Views of the Olypmic Pairs Outcome [Archive]

Roma

12-30-2003, 03:26 PM

I know this is an old topic, but none of my friends watch skating, and I had never read any skating boards until a year ago. Therefore, I don't know what many skating spectators think about the pairs outcome at the Olympics.

Immediately after watching Bereznaya and Sikharulidze and Sale and Pelletier, I felt the decision was going to be close. S and P obviously skated a cleaner program, but I felt B and S were superior in their level difficulty, flow over the ice, and body line. Therefore, I was not shocked when B and S won in a 5/4 split.

I thought that Scott Hamilton and Sandra Bezic were horribly biased in their commentary (in fact, this was the first time I ever thought that Scott did a poor job, after years of liking his commentary) and the non-knowledgeable US media did not help the matter by showing Anton's stumble on the axel a million times, with no effort to explain B and S' strengths.

So I am wondering, does anyone on this board think that it actually WAS very close and that the gold could have gone either way? Also, does anyone think that the original outcome was correct, with B&S winning gold and S&P winning silver? That is, that without the scandal, a totally fair panel might have awarded the gold to B&S?

I am interested in getting opinions of other board members, because the coverage in the US was so slanted at the time, I never ended up getting an analysis that was both knowledgeable and unbiased.

skaternum

12-30-2003, 03:29 PM

May I suggest you do a search in the skatingforums.com archives and read the 4 million posts about that topic?

Roma

12-30-2003, 03:52 PM

I just looked up archives and could not find 2002 Olympics thread. There is "scandal central" and yes, there are about 4 million posts.However, so far I can't find one that actually analyzes the 2 performances. That is, one that simply compares the 2 without mention of the scandal.

So if anyone wants to share an opinion now, I'd be interested in hearing it. I had always thought that Elena and Anton might have won even if no scandal had ever occurred. So without re-hashing the judging scandal, I was just wondering if there are any armchair judges out there who thought that Elena and Anton were as good as / better than Jamie and David that night.

mobius

12-30-2003, 04:00 PM

Wonder who would've won under COP? My bet is B/S, since they have a high level of difficulty to begin with. COP rewards great lines, edges, etc and not so much on jumps. Look at Liashenko for example, her maturity helps her under COP, but not under the 6.0 rule. Of course, if she bombed on most of her jumps, COP wouldn't help her that much. COP allows one to make a few bobbles on jumps and still win, provided they have superior presentation to begin with.

Artemis

12-30-2003, 04:04 PM

Been there, done that ...

BTW, at the time there were many posts that did analyse the two performances, element by element, stroke by stroke. And yes, many people at the time did declare B&S to be the legit winners, or "too close to call."

But I for one have no interest in going down that road again.

jcspkbfan

12-30-2003, 06:16 PM

Honestly, I can think of a few disappointing things about the SLC pairs event that hardly anybody has ever brought up:

1. If you forget about the judging scandal and everything that happened afterwards (not an easy thing to do, I admit!), SLC was probably the most exciting and cleanly-skated pairs event since the 1994 Olympics. S&Z came very close to landing the first quad throw in pairs competition and top five or six pairs (and even a few more couples further down the ranks) skated at or very near the top of their potential. But unfortunately, the judging scandal and the resulting fallout overshadowed all of that to the point where the positive things about the event are hardly discussed anymore. :(

2. To me, the most disappointing thing about the SLC pairs event was not the fact two gold medals were awarded, but the fact that everything B&S and S&P ever accomplished prior to the 2002 Olympics and everything either pair will ever accomplish during their pro careers will forever be overshadowed by what happened at SLC. :cry: Sadly, I'm afraid that would still be the case even if the second gold medals weren't awarded. Regardless of which pair you think deserves to be the "true" 2002 Olympic pairs champions (and I think either pair, under "normal" circumstances, would have been wonderfully deserving Olympic champions), I think the fact most casual skating fans remember their roles in the judging scandal more than anything either pair has accomplished on the ice is one of the saddest things of all about SLC. Both these pairs--no matter which you thought deserved the gold--deserve to be remembered and respected for much more than that, IMO. :(

3. A lot of people have also forgotten S&P are the first Canadian skaters to win Olympic gold in over 50 years--one of the main reasons why so many fans reacted so strongly after they originally placed second. For about five minutes, it looked like the Olympic curse on Canadian figure skaters had finally been broken...until S&P's marks came up. Another incredible accomplishment which, again, will be forever overshadowed by the controversial way in which they won and the judging scandal mess. :(

I'll leave the personal opinions, detailed analysis and inevitable flame wars to others here, but I just wanted to point out a few things I've rarely seen brought up in any of the other 548 "SLC pairs scandal rehash" threads I've read.

Roma

12-30-2003, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by Artemis
Been there, done that ...

BTW, at the time there were many posts that did analyse the two performances, element by element, stroke by stroke. And yes, many people at the time did declare B&S to be the legit winners, or "too close to call."

But I for one have no interest in going down that road again.

Artemis, that is interesting - I wish I had seen those analyses, and it is interesting for me to learn that others had also considered the competition too close to call. I'm not a skater, and everything I know I have taught myself from watching tv. I have become pretty good at placing the top skaters when I do my armchair judging, but I occasionally am way off, so I had always wondered if anyone else but me had thought that it was close.

As to going down that road...just to let you know, I started this as a sincere thread seeking information, and I didn't want stir up anything. Since I have no friends that are knowledgeable about skating I thought I'd toss this out to people on the board.

Also, to jcspkbfan - you make very good points. I also thought that the 2002 pairs event was a wonderfully skated competition, and it is a shame that the quality of the actual skating is often lost due to the memory of the scandal.

A.H.Black

12-30-2003, 11:33 PM

Hi Roma

Since you are fairly new to the boards, here's some of the history. There were 4 million posts, but they were mostly over at FSW, before the big blow-up. You can probably still find a lot of information in the FSU archives. Skatingforums was still quite new. In fact, Adrian didn't start this board until after the Olympics were over.

The reason many people don't want to go down that road again is because it go sooooo ugly. I was lucky enough to volunteer at ice level for the Olympics. I got to see both/all the pairs in practice and in both performances.

My feeling has always been that, as has often happened, some of the judges were judging what they had seen in practice and not what they saw on the night. In practice, Berezhnaya and Sikharulidze were magic and I was sure they would blow away any competiton. Mind you, I was/am NOT a particularly big fan of theirs.

Sale and Pelletier, on the other hand, were not very good in practice and had lots of problems. This seemed surprising to me because the year before, at 4 continents and Skate America, they were fabulous in practice as well as in performance. I didn't think they would be up to the task at Olympics after seeing practice.

That night, however, things were totally opposite of practice. Anton seemed to be very nervous and it showed. Their performance was not nearly as electric as the practices. Sale and Pelletier, on the other hand, were totally onand I thought they deserved the Gold on performance quality alone. I was NOT convinced that they would win, though, because of past experience. I was not surprised when they placed second for the reasons I expressed above.

The surprising part what all the stuff that happened afterward. Since I was so involved with volunteering, I actually didn't hear a lot of the TV stuff. I can say this; if you thought the hubbub on TV was out of proportion, it was NOTHING compared to what was happening on the boards. Like Artemis, there's a whole lot I don't want to remember about that stuff.

Alexa

12-31-2003, 08:01 AM

I don't mind discussion about the pairs event, but I do have to say I get very tired of the fluff pieces that are done on S/P and B/S whenever they are on a TV skating event together. Does the media think we have not heard enough about this from them? And do they think that the skating fans that tune into the event don't know about the scandal?

Sorry--a little off topic! In summary, a good discussion among skating fans on the topic is fine with me, but I wish we could watch a skating event without having to see S/P and B/S being interviewed about the scandal over and over again. Yes, we know they are friends now, I don't think they need to remind us about it.

icedancer2

12-31-2003, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by A.H.Black

The reason many people don't want to go down that road again is because it go sooooo ugly. I was lucky enough to volunteer at ice level for the Olympics. I got to see both/all the pairs in practice and in both performances.

My feeling has always been that, as has often happened, some of the judges were judging what they had seen in practice and not what they saw on the night. In practice, Berezhnaya and Sikharulidze were magic and I was sure they would blow away any competiton. Mind you, I was/am NOT a particularly big fan of theirs.

Sale and Pelletier, on the other hand, were not very good in practice and had lots of problems. This seemed surprising to me because the year before, at 4 continents and Skate America, they were fabulous in practice as well as in performance. I didn't think they would be up to the task at Olympics after seeing practice.

That night, however, things were totally opposite of practice. Anton seemed to be very nervous and it showed. Their performance was not nearly as electric as the practices. Sale and Pelletier, on the other hand, were totally onand I thought they deserved the Gold on performance quality alone. I was NOT convinced that they would win, though, because of past experience. I was not surprised when they placed second for the reasons I expressed above.

I like your perspective on this subject. From what I could see on TV, that night was completely special for S/P and from the audience's reaction to their program, I wasn't the only one who felt that. B/S program may have been more difficult, whatever, but it wasn't "on", it wasn't "special".

Same with the ladies event. So much discussion about the top four placements, but again, Sarah's skate was completely special -- she was in a different stratosphere than the others -- on that night, for that skate -- and her winning made it even more magical.

For me, I hope that we will continue to have these "special" performances, ones that we will remember for a long time, and having those special performances rewarded with gold medals makes the experience even more satisfying. I hope that with the newCoP system that those "special skates" are not lost and it's all just about technique and picking apart the programs second by second, step by step, landing by landing (revolution by revolution).

At that point my sport becomes dull and weighty and not worth watching anymore.

Just my 2 cents. Thanks for the sanity of this discussion.

Flatfoote

12-31-2003, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by Alexa
I don't mind discussion about the pairs event, but I do have to say I get very tired of the fluff pieces that are done on S/P and B/S whenever they are on a TV skating event together. Does the media think we have not heard enough about this from them? And do they think that the skating fans that tune into the event don't know about the scandal?

ITA. But look how many years it took for Katia to just be Katia again (in the eyes of the media) instead of "Katia-whose-husband-tragically-died-of-a-heart-attack." I felt so badly for her. And the media seemed to have no problem rubbing her personal pain in her face for the purpose of attracting viewers.

I suspect "The Scandal" will be alive and well in the media right up to (and including) the next Oly Pairs event. In fact, I'm sure it will be a highlighted fluff piece for the next Olypmics.

jcspkbfan

12-31-2003, 10:58 PM

ITA with you, Alexa--and as long as networks keep doing those "fluff pieces," people will continue to think of the judging scandal instead of the skating whenever they see either of the 2002 Olympic pairs champions. Both teams have obviously moved on and put the scandal behind them; I hope the networks will eventually do the same.

It's especially sad the networks don't seem to realize constantly rehashing the SLC scandal is actually turning longtime fans away from the sport, not helping it.

Thanks for posting your perspective of the 2002 pairs event, A.H. Black--it's always interesting to read a POV from someone who witnessed an event live...especially practice sessions and other things we usually don't get to see on TV. Out of all the different opinions about SLC, I don't remember reading too many posts from people who actually witnessed the event in person. I had limited online and TV time during most of SLC (which, in retrospect, was probably a good thing!) and I'm probably one of the few fans who've never heard the NBC commentary of the event (again, probably a good thing!)

Roma, I think you'll find almost any debate on a skating board about who should have won a particular event that took place years ago has the potential to turn into an ugly flamewar. Debates about the SLC pairs event can be especially volatile because (a) it's a fairly recent competition still fresh in a lot of people's minds and (b) whether or not you agree with the results of that competition or the way things were handled, that scandal turned a lot of fans away from figure skating altogether. :cry: Just compare the amount of activity on FSW just before SLC and the amount of activity here now. Yes, most of the ugly trolls posting back then have (thankfully) disappeared, but so have a lot of the intelligent "normal" posters who were regulars back then. Not just the ones who have "moved on" to other boards for one reason or another, but the ones who seem to have disappeared from skating fandom (or post much less than they used to) altogether. :(

BTW, thanks to everyone who's posted here so far for keeping this particular discussion civil--let's hope it stays that way! :D

loveskating

01-01-2004, 10:12 AM

I agree with your post, Roma, it could have gone either way that night, very close. In general, both pairs are very great, each for somewhat different reasons, and I truly love them both, much as I truly loved G&G and M&D (although G&G were technically better).

At the time, my stomach was in a knot for days for fear either one of the pairs teams I loved would wind up being humiliated or hurt, so the outcome of two golds was alright with me in that context...but I wish the whole thing had never happened to begin with.

icenut84

01-01-2004, 03:05 PM

I don't think there's anything wrong with discussing this event, especially if a poster hasn't read many opinions on it before. The only problem is if it turns ugly, but hopefully that won't happen.

IMO, the competition was very close and could have gone either way. At the time, I tried to analyse why the skaters might have got the marks they did, and I remember people agreeing with me, so I'll see what I can remember.

On the technical merit side, S&P's elements were overall cleaner than B&S's. The only flaws I saw in S&P's elements were a kind of jerky landing on Jamie's first throw, and travelling on the flying spins. As for B&S, the throw landings were a little tight, and Anton had the bobble after the double axel (although he already had the landing). Therefore, S&P won this portion, which is what happened.

On the presentation side, B&S were clearly (to me, at least) superior in many of the aspects. If you take the presentation components from COP, it's easier to analyse. Skating skills - most people would give this to B&S I think - their edging is wonderful, as well as their speed. Choreography, interpretation, performance & execution - I'm not sure of the details of how each of these segments are marked, but IMO B&S's choreography was superior. They had more intricacy and originality in Meditation than S&P had in Love Story (which was several years old - though I don't know if that'd matter). And in the other category, transitions, B&S were definitely better. Love Story is a very empty programme - aside from the elements, it's little more than crossovers. Therefore, B&S won this portion, which is what happened.

In competitions, the presentation mark is the tiebreaker, ie it is the more important mark. Therefore, B&S won.

I also think the whole thing took away from the wonderful performances in the rest of the competition. S&Z for example - they may not have been totally clean, but their attempt at the quad throw was absolutely amazing - I think it must be the biggest throw I've EVER seen, and they were so close. Ina & Zimmerman gave a great performance too. Unfortunately, the furore over the outcome distracted from everything else.

Roma

01-01-2004, 09:57 PM

Well, everyone, this has been very enjoyable reading your analyses. Prior to joining this board, I never had anyone to chat about the details of skating with, since none of my friends knows anything about skating. (My husband can recognize a double axel, he loves back inside death spirals, he hates triple twists because they often end in collisions, and he did give Shen and Zhao a standing ovation at 2003 Worlds because he said he could tell it was a truly great performance. But that's the extent of his pairs knowledge.) So I never had the opportunity to discuss the Olympic pairs event with anyone really knowledgeable until now. I had always wondered if it was indeed as close as it seemed to me, or if Sale and Pelletier were the perfectly obvious winners that NBC had made them out to be.

So thanks for sharing your thoughts, everyone. And anyone else who cares to add something it'll be nice to read your perspective.

Mel On Ice

01-02-2004, 09:43 AM

It was always my impression that a few of the judges were "saving" their 1st place votes for S&Z in case they did land the quad throw.

The great thing about the scandal is that both pairs, with their sportsmanship and concern for the other pair, have come out of this smelling like roses. They both have gold and have forged one of the most unique friendships on the pro circuit. To me, there is no question that they are both Olympic Champions.

icenut84

01-03-2004, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by Mel On Ice
It was always my impression that a few of the judges were "saving" their 1st place votes for S&Z in case they did land the quad throw.

That's the way it should be, IMO. I think that's why none of the judges gave either B&S or S&P a 6.0 (although there were lots of 5.9s flying around). It wouldn't be fair on S&Z if there weren't enough possible marks left for first place before they even skated.

I think, though, it would have been fascinating if S&Z *had* won. What would the NA media have done? Petitioned for a second silver? I doubt it. Twould have been interesting, to say the least.

Gaela

01-06-2004, 02:48 PM

For me, the tricky part was the stage that was set prior to the Olympics. S&P were presented as the stronger in presentation, the pair with magic and chemistry. Love Story had always scored higher presentation marks than tech marks.

The two teams were presented as about equal, and I think I was not alone in expecting that if one team went clean and the other didn't, that pair would win.

If S&P had been seen as underdogs, or lesser skaters, it would have been easier to swallow when they lost.

But, in truth, it was a close call. I've watched the competition about 50 times, and always choose S&P, because of the simplicity and choreo and magic of Love Story. However, SO thought they were flat and would have picked the Russian pair.

Anton and Elena had superior unison and ice coverage, but their long was not as perfect and spell-binding as their short IMO. The two small mistakes gave S&P the edge in my opinion.

When the Russians won at first, Debbi Wilkes said it might have been a mistake to use LS rather than Orchid, as Orchid was a more comparable program to Meditation. I tend to agree. I still think S&P chose the easier path and did not go the extra mile of take Orchid to the Olympics. Never seeing that program skated to potential is something I'm sad about.

There was a lot of debate on the boards as to whether the media was responsible for the second gold or the judging scandal. There were a lot of conspiracy theories. Then the mafia rumors of Mr. T started. Then Le Guin claimed she was pressured and denied being pressured by the federation.

So, the full story has never come out. I'd love to know what happened, but since its all smoke and mirrors, I choose to believe that the judge was pressured to vote for the Canadians, but also think the Canadian/west bloc might have been doing their own pressuring.

There was 50 years of history at stake, and all the politicing went terribly wrong thing time round.

sybyl

01-06-2004, 03:28 PM

The result could have gone either way but I think why there has been so much emotion and flame throwing is because both camps do not feel that justice happened and injustice always breeds emotion. S&P's supporters feel that they should have won and were cheated by corrupt juging. S&B's supporters also feel that they should have won and that they have been cheated by a corrupt system that allowed media pressure to award a second gold so quickly with little investigation into what or what did not happen and wether or wether not a second medal was really deserved and if or if not S&P did deserve the medal. If so and there was cheating only one medal should have been awarded or the whole event nullified and the Russian and French federations fined. But that could have caused major problems for the Olympic federation so they took the easy way out and said no-one is to blame two medals are given which pleased no-one.

LTM

01-06-2004, 06:16 PM

I'm one of those people who, after following this sport (repeat sport) for years, was so turned off skating I barely watched it for a year. It took last years Worlds and some attempt to make changes to how skating is scored to get me watching again. And the jury's still out.
The thing that ticked me off the most had nothing to do with
anything on the ice.
how stupid (or perhaps insular) are some of the people
involved in this sport. They were in the worlds biggest fish bowl, the Olympics surrounded by lord knows how many media looking for stories with very knowledgable fans crowding the arena. There's been complaints of crooked judging for YEARS and rumblings at the Nagano Olympics 4 years before. Yet this bunch, thinking perhaps only Kryptonite affects them, could only stand there resembling guppies at feeding time when the sh@t finally hit the fan. It seemed to have occurred to no one that eventually this was going to happen, given that skaters the world over are improving and it really is going to start coming down to little tiny things between skater a or b that will decide any competition. "Skater" fans need to learn that one too. No skater is going to be bang on 100 percent of the time. Once in a while everybody gets to loose.
As to which team actually won, I don't care.
S& P and B & S skated the best they could that night. It isn't their fault their sport's officals and judges let them down.

bleu

01-06-2004, 10:19 PM

the problem that I have...how things turned out for these 4 skaters...mostly what was been said about them on the internet...and still is said to this date..some of what has been said in the past seem to ignore the skaters themselves...that they are human with imperfections, their accomplishements and their different styles. It seems to me there were few debates on how wonderful it is to see two styles[a modern vs a classic style] of skating in this age of several Carmens or DQ in a field but more on who is the better one. Often times, this comparison went from what started out as a good debate about the vintage S/P and vintage B/S to something entirely different, like listing several points and therefore this is the better team. No matter what one says, both pairs have strengths and weaknesses which is why they are so close to each other.

The last time I watched pairs was G&G then I lost interest in it and only came back to it because worlds 2001 was held in Vancouver. This was the first time I saw S&P...had no idea who they were...I knew Elena and Anton. The first thing that I noticed was the difference in style. I never thought I would see a pair like this because I was so used to seeing the great pairs skaters of Moskvina. I fell in love with this *different* pair doing its own thing. For me, what S&P accomplished in 4 years is an exceptional accomplishment...slc 2002 or not. Tell me of any pair that has been able to do all that in 4 yrs. It is not easy, baby!!!! Looking back, I think everything from Kamloop 1999 to SLC 2002 was all meant to happen.

Then I got a hold of several tapes from the past of B&S and saw the magic, lines and elegance. B/S *do what the Russians are known for doing very well*. Like I said, I went into the games without been much a fan but came out of the SLC 2002 scandal a fan. I appreciate what they do.

I guess in the end, I like both of them because I truly believe they are both great. Come to think of it, what other field gave us such depth in the last 4 yrs?