Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Skating skills

(This is a test run of the skating skills post embed. It might appear or disappear depending on if the embeds worked to show the entire video.)

Before I start, I want to link this again. Skatinganalysts blog.

If anybody in media ever visits the dubemoir blog, there is no excuse to not read skatinganalysts blog. It's linked on the side bar too.

The media doesn't understand technique? I'm sure the usual suspects want to, or they wouldn't be writing about figure skating year after year. Now they can understand technique. They can go there and read about it, with on point gif and video illustrations created from video of Davis White's and Virtue Moir's 2013-2014 performances, and performances from many more, accompanied by clear citations to the relevant rules that governed the scores they receive. You will see how little relationship there is to how DW were scored and what they actually did and didn't do on the ice.

Unless the skating itself - the technique of it, the skill of it, doesn't actually interest them, which can't possibly be it. They're professionals.

Here's an illustration of Charlie's wonderful back outside exit edge on the first choctaw in the Olympic team event free dance at the beginning of the diagonal step sequence. They got level 4.
That's not a flat from Charlie. That's skating while
Davis White.
Skating analysts blog has gifs and video of this moment, and many other moments, not just a screencap.

For now, I'm linking Davis White versus embedding. The embed issue now is, I uploaded the Davis White video onto veoh myself, and did not upload the Virtue Moir video, but the embed code still embeds the Virtue Moir video with a Davis White link slugged below the video. Same thing when I embed from canadablue's veoh. I don't know why that is, as I uploaded to veoh from a daily motion download, not by downloading canadablue's veoh and re-uploading to the oycanada veoh account. But still, the embed of Davis White doesn't want to embed Davis White.

Here's the link to Davis White (for now), until the embed issue is resolved:

Davis White Skating Skills Video

and - omg, it appears as if Part 1 successfully uploaded to the blog. Fingers crossed, stay tuned for Part II.




"Skating" Skills, Part 2.
 
videos from canadablue.

Part 3.



See the title cards. These aren't suggestions. These are the criteria that determine how a judging panel should score a program. Read them. How it says "this" gets the highest scores. Watch Meryl and Charlie get 10s and +3s for doing none of it, for doing what is explicitly discouraged in the rules that govern the scoring. The rules don't simply say we prefer that you do it this way. The rules also say, explicitly, don't do it the way Meryl and Charlie are doing it.

I'm putting Davis White up first because everyone knows Virtue Moir do it right. They out CoP, CoP. Even DW fans, for all the crap they've slung, know Virtue Moir DO it. DW fans don't argue this. They just look for any imperfection in VM, because they pretend DW and VM are starting on a level playing field. They're not. DW aren't on the field at all. A VM mistake is irrelevant until and unless DW actually skate their fucking program by the rules. Until they do, nothing VM do or don't do on the ice is relevant to an outcome that has DW on top.

The rules and criteria for any sport are important. It's important when a sport decides these rules can be tossed out the window, all the while pretending the rules are still being observed.

It seems to me a lot of fans think the rulebook itself is only part of what the judges use to award scores. They think that, legitimately, judges can score on impact, on "freshness" (as if DW are fresh? For real??), and on any random criteria that speaks to their personal taste and sense of occasion, and then use the rulebook a little bit if they like, as maybe an influence on scoring, but the rules aren't actually "rules" about scoring.

It's important when everyone inside the sport colludes to pretend this gold medal heist didn't happen, and when the media is too ignorant to call it out. The media points to results (the protocols) to justify results, or points to past crap scores to justify today's crap scores because it hasn't read the rulebook, and doesn't have a clue what's being done on the ice either. The figure skating media, including those that have written books about figure skating, including those with websites showcasing themselves as experts, haven't bothered to learn anything about what goes on on the ice vis a vis the scoring system set down in CoP.

Then these same complacent ignoramuses will lecture the public about what went down.They pump the public full of misinformation. They muddy the waters on purpose.

When it comes to knowing if a result is legitimate or isn't, the proof isn't in the background of the judges on the panel, or in the protocols, or in anything some union, organization or federation head announces. It's on the ice. Look on the ice, look at the rules. There's the proof.

Imagine any other sport where the proof of a legitimate outcome rested in the score, or past scores. A sport where, no matter what we saw happening on the field, the court, or the rink, no matter what the playback showed, the only proof of foul play or shady dealing rested in finding out the scoring officials were crooked. Or in proving some authorities colluded on a deal.* Not some "deal" to throw the game. The game was played in earnest, to the best of the abilities of the athletes in question. No, the deal happened before the game, to score and call it a certain way no matter what happened on the field of play.

Only if you were able to prove behind-the-scenes shenanigans could you question the outcome. Because nobody was able to look at video of what happened on the field, the court, or the rink to see for themselves. Or the sport pretended nobody was able to do that, and the media hadn't bothered, so they went along with it.

That's figure skating.

The people who write about skating don't take either step - they don't look at skating with informed eyes, and they don't look at the rulebook themselves. And the people who are in skating don't want them to.

Doesn't that interest people? That this mindset exists all down the line from in-house flacks like P.J. Kwong to former champions like Evegny Platov. Don't tell us it's a subjective sport. We have eyes. What DW did and didn't do isn't subjective. But we're not supposed to "get hysterical" or whine, or complain. The sport patronizes the hell out of the public.

As I've said before, I believe this goes to the female demographic.

It's important for "fans" to recognize the unholy mind fuckery that happens when a team that wins because the rules were tossed out the window then runs around saying they're the best in the world at fulfilling those rules.That's enough. It's one thing to get worked over by a couple of up-their-own asses individual ice dancers who gaslight the public for their own entertainment. It's another to get consciously and deliberately worked over and fucked over by an entire sport and the media that covers it, and the insiders tasked with explaining it to us, and it's certainly a whole other thing when dissent is told to shut up.

It's not even mindfuckery really. It's more like despotism. More like, hell. Is. They lie to us, and lie about us (we've seen that with the Yuna/Slotnikova stuff; we've seen it with what gets through as comments and what doesn't).

That's post-Sochi figure skating. After a brief flirtation with legitimacy, figure skating, and most specifically, ice dance, decided to re-embrace corruption with a vengeance. Because, as has been observed before, things have been hinky in the medal department in the past, but usually, at an Olympics, the sport tries to get the gold medal right. Almost every gold medal in the past has been, at least, arguable. There are legitimate factors and values to weigh and compare.

In Sochi, in ice dance, there were none. Because there are rules, and DW didn't follow the rules or demonstrate the highest quality skating as explicitly set down in the sport's rules and criteria. They got away with it because those in the sport who know the difference looked the other way or told us it was there when our eyes said it wasn't, and those who cover the sport haven't bothered to learn anything.

DW ostentatiously, flagrantly, employed moves that are explicitly discouraged in the rules, and they frequently demonstrated substandard execution explicitly described in the rules. You can SEE it. It's not subjective. If somebody is on two feet, they're on two feet. It's not anyone's perspective if it's one or two. If someone is running on their toes or on flats, it's not depending on your perspective if they're running or gliding on a deep, clean edge.

I've talked about how figure skating seems arcane to many people, how casual viewers have no bloody idea what's going on out there. But Davis & White make it very simple to see that it's NOT going on out there.The only reason any observer could believe Davis White deserved the gold is if they don't know what the CoP rules and criteria actually are.

And that's why they don't want us to know the rules and criteria, or technique. The entire season we were told it's something like performance art with a little skating on the side and a whole bunch of non-quantifiable "impact" factors. Because if anyone has any idea whatsoever that the actual skating is what gets the points, even somebody who hasn't been taught edge one about figure skating knows Davis & White hijacked the gold medal. It's that obvious.

This post will end with the skating skills video of Virtue and Moir, and another post will handle the gala. So before we get to VM, let's  look at this teensy weensy guy getting lifted by this brute of a woman. If he were fat like Tessa these two could never get it done. As Dave Leese says, good lifting technique is all about the big strong one lifting the sylph:



It's because Meryl is such a slip of a thing that their lifts are so effortless, winning easy L4 and consistent +3:


Imagine if she weighed anything.
I think it's important that fans who have an enduring interest in figure skating at the very least educate themselves about skating technique, and, I think, that as un-fun as it may be, it's past time that blogs or web pages that talk about skating in any way at all talk about it from the point of view of people who know what the standards and criteria are and know how to recognize if it's being done on the ice.

And these sites should present it so that people who don't know anything about skating skills might know something when they're done reading.

At present, people write whole op eds on figure skating results without knowing step one about figure skating. To repeat the main point of this post: The answers are ON THE ICE. Not in a back room. Not on the judges' panel and the history of the judges. Not via the grapevine. ON THE ICE. That will tell you if something is legit or it's not.

It's the last place anybody looks, because the people who know what's happening on the ice ignore it, and the people who write about it  - the people who aren't embedded in the corruption that is competitive figure skating - don't bother figuring out how to look at what's on the ice so they'll be able to tell - for themselves, without some choreographer, coach or skater/drinking buddy whispering in their ear - what's being done out there.

I think it is important, and of course, long past due, for information about figure skating technique to be easily available/accessible on the internet. Even if the sport itself, and those who cover the sport, work hard to tell us it's not important. The sport as it stands now is a festering clusterfuck of blatant corruption, and that corruption is permitted because people who watch figure skating, cover figure skating and talk about figure skating do not know what is going on on the ice relative to the scores. They just look at the scores to decide what must have happened on the ice. Therefore, the scores can be whatever the fuck the ISU decides. It can say up is down, in is out, bad is good - and that last is precisely what the ISU did do in Sochi.

Here's Virtue Moir:

Watch Virtue Moir 2014 O FD Skating Skills in Sports | View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com

____________________________
*That's extra bullshit, and can lead to an outcome where what happened on the ice was legit (B&S over S&P in 2002) but because somebody was able to produce (or coerce) an admission of deal making, suddenly what happened on the ice didn't matter. As I've said before, for me the SLC "scandal" was that a couple of commentators were allowed to railroad an outcome they didn't like towards the outcome they wanted, simply by screaming to the media, and the scandal was also that the victory of an obviously superior team shocked so many people an investigation was launched. Both of those things suggest to me that the "scandal" was an internal political scandal, not a legitimate miscarriage of sports justice. The scandal was the inferior team was supposed to win and somebody fell down on the job.

115 comments:

  1. The D/W link is working for me...thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Meryl's edge looks pretty shallow as well. I bet another team would not get the benefit of the doubt.

    And they should get poor GOEs for their shallow edges. I don't get how anyone can say that DW deserve +3s for their step sequences.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I love how all the media and the Platovs were brushing off the reports of the collusion on the basis that D/W didn't need help to "win" because of their track record since 2012, and nobody actually going back to check the performances. How can anybody who saw Carmen argue it was inferior to NDP?

    Anybody who watched 2001 Worlds knows that S&P didn't deserve to win over B&S, and I remember at the time, the coach for B&S somewhat brushed it off that because Worlds were in Canada that year, they expected that outcome. And then at SLC, Sandra Bezic and co just completely swept what happened in 2001 under the rug.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 10:01 - shallow is the new standard. You don't want to be into the ice, you want to be above the ice. Ask Platov.

      Delete
    2. I'm sure the rules will get around to acknowledging the current criteria. Run around the rink stabbing divots into the ice with your toe picks. Crouch and clutch on wide-planted flats. Time violations for edges held too long. Etc.

      Delete
    3. What did Platov say?
      I find it rather interesting that his team of DW doppelgangers ended up in the top 10 when they should have been fighting to make the free dance. They don't skate well, they don't dance well--all the makings of Olympic champions. No wonder he is supporting this result

      Delete
    4. Everyone in skating, especially ice dance, has an agenda. Platov is no exception and it benefits his team to support whatever it is that DW are doing out there.

      Delete
    5. Platov's team of Coombes/Buckland are hideous. I cannot believe a team like P/I were absolutely crucifed in Sochi because they had a small twizzle bobble in their SD, and a team like C/B, who basically ran on their toe-picks the whole time, finished in the top ten.

      I hope P/I get a fair shake at Worlds...their skills are amazing. I think they are better than I/K.

      Delete
    6. "Time violations for edges held too long"

      LOL. That sounds about right.

      11:51, here's one of the interviews with Platov, the other one was in Russian and said that Tessa was too heavy and that D/W were better because their skating was "lighter" http://web.icenetwork.com/news/2014/02/22/68131128/borscht-belts-kim-not-really-upset-about-result

      Delete
    7. As for DW being lighter, there were many times during their free dance it appeared their skates were glued to the ice, or as if they were trying to run under water. They had legs of lead in that performance.

      Delete
    8. I finally watched some Coombes and Buckland. Oh my.

      My impression is they actually have better edges - when they use them - than DW, but for some reason their choreography insists they don't use them. She obviously can straighten her own leg and hold it in space, but the choreography insists she be flung around like laundry and have non-skating, bullshit dismounts like DW.

      Maybe it's just that Buckland's hair is channeling Platov 1994, but it appears to me as if Platov was going for a Grishuk/Platov type of frantic with them - they sure look more 1980s/1990s than 2014, and cribs some of DW's tricks for transitions and filler.

      Delete
    9. i suspect they can't use their edges for too long and that is why they have all the filler--much like DW.

      OC, where do you rank DW's skating skills? I would have had VM, PB, PI, IK, BS, CL, WP, Shibs, HD, ZG, ZS, SZ, CJ, TS all ahead of them for skating skills.

      Delete
    10. DW's skating is so bastardized it's difficult to say without really settling in and watching everybody on your list, but I definitely put them much lower than I used to think, because they simply don't skate.

      I haven't analyzed C&B. At times they have extreme lean with the sides of their boots practically dragging on the ice and it appears to travel from the blades up, but at the same time, how controlled is that? They don't sustain it, and at times it appears that momentum from throwing themselves into that edge is holding that edge, not the security of the edge itself. Their skating is an incredible amount of slop held together, just everything and the kitchen sink, and very little of it actual skating skill. Their lifts are hideous. The dismounts are hideous. They look like a throwback to the worst of 1980s choreography, which is where ice dance appears to be heading - away from dance, back into Vegas-style schlock that has little to do with skating or dancing.

      They are very frantic, which reminds me of G&P, and their non-skating "transitions" appear inspired by DW.

      OC

      Delete
    11. lol, this from elif, a DW uber, in the Worlds Ice Dance Predictions thread:

      "But I don't think lines, posture, grace is important in ice dance anymore. You don't need good posture/lines or good edges for to become olympic ice dance champions."

      and this doesn't bother you? oh well, at least this person isn't claiming DW have good line, posture and edges like some of the other ubers are doing

      Delete
    12. This Elif person is a moron. She often posts on Goldenshit as well. She trashed V/M's FD this year as being "juniorish" on the basis that the two transitions where they were apart (after the circular step sequence, and just before the diagonal sequence), never mind they are in ridicliously difficult and close dance hold the rest of their program. She also trashed their lifts this year as being juniorish without specifying why.

      What qualifies as juniorish? I was watching some of the Junior Worlds, and the US team of Hawyker/Baker was doing much more difficult elements (including a three-twizzle pass) with much more polish than anything D/W have done their entire senior careers.

      Delete
    13. Hey, elif is doing our job for us. That's exactly what we're saying. It's neither dance (posture lines) or skating (edges) anymore.

      Are we sure she's not intentionally subversive?

      oc

      Delete
    14. "They are very frantic, which reminds me of G&P, and their non-skating "transitions" appear inspired by DW. "

      If you just mean they are like G&P in a very limited sense of "style" and "program," then fine, but G&P had amazing skating skills, nothing like what you just described about C&P.

      It's a pet peeve of mine because there is a poster on FSU who keeps saying that the DW/VM debate is just like BB/KP in the 80s and GP/TD in the 90s - a "frantic" vs. "elegant" thing. IOW, that we VM fans just like their packaging better. And it's like, no, all of those teams except DW can skate. DW are not even close. I would just be careful framing it in that way. GP had excellent compulsories. There are valid reasons they beat so many great teams - there are also valid arguments for why TD or UZ should have won - but that's the point, at least there is skating there, there is an argument to be made, they had rhythm, they did the things you're supposed to do on the ice, and then we can all quantify who did them better. CB and DW don't do it.

      Delete
    15. My first paragraph should say C&B*

      Delete
    16. Anon at 10:19 am - I think OC meant Gilles/Poirier - not Grishuk/Platov...

      Delete
    17. Ohh, maybe you're right - I was thinking she was saying Platov was making CB in his image, lol.

      Delete
    18. 10:19 - the reason I didn't make the distinction between frantic style and skating skills is I haven't yet gone back and looked at G&P to confirm my past assumption that they had strong skating skills. I know Grishuk was considered a great twizzler (when only the girl did them and she would twizzle in and out of hold in front of her partner) and considered to have great feet, but I read that on fsu and never verified for myself, nor went back to check. So I meant style, and kept the skating point unclarified until I could check again for myself.

      And you are right, of course, doing that without clarifying risks reinfocing the idea that it's a matter of style and packaging and not skills versus skills.

      CB were truly awful.

      oc

      Delete
    19. I did actually mean Grishuk/Platov, as their styling (particularly his hair) reminds me of Grishuk/Platov, and performance mode reminded me a lot of Grishuk/Platov's frenetic performance mode.

      But, my observations about their packaging and their "style" evoking Grishuk/Platov should have been made distinct from my remarks about their skating skills.

      I didn't go back to reconfirm my assumption that Grishuk/Platov actually did have strong skating skills and so didn't emphasize that distinction enough because I hadn't done that yet. Sorry to appear to conflate the two things.

      An additional problem with elif's claims that you don't need good edges to become Olympic champions is that the rules in CoP say you do.

      So does she mean in practical reality you don't need good edges to become Olympic champion (because with DW having that official title, that's just a fact), or is she saying the rules no longer require good edges?

      Delete
  4. Haha, of course the ice dance analysts blog is accused of having an agenda in that VM/DW thread. How dare anyone look closely at the skating and encourage fans to do the same. So apparently they manipulated the pictures so that we think we are seeing flats...the evidence is the skating, as you said. It is there for all to see.

    But what IS trustworthy is the opinion of a judge who admits to not knowing the key points of the Finnstep saying a team deserved the levels they received for the Finnstep. That makes a lot of sense...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The DW vs VM thread on fsu is just another opportunity for DW ubers to bash VM. No matter what the arguments presented by VM fans, whether it be presenting videos, photos, rule book evidence, hearsay, quotes from anyone in the skating world, the DW faction response is consistently predictable. Attack, but no supporting evidence for DW except their circular argument.
      This particular thread is exposing prancer, doris, Aussy Willy (the "judge") and many others as the bullies they are.

      Is Prancer somehow related to DW? or is she paid to be their personal flunkey and spokesperson for policing any criticism against them? Poor girl, I hope this is not her mission in life.

      Delete
    2. and they are accusing it as photoshop as well!
      prancer definitely also has an agenda.

      Delete
    3. I think it has more to do with Prancer hating VM fans. She likes to rip people into shreds any chance she gets. Its her M.O. Isn't it odd that she points out flaws or supposed flaws in the arguments of VM ubers but ignores the faulty logic of DW ubers? Look how she failed to comment on the lack of substance in the argument that DW won because they looked like they were having more fun. If she really were interested in how well the arguments were being made she would have picked up on that.

      And I agree, 2:05, the usual tactic is to attack with vague remarks and no supporting evidence and/or to call the VM ubers biased (because they are the only ones with bias) and draw the attention to how shitty VM and their fans are as people. FSU is like a high school with an established group of cool kids that others suck up to and protect; anyone who goes against these people and against the board's favourite skaters gets bullied.

      Delete
    4. or banned^

      her current comment is hilarious

      Delete
    5. They seriously mis-named that thread, it should have been the Prancer vs VM thread. Is she purposely being obtuse in order to demonstrate her supposed debate prowess?

      Delete
    6. Prancer actually admitted in SS that she uses FSU comments to her students as examples of bad arguing. So classy. Of course Doris pretended to be all offended until Prancer told her she didn't expect she'd ever use one of her posts. Doris said she uses her real name online because it makes her think before she posts and keeps her from posting anything stupid... no comment...

      Delete
    7. She may quote the posts (is this even allowed)? but besides hating anyone VM, I think that she just enjoys the power trip and is on the DW payroll, along with certain officials.
      Well from what I've read, Doris' strategy is not really working for her.

      And they have the nerve to call out VM fans for being crazy.

      Delete
    8. Someone pointed out that quoting them was against FSU'S OWN RULES and she said the rules only apply to members (which, um, she is?) and that everyone should realize anything they write on the internet can be copied.

      She claims she changes names and stuff anyway.

      Delete
    9. someone needs to ask prancer whats the difference between someone calling D/W SD a waltz and someone calling seasons mahler 2.0.

      Delete
    10. I wonder if OC is going to give the FBI our information after we dissed Prancer. ;)

      Delete
    11. @3:42
      Has Prancer read any of the other threads? FSU has always been a place where you can dish out criticism...there are just a few skaters who are shielded from it. Calling someone out on skating the wrong style of SD is wrong now? What about all the things said about ice dancers of the past?

      Prancer is making a fool of herself there, ad so are a lot of the others. I don't know why VM fans even bother to post there or on FSU. It is pretty clear that the mods have it out for them and will allow DW ubers to run the place. If you want to have a real discussion about ice dancing, go elsewhere. Haven't you noticed that some of the regulars in the VM thread have disappeared?

      Delete
    12. What is wrong with Prancer? DOes she not see she is only making herself look like a petty bitch? She is picking at the stupidest shit! Meanwhile there are all kinds of weak arguments there from DW ubers that she completely ignores. Did VM fans eat her first born or something?

      Delete
    13. Wow, Prancer continues to make an ass of herself. Here is her take on the credibility of that ice dance analysts blog:

      "The first standard for evaluating a source is assessing the qualifications of that source. The second one is assessing the possibility of prejudicial bias. Hard to do with an anonymous source--but not entirely impossible. You can assess the quality of an anonymous analysis by....comparing it with other analyses, preferably those made by knowledgeable people with expertise in the field.

      There are no other analyses that I know of that match the one on that site. Perhaps I've missed something. But I don't believe I dismissed the source just because it is anonymous. There are other ways to assess credibility and I am not seeing any of those, either."

      Um, there are no or few other analyses that talk about skating in those terms--maybe that is why you can't find ones that match it. The "knowledgeable people with expertise in the field" are not doing the analysis--they are making vague claims that are not supported by actual evidence. How many of these people are going through the skating and showing what makes one team's performance better than another team's according to the rules? What analyses did he look at?

      And what, Aussie Willy is a novice ice dance judge so that is enough to establish her credibility? No rigorous testing for prejudicial bias in her 'analysis'? It is not even worth posting at that place because people like Prancer, a moderator, can't even have a reasonable discussion.

      Delete
    14. I should add that i not only want to know what analyses she looked at but why those analyses are seen as credible and a standard by which another source can be judged. Is it just because those analyses come from people with qualifications?

      If she is going to say that it doesn't pass the test of matching other analyses, she should give us the analyses she is referring to and explain the merits of those analyses. and at least acknowledge the limitations of a test like this.

      Delete
    15. prancer is so biased i dont understand how she is still a moderator. she makes the place so hostile and unwelcoming

      Delete
    16. i can't make out what Prancer is saying--the angry and exasperated tone doesn't help. how does she know that DW aren't doing a waltz? just because their music isn't a waltz? That makes no sense whatsoever.

      Delete
    17. That whole thread is lame; the only ones putting forth any thought and attention to the actual skating are the V/M side, and that's being shot down at every turn.

      Instead, this is the gems that the D/W ubers can put forth:

      "I am a big Meryl and Charlie fan. I adore both their skating and humble personalities (and on top of that, Scott rubs me the wrong way for some reason I can't put my finger on) but for a while there it bothered me because I couldn't deny that Tessa and Scott truly have a special quality to their skating. It really is something deserving of the accolades and gold medal in Vancouver. However, when I watch Mahler then watch their current programs, I can't help but feel they've regressed in some way that I can't really describe. I can't link you to some blog with gifs detailing step sequences, I can't really go into depth, it's just an impression. You can feel how legendary their Mahler was ... to me, they are not the same skaters now. However, while I feel like it was obvious who the winner was in Vancouver, I think it is clear that Meryl and Charlie have progressed significantly over the next four years. So ultimately, I feel like both results were right and I'm glad both teams ended up with OGMs. "

      So they can't go into detail why they think V/M have regressed (which they haven't), it's just an "impression".

      Trying to reason these people is pointless.

      Delete
    18. @6:52, the key words in that quote for me were "feel" and "impression". If they were discussing personal preferences, then okay. But they're not talking about the skating itself, are they? Just parroting the infallibility of DW's ISU protocols (because the protocols are never wrong and are not subject to human error!). And going on and on about vague feelings, never objective/concrete clarification.

      Delete
    19. @7:24
      The sad thing is that even the judge in that thread talks in those terms. no specifics on the skating itself. yet people are expected to regard her opinion as holding more weight than others

      Delete
    20. That judge has repeatedly shied away from backing up her opinions. She has to know she can't. And yet because it serves the agenda on that forum, her opinion is meant to convey extra validity.

      oc

      Delete
    21. Now Prancer is making fun of people for using video evidence. I agree that sometimes definitive conclusions cannot be drawn, but in this case, Charlie is clearly on a flat and should not have gotten the level. How is that debatable?

      Delete
    22. "Now Prancer is making fun of people for using video evidence. I agree that sometimes definitive conclusions cannot be drawn, but in this case, Charlie is clearly on a flat and should not have gotten the level. How is that debatable? "

      There you go. It's all the proof you need that FSU is not interested in actual skating. They're only interested in drama and soap opera.

      Delete
    23. "The first standard for evaluating a source is assessing the qualifications of that source. The second one is assessing the possibility of prejudicial bias."

      Another way to evaluate is if YOU know what you're talking about, or know anything about the subject at hand, you can use that to determine if the source knows what they're talking about. But let's just go in circles. Let's ignore primary resources - all research recommends that, doesn't it? Don't use primary sources.

      In the case of ice dance, the primary sources are the rulebook and what's actually happening on the ice.

      oc

      Delete
    24. So who are people going to trust? The IceDanceAnalyst blogger, who can IDENTIFY THE MOTHEREFFING KEY POINTS, gif them, break down all the turns in a step sequence and opine as to whether they are clean? Or Aussie Willy, the novice judge, WHO ADMITTED THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE KEY POINTS ARE?!?!

      I mean, seriously? If you want to get technical about it, she's a novice judge, it's a senior dance, she doesn't judge or call it, she's not obligated to know it, admitted she doesn't, so what is her expertise? If I were an attorney and she were an opposing expert witness I'd rip her to shreds on the stand.

      According to FSU, AW has more credibility simply because she is a judge. Or rather, she SAYS she is. Who the hell is she, how do I know she's a judge? She has a made up screen name and said she was a judge. Ok, this blogger made up a screen name, IceDanceAnalyst, so that's step 1. So all the IDA blogger has to do is post a tweet that she/he is a judge, and then they become credible? I certainly haven't read any insight from AW that makes her sound like a judge, although, ironically, I completely believe that she is telling the truth, which is scary.

      Delete
    25. Awhile back, someone on fsu said AW was organizing the Australian Nationals? My God. The horse-before the cart-ing there in determining credibility is actually scary.

      Look at the rules? Look at the skating? What use is empirical evidence versus someone's title?

      oc

      Delete
    26. Amending what I said about prancer's rules of determining credibilty - EVIDENCE is traditionally also a good metric. Evidence in figure skating isn't the protocols. It's the skating. And measuring the skating against the explicit standard and criteria in the rulebook that determined how points are awarded.

      oc

      Delete
    27. She was a volunteer at Australian Nationals. You would have thought her volunteering was the lynch pin to the whole event happening the way it was made out though.

      A lot on FSU are praising her right now because it suits their agenda. In the past, the very people who are praising her were making fun of her in Sekret Sources because she's posted about not being into celebrating holidays for some reason.

      Delete
    28. 10:49 AM - "you would have thought"? *I* actually did think that, because, if memory serves, during a discussion some months ago somebody actually came out and said AW was organizing Australian nationals, leaving the impression she was tasked with the entire thing - or in charge of it. This information was posted by way of bolstering her credibility, since the actual rules and what's happening on the ice don't do the job.

      Delete
    29. She said she doesn't have time to post a more detailed explanation now because she is getting surgery on her ass.

      Delete
    30. For fuck's sake, the SKATING is the evidence. I could link that blog as a credible source because I know skating, I know key points, and I know what edges look like enough to say that what that blog is saying is valid. They show the actual key points in videos, gifs and pictures (oh right, now people are saying they are doctored). I actually went and looked up the stream and screen capped it myself and compared the video stream to theirs and guess what? my screen cap also showed a flat. But it makes sense to link to a blog that has isolated the moments on video and gone through the trouble of doing a write up. I am seeing what they are seeing, i just didn't do a detailed write-up. What are these people going to tell us now, that the rules the blog linked to aren't the actual rules? They must have been messed with as well. Flats are the new edges.

      Delete
    31. OC @ 11:22,

      I haven't felt like going back to look at the thread and read through all of the stupid again to see how events actually played out, but now that you mention it, I think you're right that somebody did come out with the statement that she was organizing nationals. I don't think Aussie Willy said it herself though.

      Delete
    32. AW was a volunteer at Australian Nationals. That was the excuse given not to explain what was so much better about DW in the last thread (bookies, I think). This time, she needs to have surgery on her ass. Alas, the secret will never be revealed to the world.

      To be fair to her, no, she never said she was organizing Australian nationals. I don't think she's tried to make herself more than what she is. Others are doing it. In the last thread someone got all huffy, like, "well, how can you expect poor AW to sit here and respond to you, when she is so busy *organizing the Australian Nationals* and doesn't have time." I doubt she did more than spreadsheets or sign in sheets. Nothing substantive.

      In another case, someone was talking about something in the rules and someone actually posted to AW that she should bring it up with the Australian federation so they could tell the ISU. *dead*

      Another person asked her a question about singles, prefaced with "I know dance is your specialty, but..." and it's specifically NOT, and AW made that clear. She hasn't pretended to be a dance expert. It's others who are co-opting to her because they agree with her. I actually feel kind of bad for her because she's become like the scapegoat for how uninformed the judges are. She does have a brain, because she initially used to post VM were superior skaters, until she went to an ISU seminar and they explained how DW ticked more boxes... and I think she just really wants to seem like she knows what she's talking about so she parrots the protocols and the ISU so she doesn't sound stupid or have to offer her own argument. I think a lot of judges do this, especially from smaller federations. The culture of judging is very interesting.

      Delete
    33. "I actually feel kind of bad for her because she's become like the scapegoat for how uninformed the judges are. She does have a brain, because she initially used to post VM were superior skaters, until she went to an ISU seminar and they explained how DW ticked more boxes... and I think she just really wants to seem like she knows what she's talking about so she parrots the protocols and the ISU so she doesn't sound stupid or have to offer her own argument. I think a lot of judges do this, especially from smaller federations. The culture of judging is very interesting."

      Stupidity, low self-esteem, and bootlicking aren't adequate defenses. AW pisses me off.

      Delete
  5. Look at Meryl's knee: http://death-spirals.tumblr.com/post/79405105121/icedanceroyalty-queen

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That looks rather odd.
      The picture as a whole is a disaster. The spray on tan is inconsistent, each limb has a different color. Is she going to keep this color for the show ?

      They definitely photoshopped her arms to make them appear less skinny.

      Delete
    2. In fairness, DWTs promo photos all tend to have hideous photoshopping for everybody.

      Delete
  6. Why do they think that figure skating analysis blog photo-shopped the screen caps? I don't understand?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 6:28
      It's not like they can acknowledge the icedance blog is correct. That would be acknowledging they've been duped by DW's skating, that they aren't as smart as they think they are. So it's imperative to find some reason why the analysis is incorrect. It's just a way of saving face and not admitting to themselves they're stupid.

      Delete
    2. What are you going to believe, the protocols or your lying eyes?

      Delete
  7. Now there's another stupid thread on FSU about who had the better career, D/W or V/M; not surprisingly, all the D/W ubers are voting D/W, on the basis of their "wins" in the last quad, never mind any and all of their titles/medals were undeserved. One poster is even calling out V/M's world bronze in 2009 as suspect. I guess they're smarting over the fact that V/M were on the podium the year of the mighty S&D program that has been templated ever since.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. how the hell did the results on that thread jump from 22 to 32 in such a short amount of time? i think v/m ubers arent voting bc prancer and co. has driven them out. what a fair poll.

      Delete
    2. i bet prancer is going to come in that thread and whine about ~argumentive skillz~ whenever a v/m fan questions d/w's wins. meanwhile the person who claims v/m's bronze in 2009 was suspect will be "ignored"

      Delete
    3. I think Prancer 's time would be better spent working on her own argumentative skills.
      Shrouding something in academic language with a forceful tone is an effective way to disguise weaknesses in the actual arguments. It is a tactic Prancer uses often.

      Delete
    4. what she just posted in the new thread

      "Why not try actually offering some criticism in that thread and see what happens?

      You might not want to try to use an anonymous source to back up the criticism, but that's up to you. "

      lmao what a fucking dumbass. it does not matter whether the source is credible or not ppl like prancer will just make up bs excuses and whine about bad argumentative skills (look what happened to l'equipe.)

      Delete
    5. 2:18 prancer's also does not realize the logical fallacies she has committed as well. they keep on assuming that because an argument has been poorly made, the claim must be false. correct me if im wrong, but isn't that a logical fallacy? specifically the fallacy fallacy/argumentum ad logicam? (im only asking because some definitions of the fallacy fallacy include "poorly constructed arguments" while others strictly define it as "if an argument contains a logical fallacy all of the entire proposition is wrong")

      Delete
    6. Anonymous source? I looked at the blog, I saw screencaps and video of Tessa Virtue, Scott Moir, Meryl Davis, and Charlie White... are they not the persons who actually competed at the Olympics? Can I not watch their performance and see the steps and read the rules and come to a conclusion?

      Sure, now it's "anonymous sources are bad" but when VM fans quoted Averbukh, Tarasova, and Tcherynshev, that wasn't taken seriously either.

      The funny thing is, that blogger isn't even taking the position that DW were worse. They are not harsh on them the way OC is, the way they deserve. They are just laying out what the key points are and suggesting where levels may have been lost. They haven't started with a hypothesis that VM were better; they seem to be taking great pains NOT to do that, they're just posting the information and asking people what they think. And because VM look better in the gifs, people take it as an attack on DW! JUST ISOLATING THE SKATING/STEPS IS CONSIDERED AN ATTACK!

      Someone also noted (in another thread a while ago) that on another page the blogger had posted example gifs of how to identify different steps, and that DW looked so much worse in their gif and it was so unfair to DW. And they don't get it. There is no gif of DW doing textbook steps. That's why one is never produced. So it's unfair of this blogger to include the reigning champions in an example of footwork because they didn't look good doing it.

      The blogger should delete all the photos and gifs - they could be libelous!

      Delete
  8. Just listened to CHUM FM, Tessa and Scott radio interview from this morning.
    Anyone buying that they're in separate places? LOL
    Not me, not buying that bit of lying at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only think that would've made it better is if their little girl cried out "mommy, mommy" in the background.

      Delete
    2. I didn't buy it either. He was probably trying to prevent a repeat of the phone interview between 4CC and Worlds last year by keeping Little Moir quiet.

      Delete
    3. I might do a a post on this or not, but for now:

      When Cassandra changed her profile pic she was either making an eye-opening statement (or the sham was) changing what we thought everybody was pretending was her status with Scott, or it was bait. No matter how much we (and I, of course) want to believe she'd had her fill and was saying "This is my REAL boyfriend" it was unlikely because prior to the sham she didn't put herself on parade on social media. If she was ready to get real why would she make herself and her real bf a public profile picture? Because we want to think after more than a year and a half she abruptly got fed up?

      No, it was bait, as I've mentioned before. That's clear enough with her open instagram, and it was the best interpretation based on past Moirville patterns, especially with Scott and Tessa mixed messaging it up in all of the interviews they're now giving from the 2010 Wayback Machine.

      Anyhow, the second piece of bait is this twelve month thing. When Scott and Tessa got the (bizarre and overly specific) question "Which one of you is more likely to be married in twelve months" I thought - okay, that's bait (IOW, fans would hope that they'd reveal in a year).

      Even more recently (I believe more recently) Moirville came out and said that their relationship is "equivalent to a marriage" and they're "sewn" together and they figured a year from now Scott and Tessa would realize they couldn't go their separate ways.

      Alright, we don't need to be clubbed over the head. There's a line baited with a calendar on it, dangling in front of us.

      And furthermore, what are they talking about, seeing as Scott and Tessa have yet to announce retirement? If they don't retire - and they claim not to have made a decision - there's no separate ways, so why is Moirville going there?


      I agree in the phone interview they were trying to avoid a repeat of last year.

      Oh, and in the interview with the Russian fans, when asked about writing another book, Tessa joked that maybe they'd do a tell all after some time had elapsed. In one of their post-Sochi interviews, Scott joked about a tell-all. Why doesn't an interviewer ask what they could possibly "tell all" about since we already got the genuine, authentic, inside view from the reality show?

      Delete
    4. "Why doesn't an interviewer ask what they could possibly "tell all" about since we already got the genuine, authentic, inside view from the reality show?"

      Ikr. The interviewers never follow up with anything. There's no logic at all to these interviews, in the journalistic sense. It's obviously just the celebrity fluff treatment. VM are put on display, they joke around, answer the same questions as always (any fan who has followed VM for a while could answer those questions and 99% of the time the answers would match what VM will say).

      Like you said in another comment, they are never asked about the rumours of marriage and child, the blog is never mentioned (anyone who googles VM will get the blog - anyone with even a mild interest in VM knows about this place). It's invariably the leading statement, "Everyone wants you to be together...." And there's no follow up to whatever they say there, either. Like that interview yesterday where Scott says he's "on the outs" of a relationship. What the hell does that mean? Any other person, the interviewer would of course follow up on that and ask for explanations. Oh, but not when it comes to Tessa and Scott. This topic, although ever present, is treated very narrowly and with kid gloves.

      Also, all these interviews are on the heels of a reality show that hit the viewers over the head with Cassandra. Where is any follow up about that? No one asking Scott, "How is your gf Cassandra?" "How is she/you two together handling all of this post-Olympic stuff?" Nope - she's ignored. Just like Jessica was. Even after all of Canada (that cares about VM) saw that show. The nameless/faceless "gf." What the hell. I can't believe people don't pounce on this and realize how fake it all is.

      Delete
    5. "No one asking Scott, "How is your gf Cassandra?" "

      Nobody asks because no one cares. The media is just asking the questions they're told to ask.

      Let's be real here folks. Ice dance isn't a sport. If this were hockey, maybe the interviewers would actually be interested enough to ask about a girlfriend. Nobody cares about Scott. They might care about Tessa because she's hot, but otherwise, whatever. The whole "marriage and babies" thing would require the interviewer to spend a second on google to see what fans are saying. Why would they do that when they don't care? Way easier just to ask the pre-set questions.

      Delete
    6. "I didn't buy it either. He was probably trying to prevent a repeat of the phone interview between 4CC and Worlds last year by keeping Little Moir quiet."

      I wonder what he did. Gag her and throw her into the washing machine?

      Delete
    7. "...(any fan who has followed VM for a while could answer those questions and 99% of the time the answers would match what VM will say)."

      "Unique!"
      "Difficult to understand or explain!"
      "Platonic!"
      "Train alongside Davis and White!"
      "Golf!"
      "The real us!"
      "Ilderton!"
      "Maple Leafs!"
      "Canadian Support!"
      "Bubble!"

      Delete
    8. Brilliant !
      Add to that
      " Balance ! "
      " School ! "
      That pretty much sums up their entire career.

      Delete
    9. "Even more recently (I believe more recently) Moirville came out and said that their relationship is "equivalent to a marriage" and they're "sewn" together and they figured a year from now Scott and Tessa would realize they couldn't go their separate ways.

      Alright, we don't need to be clubbed over the head. There's a line baited with a calendar on it, dangling in front of us.

      And furthermore, what are they talking about, seeing as Scott and Tessa have yet to announce retirement? If they don't retire - and they claim not to have made a decision - there's no separate ways, so why is Moirville going there?"

      Joe and Alma had that discussion in the last episode of the "reality" show. It was definitely bait in the scope of one the shows story arcs that VM would be parting ways and maybe only talking once a year if ever again. Still, it was bait.

      I think VM are hedging their bets on several different fronts right now, which would fit if they are really trying to figure out what they want to do.

      Speaking of which, the first of the indications of rule changes for next year have come down today. http://www.icenetwork.com/news/2014/03/14/69357510/usas-hawayek-baker-cook-up-dance-gold-in-sofia

      I love the part where they're taking a lift out to leave more time for dancing and choreography.

      I have a hunch that the changes may actually favor what VM do and not what DW do. Then again, the rules mean nothing when DW compete.




      Delete
    10. 9:43 again.

      I also wonder if the part about the teams creating their own steps for one of the Paso Doble sequences might be somewhat like catnip to VM.

      I'm trying not to get my hopes up, but there's a part of my brain imaging the brilliance of what VM would come up with.

      Delete
    11. Yeah, I'm intrigued by that.. assnetwork doesn't explain well. Are they saying couples must do one pattern of the Paso Doble CD and then one pattern of their own paso doble steps (like the old OSPs) but they need to incorporate the Paso key points to get the levels? That is completely confusing. In the SDs, the levels for the pattern dances live and die by they key point (whereas in regular footwork sections, dancers receive a level based on the overall percentage of difficult, clean turns). So doesn't that mean an intrepid team would just create their own pattern with the key point coming after something easy and very few difficult steps but nail the key point and get a level 4?

      And... fuck the ISU. Couples like VM, PB, and WP found plenty of time to dance in their FDs this year. VM have done that every year. If they wanted to reward that type of skating, they would have been doing it. Taking away a lift and adding a "choreographic spin" wtf-ever that is, is not addressing the problems in this "sport"...

      Delete
    12. @5:25: curious what rule changes will be made to the twizzles. Will that fucking dance hop still garner a level 4?

      Delete
    13. So a team like D/W, would they fill their programs with more lunges and posing then? Seeing as that is their idea of "dancing". Good grief.

      Delete
    14. I have to admit that I enjoyed their Off the Record interview a lot. The host left most of the sordid personal bits aside and actually focused on the sport. I want more of that.
      Strangely it looked to me like they were uncomfortable when they were asked about their own sport ...
      I wanted to slap Tessa when she said she didn't want people to think about the controversy. That's the reason the sport will never evolve !

      Delete
  9. It makes no sense--the sources Prancer used are anonymous to us until she provides more information about them. She said she compared that blog to other sources and it didn't match (don't get me started on the issues with that)--so where are these sources and how did she establish their credibility? And why isn't she demanding more from her credible source? (nothing against Aussie Willy, it is just that her explanation was not very informative, though I get that she doesn't have time now). but why are AW's credentials enough to establish the credibility of what she wrote? No one is telling me why, in skating terms, DW deserved their marks and placement. Why isn't Prancer concerned about that? She is only concerned about claims that are not favorable to DW. Great way to make an argument...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not reading that thread but now I'm curious wtf other sources they are talking about. That's the problem, no one analyzes it like that. I bet her sources are the protocols, lol.

      So what Prancer is suggesting is that if any new research/analysis does not conform to what has previously been done, it is wrong? I guess the world is still flat then.

      Delete
    2. I think what she probably means is that the CONCLUSION of the icedanceanalysts blog doesn't match the CONCLUSIONS of those she deems to have credentials ie. some of her buddies on FSU. But you can't compare the analysis on the blog to sources on the other side of the equation because there are none. Not a single one. Both some V/M and D/W ubers are guilty of making claims, loosely based on something they've heard regarding the requirements, without providing evidence to back it up. Only one side has people who are consistently using video, screencaps, criteria straight from the handbook. I find someone who provides evidence for me to assess to have more credibility than someone who claims to have credentials and says "just trust me on that". (Doris is the only D/W uber who I can think of who tries to reference the rules, and then it is almost always twisted beyond recognition. She's a perfect example of needing to check up on the primary sources - but no, let's worry some more about whether the blog might be photoshopping its screencaps!!)

      I think Prancer wants to have it both ways - she keeps insisting she doesn't know enough about it, or isn't interested in it - fine. If you don't want to go assess it for yourself, that's fine, and yes, if someone is saying you should just trust it *without* making an assessment, she has every right to say, "tell me why I should trust it". But that doesn't mean that there is NO WAY to assess whether the blog's analysis is credible. It means there is a way, and she IS CHOOSING not to take it. (Why she cares so little and yet hangs around so much is certainly questionable, though). You can go assess the logic of the blog, check its sources, use your own head a bit, educate yourself some more from primary sources if you still have questions, and decide if the blog makes sense on its own merits. To say that without credentials agreeing with the blog is just "believing whatever you like" is ... frightening, actually. Has she never ever been faced with an argument from someone non-credentialed that made a lot of sense to her but that she didn't like the conclusion? You can be faced with something that makes sense that you don't like. (One example, for me, is the sham). You can also be interested enough in the truth that you are able to examine an argument by putting your own biases aside. I'm so confused how this is not all very straight forward. I wonder what kind of "argumentation" classes she teaches - "Always Win at Any Cost"?

      Delete
    3. I also want to add, though, that 3:31 above has an excellent point that the icedanceanalysts blog has taken pains to NOT to declare explicit conclusions about the scoring.

      Delete
    4. I think Prancer is mad that some people talked back to her in the VM thread when she went on her banning spree and is now taking it out on all the fans. It's dumb and not worth reading. Why are you so obsessed with everything she writes? Who cares?

      Delete
    5. 5:37 PM maybe she teaches sophistry ;)

      Delete
    6. 5:56, that does seem to be her specialty lol.

      I'm not sure who you're referring to by "you", 5:49. I'm 5:37 and it was my first post on the subject. I'm guessing you just mean the plural "you" of this being a main topic of discussion here?

      I think it matters because the crux of OC's post is that fans and the media have no excuse to not be educated on what's supposed to get points and what isn't. To have someone going on so forcefully and at such length about how understanding ice dance is out of reach for those without credentials is very relevant here. I don't think the point is Prancer, I think the point is what she's saying is a symptom of an underlying problem that's going on with the scoring. Understanding ice dance isn't that complicated. You know the rules, watch the skating and the evidence is there. The point of view that Prancer is spreading is damaging - whether she actually believes it or is using it as a method to shut down discussion.

      Delete
    7. I was 5:49 and yes, I meant "you" as a collective, the fans commenting on this blog. People are free to say whatever they want but I don't see the point coming here to complain every time Prancer or whoever else says something stupid on FSU.

      But I agree with everything you said. Obviously the VM fans are biased just like anyone else. The difference, at least for some, is that they're using the rulebook, screencaps and videos to make their point. That way, if someone disagrees with the interpretation, there can be an intelligent debate instead of the usual vague statements about feelings and "hitting it out of the park".

      Delete
    8. There are so many stupid comments on FSU that if people were complaining every time one came up, the comments would run into the thousands. The specific comments that were brought up were, as 6:34 pointed out, particularly relevant to this entry. Not only are there a lot of vague, non-skating justifications being given for the ice dance results of the last several years by posters, including a judge, but a moderator is using flawed reasoning to shoot down valid claims like the one that DW are actually doing a waltz. Prancer is enabling a bunch of entitled ubers who talk around the skating and mock the posters who actually talk about the skating and people can't call her on it on FSU because they will be banned. I think is is understandable that people will want to use this place to vent and point out how problematic that is.

      Delete
    9. 9:34 - could you explain why the D/W doing a waltz thing is valid? I'd really appreciate knowing the explanation behind that, because I've seen the claim and don't really get it. The music isn't in a waltz time signature. They're not doing a foxtrot, in the same way they weren't doing a waltz in DF. I don't follow the logic that opting out of dancing a foxtrot automatically means they're dancing a waltz instead. If we're talking about theme, I totally get it - MFL is a DF rehash. But I don't see how MFL is an interpretation of waltz rhythm anymore than it's an interpretation of foxtrot rhythm (ie. not at all).

      Delete
    10. *an attempt at interpretation, I should say. Even if they tried, they probably wouldn't be successful.

      Delete
    11. @11:10

      9:34 here. You are right, they are not doing a proper waltz--I would classify it more as running and hopping around the ice than anything else. I was citing MarieM's post but I should have worded my comment differently. I agree that not doing a foxtrot does not automatically mean they are doing a waltz but if I had to classify their SD as any dance style, it would be a waltz/march hybrid when I look at their hold and how they carry their bodies. But my main point in bringing that up is that Prancer's argument that they are not waltzing in their SD because their music is not a waltz is a weak one. We have to look at what they are actually doing with their bodies to determine what style of dance is being performed in that program. And in that thread Prancer and the rest of the mob seem to be avoiding looking at the actual dancing and skating in favor of looking at the protocols and at the credentials of someone opining on the skating. Okay, Prancer admitted she doesn't know enough about ice dance to really say, but why pick at the credibility of some posters and their sources without being equally as scrupulous with the rest?

      Delete
    12. 11:47 here

      I should add some examples. The steps they take just before the lyrics start have the style of a march--stiff steps to the beats, equal emphasis on all of them. Then they throw in a bit of waltz with the way they do their turns and their hold but yeah...it just isn't very good dancing.

      Delete
    13. "We have to look at what they are actually doing with their bodies to determine what style of dance is being performed in that program. And in that thread Prancer and the rest of the mob seem to be avoiding looking at the actual dancing and skating in favor of looking at the protocols and at the credentials of someone opining on the skating."

      Seems to be - that's what they are doing, that's what everybody does. Ignore the evidence. The primary source evidence is the skating matched against the rules. Period. Not the protocols, not somebody's opinion, not the music. Furthermore, DW are so explicitly not doing what is described in the rules, in fact, often doing what is discouraged in the rules, that it's elementary. No scrutiny required. It's right there.

      Delete
    14. A new thread was started be VIETgrlTerifa about ranking the Sochi performances based on "simple feelings". While I have no interest in participating in a thread like that, I would have no problem with it if it weren't prefaced with this:

      " No need for "in-depth" technical analysis or how COP justified or didn't justify a particular result. Let's get rid of all that pretense because if we're totally being honest here, most people who try to use COP to justify their arguments are only using COP as a pretext to support what their gut emotional feelings are telling them."

      Okay, so let's just ignore anyone with any expertise in anything because they must just be using their knowledge to further their agenda. Or is it something particular to people who bother to educate themselves on CoP and technique? And that is a pretty bold statement to make--what led her to that conclusion?

      Delete
    15. So how come the DW fans, who rely totally on gut feelings, can never use COP to justify their arguments? I mean, if it's so easy?

      Delete
    16. 9:53 here

      I would love for her to qualify that argument. Is she basing it on the fact that most people using detailed discussions of CoP and technique have explanations that favor the skaters who happen to be the ones who come out on top in terms of gut emotional feelings? (I am not saying this is the case, just trying to understand her reasoning). How is she making this correlation? Isn't it possible that these people believe that, when applied correctly, CoP actually rewards the best skaters or skaters who best embody what they feel is important in figure skating?

      It is like backing up your assertions with in-depth discussions of skating technique, dance technique, and the actual rules governing the sport is a bad thing on FSU.

      Delete
    17. If she doesn't know CoP or technique that well, how can she be sure that they are being used incorrectly or to support gut feelings? You would have to actually know CoP and technique to determine the validity of the way in which they are being used.

      Delete
  10. @11:10

    9:34 here. You are right, they are not doing a proper waltz--I would classify it more as running and hopping around the ice than anything else. I was citing MarieM's post but I should have worded my comment differently. I agree that not doing a foxtrot does not automatically mean they are doing a waltz but if I had to classify their SD as any dance style, it would be a waltz/march hybrid when I look at their hold and how they carry their bodies. But my main point in bringing that up is that Prancer's argument that they are not waltzing in their SD because their music is not a waltz is a weak one. We have to look at what they are actually doing with their bodies to determine what style of dance is being performed in that program. And in that thread Prancer and the rest of the mob seem to be avoiding looking at the actual dancing and skating in favor of looking at the protocols and at the credentials of someone opining on the skating. Okay, Prancer admitted she doesn't know enough about ice dance to really say, but why pick at the credibility of some posters and their sources without being equally as scrupulous with the rest?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've seen I Could've Danced All Night danced as a waltz... or are you guys saying DW's particular rendition of it is not in waltz time? (I haven't watched them recently and would rather not).

      I agree they're not skating a waltz. They aren't dancing either. What they are doing is performing something on ice that purports to be a foxtrot but is completely of time, as is their quickstep (noted by Petri Kokko), and bears a striking similarity to choreography borrowed from their Die Fledermaus FD, which used waltz music.

      Delete
    2. Giselle also bore a striking similarity to Die Fleudermaus, but the St. Paulie Girl costuming and the in-place homage to the ballet diverted people from noticing it.

      Delete
    3. @5:30
      Yes, I meant DW used music with correct timing for foxtrot but that is as far as it goes. When I said the comment about them doing a waltz instead of a foxtrot has some merit, I meant that their SD resembles a waltz/march more than any other rhythm if we were pushed to classify it as one of them...with a bit of the Bunny Hop thrown in. But they don't have the lilt to do a waltz or foxtrot properly. It really isn't proper dancing, it is skating from one end of the rink to the other and him whipping his partner around into turns or her turning independently of him--they are not dancing with a leader-follower relationship. Some people on FSU are acting like ice dance is some impossible to crack code, that we can't trust our eyes and what we know about skating, dancing, and the rules. It is insulting to fans of the sport who have actually taken the time to educate themselves about these things.

      Delete
    4. Thank you 9:34 for further clarifying. I agree with most of what you said. It's funny, I had actually been reminded of a march to some degree as well. But yeah, I think to classify the movement they do as any style in particular is problematic - it's not dancing at all. Especially when I've seen the claim coupled with "well, V/M got dinged for not doing enough polka." That was a theme thing, plain and simple, if it indeed played into justifying V/M's losses at all.

      Delete
    5. Please, VM had the best polka pattern dance all season, especially at Worlds. There's a minimum required amount of polka you have to do, and they did it, and combined it with waltz which was one of other choices! The point is when they were supposed to be doing polka they were dancing polka, and when they elected to waltz, they were actually waltzing. Just because DorisP decided to start something about "not carrying the true polka feeling" throughout does not mean there was anything wrong with VM's routine. How is it at all comparable to DW not performing the foxtrot and quickstep in time, which is a HUGE error, not a style preference, and is the type of program you see in teams that don't even qualify to the FD (and it's not like DW had tremendous skating or elements to compensate for that huge flaw).

      The Waltz Goes On is one of my very favorite VM programs. I'd argue it's the one that showcases their edges best.

      Delete
    6. The Waltz Goes On was a brilliant SD and truly captured the essence a waltz...I remember during the Rostelecom GP, Nicky Slater describing it as a mini-freedance.

      Not only was D/W's polka pattern terrible, but what did the rest of the program have anything to do with a ballet? Meryl's positions were awful. There was more ballet in V/M's "Everybody dance now" exhibition than in that God-awful SD.

      Delete
    7. I'm 10:43, and just want to clarify that I wasn't meaning the polka claim had any merit whatsoever. I was meaning that I've seen V/M fans say something along the lines of "well, if V/M got dinged for that, D/W should get dinged for doing a waltz." TWGO's non-existent "problem" (and yes, that could have been all Doris, rather than related to the ISU's own rationales to keep V/M down), the "problem" was that it didn't have a polka-centric theme, not that it lacked them doing the polka rhythm, or that they were doing a different rhythm that wasn't allowed. So, I agree with these fans that D/W haven't embraced the spirit of the theme (something I think V/M did do in a sophisticated way in TWGO), and that they aren't doing the foxtrot rhythm in any meaningful way, but to go to the third option and say "D/W are doing a rhythm that isn't even allowed" is problematic. Waltz isn't a choice, but they're not doing a waltz, they're doing no dancing at all.

      I agree re: edges. V/M had some spectacularly unique edgework in that program.

      Delete
    8. Yeah, I think Doris or someone else on Goldenshit started that whole 'it's not polka enough' crap, and idiots like mia joy repeated it. The sad thing is, one of the Eurosport guys also said they did a waltz and they were supposed to do a polka in their SD (he said this during their gala performance at 4CC i think). People really need to read the rules. I actually think Doris does read the rules and understands them to some extent--she just twists them into something completely divergent from the meaning of the original rules.

      TWGO was a brilliant SD and should have easily won.

      Delete
  11. It occurs to me Cassandra made her instagram public as a means of acquiring as followers as many VM fans as possible. In a little while she can hide it again, under the pretense of privacy, but by then there are a lot of followers who will of course inform the fandom about what is posted. It creates the same scenario as when Scott pretended to make his personal facebook private but made sure some fans were left as friends. That way the fandom is informed of "intimate" pictures and it moreover gives VM and Moirville the excuse that this stuff is "private" and they had no intentions of sharing, and "See? We're stalked!!" (*Rolleyes*)

    These people really really care what we think. Yes, I'm following what they do, as are many other fans, but it certainly does not enhance their image in my mind. On the contrary, VM and their sham (especially the fake girlfriend and all her sycophants) are ever hideously ridiculous and grotesque. I follow for the curiosity and the laughs as to what in the world they will do next. They never fail to come through in their idiocy with this sham.

    I hope they're happy with their "following" that sees them as objects of derision.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At this point, I pretty much agree with the person in the comments who, last week, said they don't give a fuck. Now, this person meant re having their home on the reality show and then tracked via trulio, but I think it's reasonable to amplify that idea. They don't care. As long as they're not accountable, they don't care. This is their game. It's their brand. So it's a clusterfuck - at least it has people talking.

      Although more and more, as you say, it IS derision, and most of the actual passion in the fandom has to do with what's going on with skating and judging.

      Delete
    2. As OC says, the vast majority of their following follows them because of their skating. The sham is sideshow, but for whatever reason, V/M believe the sham is their selling point -- the thing that makes them unique. I don't know if it's because they've been told that it's easier to sell that to the mainstream public than ice dancing (which as we see on FSU, is totally impossible to understand *rolls eyes*).

      For V/M, the sham is a joke, even for them. Their skating though, is deadly serious, and not something they will let others fuck with. Therefore, as OC and others have said in the past, the sham is where they can let busybodies get involved, trade favors, and do whatever else a town of over-involved people needs to do to be happy and feel like they are a part of V/M's lives. Also, its something easy to say to all the idiot journalists/show hosts/etc., who just want a quick soundbite and aren't interested in truly discussing skating.

      You probably have noticed that the few times they have been asked true skating questions by fans/journalists who take skating seriously, they will answer very intelligently. This is the real "V/M," and part of the reason I believe Scott often says he wishes they would fade into obscurity. Tessa, though, I think enjoys all the perks that come with having "business" relationships so it will be interesting to see what they choose to do in the future (I'm sure Scott enjoys the free hockey tickets, the chances "to be clever," etc., but I'm betting what he enjoys the most is seeing Tessa enjoying herself so he goes along with all of this.).

      Delete