% success rate?BG-Good point. And.....

Michelle also competed at a cheesefest in late March of 2005 in Tampa, FL after Worlds, where she very handily ticked off 5 triples--she made it look easy. I know, I was there. A video of the performance can be downloaded from cruelladekwan.com. In addition, if IIRC, there was a COI after Worlds and before the Tampa event and someone who was there reported that Michelle did a 5 or 6 triple performance of Bolero, including a 3-2-2. (And even though it isn't technically 2005 but it is technically part of the 2004/2005 season, Michelle did a 5-triple Bolero at the 2004 December Cheesefest in Auburn Hills.)

Because that was such a HUGE typo, to set the record straight:

Michelle consistently delivered 6 triple performances during the 2002 season, and continued to do so right up through Fall of 2004 at the Cheesefest in St. Paul where she did 6 triples in her debut of Bolero (I was there too.) Not to mention, she did a 7 triple practice of Aranjuez at the 2003 Worlds. She competed 3 times in 2005. At Nationals that year she completed 5 solid triples (had a rough outing at Worlds) and came back strong with another solid 5 triples at the cheesefest. That's not my definition of being inconsistent with 5-triples, even for 2005.

And I'll state the obvious: what's the big deal about 5 versus 6 versus 7 triples anyway when the current Olympic Champion of 2006 won the Olympic Long Progam with only 5 triples and no 3/3?

[skatesindreams]

Ginny,

:clap :clap :clap

[lavender]

With what we know today about Michelle's injury the shock should be over.

[Dragonlady]

And I'll state the obvious: what's the big deal about 5 versus 6 versus 7 triples anyway when the current Olympic Champion of 2006 won the Olympic Long Progam with only 5 triples and no 3/3?

When the most consistent 7-triple skater of all time has a drop in jump production this pronounced, it IS a big deal, especially when she stops attempting to do 5 different triples.

While it's reasonable to note that Arakawa won the Olympics with 5 triples and no 3/3, it is also reasonable to note that Worlds 2004, 05 and 06 were all won by skaters with two 3/3's and 7 clean triples.

[nymkfan51]

From 2001/2 to 2002/3 she dropped to a very reliable 6 triples and in 2003/4 to 5 triples and they became less reliable. I believe at 2005 Nationals, she landed 4 clean triples, and had problems with her second lutz.


I know for certain she landed 6 triples at Nats/04, so you are incorrect about her landing only 5 triples in 2004.
And you are also wrong about Nats 05 ... she landed 5 triples ... just doubled her 2nd lutz.

[ScrappyTheOwl]

And I'll state the obvious: what's the big deal about 5 versus 6 versus 7 triples anyway when the current Olympic Champion of 2006 won the Olympic Long Progam with only 5 triples and no 3/3?

I'm confused as to where this conversation went to -- wasn't the original point Michelle's technical content in relation to Slutskaya and Cohen's at 2005 Worlds?

Ah, moot point; that wasn't even the topic. I'm really surprised this thread hasn't been closed ... or re-titled. :D


Sasha's 2005 worlds was the best???? Well, that's pretty sad when she had a hand down on one jump, a fall out and couple of wobble jumps. I've seen Sasha skate better....maybe not at worlds.
2005 Worlds was definitely Sasha's best Worlds LP -- it's the only one she never fell at, for one (well, 2004 Worlds didn't have a fall, but the error was much glaring, plus her opening passes wobbled).

She never put her hand down at 2005 Worlds; she turned out of one pass, fell out of another (the 2nd jump in the sequence), and had an off-edge (but saved) landing on her opening combo, but the other four passes were completely solid.


Never understood why Michelle went to 2005 worlds with only level 1 and 2 non-jump elements. Did she and Raphael just not understand cop? Hard to believe. Or did they underestimate how rapidly other skaters were getting into it.

Well, her Spiral Sequence was theoretically fine, provided she held each move long enough. She got a Level 3 in the SP, then got a Level 2 in the LP because she brought her leg down as soon as she kicked it up on the fan spiral instead of holding it.

Step Sequence was fine; Level 2 just like the rest of the field.

It was the spins she had trouble with, but not because she wasn't planning higher levels. She just didn't hold some positions long enough (especially on the front camel in the LP, which was potentially a LEvel 3 with all positions held). I think with a few more competitions under CoP, she could have worked out the level kinks.

[vive_la_reine]

I know for certain she landed 6 triples at Nats/04, so you are incorrect about her landing only 5 triples in 2004.
And you are also wrong about Nats 05 ... she landed 5 triples ... just doubled her 2nd lutz.nymkfan51--You are correct on both counts. I wasn't at the 2004 Nationals, but I have watched that performance of Tosca probably 100 times now and she completed 6 clean triples. It was the only way she could have possibly beaten Sasha whose marks were very high (including a 6.0 for presentation) even though Sasha fell in her long program. I was at the 2005 Nationals and, as you said, Michelle completed 5 triples and doubled her 2nd lutz which would have made it 6. Again, all of this information in on Heather's page under jump stats. And if you don't trust those numbers or what I am saying, these performances are all up on www.cruelladekwan.com (http://www.cruelladekwan.com) and can be viewed for verification.

[vive_la_reine]

I'm confused as to where this conversation went to -- wasn't the original point Michelle's technical content in relation to Slutskaya and Cohen's at 2005 Worlds?
I am responding because I wasn't the one who originally when of topic and mis-stated Michelle's record since 2002 (which also had nothing to do with her technical content at the 2005 Worlds) and when someone who is respected by so many makes a mistake while going off topic, it needs to be corrected before it becomes embedded as "fact" in the minds of those who have not witnessed Michelle's performances.

Frankly, I am weary of so little fact checking that is done to back up generalizations about Michelle's alleged declining abilities. And in a way, my observation about the technical content of the 2006 Olympics is relevant to the original topic because it seems to me, that since CoP arrived, many skaters have demonstrated inconsistency or reduction in jump content, not just Michelle.

[lavender]

I'll have to look at Sasha's 05 world program again. I didn't really like her 05 performance at worlds. I thought her overall performance of her long program at nationals was better even with the fall.

[scootie12]

Although this really isn't part of the overall original discussion of this thread, I just thought I'd post this link for anyone that forgot about THIS performance....For the 2005 season opener, here is a wonderful program with every triple landed.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hszrK09reY4


:knee

[vive_la_reine]

Although this really isn't part of the overall original discussion of this thread, I just thought I'd post this link for anyone that forgot about THIS performance....For the 2005 season opener, here is a wonderful program with every triple landed.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hszrK09reY4


:knee

The 2004/2005 season opener and debut of Bolero. Per Peggy Fleming's commentary: "She completed all of her triples: 6 of them."

Yes, I remember it well. Thanks, Scootie!!! :bow :tos

[ScrappyTheOwl]

I am responding because I wasn't the one who originally when of topic and mis-stated Michelle's record since 2002 (which also had nothing to do with her technical content at the 2005 Worlds) and when someone who is respected by so many makes a mistake while going off topic, it needs to be corrected before it becomes embedded as "fact" in the minds of those who have not witnessed Michelle's performances.
Oh, it was more of a general observation, I didn't mean for it to sound like you were being OT or anything ... it's not your fault this conversation keeps going in a million different directions. I have no idea what's going on now.


I'll have to look at Sasha's 05 world program again. I didn't really like her 05 performance at worlds. I thought her overall performance of her long program at nationals was better even with the fall.
I could be mistaken, but I thought whoever brought it up was only talking about Worlds LPs ... I can't seem to find the original post now ...

[missmarysgarden]

Thanks, Scootie. That's the last time I saw Michelle skate live. She was gorgeous. When she fell on her footwork (right in front of me), I was as startled as Dick was. Later when I replayed this, with confirmation that Michelle had a serious hip injury, I always felt that he knew it - and that's why he sort of gasped "That's the WORSTkind ...and then caught himself mid sentence - and when I see it over and over, I agree that its the worst kind of fallout for someone with a torn labrum.... I cry every time I watch it. Later she was holding her hip and looked very distressed.

[iceman]

At the 2005 cheesefest, according to both Peggy and Dick, Michelle was doing 3/3's during the practice session. With a serious injury, it seems odd that she would be practicing those at a competition in which she would probably have no need of them.

[vive_la_reine]

There seemed to be a dispute as to the number of triples Michelle completed during the 2004 Nationals Tosca LP. Thanks to Scootie for the Youtube reminder.

Michelle completed 6 triples and received seven (7) 6.0s for presentation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWQSoIEAxns&mode=related&search=

[Dragonlady]

Frankly, I am weary of so little fact checking that is done to back up generalizations about Michelle's alleged declining abilities. And in a way, my observation about the technical content of the 2006 Olympics is relevant to the original topic because it seems to me, that since CoP arrived, many skaters have demonstrated inconsistency or reduction in jump content, not just Michelle.

As previously stated, the reference to 2002 was a typo and should have read 2005.

Skaters have always been inconsistent, which is one of the things that made Michelle so very remarkable. It also spoiled us into thinking that everyone should be this consistent because she was for so very long. CoP hasn't made skaters any more or less consistent than previously.

Irina was just as consistent before CoP as she was after, which is to say most of the time. Sasha was never consistent before or after. Shizuka could be very, very clean or not. She was actually a better skater after CoP than before, but then she was also juggling school and skating before so that may have been a factor. Fumie was about the same.

In terms of the men, few stuck around after SLC. Plushenko was always rock solid, unless he was sick or injured. Honda declined but that was due to injury not CoP. Goebel declined but that was due to injuries, boot problems and coaching issues.

[jaylee]

When the most consistent 7-triple skater of all time has a drop in jump production this pronounced, it IS a big deal, especially when she stops attempting to do 5 different triples.

Ok. It is only a big deal if you compare Michelle Kwan of 2005 to Michelle Kwan of 4 years earlier. If you compare her to anyone else, you see far more inconsistent production among them. Why the double standard for Michelle, while letting her peers off the hook for the same thing?

When you compare Michelle to anyone else's career, Michelle's jump production in 2003, 2004, 2005 was still amazing. Where was Shizuka, reigning world champ, in 2005? Where was Irina, reigning world champ, in 2003 and 2004?

Shizuka struggled to 9th at the 05 championships. Irina was MIA in 2003 and 9th in 2004, before she came back to reclaim the title. But luckily no one in her country pronounced her career dead after 2004. The door was open for her to come back.

Where was Sasha at Worlds 2006? She produced a LP with only 3 clean triples (other mistakes were step-out, hand-down, fall, and a two-footed double axel). I find a little humor in the fact that when comparing their worst programs, Michelle's 05 to Sasha's 06, Michelle completed more triples. :P

Let's see, over 2003-2005 championships, Michelle's places (1st, 3rd, 4th). Irina: (N/A, 9th, 1st). Sasha: 4th, 2nd, 2nd. Shizuka: (?, 1st, 9th). Sasha is the only one who was comparably consistent to Michelle, which isn't surprising because she was in her prime during this time. But then Sasha added a terrible 06 appearance.

It's all about the way you phrase it. You make it sound like Michelle's technical content had fallen so far down by Worlds 2005 that it was some kind of disgrace or embarrassment, never before seen in the history of skating. In fact, all of her rivals had far larger ups and downs in their technical content over the same period, and no one buried them for it. Michelle skated at a higher level for for longer than all of them. And Michelle, a skating icon, is human just like them with a human body.

Oh yeah...and I still think that at Worlds 05, Michelle's 2005 PCS marks were held down for no good reason.

[skatesindreams]

It's all about the way you phrase it. You make it sound like Michelle's technical content had fallen so far down by Worlds 2005 that it was some kind of disgrace or embarrassment, never before seen in the history of skating. In fact, all of her rivals had far larger ups and downs in their technical content over the same period, and no one buried them for it. Michelle skated at a higher level for for longer than all of them. And Michelle, a skating icon, is human just like them with a human body.

Oh yeah...and I still think that at Worlds 05, Michelle's 2005 PCS marks were held down for no good reason.

Thank you for this, jaylee.

[lavender]

This is silly....why is it still a big deal when we know she was injured.

[Dragonlady]

It's all about the way you phrase it. You make it sound like Michelle's technical content had fallen so far down by Worlds 2005 that it was some kind of disgrace or embarrassment, never before seen in the history of skating. In fact, all of her rivals had far larger ups and downs in their technical content over the same period, and no one buried them for it. Michelle skated at a higher level for for longer than all of them. And Michelle, a skating icon, is human just like them with a human body.

Why do you try to put words in a post that are not there or project ideas that were never intended? You assume intentions and ideas that are completely false.

In Michelle's case, there was no explanation for the drop in the number of triple jumps she was completing and it was a gradual drop, year by year. From the point of view of observers, she was cutting back her training time, cutting back the number of competitions she was doing, scaling back on her choreography, and cutting the number of triple jumps she was completing. From 7 clean triples at Worlds in 2001 to 4 in 2005 is a 43% drop in success rate with no explanation. Unlike past seasons, she made mistakes. So much of the commentary about Michelle losing her edge and not keeping her technical comment stemmed from this drop in content. Yes, we know now that she had hip problems but she never used that as an excuse.

Had Michelle said that she was having hip problems and hoping to postpone surgery until after Turin, she would have garnered an enormous amount of sympathy. Michelle has never been one to make excuses or to explain herself in pubic. That's not a criticism.

For Irina, there was a clear reason for her absence from 2003 Worlds and her placement at 2004 Worlds. Shizuka has publically stated that she had planned on retiring after 2004 and was persuaded to stay on but that she lacked motivation and focus.

As for "no one writing them off", well I saw lots of posts that said Irina could never make it back and that Shizuka's win in 2004 was a bigger fluke that Sarah Hughes winning the OGM and that it was a disgrace for a defending World Champion to finish 9th at the next Worlds.

The difference for Irina was that there weren't hoards of young Russian girls waiting in the wings to step into her place. In fact, the Russian program was dead in the water without her. In the US, Sasha and her fans couldn't wait for Michelle to step aside so Sasha could claim the US Championship. Sasha's fans were the most vocal group calling for Michelle's retirement. They seem to forget that it was always there for Sasha to claim - all she had to do was beat Michelle.

[kwanette]

This is silly....why is it still a big deal when we know she was injured.

What lavender said...she's so pretty.:hug

[vive_la_reine]

As previously stated, the reference to 2002 was a typo and should have read 2005.After you corrected your typo, you came back and later posted:



in 2003/4 to 5 triples and they became less reliable. I believe at 2005 Nationals, she landed 4 clean triples, and had problems with her second lutz. which again, is flat out wrong!

I know that I am repeating myself but it seems to be floating somewhere in space rather than being heard: Michelle landed 6 triples at the 2003 Nationals and 2003 Worlds (in both the QR and LP) and again landed 6 triples at the 2004 Nationals.

Michelle landed 5 triples at the 2004 Worlds, 6 again at the 2004 Season Opener for Bolero, 5 in December of 2004 at Marshalls and 5 again at the 2005 Nationals. Again she landed 5 at the 2005 Spring Marshalls. The only comp where she did less than 5 triples in 2005 is Worlds in the QR and LP. So out of 6 competitions during the 2004/2005 season, Michelle landed 5 or more triples at 4 of them. So, color me clueless as to how you conclude that Michelle's 5 triple performances became less reliable during any season, unless you are only counting her performance at the 2005 Worlds.

These are facts that are easily checked by going to YouTube and watching the performances. That is what I was referring to when I made my subsequent statement about fact checking. You continue to mis-state the numbers. This is NOT FAIR to Michelle.

If such mis-statements are allowed to go undisputed, and if Michelle's detractors and revisionists of her record have their way, by 2025, the myth throughout the skating world will be that Michelle Kwan never did anything of technical difficulty and for 12 years, just showed up, looked pretty, did nothing but pick lint out of her bellybutton, and somehow managed to win 9 National and 5 World Titles and become the most decorated figure skater in US history. :boggled

jaylee--Thank you for your post. I completely agree.


This is silly....why is it still a big deal when we know she was injured.lavender--I agree with you too.

Before I exit this thread for good, one more YouTube clip to confirm that nymkfan51 is correct about Michelle's 2005 Nationals Bolero--MK completed 5 clean triples and doubled her 2nd lutz. Her final jump after the double lutz was a 3 toe:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLyh14FXGGg

Editing to add:

I highly recommend you take a look at Heather's jump statistic page for the proper perspective:

http://www.heatherw.com/mk/jump/bytriples.htm

Michelle completed:

7 Triples at 11 events

6 Triples at 31 events

5 Triples at 25 events

4 Or less triples at 15 events AND of these only 4 occured between 2003 and 2005: 2003 International Figure Skating Challenge, 2004 Worlds (qualifying round), 2005 Worlds (qualifying round), 2005 Worlds (long program). Therefore, less than 1/3 rd of her 4 or less triple programs occured after 2003. 2/3 rds were spread over the prior years. And of course, as lavender reminded us, we all know she was injured.

[jaylee]

Why do you try to put words in a post that are not there or project ideas that were never intended? You assume intentions and ideas that are completely false.

*shrug* That's simply how I interpreted your posts, which included this: "At 2005 Worlds I noted, with great sadness, that Irina had more transitional moves and more choreography than Michelle, and that's something I didn't think I would ever say."

It sounded like you think 2005 Worlds was where she died. And in your other posts, you continued to argue that all of her technical content had plummeted, with some inaccuracies as GinnySmith pointed out. If that's not what you intended, then how do you really feel? Worlds 2005 wasn't her best performance, but even objectively looking at her technical content/execution, she was still ahead of everyone but Irina and Sasha. PCS is another fish.


In Michelle's case, there was no explanation for the drop in the number of triple jumps she was completing and it was a gradual drop, year by year.
...Yes, we know now that she had hip problems but she never used that as an excuse.

Yes, we know now that she had serious, serious hip injuries. We know this now, so I personally think current criticism and discussion of Michelle's competitive performances over these years should factor this in. If it's not mentioned, then it makes Michelle seem like she was incompetent or lazy for not competing more often, having more triples, or for not having the highest of levels.

We've heard all of those arguments from the uber-Sasha fans over the years. That's why it's surprising for me to hear you criticize Michelle's technical content so harshly. I recognize that Michelle was not technically at her own peak during these years, but first I don't think it was as poor as you imply, and second I understand that she was struggling with injuries, so I am not going to knock her in 2005 for not having as many transitions as Irina.

[Sparks]

Thank you Ginny for the FACTS.
BTW, why does Michelle get questioned (at MKF) about the supposed "lack" of technical content and choreography when others are not? These days, Championships are won without the same high technical content Michelle exhibited from 1993 to 2005.
And why are people driven to shove mis-statements down our throats about Michelle and question her record here at MKF?
I guess I can go to a Jeff Buttle fan site and insist that Jeff is stripping down his JUMPING PASSES because he is not completing triple Axels, any type of Quad, and does not have consistent 3/3's.

[jaylee]

If such mis-statements are allowed to go undisputed, and if Michelle's detractors and revisionists of her record have their way, by 2025, the myth throughout the skating world will be that Michelle Kwan never did anything of technical difficulty and for 12 years, just showed up, looked pretty, did nothing but pick lint out of her bellybutton, and somehow managed to win 9 National and 5 World Titles and become the most decorated figure skater in US history. :boggled


Thanks GinnySmith for doing the double-checking. LOL about the bellybutton lint. I agree with you, it's important to counter these kinds of arguments, even if it's just in a discussion at MKF. I've already seen it in the press, how Michelle only succeeded under 6.0 because she was an "artistic" skater and the judges were allowed to use presentation scores to keep her ahead. Hah.

Technically on average she was more consistent and more accomplished than any other skater for a much longer time. One poor showing at Worlds 2005 under CoP shouldn't erase all that. I recall that there was a good discussion in the main MK chat about how too much was made of Worlds 2005, where she simply didn't perform her best, and that incorrectly created the impression that Michelle just couldn't succeed under CoP. And she finished 4th, not 30th!

Actually, and trying to get this discussion back on track (I guess it's too late), here's another thought. Comparing Emily Hughes at Skate America 06 to Four Continents 07: Prior to Nationals, she and her coach publicly discussed how they removed a number of difficult transitions (i.e. her spread eagle entrance, among others) because Emily had some ankle sprain or something. These transitions remained MIA at 4ccs. Yet her PCS, including her Transitions score, went up significantly from SA to 4ccs! What kind of a message does this send to Emily? That you can "water" down your program and be rewarded? That it's more important to land your jumps cleanly (which she did at 4ccs, and not at SA) than to include those difficult transitions? Wait a second, I thought jumps landed/falls weren't supposed to affect PCS!

In reality, judges do seem to factor in jumps/falls with PCS, even if they're not supposed to. Hence at SA, Emily's missed jumps hurt her PCS.* Hence why Alissa, though she gets highest level spins/spirals, doesn't get the highest PCS. But exception to the rule: if your name is Sasha Cohen, your PCS will remain high when you fall the most.

* That and the fact that there were a number of skaters who did far better than her at SA, i.e. Miki Ando, Mao Asada, Sarah Meier. They weren't at 4ccs, so unsurprisingly, that also must have contributed to Emily's bump up in PCS. It's the placeholder effect!

[taf]

Thanks Ginny for the facts. And thanks jaylee for the excellent posts. And lavender, kwanette is right, you are pretty.


Michelle has always been really smart about not over-doing things. Maybe by 2003 she had reached the point where it was getting harder to hide. I do know that not long after she and Frank parted ways, Frank Carroll was overheard to say that there was "hip surgery in Michelle's future".

Frank & Michelle parted ways in Oct 2001, so I guess you have known about her injury that far back. Why then did you criticize Michelle on this and other boards, implying she was lazy, spending too much time at the beach, unprepared at 2004 Worlds, etc, when you knew she was injured?


In Michelle's case, there was no explanation for the drop in the number of triple jumps she was completing and it was a gradual drop, year by year. From the point of view of observers, she was cutting back her training time, cutting back the number of competitions she was doing, scaling back on her choreography, and cutting the number of triple jumps she was completing. From 7 clean triples at Worlds in 2001 to 4 in 2005 is a 43% drop in success rate with no explanation. Unlike past seasons, she made mistakes. So much of the commentary about Michelle losing her edge and not keeping her technical comment stemmed from this drop in content. Yes, we know now that she had hip problems but she never used that as an excuse.

I disagree that Michelle was scaling back on her choreography when you compare her to what others were doing at that time. But then, I don't compare Michelle to herself. She was competing against other women, not against Michelle of 1996.

And as Ginny has PROVED to you, Michelle was not greatly scaling down on the number of triples in her programs...I don't think the difference between 6triples and 5 triples is all that much, do you? It's not like 4 triple programs became the norm for her. And almost every one else was planning 6 triple programs from about 98 on...even Irina who was supposed to be such a powerhouse rarely (if ever) landed a 7 triple program before 02 Worlds.

[SamChez]

Enough...I gotta chime in:

COP is a Crock of Poop.

Michelle not winning Worlds 05 SP is a Crock of Poop.

Michelle and Rafael not having a winning strategy in 05 is a Crock of Poop.

Constant misrepresenting the FACTS about Michelle's record is a Crock of Poop.

Not including Michelle's VERY SERIOUS injury in one's evaluation of 03, 04, or 05 is a Crock of Poop with beans and bacon.

taf is a Crock of Lavender Blossoms. I believe we are doing the same dance around the room for some posts. Watch for us on Dancing With the Stars accompanied by GinnySmith singing "The Truth Will Set You Free From Your Crock".

I understand why people might question Michelle's program content post SLC. Her programs were extremely "watered down", sometimes without a complete jump matrix or Crock-friendly spins. Those that post regularly should know the facts of this period and include them in any analysis: Michelle was VERY seriously INJURED! So veterans, if you find it difficult to recall this leetle item, please visit a Seattle fish market and I will gladly hurl this forgotten fact at you. If you're new, please post your doubts in the form of a question. I'm sure there are several fish throwers here that will set you straight.

So, back on topic. Yes, the disagreement with COP is due to a generation gap. We beyond exfoliation remember amazing moments under 6.0 where we cried, laughed, fainted, snarled, medicated, thrilled, swooned, and bled. Now all we have is a bunch of promising skaters who, by necessity, are nothing more than Point Whores.

Enough purging, I'm done.

PointWhoreChez.

PS - I'm not done purging: I like Kimmie's skating and ethic. I don't like Emily's skating and ethic. And Rachel Flatt is Little Miss Sunshine. Oh, and I like Jeff Buttle cuz I saw him in the restroom in DC. Yes, he may be a PW now, but the restroom experience was under 6.0. 'K, now I'm done. I’ll crawl back into my Lurker Crock.

[UGG]

When I went back and reviewed the scores for Worlds 2006, I just got even madder at seeing Sasha's PCS. Her LP performance was slow and sloppy (and she obviously hadn't been training, hence her similarly disastrous QR) and was riddled with errors, yet she got the highest PCS of the night. Sure, falls are supposed to be penalized in TES, but her PCS should still have reflected the quality of her performance in the separate categories, which was far from her best and should have been average scores, if not poor. What exactly were the 8s for? Flexibility and extension are not PCS categories; she was *off* that night and the program got worse throughout.

Sasha received the highest PCS because she was in the position that Irina had been in 2005--she was the favored one, the one the judges wanted to win, and they'd give her the PCS she needed to stay ahead, PCS that she didn't deserve. Unlike Irina though, she didn't hold up the TES end of the bargain (3 or 4 clean triples?!?). The judges' ridiculously high PCS scores kept her in 3rd, while they kept Michelle out (wrongfully) in 4th at Worlds 2005. To be fair, maybe Sasha would have been 3rd anyway without such high PCS scores--we'll never know, because too many judges gave her too high marks, including 8s.

What kind of a message does Sasha's performance send to skaters, anyway? That if you want 8s in PCS, you should skate like she did? *shudder* Sasha's a pretty skater, but that performance was a mess.

Comparing Sasha/Worlds 06 to Michelle/Worlds 05 is very interesting. Both had poor QRs, solid short programs, and a fall in the long. But Sasha's LP was far worse than Michelle's--yet her PCS were still ridiculously high, while Michelle's were ridiculously low. That's what troubles me about CoP.

Wern't their long programs less than a point apart? I remember Sasha scoring about a 114 in the LP at 2006 Worlds, and MK scoring a 113 at 2005 Worlds. They both landed 4 clean triples, I think...plus Sasha's LP was actually scored in 4th place...MK's LP was third.

Edited to add-

Sasha's scores-114.67 (TCS)54.32 (PCS) 61.35 7.64 7.43 7.64 7.75 7.89 1.00
MK's scores- 113.98 (TCS)55.62 (PCS)59.36 7.68 7.18 7.39 7.39 7.46 1.00

The long programs are pretty close...but I agree...MK should have been scored about 5 points higher in the short program. The total scores were MK-200.79 and Sasha-208.88.

[michelle2006]

Thanks Sam. I'd love for this thread to be closed...but that ain't up to me.

[jaylee]

Wern't their long programs less than a point apart? I remember Sasha scoring about a 114 in the LP at 2006 Worlds, and MK scoring a 113 at 2005 Worlds. They both landed 4 clean triples, I think...plus Sasha's LP was actually scored in 4th place...MK's LP was third.

The TES / PCS breakdown is interesting to me. Sasha made her deficit up through PCS. At Worlds 06, Sasha did have high level spins/spirals, higher levels than Michelle did at Worlds 05. But, Sasha had more serious jump errors.

Using strictly GOE to decide, Michelle landed 4 clean triples, a clean double axel and all her jumps in combination clean. Sasha landed 3 clean triples, but double-footed her double axel and only landed one combination cleanly, omitting the others.

Michelle had the fall on the salchow and the slightly two-footed lutz. Sasha had the fall on the salchow, two-foot on the double axel (it's bizarre, I just rewatched it, she ends up dragging her foot I guess to help keep her balance), and had problems on both the flip (she had a slight stumble around) and the triple toe (slight two-foot and hand briefly down).

So, in the end, it seems strange to me that Michelle, with her mistakes, got the PCS that she did at Worlds 05 while Sasha, with her greater amount of mistakes got the highest PCS at Worlds 06.

[YankeesSuck01]

The TES / PCS breakdown is interesting to me. Sasha made her deficit up through PCS. At Worlds 06, Sasha did have high level spins/spirals, higher levels than Michelle did at Worlds 05. But, Sasha had more serious jump errors.

Using strictly GOE to decide, Michelle landed 4 clean triples, a clean double axel and all her jumps in combination clean. Sasha landed 3 clean triples, but double-footed her double axel and only landed one combination cleanly, omitting the others.

Michelle had the fall on the salchow and the slightly two-footed lutz. Sasha had the fall on the salchow, two-foot on the double axel (it's bizarre, I just rewatched it, she ends up dragging her foot I guess to help keep her balance), and had problems on both the flip (she had a slight stumble around) and the triple toe (slight two-foot and hand briefly down).

So, in the end, it seems strange to me that Michelle, with her mistakes, got the PCS that she did at Worlds 05 while Sasha, with her greater amount of mistakes got the highest PCS at Worlds 06.

Didn't they also lax some of the rules between 05 and 06?
I thought I read somewhere that the rules Michelle competed at were tougher and were changed sometimes after the 05 worlds?

[lavender]

Why then did you criticize Michelle on this and other boards, implying she was lazy, spending too much time at the beach, unprepared at 2004 Worlds, etc, when you knew she was injured?


Wow...how disappointing.

I love your post Sam.:lol

[jaylee]

Didn't they also lax some of the rules between 05 and 06?
I thought I read somewhere that the rules Michelle competed at were tougher and were changed sometimes after the 05 worlds?

The rules have been revised pretty much every season, I think? So that's why it makes it so difficult to compare scores across seasons. Heck, there's a lot of fluctuation in PCS across events within a season.

Anyway, I'm no expert...I just thought that in regards to CoP, those two performances and how they were scored in terms of PCS made for an interesting comparison.

[Sparks]

Sam - LOVED your post. :lol I'll meet you at the Seattle Fish market this summer...I'll be the woman throwing the BIG carp...

FWIW, I don't want this thread closed...I like to see the FACTS out-weigh the mis-representations. Let the truth be told.

COP = Crock of Poop because cheating and favoritism can still take place.
Exhibit 1: Sasha's spiral sequence at Worlds 2005 Short program...talk about p**p!


Prior to Nationals, she and her coach publicly discussed how they removed a number of difficult transitions (i.e. her spread eagle entrance, among others) because Emily had some ankle sprain or something.
Ahhhh, now I see. I was wondering what happened to the spiral into a spin move...IMO, EH's PCS scores should have suffered when she took out that move.

[Tennisdrive]

Holy cow, this thread has exploded. I'll have to back and read! :D THANKS!

[Krista]

Great post SamChez! :)

[Dragonlady]

Why then did you criticize Michelle on this and other boards, implying she was lazy, spending too much time at the beach, unprepared at 2004 Worlds, etc, when you knew she was injured?

Since we're into correcting posting errors, at no time did I ever criticize Michelle for spending too much time at the beach or imply that she was lazy. I mentioned an interview she did on Canadian television where she said she had been spending a lot of time at the beach in response to a question as to what she had been doing with the time she took off from the GP circuit. Once again posters have elected to twist this into something it was not and was never intended to be.

I ihave never said anything in this forum that I would say to Michelle's face. When I have conversations with skaters, they are very forthright about their skating and very honest. It's fans who go ballistic if you're not blowing sunshine every second of the time.

[Louise1991]

Since we're into correcting posting errors, at no time did I ever criticize Michelle for spending too much time at the beach or imply that she was lazy. I mentioned an interview she did on Canadian television where she said she had been spending a lot of time at the beach in response to a question as to what she had been doing with the time she took off from the GP circuit. Once again posters have elected to twist this into something it was not and was never intended to be.

I ihave never said anything in this forum that I would say to Michelle's face. When I have conversations with skaters, they are very forthright about their skating and very honest. It's fans who go ballistic if you're not blowing sunshine every second of the time.well, well. we are very indignant about being misquoted, aren't we??? i for one am glad you got a taste of having your own past misrepresented, if you are telling the truth. you apprear to have a problem getting your facts straight.

[YankeesSuck01]

More proof we so need Michelle skating again.lol

and I am still waiting for an answer to my question

[centerstagequeen]

Since we're into correcting posting errors, at no time did I ever criticize Michelle for spending too much time at the beach or imply that she was lazy. I mentioned an interview she did on Canadian television where she said she had been spending a lot of time at the beach in response to a question as to what she had been doing with the time she took off from the GP circuit. Once again posters have elected to twist this into something it was not and was never intended to be.

I ihave never said anything in this forum that I would say to Michelle's face. When I have conversations with skaters, they are very forthright about their skating and very honest. It's fans who go ballistic if you're not blowing sunshine every second of the time.

Actually, I do remember one time in your post regarding Jeffery was training by Rafael, you mentioned "perhaps Michelle can learn something from Jeffery since they are training together", and the "something" you talked about in your post was Michelle's work ethic. I remember it because I posted my thought after reading yours. However I can't find it now since it was more than 2 year ago.

So I do have the same question as taf: Since you know Michelle was injured way back in 2001 after Michelle and Frank parted ways as you said in your post, then why more than once you implied she's being lazy in your posts? Besides, as Ginny pointed out, even during the time Michelle was injured, she still continuely and consistently dilivered 5 or 6 triples program--which is something not many of the young skaters today can do.

[kwanette]

FWIW, I don't want this thread closed...I like to see the FACTS out-weigh the mis-representations. Let the truth be told.

I don't want it closed either, Sparks. IMO, it's a great discussion.

And, BTW, on my way to buy tequila.;)

[Dragonlady]

Actually, I do remember one time in your post regarding Jeffery was training by Rafael, you mentioned "perhaps Michelle can learn something from Jeffery since they are training together", and the "something" you talked about in your post was Michelle's work ethic. I remember it because I posted my thought after reading yours. However I can't find it now since it was more than 2 year ago.

So I do have the same question as taf: Since you know Michelle was injured way back in 2001 after Michelle and Frank parted ways as you said in your post, then why more than once you implied she's being lazy in your posts? Besides, as Ginny pointed out, even during the time Michelle was injured, she still continuely and consistently dilivered 5 or 6 triples program--which is something not many of the young skaters today can do.

Again, I have never implied Michelle was lazy. That is how the words were twisted. I was not told about Frank Carroll's comment until about a year ago so I didn't know she was injured in 2001, although I suspected it after she stopped attempting the 3/3 in 2001/2002. When I posted those suspicions here, I was ripped for it, just as I was ripped for posting Frank's comment last year after she pulled out of the Olympics.

When I posted about Jeff going to Lake Arrowhead, I suggested that maybe Michelle would be inspired by Jeff's hunger since she had made comments in an interview about not being as motivated as she once was. Once again, a comment was twisted as a bash where none was intended.

[Erin S.]

Okay, last night I actually had a bad dream about this thread. Yes I know it makes me nerdy but in my defense I was reading it right before I went to bed and I guess it really upset me. I don't see a single poster in this thread who has not articulately and beautifully expressed love and respect for Michelle's skating countless times since I've been on this forum. It makes me really, really sad to see everyone so angry at each other over such marginal inaccuracies and slight differences of opinion--everyone has so much more in common than they have in difference. This is not to say differences aren't worth debating, but I wish it didn't have to be so polarizing. In the real world I only have two friends who care about skating at all, and one of them thinks Emily Hughes should have gone to Torino instead of Michelle (needless to say I would have a hard time watching skating with her!), so it's hard to describe what a wonderful outlet this has been. Which is why, I guess, it affected me emotionally enough that I would actually have a dream about that everyone is so upset with each other. I agree that a lot of people have unfairly criticized Michelle for not "upping the ante" in the last couple of years, but I just don't see those opinions expressed here, in this thread, by anyone. I thought DL's original point was that Michelle having ANY trouble with jumps was so shocking as to make it obvious that she was injured--not because she was resting on her laurels and only because her jumping technique has been so flawless in the past that any mistakes are startling. I understand why people are so sensitive to the topic because Michelle has been subjected to countless unfair criticisms by other elements in the skating world (and on this Board in the past). I just really wish we could focus on what unites us now. This community is usually such a warm and wonderful resource. Rant over now--I sincerely apologize if that sounded preachy in any way.

[Krista]

good post Erin :) :clap

[Dragonlady]

Thank you so much Erin. I appreciate your comments very much.

[Deetlebug]

Erin, I couldn't have said it better myself. Which is why I haven't posted a comment in this thread though I felt much the same way you do after reading it.

Thank you for expressing so eloquently the things I was struggling to find words for.

I miss Michelle and her skating very much, and I hope with everything I have that I don't lose the pleasure of spending time at this Forum as well.

[MKGrace]

While it's reasonable to note that Arakawa won the Olympics with 5 triples and no 3/3, it is also reasonable to note that Worlds 2004, 05 and 06 were all won by skaters with two 3/3's and 7 clean triples.

I thought Irina did one 3/3 (3lutz/3loop) and 5 other triples?? I don't remember 2 3/3's in her program. Either way the last few years of World championships have skated tough programs. It's a shame the Olympic program standard was downsized this time.

Nice post Erin. I do not understand why posters who are clearly Michelle fans have to undergo the inquisition every time they post anything that even remotely suggests Michelle doesn't walk on water.

Back to the original question: Is the COP/6.0 due to a generation gap? Answer: No.

[kwanette]

Okay, last night I actually had a bad dream about this thread. Yes I know it makes me nerdy but in my defense I was reading it right before I went to bed and I guess it really upset me. I don't see a single poster in this thread who has not articulately and beautifully expressed love and respect for Michelle's skating countless times since I've been on this forum. It makes me really, really sad to see everyone so angry at each other over such marginal inaccuracies and slight differences of opinion--everyone has so much more in common than they have in difference. This is not to say differences aren't worth debating, but I wish it didn't have to be so polarizing. In the real world I only have two friends who care about skating at all, and one of them thinks Emily Hughes should have gone to Torino instead of Michelle (needless to say I would have a hard time watching skating with her!), so it's hard to describe what a wonderful outlet this has been. Which is why, I guess, it affected me emotionally enough that I would actually have a dream about that everyone is so upset with each other. I agree that a lot of people have unfairly criticized Michelle for not "upping the ante" in the last couple of years, but I just don't see those opinions expressed here, in this thread, by anyone. I thought DL's original point was that Michelle having ANY trouble with jumps was so shocking as to make it obvious that she was injured--not because she was resting on her laurels and only because her jumping technique has been so flawless in the past that any mistakes are startling. I understand why people are so sensitive to the topic because Michelle has been subjected to countless unfair criticisms by other elements in the skating world (and on this Board in the past). I just really wish we could focus on what unites us now. This community is usually such a warm and wonderful resource. Rant over now--I sincerely apologize if that sounded preachy in any way.

Erin, I'm sorry that this thread has been so emotionally upsetting for you. It's a shame that you had to go to bed with a forum topic on your mind. Yes, this forum is indeed a wonderful resource...for all kinds of FACTUAL information. That may, indeed, be the source of certain differences of opinions. I also suspect by your "join date" that you have not been privy to some of the differences of opinion here, kind of like "antecedent action" in a novel. And, yes, Michelle would , one would think, be the common tie here. I don't doubt that people here "love" Michelle, but love is relative. I loved my mom and OJ loved Nicole. Trust me, Erin, this will pass...for a time and then something similar will occur again. That's the nature of a discussion board.

I hope that you sleep better tonight...warm milk and Lyra Angelica always work for me.:)

[taf]

There is a HUGE difference between saying Michelle walks on water and saying Michelle is lazy, over-the-hill, puffy, unmotivated, doesn't make good career choices, has ugly costumes, uses bad music, has watered down programs, calls in her performances, etc, etc, etc. Does it really matter whether the snarky, unfair comments come from a fan or a detractor? And it's not right to be accused of being biased every time someone defends Michelle...it's not being biased to try to correct a misstatement. No one thinks Michelle walks on water, or is an angel come to earth, or a goddess.

At a time when you would think we would be celebrating her stellar career and looking back fondly at those special Michelle moments, there are people still sniping at her. It gets very old, especially when they deny they ever said it, or that they didn't mean it that way. (BTW, we do have archives.)

You know, Michelle can't turn back time and correct all those "errors", she can only go forward. What do people who criticize every little thing think she can do about it now?

[Dragonlady]

What do people who criticize every little thing think she can do about it now?

People aren't criticizing every little thing. They're discussing in a reasonable fashion aspects of her career and choices she's made that they find interesting in some way. Whether you agree with the approach or not, they are valid discussions. What gets old is the constant sniping, misreading and out and out attacks that happen whenever people don't gush with reverence over every aspect of Michelle's career. You don't have to read these threads or respond to them if you're that offended by the discussions.

Yeah, we do have archives and they do support everything I've said here about misquotes.

[vive_la_reine]

Enough...I gotta chime in:

COP is a Crock of Poop.

Michelle not winning Worlds 05 SP is a Crock of Poop.

Michelle and Rafael not having a winning strategy in 05 is a Crock of Poop.

Constant misrepresenting the FACTS about Michelle's record is a Crock of Poop.

Not including Michelle's VERY SERIOUS injury in one's evaluation of 03, 04, or 05 is a Crock of Poop with beans and bacon.

taf is a Crock of Lavender Blossoms. I believe we are doing the same dance around the room for some posts. Watch for us on Dancing With the Stars accompanied by GinnySmith singing "The Truth Will Set You Free From Your Crock".:lol :lol :lol

I had to come back and thank you for this. I am ROTFLMAO...and warming up my pipes as I type. See you on Dancing with the Stars, my dear PoopChez! Bye for now! :hug

[Sparks]

Whether you agree with the approach or not, they are valid discussions.
I *heart* valid discussions. What invalidates these 'discussions' is when un-truths are told in defense of someone's current opinion.

...out and out attacks that happen whenever people don't gush with reverence over every aspect of Michelle's career.
Awww! Attacks? Pobrecita. :cry

I may be old, and I may have some other problems, BUTT I remember quite clearly what has been said about Michelle by DL in the past.
To use an old adage: It's not the crime, it's the cover-up. ;)

[lavender]

Sorry Michelle. If you had that pot o gold when a once in a lifetime lucky person winds up getting it these days all your flaws would have been forgotten.:sarcastic

[mao3x]

I may be old, and I may have some other problems, BUTT I remember quite clearly what has been said about Michelle by DL in the past.
To use an old adage: It's not the crime, it's the cover-up. ;)

Well, DL always has her 'facts' handy. :P

[centerstagequeen]

Again, I have never implied Michelle was lazy. That is how the words were twisted. I was not told about Frank Carroll's comment until about a year ago so I didn't know she was injured in 2001, although I suspected it after she stopped attempting the 3/3 in 2001/2002. When I posted those suspicions here, I was ripped for it, just as I was ripped for posting Frank's comment last year after she pulled out of the Olympics.

When I posted about Jeff going to Lake Arrowhead, I suggested that maybe Michelle would be inspired by Jeff's hunger since she had made comments in an interview about not being as motivated as she once was. Once again, a comment was twisted as a bash where none was intended.

Dragonlady, I hold nothing against anyone on this forum and I simply stated what I remembered. Trust me, I wish I had saved both of our posts so you can see I did not twist your words.

I know you are a Michelle fan and very knowledgeable in this sport as many others in this forum. I love meeting Michelle fans on MKF but I don't always agree with their words. If I read something which I believe is not the truth or conflict to themselves, I will respond.

And if you think those "fact" you stated regarding how Michelle's programs "don't begin to approach her pre-2002 programs in either difficulty or execution" is "not snarking, that's reality", then why can't you see those fact others stated in their posts regarding "how Michelle's ability to deliver a program didn't decline" the same way?

Edit to add:

Regarding Frank's comment about the possibility of Michelle undergo hip surgery. I remember the first time I read it was after 2005 or 2006 US Nationals. It was reported by a long time MKF member who had a conversation with Frank. After reading it, people were concerned and some were surprised or even upset about Frank didn't protect Michelle's privacy and revealed it to people. However, I don't remember anyone ripped off that poster who reported Frank's comment.

[YankeesSuck01]

Now I have seen everything (I did just watch Shaq hit TWO three pointers on youtube) Maybe someone should add "Not responsible for nightmares, bad dreams and other scary things that might happen when you fall asleep to the. disclaimer for this board.

[ebayj]

Okay, last night I actually had a bad dream about this thread. Yes I know it makes me nerdy but in my defense I was reading it right before I went to bed and I guess it really upset me. I don't see a single poster in this thread who has not articulately and beautifully expressed love and respect for Michelle's skating countless times since I've been on this forum. It makes me really, really sad to see everyone so angry at each other over such marginal inaccuracies and slight differences of opinion--everyone has so much more in common than they have in difference. This is not to say differences aren't worth debating, but I wish it didn't have to be so polarizing. In the real world I only have two friends who care about skating at all, and one of them thinks Emily Hughes should have gone to Torino instead of Michelle (needless to say I would have a hard time watching skating with her!), so it's hard to describe what a wonderful outlet this has been. Which is why, I guess, it affected me emotionally enough that I would actually have a dream about that everyone is so upset with each other. I agree that a lot of people have unfairly criticized Michelle for not "upping the ante" in the last couple of years, but I just don't see those opinions expressed here, in this thread, by anyone. I thought DL's original point was that Michelle having ANY trouble with jumps was so shocking as to make it obvious that she was injured--not because she was resting on her laurels and only because her jumping technique has been so flawless in the past that any mistakes are startling. I understand why people are so sensitive to the topic because Michelle has been subjected to countless unfair criticisms by other elements in the skating world (and on this Board in the past). I just really wish we could focus on what unites us now. This community is usually such a warm and wonderful resource. Rant over now--I sincerely apologize if that sounded preachy in any way.


I'm with Erin - and it explains why I rarely ever post here anymore, except to check on Dragonlady's comments on the sport. I'll stay over at FS Universe, and we'll probably all be the better for it. Carry on, have fun, be yourselves as Michelle herself would probably say.

[moxie]

I agree that a lot of people have unfairly criticized Michelle for not "upping the ante" in the last couple of years, but I just don't see those opinions expressed here, in this thread, by anyone. I thought DL's original point was that Michelle having ANY trouble with jumps was so shocking as to make it obvious that she was injured--not because she was resting on her laurels and only because her jumping technique has been so flawless in the past that any mistakes are startling. I understand why people are so sensitive to the topic because Michelle has been subjected to countless unfair criticisms by other elements in the skating world (and on this Board in the past). I just really wish we could focus on what unites us now.

Yes, absolutely!:clap

And it also would help if people would discuss the actual words that are written in a specific post in a specific thread, instead of starting with assumptions based on what was perceived to have been written two or three or even five years ago.

In such a climate as we have in this thread, a poster could make a simple statement like: "I prefer Michelle's Lyra program to Schez and Bolero,"
and then get accused of being a troll with a secret agenda to snark at her more recent performances.

[vive_la_reine]

In such a climate as we have in this thread, a poster could make a simple statement like: "I prefer Michelle's Lyra program to Schez and Bolero,"
and then get accused of being a troll with a secret agenda to snark at her more recent performances.This is a ridiculous. No one in this thread is splitting hairs to this degree. The reason some of us are crying foul is that there were repeated mistatements of Michelle's jump stats (over and above the original typo on 2002 versus 2005) trying to make a point. I'm not saying they are intentional but they are erroneous.

It is one thing to say you believe Michelle's abilties declined. It is a completely other thing to try to back up your statements with erroneous stats. If you are a fan of Michelle, then you at least owe it to her to review her performances and confirm what you are posting is accurate. But if you play fast and loose with the facts to make your point, then I have absolutely no respect for that approach.

It is the sweeping generalizations made about Michelle without really going back and watching what she has done the last few years at ALL competitions, not just one lousy showing at the 2005 worlds and the snarks at her fans being some sort of Jonestown zombies for issues with the mistatements that frustrate me to no end.

If you want to drink the Dragonlady cool aid, then fine with me. If you are looking for negative swipes at an injured Michelle over the last few years, supported by erroneous statistics, then you will no doubt adore Dragonlady.

[centerstagequeen]

Quote:

"And it also would help if people would discuss the actual words that are written in a specific post in a specific thread, instead of starting with assumptions based on what was perceived to have been written two or three or even five years ago."

I guess the above was a response to my earlier post. To be honest with you, I certainly don't enjoy bringing up something that I can't find the evidence to back up my opinion. The only reason I brought up Dragonlady's old post was because her words in this thread indeed conflict with what she said before, i.e. Since she suspected or even knew beforehand that Michelle was injured, then why continue questioning Michelle's work ethic or criticize Michelle's ability to deliver a program? What's the point? Not to mention certain things she said was NOT TRUE and members like Ginny, scootie and nymkfan had provided actual evidence to prove which part of Dragonlady's post was false and why they disagree with her. Many people who post here long enough will consider Dragonlady is knowledgeable in Figure Skating so for her to state false info is even more hurtful than a troll's bash.

Quote:

"In such a climate as we have in this thread, a poster could make a simple statement like: "I prefer Michelle's Lyra program to Schez and Bolero,"
and then get accused of being a troll with a secret agenda to snark at her more recent performances."

This is so unfair and uncalled for. If you want people "discuss the actual words that are written in a specific post in a specific thread" then I will also expect you discuss the actual post that are written in a specific thread that support your accusation. jaylee, Scrappy, taf, nymkfan, Ginny....and others who has contributed to this thread they have spent their time to provide numbers of triples, personal or professional opinions. Some may challenge Dragonlady's "fact", but no one force her to say nothing but praise Michelle. For people who disagree with her, all we want is ACCURATE INFORMATION. We challenge what has been said but we did not attack her.

Many members here know Michelle is not perfect and although we love her dearly we certainly don't expect others to praise her to the sky. As Sparks said, healthy discussion is great, but if there's false info or unfair statement then you will see people speak up. I don't care who the poster is, I only responded to the post itself according to what I know or what I believe. And MKF members are not just speaking up for Michelle, I've read many speak up for Fumie, Irina, Sasha, Yu Na.....even for different scoring system themselves as originally what we read in this thread.

[Krista]

Oh, what would people do if they didn't have the drama of mkforum to entertain them during the day :lol Its like a quilting circle or something.

[moxie]

This is a ridiculous. No one in this thread is splitting hairs to this degree. The reason some of us are crying foul is that there were repeated mistatements of Michelle's jump stats (over and above the original typo on 2002 versus 2005) trying to make a point. I'm not saying they are intentional but they are erroneous.

It is one thing to say you believe Michelle's abilties declined. It is a completely other thing to try to back up your statements with erroneous stats. If you are a fan of Michelle, then you at least owe it to her to review her performances and confirm what you are posting is accurate. But if you play fast and loose with the facts to make your point, then I have absolutely no respect for that approach.

It is the sweeping generalizations made about Michelle without really going back and watching what she has done the last few years at ALL competitions, not just one lousy showing at the 2005 worlds and the snarks at her fans being some sort of Jonestown zombies for issues with the mistatements that frustrate me to no end.

If you want to drink the Dragonlady cool aid, then fine with me. If you are looking for negative swipes at an injured Michelle over the last few years, supported by erroneous statistics, then you will no doubt adore Dragonlady.

I didn't mention DL or any poster specifically, so see, you were making an assumption of what you thought I meant instead of dealing only with the actual words that I wrote. To get this back to the topic of this thread: I support CoP not because of generational issues, but because I believe Michelle would have won the OGM in 1998 had that system been in place instead of the jump-centric 6.0 system.

[Erin S.]

Now I have seen everything (I did just watch Shaq hit TWO three pointers on youtube) Maybe someone should add "Not responsible for nightmares, bad dreams and other scary things that might happen when you fall asleep to the. disclaimer for this board.

I apologize if my mentioning a bad dream came off as melodramatic, and I don't mean to imply that it was in some way "scary." The subconscious puts all sorts of random stuff into our dreams and, as I said, I was reading this thread right before I went to sleep at around midnight. The fact of the matter is that this forum is pretty much my only entertainment during my tedious 14-hour-a-day job and I don't believe even the most creative subconscious could formulate a dream out of legal document review!

The point was simply that it saddened me enough that things were getting so tense here that it obviously stayed in my mind after I shut my computer. That's all.

[lavender]

It is sad that some have changed this website.

[Dragonlady]

And if you think those "fact" you stated regarding how Michelle's programs "don't begin to approach her pre-2002 programs in either difficulty or execution" is "not snarking, that's reality", then why can't you see those fact others stated in their posts regarding "how Michelle's ability to deliver a program didn't decline" the same way?

I agree that aspects of Michelle's performance improved during that period - her footwork in particular, and her use of her upper body. She also improved her speed which was in part, I think, why she cut back on the choreography. It's nearly impossible to skate very fast when every beat of the music is choreographed. The judges were rewarding speed, not choreography, so under 6.0 it was the smarter way to go. The problem with her Worlds program in 2005 is that CoP reversed that trend and starting rewarding transitions and choreography.

I often think that when New Judging System was being put together, they looked at tapes of Michelle around 1997 - 2001 and said "This is what we want to see" because the structure of the system is designed to reward exactly that kind of skating. I therefore find it truly ironic that the skater who would seem to epitomize what CoP was rewarding, in the only competition that she skated under this system, was no longer doing those kinds of programs. Jeff Buttle has done very well under CoP and those are the kinds of programs he skates. Admittedly, he doesn't have the jump consistentcy that Michelle had when she was winning multiple World Championships, but his other skills and musicality are amazing.

I really don't have anyone in the women's ranks who I have unabashedly come to love any more. I thought Mao Asada would be the one but it hasn't happened. There's a few that I like, none that I love, love, love.

The skater who has totally captured my heart is Nobunari Oda. On the ice, he reminds me so much of a male version of Michelle because like Michelle, his technical elements are so close to perfect, plus he has musicality and a playfulness that is genuine and infectious. When I saw him at Jr. Worlds in 2005, I said he would be World Champion some day. If he can land his quad at Worlds, this could be the year. Not to mention, he's a really nice kid off the ice.

[lavender]

I therefore find it truly ironic that the skater who would seem to epitomize what CoP was rewarding, in the only competition that she skated under this system, was no longer doing those kinds of programs.

Why is it ironic when you know why she scaled back. It's not ironic, it's strategic and you know it.. You even mentioned how they were now rewarding speed skating (Irina) over in-betweens (not your exact words). There's usually a reason to the madness. It is the judges or federation who decided that speed and jumps would all of a sudden get rewarded over quality. Then she had to changed back and she was going to until her serious injury completely took her out the picture.

[Krista]

Yeah, I agree with lavender. bottom line is that she had an injury already, she was trying to stay in it for the long run, up to the next olympics. She was smart.

[Erin S.]

All of this goes to show how exciting it would be to see Michelle with a healthy hip tackle a COP program. I count myself amongst those who dislike COP, but I believe that if anyone would use the system to its fullest potential, capturing what the system was designed to achieve rather than its reality, it would be her. I so wish we would have that opportunity.

[skatesindreams]

All of this goes to show how exciting it would be to see Michelle with a healthy hip tackle a COP program. I count myself amongst those who dislike COP, but I believe that if anyone would use the system to its fullest potential, capturing what the system was designed to achieve rather than its reality, it would be her. I so wish we would have that opportunity.

I absoutely agree, Erin!

[ScrappyTheOwl]

All of this goes to show how exciting it would be to see Michelle with a healthy hip tackle a COP program. I count myself amongst those who dislike COP, but I believe that if anyone would use the system to its fullest potential, capturing what the system was designed to achieve rather than its reality, it would be her. I so wish we would have that opportunity.

I completely agree. CoP was so catered to Michelle (at least at the time of its creation, which was before Michelle's injury). Post-injury this is obviously up for debate, pre-injury she had more transitions, spin variations, difficulty and originality in her step sequences, and so forth than anyone else out there. It was never the jumps that made me fall in love with Michelle's skating (she was solid, and I never felt I had to worry about the jumps with her), it was all the other stuff in her programs.

[Dragonlady]

It was never the jumps that made me fall in love with Michelle's skating (she was solid, and I never felt I had to worry about the jumps with her), it was all the other stuff in her programs.

Yes, yes, yes. Although I think that the security of the jumps is a factor for me because it enables me to relax and enjoy the rest of the stuff of which there was so much to love. It was always a treat to see what transitions she was going to be using and how it all tied together.

For example, Plushenko has that same kind of security in his jumps but I could never warm to his skating because there was no program around them. In spite of his considerable technical skills, there isn't a single one of his programs that I would consider memorable. He just skating past the judging tables doing tricks and then stroked up the back-side of the rink to come around for another pass. All of his big jumps were front loaded and he was a perfectly awful spinner, although he did improve his spins under CoP.

I agree that Plushenko is deserving of every one of his medals and he really was that much better than everyone else, but as a skating fan, it's really heartbreaking to see someone with that much talent and ability do so little with it when they seem to be capable of much, much more.

[YankeesSuck01]

I apologize if my mentioning a bad dream came off as melodramatic, and I don't mean to imply that it was in some way "scary." The subconscious puts all sorts of random stuff into our dreams and, as I said, I was reading this thread right before I went to sleep at around midnight. The fact of the matter is that this forum is pretty much my only entertainment during my tedious 14-hour-a-day job and I don't believe even the most creative subconscious could formulate a dream out of legal document review!

The point was simply that it saddened me enough that things were getting so tense here that it obviously stayed in my mind after I shut my computer. That's all.
I was being sarcastic. You have nothing to apologize for.

[synnabun]

MODERATOR POST

This topic is now closed. The discussion within this thread has gone too far off topic. To remind everyone it was "Is the COP/6.0 disagreement due to a generation gap?” The amount of bashing, snarkiness and ill-intent within this thread warrants too many warnings for at least 10 members. I'm going to be nice a let it slide this time. I would like to remind everyone that (as per the FAQ (http://www.mkforum.net/forum/faq.php)) if you do not like what another poster says, just ignore it. Bickering does no one any good. Report it if you feel it is out of line.

Thank you for your attention,
Bonnie