#frances denney | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

the-a-factor-fs-blog · 7 years

Text

Kiss & Cry - Episode 5

Welcome to the fifth Episode of “Kiss & Cry”, Max&Angelo’s Podcasts.

If you missed previous Episodes, you can catch up with it here (x).

This fifth podcast is 121:06 minutes long, and it’s available to be listened in Italian here: https://www.spreaker.com/user/talk-sport/puntata-5

In the following translation, (M) indicates when M. Ambesi is speaking, (A) indicates when A. Dolfini is speaking.

Translated by The-A-Factor Team. Please do not repost without permission.

Table of Content

1. Rostelecom Cup 2017 1.1 - Overview

As usual, the Olympic season started with a bang, as most of the top contenders showed to be in good shape already - [M. Ambesi]

1.2 - Ladies

Is trying the 3A really worth it? Let’s talk about it.

10 means perfection. If you fell, then you weren’t perfect. -[A. Dolfini]

1.3 - Men

Hanyu did a 4Lo, judged underrotated and with a saved landing, but he did it out of steps and choreographic movements and you got to ask yourself: “Is he a fool?” He takes a risk, then maybe he does a mistake, but it’s only fair that GOEs (for him and others) reflect what they do on ice. - [A. Dolfini]

It’s to his [Nathan Chen] credit that he can execute five different quads and he can handle his layouts (what to do, what not to do, how to change his program) based on his condition, but this also makes his program less matched to music, less complex. - [A. Dolfini]

Shoma Uno opened a door [to 4F attempts]. Showing that nicking something away from the take off, you can bring home high GOE. - [M. Ambesi]

1.4 - Ice Dance & Pairs

Regarding Shibutanis, a choice in Short Dance that is really a Rhumba, and that can play to their favour. About the Free Dance, I dare say it was something “already seen”. - [M. Ambesi]

[ Tarasova/Morozov put] great attention to the quality of each element; and increasing TES with high GOEs, rather than going for a higher base value than the rest of their competitors. This, in particular, was the key to Volosozhar/Trankov’s success in Sochi. - [M. Ambesi]

2. Skate Canada Preview

Wagner['s result]… it’ll depend a lot on the technical panel at Skate Canada. - [A. Dolfini]

3. Q&A Session

[Regarding Max Aaron’s new programs] Well, anything is better than Footloose to be honest. - [M. Ambesi]

They need to reform the anti-doping rules completely, with the help of international legal experts who’d make sure the new set of rules won’t have any grey area. - [M. Ambesi]

[T/n: This translation starts at 1:30]

Part 1: Rostelecom Cup

Events’ Analysis, Judging, Trends & Others

Part 1.1 - Overview of the whole event, trends & other things

(M): Rostelecom Cup has just ended, so let’s start by looking at the competition as a whole.

(A): Yes, well, we’ve seen an intense competition, the level was really high, with high scores and some great performances. Actually, in some cases, the competition was even more intense than what we thought it would be, but most of these results were expected. As usual, the Olympic season started with a bang, as most of the top contenders showed to be in good shape already.

(M): Exactly. To give you an idea, men reached the highest score we’ve ever seen in the first GP; we have to thank Nathan Chen for that, but the same can be said for Hanyu Yuzuru. In pairs, it was the second highest score for the first GP, and it was the highest score ever achieved for both dance and ladies. How can we explain that? As you said, the level was really high, but it was also due to the technical panel and the judges’ generosity.

(A): Yes, it’s true, but not for all cases. Overall, we actually saw some rather harsh calls during the men’s competition – more in the SP than the FP – while we did see some high scores for PCS. In the other disciplines, we saw more generous scores - especially in the ladies’ competition, I’d say. Although the level was very high and the competition itself was very exciting. We’ve already mentioned how high the scores were: all the girls in the top 7 reached 185 points, and the 8th was very close to that score. So, maybe the panel was more lenient when it came to underrotation calls for the ladies, but that doesn’t take away the fact that these girls had great performances. It’s different when it comes to ice dance, as we saw some really high scores even with mistakes, so maybe we should look deeper into this. Yes, in ice dance we have seen some “interesting” calls, while we usually don’t see couples reach so many high levels so early in the season.

(M): Very high levels, and even three level 4’s in the StSq. Before CoR, we had seen only one level 4 during the Challenger Series, reached by the Parsons for the NtCiSt (no touch circular step sequence) – they competed in Minsk, they’re a really solid team when it comes to technical elements, but they struggled quite a bit. But here we saw three level 4’s: in the CiSt (circular step sequence) in the FD for Bobrova/Soloviev – who then managed to lose the competition because of a mistake on a spin – and then two level 4s in the SD, one for Bobrova/Soloviev and the other for Shibutani/Shibutani. It’s not something trivial, actually in ice dance they usually struggle to reach level 4s in the StSq in their first competition.

(A): Yes, actually Shibutani/Shibutani got level 4 for the PSt (partial step sequence) and Bobrova/Soloviev for the NtDiSt [in the SD]. Considering Bobrova/Soloviev’s level 4 in the FD also, well, it’s quite rare to see so many level 4’s in the first GP of the season. This means that they are already in good shape, but the panel was probably quite generous too. I think we’ll have to wait for the second/third GP to see what the actual standard is: only then we’ll see if the panel was generous or if it’s because the top teams are already in good condition.

(M): Let’s not forget that we usually see the host country win the highest number of golds in their own GP, see CoR, SA, SC, NHK, CoC – maybe I should check again for CoC, but it can be said for the other four GPs. In France it’s more difficult, the ladies haven’t had great results lately, they haven’t won pairs in a while, while they’ve always had good results for ice dance. When it comes to men, Joubert almost did it – he was close to winning a gold in every GP after all – but in this case the host nation isn’t the one who won the most.

(A): Well, it’s almost inevitable, we need to remember that France, in spite of having a strong team, isn’t one of the top 3 countries overall. Not even one of the top 4 maybe, so winning competitions in a GP is quite difficult. When they had Joubert…they’ve always had a good tradition among men, but it was difficult even then. They are still able to reach good results, but overall it’s difficult for them to win most of the gold medals. They struggle a bit more, but it’s understandable.

(M): “s I said, they haven’t won in pairs lately – we need to go back to Abitbol/Bernadis in 2000…at the German GP, back when there wasn’t a GP in China yet. They even won twice in their home country, in ’98 and ’99, but afterwards, French pairs struggled quite a bit. And I’d say they kept struggling until…James/Cipres, who are now among the top medal contenders at the Olympics.

(A): Yes, we’ll see if they manage to win. They can certainly reach the podium, but winning won’t be easy. They will compete against Tarasova/Morozov in Grenoble…they might be able to reach a score high enough to beat them, but they can’t make mistakes.

(M): Exactly. Also, we’ll see them this week at Skate Canada – we’ll talk about it later – but the pairs’ competition will be of the highest level: there are six pairs who could reach the final and the seventh would be Denney/Frazier, who aren’t bad either.

Part 1.2 - Ladies’ Event

(M): Now, let’s start analyzing the results from CoR, starting with the ladies’ competition, which was won – as expected – by Evgenia Medvedeva. Kostner finished second, with a great performance, and a good Higuchi was third. Let’s start with the SP, in which Medvedeva ended up being far superior to the others in five elements out of seven. Which is extremely impressive, and even more so considering that Medvedeva doesn’t have the Lutz in her combo, nor as the solo jump. How can she reach higher scores than the others then? Easy, the quality of her elements is so high that she can make a difference through that, even when compared to those who have the Lutz in their layouts.

(A): Yes, it’s an example of how much of a difference GOE can make. You can add to it that she executes all of her jumping passes in the second half of her SP, which makes her BV higher – and therefore she’s able to reach higher scores. That said, she’s also a complete athlete: at the moment, she’s the most complete when it comes to technical elements and consistency, which makes her unbeatable for the others. Kostner reached one of the highest scores of her career and yet she was over 15 points behind Medvedeva, who had even made some mistakes. The others were even more behind. As you said, at the moment it’s impossible to get close to her scores, especially in the SP. It’s up to her. If she skates clean, the others can’t compete.

(M): Which ones were the elements in which someone managed to do better than Medvedeva? There are two elements; let’s start by mentioning that Radionova received higher GOE [than Medvedeva] for her layback spin – an element that’s always been among her best. That said, she has been struggling with it lately, but her layback was textbook in this occasion.

(A): Yes, she’s always gotten high GOE, but lately she has lost quality on it – and on other aspects of her skating – mainly due to the fact that her body has changed. Here she managed to do a layback reminiscent of old times.

(M): We’ll talk more about Radionova later, as she’s always beloved among Italian fans. The second element [where Medvedeva wasn’t the best] was the Axel: because Mirai Nagasu landed a 3A that, although underrotated, received a higher score than Medvedeva’s 2A. To be honest, if Medvedeva gets more points than the others for an element that was never among her best, then her rivals should start worrying. Especially Higuchi.

(A): Yes. Higuchi got just a bit less than Medvedeva for her 2A, but she should try to make a difference with that jump. Nagasu tried to do that by taking a risk, we’ve got to give her that. Trying a 3A is a huge risk and she managed to land it, even though she received negative GOE because it was underrotated. This risk partially paid off, but then we also have to analyze how that 3A affects her PCS. She also paid the price on her other technical elements, especially in the SP, with some underrotation calls. How much of her energy goes into that 3A attempt and how does that affect her [other] elements – now that’s something we need to think about.

(M): Is trying the 3A really worth it? Let’s talk about that: its BV is 8.5. With a fall, you get 4.5 (t/n -3 for GOE and -1 for the fall) for it. A 2A’s BV is 3.3, and with the maximum GOE you can achieve, it can get up to 4.8 points. You can get 4.5 for a 3A with a fall, so it’s worth the risk if you can rotate it. But that’s a big if.

(A): Yes. The only alternative is to do an underrotated one but without a fall, as you can still get something more than what you’d get for a double. This was Nagasu’s case. It’s always a big risk, such that it’s almost better to do it underrotated rather than to fall on it, since a fall would affect your PCS as well. Overall, we also need to take into account how much it could affect the PCS – it could affect the scores in TR, especially if you need a long setup to do it. Or even when it comes to CO.

We’ve talked about this before, even when it comes to other disciplines, like for the throw 3A for pairs, or quad throws; if you need a long setup for it, then it can affect the flow of the program. Doing this element can also take its toll mentally and affect the rest of the technical elements. Then you can see if it’s worth it or not by judging the success rate in practice, as it’s still a jump that can make a difference, especially in a ladies’ SP, like it happened in Tuktamysheva’s case.”

(M): Exactly. This also explains Mao Asada’s low PCS. She was an extraordinary skater, but the first part of her programs was usually affected by the 3A, and therefore the judges correctly gave her lower PCS.

(A): Yes, that’s exactly what I meant, and the same could be said about Nagasu, both in the SP and the FP. Anyway, I think that it’s good for Nagasu to try it. We’ve seen videos from her practices in which she rotated it, so it’s worth the risk for her.

(M): Yes. I’d say so, especially considering that she struggles with the other jumping passes, like rotating a 3-3 combo. She often underrotates the second triple of the combo, so she has to make up for it with something else. She might even plan two 3A in the FP throughout the season; we’ve seen videos in which she managed to complete 3A3T – although it isn’t a clever strategy, as it would be smarter to attach a double Toe Loop there – but that seems to be the route she is probably going to follow. Talking about combos: Even there, Medvedeva was the best, as she managed to get a higher score for it than those few skaters who executed a 3Lz3T. Only three girls got more than 10 points for their combo: Medvedeva, with 3F3T, Sakamoto, who did 3F3T too – and both of them had it in the second half of their program – and Valeria Mikhailova with 3Lz3T – not exactly a beautiful 3Lz, but keep in mind that a 3Lz3T combo has a BV that is already higher than 10 points on its own: 10.3, so you can usually reach 10 points even with negative GOE. The others didn’t manage to get 10 points for their combo. Let’s take Kostner for example: she did 3T3T and its BV is 8.8, so you can get 10 points for it only if all the judges give you +2 GOE. If you don’t get all +2s, you can’t reach 10 points.”

(A): And that’s what happened in Carolina’s case, although she got 9.70 points for it, which was still pretty good; it means her GOEs were +1/+2. Then, truthfully Medvedeva reached over 11 points, almost 12, for that combo. As did Sakamoto – let’s not forget that both of them did 3F3T in the second half of the program.

(M): Regarding Kostner: she skated a clean SP. This time she didn’t do a 3F – we’ll see if this will be her strategy throughout the season or not. However, she has improved a lot on spins, which are now built more carefully; and some rule changes throughout the years also allowed her to reach level 4 on the layback spin – a spin she’s always struggled with in the past, as she’s never been as flexible as some of the other ladies. Can’t say anything about the StSq – it’s always been one of her best elements – the jumps were good, so…well, it’s not easy to beat her in SP. True, Medvedeva easily reaches more than 80 points, but she’s on another level, while it won’t be so easy for the others to beat Kostner in the SP.

(A): Yes, I’d say so, even without a 3F, she still reached 74 points. Higuchi skated well – although she got an underrotation call on the 3T of her combo – and yet didn’t even reach 70 points. Carolina usually gets very high PCS in the SP and, as you said, she can now reach level 4’s on her spins because of how much she has improved on those elements. She isn’t easy to beat. At this point, I’d say that this is the right strategy. She doesn’t need the 3F.

(M): Yes, she doesn’t need it, in the SP. The difference between a Flip and a Toe Loop, in terms of BV, is a point, so…at that point, it’s better to do an easier element but with better execution [therefore getting higher GOE]. It might also help her in terms of PCS, and that’s where Carolina Kostner is trying to make a difference, compared to the others, Medvedeva aside.

(A): Yes, exactly: interpretation of the music, choreography…we’ve already highlighted that she’s the most mature skater in this field, when it comes to interpretation. We’ve already talked about Carolina’s feat in Moscow, which is even more impressive if you think about how long her career is, and her age, especially if you compare her with her rivals. I mean, Kostner is really a rare case in ladies’ skating, if you think about it.

(M): If I remember well, we need to go back to 1924 to find a lady older than 30 on an Olympic podium. That’s almost a hundred years ago; if we look at the latest events, we often see teenagers on the podium. Of course, you can find more mature skaters too, like Arakawa, but we see teenagers more often than not: Sotnikova, for example, who wasn’t even the youngest winner, but also Lipinski – and going back to 2002, there’s Sarah Hughes, who was also helped by the system back then. She would definitely have struggled with the current rules.

I just came back from the ceremony in which they announced Italy’s flag-bearer for the Olympics, and the CONI and FISG’s presidents both had kind words about Kostner. Italy has had a good start to the season so far, when it comes to figure skating and short track – let’s not forget Matteo Rizzo’s victory in Egna.

We also received a question about Kostner: “Carolina might have lost speed, but don’t you think that her jumps were flawless? The 3F and 2A were perfect.”

Well, regarding Kostner, I invite you to look at her current FP and then go back to watch her FP from the 2010-2011 season. These two programs have one thing in common, Angelo. Which one?

(A): The music was the same.

(M): Exactly. If you watch that program, you’ll notice her speed at first glance. Her speed was definitely superior back then, you can’t even compare.

(A): I’d say that’s understandable. Kostner has always received very high PCS – first few years of her career excluded, but she was not mature then. Let’s not forget that Carolina was already on many people’s radar during her junior career, and that she rose through the ranks among seniors before her 18th birthday after all. She was very young. And back then, she was by far the fastest lady – at least before Kim started competing as a senior, as she was the only one who could compete with her in terms of speed and fluidity. But Kim wasn’t a senior yet. When it came to certain aspects of her skating, she was already excellent – and afterwards she started improving her choreography, her interpretation, etc. She started working with Lori Nichol only after her breakthrough, and that’s when her programs started to becoming more complex. There was a time when Carolina was the best in terms of skating skills and interpretation. She’s lost some speed now, despite still being excellent, but I think that’s also quite normal. But she has improved even more when it comes to interpretation and expressiveness.

(M): And today, Medvedeva aside, she’s the only one who holds a record in PCS: the 9,71 she achieved for interpretation in Japan in 2014 has never been reached by Medvedeva. It’s the only record that Medvedeva hasn’t broken yet – which truly says something about how great Medvedeva is, but that also says something about Kostner. Regarding her Flip: I’d say she executed them flawlessly in competition, which is actually surprising because we saw her struggle with this element in practice. The fact that she managed to do it in competition speaks volumes about her: she has probably found the way to approach the competition with the kind of maturity she often lacked in the past, when she often struggled with her toe jumps, the Flip and the Lutz. At some point, she even stopped putting the Lutz in her programs, but she also used to make mistakes on the Flip, which has always been an element she executed with a lot of quality.

(A): Yes, she has a lot of quality on that element, but this is a complex topic. Were Flip and Lutz the problem? Or maybe her mindset going into the competition – which gave her problems especially when there was a lot of pressure on her, like in Turin in 2006. Or maybe it was even due to an unsuccessful coaching change, see Los Angeles, 2009. There may be a lot of reasons behind this, but yes, there were times in which we could have asked ourselves if it was due to technical problems with jumps that she had always executed well as a teen, or not being able to approach the competition in the right way. It’s an interesting topic, but difficult to address…we could say that these aspects might have been intertwined, even though she has won a lot of medals throughout her career.

(M): Regarding Medvedeva: she dominated the competition, but we didn’t see the best Medvedeva. Evgenia has had some physical problems in the last few weeks. The execution of some was a bit more conservative: she planned to execute a 3Lo rippon, and she didn’t do it. She planned to execute all the jumps in her combos with at least one arm above her head, and she didn’t do that either. She was probably afraid of going into the competition in imperfect physical condition. She still beat the others by a big margin – which says something about how great she is. We’ll see where she can be at her best: as a matter of fact she can’t do much more in terms of GOE, as almost all of her jumps always get +2. She even manages to “hide” the issues she has with the 3Lz, by doing it in a side of the rink which makes it more difficult for the technical panel and the judges to see, therefore almost always receiving positive GOE for that jump too.

(A): Yes, true, although she did receive a wrong edge call for it this year. It’s obviously her most critical jump in the FP. We can add the Axel too – this mistake was an exception, but it certainly isn’t her best jump either. In this case, she fell on it, although it wasn’t expected, to be honest. When it comes to her FP, there might be something else to say as well. It was a great performance – one of many great performances from her - even more so considering she wasn’t at her best. That said, she received three 10s in PCS.

(M): Yes, three 10s that she shouldn’t have received, because the current rules say that if there’s a fall, the judges can’t give 10s in PCS. We can discuss about whether that is right or not, because you could say that it’s a rule that links the PCS too much to the technical aspect. But that’s how the rules are, and that’s not what happened here.

(A): I’d say it’s reasonable. 10 means perfection. If you fell, then you weren’t perfect.

(M): Maybe not for composition though. (t/n meaning that maybe CO isn’t a mark that should be affected by the fall)

(A): Well, I imagine the fall wasn’t meant to be part of the choreography. So you shouldn’t give a 10 even for choreography. I think it’s correct – if you fall, then it isn’t a perfect program. Absurdly, if someone did a program full of single jumps without falling, they could receive a 10. Because it doesn’t undermine the complexity of the program, whereas a fall does undermine it in terms of choreography and transitions. Therefore you can’t reach perfection. I think you could even give 9.5s – which would already be a lot for a program with a fall in my opinion – but 10? I agree with this rule. And yet, there were three 10s in spite of this rule.

(M): I’m sure ISU will intervene, as it was a mistake in terms of judging. The rule is rather new –

(A): The judge from Belarus…definitely a fan.

(M): Now let’s talk about Higuchi. Overall a good performance, as she exceeded 200 points. The strategy isn’t exactly convincing though – her first jumping pass was meant to be a 3A, and that’s why her program was built like that (t/n 2A is the first jump), but it should probably be revised. She is slowly finding the consistency she often lacked in her first senior season, and if she found some confidence, she could even become the leader of the Japanese ladies, since there aren’t many skaters with the kind of quality she has in the ladies’ field. That said, it’s impossible to say which Japanese girls will go to the Olympics at the moment: in the end, only the Nationals will matter, there won’t be another way to go to the Olympics. There are 4-5 athletes at the same level, how can you choose between them without considering the Nationals? There would be too many controversies. It will be a peculiar season for the Japanese ladies, because they will need to be at their best at the end of December; they might even think of the GPF as a stop-over before Nationals, unless a miracle happens and one of them wins the GPF, or ends up finishing second.

(A): Yes, the Russian ladies will be the favorite for the win, and Carolina won’t be easy to beat for many of the Japanese ladies – of course they can beat her, but it isn’t so trivial. Higuchi didn’t skate clean, true, but she still got one of the best scores of her career – although she did reach higher scores this season. True, she popped a 3S to a double, but those 3 points wouldn’t have been enough to beat her. Then, of course, Kostner hasn’t qualified for the final yet, but she is well on her way to it. Being first or second at the GPF would be extremely difficult – but it’s also difficult to say who might be the n.1 among the Japanese ladies. I think that Higuchi might become the leader of their ladies’ field, but Marin Honda also has a lot of talent – and might even have something more on certain aspects of her skating. We’ll have to see if Miyahara can come back to her best condition. Her participation in this GP isn’t to be taken for granted either. There are also other notable athletes: Sakamoto, Mihara etc.

(M): Well, Sakamoto might have even reached 200 points [in Moscow]; she made a mistake on her best jump, the 3F.

(A): The first jumping pass of her FP. Incredible.

(M): She fell on it, which doesn’t happen so often, and then did an amazing 3F3T well into her program. Sakamoto hasn’t done so well in her first competition of the season in Salt Lake City, but she was fifth in this case, just behind Radionova. Well, the fact that Radionova managed to beat Sakamoto is debatable. The difference between them – especially in terms of jumps – was huge. Radionova managed to bridge that gap thanks to her PCS…she can certainly make a difference with her interpretation, but she struggles more when it comes to the other aspects of [PCS]. It’s obvious that she’s far from being at her best, and the Russian field is certainly very competitive.

(A): Yes, honestly, even the best Radionova would struggle with this kind of domestic competition. She is struggling with the Loop, and even though she has improved a lot – I’ve always admired Lena a lot, for her fierceness in competition and her charisma – she still doesn’t have the best skating skills. It makes me chuckle a bit that she got 0.5 points more than Sakamoto [in terms of SS], because even though Sakamoto isn’t the most expressive skater, she does have quality in terms of skating: great knee bend and fluidity. We can discuss about other aspects, but in terms of skating skills, there isn’t this difference between her and Radionova. Even though there are many factors behind these marks, some of them might seem puzzling to those who watch, because honestly Radionova got some 7.5s – truthfully, one – for SS, some 7.75s…and then 9, which was definitely inappropriate, in my opinion.

(M): Yes, she could get 9s for some aspects of her skating…not for others. Many people asked me who might try to beat Medvedeva. Zagitova can probably try. But how? She needs about 35 PCS in the SP and almost 70 in the FP. Then she could definitely put pressure on Medvedeva, more in the FP than the SP, because there’s a bigger difference there. Zagitova plans to execute the three most difficult triples – Axel excluded – in the second half of her SP, but Medvedeva plans to do her jumping passes in the second half as well. The only difference in terms of overall BV is the difference between a 3Lz and a 3T’s BV. And Medvedeva can make a difference with higher GOE and PCS, so even the best Zagitova can’t beat her in the SP. But if she manages to be near her, she can put pressure on her in the FP. And in an FP, things could go in a different way, because Zagitova plans to do two 3Lz and two 3F and all the jumps in the second half of the program. In her senior debut, she got the second highest TES ever, by reaching 80 points. She could probably reach 82-83, and with 70 PCS, she would get about 152-153 in the FP. Only Medvedeva was able to reach similar scores lately, and Zagitova’s the only one who can try to put pressure on her. We’ll see if it is possible, because those 70 PCS seem quite faraway…but we’ve also seen skaters get 30 PCS at the start of the season and then get around 35 over the next months – in the SP – so…at that point, beating Zagitova would be difficult. Only Medvedeva could do it.

(A): And it wouldn’t even be that easy for her too.

(M): Exactly, beating a rival that has scored over 230 points isn’t trivial. So she is probably her main rival. Someone asked about Osmond, but Osmond lacks consistency in the FP to try to beat Zagitova and Medvedeva.

(A): Yes, Osmond has never reached those scores. She could try, but even with a perfect skate at the Olympics, she would still lack the kind of consistency that allows you to increase your scores throughout the season. Medvedeva’s consistency and all the clean skates she has had…her scores slowly improved because of how much confidence they gave her and because the judges started holding her in high regard. It’s difficult to reach those scores without this kind of consistency. Obviously she could put pressure on her, but it’s Zagitova that has the highest potential. We’ll see about Tsurskaya’s condition, as she has the potential to hit a high score. These girls aside, we would need to have a lady with an element that can make a difference; Nagasu, if she had three 3A’s and didn’t have underrotation problems, could try, but she seems far from that.

(M): Yes, far from it. Anyway, the highest score of the season was reached by Medvedeva. Zagitova has the second highest score, then Higuchi – both competed at the Lombardia Trophy – Osmond is fourth, Kostner fifth. It’s obvious that none of them was close to 230 other than Medvedeva – actually no one out of the current ladies has ever reached 220 points, which speaks volumes about Medvedeva.

(A): Yes, she’s dominant, the clear favorite. We’ll see if Zagitova manages to put pressure on her.

Part 1.3 - Men’s Event

(M): Let’s go to Men’s Competition, won by Nathan Chen. First GP win for him, winning the event over Yuzuru Hanyu. Hanyu won the Free Program but not by a big enough margin to overcome the deficit he had after the Short Program. A Short Program in which there was an arguable call on his first element, the 4Lo. At regular speed, it seemed underrotated, but watching in slow motion, it wasn’t so. There he lost a significant amount that allowed Chen to bring the win home.

(A): Because the gap he had after SP wasn’t totally recovered the day after, despite him having a better Free. I also want to add the high GOE that Nathan Chen got for his 4F in his short program. A jump not landed in the best way - despite him saving it - but especially a jump without any kind of step before it (t/n Chen’s 4F is his “solo jump preceded by mandatory steps” in SP). Three judges gave him 0 as GOE, something out of this world, absolutely. And even those -1 are frankly way too generous. Even -2 would have been too generous.

(M): Theoretically, by the rulebook, it should have been -3 without question, at least starting from this season (t/n Max is referring to a rewording of negative GOEs in ISU rulebook which, for this season, says that a jumping pass that doesn’t meet requirement in SP must have -3 as FINAL GOE. Theoretically, steps into solo jump are a requirement). It’s obvious that a discussion needs to happen about this, because GOE - especially for quads (t/n quads and 3A have the highest coefficient for GOE: a +3 on a quad means 3 points, a +3 on a triple that’s not 3A means +2.1) - makes a big difference. And for a quad, the gap between a -3 GOE and a +3 GOE is 7 points, because let’s not forget that a -3 GOE means -4 points, +3 GOE means +3 points, difference between lowest GOE and highest GOE is 7 points.

(A): Exactly, and I meant that Nathan’s 4F should have been -3 GOE, meaning -4 points, instead he brought home -1 point for the element. Those are three points that weigh a lot in a total score.

And I think it’s very important that judges pay attention to this. Because Hanyu did a 4Lo, judged underrotated and with a saved landing, but he did it out of steps and choreographic movements and you got to ask yourself: “Is he a fool?” (t/n: for doing his solo jump according to rules). I mean, he takes a risk, then maybe he does a mistake, but it’s only fair that GOEs (for him and others) reflect what they do on ice.

Then perhaps Nathan turns out to be the rightful winner of the competition anyway, but that’s another topic.

(M): Going from the technical side and GOE to PCS, a difference that has no bearing on reality stands out, because the gap there should have been bigger. And here we have a question from one of our listeners: “Skating Skills and Transitions have precise bullets to consider: multidirectional skating, one-foot skating, knee bend, complexity and variety of steps and turns, etc, etc. Is Chen’s Free Program really worthy of 9 on average in Skating Skills and 8.6 on Transitions with the highest mark of 9.75 and 9.50 given by a judge? Or - in other terms - is his Free Program more complex compared to his Short Program, which got 8.60 in Skating Skill and 8.40 in Transitions?”

This is a good question, because if you ask me, it’s the Short Program that is the more complex program of the two.

(A): It’s an interesting question. You rightly observe how the Short Program is the more complex one of the two. And another observation needs to be stressed upon Chen’s FP: there has been more room left for - I don’t want to say “improvisation” - but for more flexible management. It’s to his credit that he can execute five different quads and he can handle his layouts (what to do, what not to do, how to change his program) based on his condition, but this also makes his program less matched to music, less complex. That said, I maintain my opinion that, in the Short Program, Hanyu - for the transitions and the general complexity of his program - has no rivals. Nathan is no exception. We spoke about the Flip without a step, but we have the combo without a step while Hanyu’s combo has a difficult entry. It is not even worth it to try and talk about (their difference) in the 3A, even if - in the Free, but not in the Short - Nathan tries to do it from a spread eagle… But in the end - the Short Program for one reason, the Free Program for another - neither of them are so complex in terms of skating, transitions, et cetera. It’s true that Hanyu simplified a bit on his FP too, on the Axels especially - the first one he takes off from a spread eagle, not the second one, which is the last jump of his program and it’s already sensational enough that it is a 3A. But there have been free programs in the past in which he had an Axel from a backcounter and an Axel from a spread eagle. So he is not at that (past) level, but there is quite a pronounced difference (compared to Chen) in terms of transitions. In terms of Skating Skills, it’s a bit different. Hanyu is superior but the difference is less marked than with Transitions. Chen has good upper body movements, quite elegant and with correct and fluid movement. Passable interpretation. He is a good skater, but he still lacks something to be on the same level as Hanyu, and not only Hanyu at that.

(M): Regarding Hanyu, another question: “What does Hanyu’s Step Sequence lack to get level 4?” To be fair, lately he usually gets it, and then from time to time a level 3 call can happen. Good question, the answer’s not so simple.

(A): Usually Hanyu is penalized in the Step Sequence for not enough upper body movements. But I also want to point out a rule change for this season. Up to last year, you could do as many “clusters” (sequences of three difficult turns) on one foot and the other, and one on each foot would have been counted to get the level, now only the first attempt on each foot is considered. You can execute more clusters, but they are not counted. So you just need to miss a turn in the first of your clusters for your step sequence to lose a level, something that hadn't been the case up until this season.

(M): Same listener also asks, “Why is it so hard for an athlete to give up, even just temporarily, a jump that’s not consistent enough, in favour of a more secure but simpler one? It would seem a logical choice, but it’s not always the choice they opt for.” I would add on this topic. If Yuzuru Hanyu keeps having difficulty in improving the consistency of his Rittberger, it’s more probable for him to switch it out for a Lutz than to go back to the Sal. Which can also be a debatable course of action, considering how much more similar Salchow and Rittberger entries are, compared to the Rittberger and the Lutz. To switch to a Lutz, he would have to change, even if just partially, his choreography.

(A): Well, quite radically, to be honest.

(M): We are speaking of those few seconds immediately preceding the element. Then if he can execute a 4Lz from steps… we can call it a day and go home.

(A): I do agree. I’ve shared my opinion often enough about it. I keep repeating it: Hanyu is the World Record holder and he got that WR with the Salchow and the Toe Loop. I don’t think there’s anything else to add.

That said, we know his character, we know what his goals are, so let him go with the Rittberger, let him go with the Lutz, let him do whatever he feels is right. He will always have my estimation and admiration, but if I could decide what kind of layout he has to execute at Olympics, I’d suggest that strategy to him…

(M): But how would you be able to convince him?

(A): [laughing] Good question. If he doesn’t convince himself, protocols in hand, I really wouldn’t know what to say to him.

(M): Also because, after Rostelecom Cup, he let out that he is considering to start and try the 4A (in competition) after the Olympics. This is an element that he has already tried in practice, from time to time. This is even an element that he landed in training, without the help of a harness. (If he did execute it in competition,) it would further mark his entrance into Olympus, not only Figure Skating Olympus, but Sports Olympus. The Quadruple Axel is something mythical. It’s already significant that someone is thinking about it. The fact that someone can even actually do it is striking. Although considering his jumping technique, it would be possible for him to complete the four and half revolutions.

(A): To be honest, I don’t know what to say about it. It seems to me like Science Fiction. Then, if it’s really possible to nail such an element… if it’s possible, then he's probably the one who can do it. I wouldn’t know who else to name.

(M): We have seen the attempts of some other skaters. In competition, Artur Dimitriev maybe tried it once, but it was very far from being close to complete it. Max Aaron was close to rotating it with the help of a harness, but he gave up on his attempts. Yuzuru really cares a lot about being the first in history to land that element. It would be the culmination of an incredible journey for an athlete who, including the Rostelecom Cup, managed to land 4 different quads with positive GOE in his career. Only Nathan Chen did more, with 5 different quads with positive GOE landed in his career. [This development] is something that you couldn’t have imagined three or four years ago. Men’s Figure Skating has pushed the technical limits to inconceivable heights in very little time.

And - a topic we discussed among ourselves in our recent dinner together - the “problem” is that the International Federation, in assigning the Base Value to various jumps, didn’t think that one or more athletes could easily execute a 4Lz. Because the 4Lz BV is disproportionate compared to other quads (t/n a 4Lz with a fall is worth more than a 3Lz with +3 GOE, even taking into consideration the deduction for a fall. This doesn’t happen for other quads). What does it mean? That a skater has all the interest of trying a 4Lz, even if he or she has very little chance of not falling on it, because it will still be worth more than the best 3Lz.

(A): Which is not easy to start with (to get a final +3 on a 3Lz).

(M): Not easy at all. Kolyada at the Rostelecom Cup was a perfect demonstration. Kolyada, who fell three times - and that means -4 on deductions - was really close to his own Russian National record in the FP. And he scored a very high TES that allowed him to finish in third place. Maybe something [in the scoring system] needs to be reviewed.

(A): It’s a bit bizarre, if you think about it. The first quad landed in competition was the Toe. Then the Sal. But the third one was the Lutz, not the Flip nor the Rittberger.

(M): Indeed, and back in the day, Mishin said he didn’t understand why the Rittberger wasn’t the quad with the highest BV because, according to him, it would be easier to complete 4Lz and 4F. If we go and look at stats, there is interesting data: there have been more athletes landing 4Lz than 4Lo.

Who did land 4Lo with positive GOE? Yuzuru Hanyu, Shoma Uno, Nathan Chen. Boyang tried but fell. American - but of Russian origin - Krasnozhon managed to rotate it, but at best he landed it with a step out. And that’s all.

If we look at 4Lz, we have a much longer list: starting with Mroz, then Russian Sezganov, Kolyada, Chen, Zhou, Jin Boyang clearly - who probably in terms of distance, still has the best Lz, closely followed by Hanyu. Let’s add Samarin who landed it in a National Competition in Russia (t/n Samarin landed 4Lz again at Skate Canada, some days since the recording of the podcast) and Aliev, who was very close to fully rotating it at the Rostelecom Cup. We are very close to reaching double digit. If we look at Rittberger, we can count with one hand.

(A): What about Flip?

(M): Flip we have Nathan Chen, Uno Shoma, Vincent Zhou, Ukrainian Paniot - the first European Skater to land it. And I suspect we will see more and more athletes trying it because Shoma Uno opened a door. Showing that nicking something away from the take off, you can bring home high GOE. And there are many athletes who are trying to add that element on their repertoire. Patrick Chan did try it in the summer too. As far as I know, results haven’t been great, but the idea was to add it in his program. It must be said that the Flip is a jump that many male skaters find not so easy to handle.

(A): Because of the inside edge.

(M): Exactly. Usually a more powerful and explosive athlete is more at ease with the Lutz. And many of those athletes who execute a perfect Lz have great issues in handling a Flip. 80%, more or less, of the Russian men’s skaters fall in this category. If we look back at Russian champions from the recent past, Plushenko and Yagudin included, their Flip was very bad.

(A): Let’s say [those Flips] were Lutz’s. There are few skaters who don’t try and find a way of entry they feel the most comfortable with which to realize one of the two jumps. And that entry they are comfortable with often gets replicated in the other jump. It’s a very, very, very common mistake. Then there are those who can execute both the Lutz and the Flip correctly. Nathan Chen is one of those skaters and that is another of his weapons, but there really are few of them. Hanyu can now execute both a good Lutz and a good Flip, but he struggled with his Flip for a long time, before decidedly improving on his entry edge. But the case to the contrary really are many. I don’t think we even need to speak about Uno and his Lutz – a jump that is aesthetically ugly and taken off on an inside edge.

(M): One of the best examples of a “Flutz.”

(A): Indeed. I’d say it is quite impossible to miss.

(M): Looking at scores, Chen and Hanyu got the highest scores ever in the first event of Grand Prix Series. Hanyu never started (Grand Prix Series) so well. Not to mention he did throw away points in quite a banal way. See the fall on the combo after rotating and landing both jumps. And without risking too much on it, because he didn’t try to rippon the 3T after a not-exceptional landing on the 4T. So yes, Hanyu brought home 290, but how many points did he leave on the table here and there? In the Short and Free programs both.

(A): Oh, in the Free, between the Loop popped into a triple and especially the combo with highest BV missing, 4T-lo-3S… how many points did he left out there? 15?

(M): Considering he did a 2T there, we are over 15 [t/n: Combo BV is worth 16.72 points, 2T was worth 1.43]. As you said, what’s impressive with Nathan Chen is how he can freely change his layout, mixing and changing the placement of his jumps. But again, as you said before, this is proof of a free program that is less polished on details. And this sort of “approximation” should be better reflected on many of the components included in PCS. That’s not what’s happening.

(A): No, it isn’t.

(M): Because in the end, the gap with Hanyu in the Free Program is not that much.

(A): Six points, more or less. A little less. I repeat, Nathan Chen is not a mediocre skater. He is a good skater, and one of the most accredited rivals for Hanyu for the Olympic title, but it would be fair to see him judged correctly on his various components. With a different gap, component by component, so to reflect correctly also the components where the gap is very big and those where the gap is less. That (t/n scoring the various components independently from each other, to a point) is something we don’t really see yet. But we also have to keep in mind that those judges - even if they know the skaters and their strengths and weaknesses well - only have 1.5 to 2 minutes to judge, and a performance with three or four different quads may leave more of an impression upon them at first glance, and that may push them to raise their scores. It’s relatively easier to judge more objectively with a cool head, after watching and rewatching programs and highlighting all the details and differences. That is what we are trying to do now, but it’s also fair to try and look for justification for scores that can be influenced by many factors when you are there live and have to decide in few minutes. Then yes, the program is less refined, but that flexibility is a real strong point in his favour. And I also want to add: two triple Axels, as proof of the hard work he is doing on that element.

(M): Indeed. One of the most interesting theme of the men’s event has been the comparison between Misha Ge - Uzbekistan skater, who doesn’t try any quad - and Mikhail Kolyada, leader of the Russian men’s field who tries three quads in his FP. Why is the theme interesting? Because Misha Ge skated perfectly in both programs. Hard to ask him to skate better than that. He got personal bests for Short and Free programs both. Kolyada made a lot of mistakes. In the free program, he fell three times and, nonetheless, finished third with a huge margin over Ge. For some people, such a result is not admissible. It’s also true that it’s not so easy for ISU itself to explain the reason for such a significant gap. Before letting you speak about this, I just want to say that we are talking about two athletes who are basically doing two different disciplines.

(A): Yes, that’s exactly the point. Kolyada’s program wasn’t the most extreme we saw in Moscow, he wasn’t even close to being the most extreme, but it still included three different quads, two triple Axels - a very good one, the second one attempted, not so good that first one. And regardless of the error on the landing of the first, Kolyada’s quality on 3A is significantly superior to Misha’s - it’s also fair to stress on this. The technical content of those two programs can’t be compared. Mikhail’s program was infinitely more complex (technically speaking), and he got over 100 TES. Misha skated a program that - technically - is reminiscent of the late 90s, early 00s. An excellent program, with two 3As, but both of them executed in the first half… all these differences put together made up for that gap. The second 3A and the 4T for Kolyada were in the second half, for example, and all of this meant that Kolyada’s TES was way, way, way bigger. That’s the path that men’s skating took. Whether or not that is right, I’d let people watching the sport decide. I can see how it could be difficult to understand how a program with three falls can be scored so much higher than a clean one. That [perplexity] I can see. But the one who fell three times did try much harder things. And he is also a skater superior to Misha in terms of speed, power, and ice coverage. Then Misha, whom I adore, is a skater with exceptional charisma, very detailed choreography - although in terms of transitions, his programs are not so complex even though they are not as technically challenging, relatively speaking. It’s not so banal an evaluation. We look at two programs and we see three falls vs zero. A great interpreter vs a good skater but not an exceptional interpreter. So to ask how it is possible the difference is so big is just natural. But if we go and check all the details, we can see that the difference is there, and it’s not even that small.

(M): Let’s not forget that on some elements, Kolyada is one of the best in the world. Few skaters have a better 3A. And the same can be said about his 4T. And even the 4Lz he fell on has its own merits. It’s also important to notice how he rotated all this elements (even if he fell on them). He seems to be close to successfully landing the 4S. He fell at the Rostelecom Cup, but the rotation was complete and the landing not that bad. Let’s see. He can be dangerous, with that BV. In the last few years, Fernandez had no opposition whatsover in Europe, let’s see if Mikhail can try to put some pressure on the Spanish skater. It’s something necessary for European skating, so behind in the men's discipline compared to North America and Asia. Kolyada’s TES score, with three falls, has been the highest ever recorded by a European man, Fernandez excluded.

Part 1.4 Ice Dance & Pairs Events

(M): Let’s now go to what happened in Pairs and Ice Dance. Everything or almost everything as predictable: results may be expected, but we can comment on the way those results came to be.

For example, Shibutanis won in Ice Dance, but it wasn’t an easy win. Bobrova/Soloviev weren’t that far off and they threw away the chance to finish with a head-to-head on razor’s edge because of an inane mistake on the spin. We often said that you can’t win a World Championship on Spins, but you can totally threw it away because of them.

(A): It wasn’t a World Championship, but it was what happened here.

(M): Anyway, they - a couple defined by many as quite “old-fashioned” - brought two programs that looked very competitive, this season. That doesn’t mean they are a lock for GPF, since their second event will be very challenging, with Papadakis/Cizeron and Chock/Bates, but they left a good impression.

(A): We expected high scores for them, and so it was. They showed a great and energetic performance for well over 2 minutes in their free dance, before that fateful error costed them, if not the win, at least the chance to fight for the win. I am curious to see them in next event, against those couples you mentioned. It won’t be easy for them to reach the Final, but Final aside, I’m curious to see their scores there compared to these other couples. Of course, it will also depend on the performance on the day, but while the home event tells us they may be in the race for important placements, I’d like to wait for the second event before giving a more complete appraisal (on them). I’ve to admit that while I do admire their technical level, I’m not a big fan of them. I’m one of those who think they are “old-fashioned”, as you said earlier. They don’t manage to grab me on an emotional level. So there's another reason to see them - next to a couple like Papadakis/Cizeron, who have exceptional projection skills, and see how close they can be.

(M): Regarding Shibutanis, a choice in Short Dance that is really a Rhumba, and that can play to their favour. Points wise, it was a good debut for them. Let’s remember they didn’t take part in any competition prior to the Rostelecom Cup. About the Free Dance, I dare say it was something “already seen”. An “already seen” that brought important results quite recently, though.

(A): We can group Shibutanis and Bobrova/Soloviev together on this. They are very different, physically and technically, but in the same way as B/S, S/S is another couple more solid on TES than what they can express under PCS, especially in terms of projection and interpretation. The Shibutanis struggled a lot (in the past) to find their way. They managed to find the right path, they got very important results with their old program on Coldplay music - a program that I loved very much - but this one… it seems stale. And in the end, even if they are couples with very different traits, we can group them together for the choices on their programs and for having a greater mastery on technical part of Ice Dance than on components. So it was a close battle also because they are, in a way, similar ice dancers, and it’s right that Shibutanis won since they were decidedly better technically. We still need to wait and weigh them against Virtue/Moir, Papadakis/Cizeron but also the other couples. Cappellini/Lanotte, Chock/Bates, Weaver/Poje, et cetera.

(M): For bronze, we thought we could have a closer competition, but Stepanova/Bukin got the bronze medal quite comfortably, with a good margin over Gilles/Poirier and Guignard/Fabbri both. The latter had good skates nonetheless, scoring a Personal Best there. It must be remarked that never before had a couple finishing fifth in a GP event scored as high as G/F did. It’s a good signal for the rest of the season (for them).

(A): It’s cold comfort, because they could have fought for a top-3 finish, even though we knew it wouldn’t be easy to defeat S/B in Russia, and there was a bit of curiosity to see - let me put it this way - how much [Russians couples] would be held up. In the end, the margin with S/B wasn’t that small, while the gap with G/P was really close. That’s a very important acknowledgment for Marco and Charlene and their future. For them, the goal is not to reach the Final, clearly, but to skate well, improve their scores, to get closer and closer to reach what could be the goal in their career: to get near European podium.

(M): Or to get a GP medal… it must be said they didn’t have the easiest of assignments this season. We talked at length (t/n in previous podcasts) about the quality of the Rostelecom Ice Dance field, and keep in mind: the sixth here, Popova/Mozgov, are a team that the Russian Fed is really counting on for future seasons. And if we look at G/F, in their next assignment they will find Stepanova/Bukin again, Chock/Bates, Papadakis/Cizeron, Weaver/Poje… the podium is really out of reach.

(A): I can’t disagree. But they can play their cards, trying to raise their scores even more. It’s important to put together a series of impeccable performances. They can be satisfied with the way things are going. They can still improve: They had a level 3 lift and one of the step sequences was only level 2, and considering how solid they usually are on steps, they can gain some more points there. Had they gotten those levels, they would have overcome the Canadian skaters. They can still be happy with their results, though.

(M): In Pairs, Tarasova/Morozov won with a huge lead. Their scores show how big their potential is, and it’s interesting to highlight that they achieved their personal best in the free skate, the segment they’ve always struggled the most with. In Moscow, they showed good consistency on side by side jumps, and great quality on every single element. With this consistency, they are indeed very tough to beat for everyone, even more so because their quad twist is becoming more and more solid with each week. (A): I’d say it was the highlight of the competition, to be honest. With that quad twist they created a 3-point gap between them and their closest competitors, training mates Stolbova/Klimov, on that element alone! That’s really an element that can shift the balance, especially when performed in a program with a high coefficient of quality and lots of positive GOEs, as the Russians’. They are indeed nasty rivals for everyone. I think they are clear favourites for gold at European Championships, together with Savchenko/Massot. The battle for Olympic gold will be harder, since it will include Duhamel/Radford and Sui/Han too, but the Russian pair has all the right characteristics to go for it, in my opinion. We compared them to Volosozhar/Trankov many times, after all. Right, Massimiliano? (M): Yes they have many things in common, like side by side and throw jumps; great attention to the quality of each element; and increasing TES with high GOEs, rather than going for a higher base value than the rest of their competitors. This, in particular, was the key to Volosozhar/Trankov’s success in Sochi, and the silver medalists there were Stolbova/Klimov, who came second here as well, although they seemed very far from their top condition. They were a lot slower, even though speed had always been their trademark, and made many mistakes on various elements. And this has been happening for two seasons already. (A):“They made mistakes on side by side jumps, on throw jumps, there was a fall on their throw 3S… There’s a lot of insecurity, instability, it’s clear that they couldn’t train well in the last two years, since both of them went through tons of injuries, and you can see they lack consistent training.They couldn’t find their pace in the competition, they were really struggling in both programs. Their strongest points have always been the great speed, great quality of execution, and even difficult side by side jumps as they’ve landed a triple-triple combination. Now these traits are gone, they make many mistakes. Clearly, there’s something wrong. (M): Third place for another Russian pair, Astakhova/Rogonov. They skated a near-flawless free program, only one small mistake on a throw jump, but the rest was very good. They had never skated such a good free skate, and it seems that here they were able to make that final step to reach the maximum of their potential. With their free skate, they managed to surpass the Italians, Marchei/Hotarek, who were third after the short program, but lost many points in the free because of Valentina’s fall on the 3T - which was also marked as under-rotated. They lost around 5 points with that mistake and that’s what costed them the podium in the end. Nevertheless, their season debut in the GP was positive, they scored more than 190 points with a big mistake, so they showed they can reach 200 points again when clean. It’s not enough to win an event anymore, but depending on the entries, a podium finish is doable.

(A): Yes, although we did predict a possible third place for them, Astakhova/Rogonov had the best skate of their career, and that’s why they beat Marchei/Hotarek. Clearly, it’s hard when you come so close to the podium and then wind up in fourth place, but the Russians really skated at the top of their capabilities and completed the podium sweep. Regardless of the missed medal here, both Italian pairs are doing really well in international competitions, and the preparation towards the Olympics is going really well. (M): Highly anticipated Canadians Seguin/Biloideau had to settle for fifth place, without showing anything remarkable. This pair looked really strong until last year, and it seemed they could have reached the elite of the discipline, then at some point, they had a sort of blackout. They started making many mistakes, and it’s like they lost confidence on their strongest elements. Probably their attempt at raising the bar technically, going for more difficult side by side jumps like 3Lo, backfired and made them lose the solidity they had on the rest. At the moment, I don’t think they can be considered the third Canadian pair.

(A): And that’s a surprise. We expected them to be fighting for supremacy in Canada, given their constant growth over the years, but right now they are way behind the top three Canadian pairs. It’s a real pity though, they’re both complete skaters, with very nice basics, great speed and flow and good interpretation. They had strong side by side jumps too, yet they made mistakes on these very elements at the Rostelecom Cup. They’re still young and their talent is unquestionable, so in my opinion, they can still come back and be competitive, even in a highly competitive and demanding field, such as the Canadian pairs.

Part 2: Skate Canada Preview

(M): Let’s focus on Skate Canada now, and let’s start with Pairs since the quality in this event will be sky-high. I can’t really tell who the favourites for gold are here… We have Savchenko/Massot, Duhamel/Radford, James/Cipres, Ilyushechkina/Moscovitch, Zabiiako/Enbert, and Peng/Jing. In theory, all these six pairs could aim for the Final. Savchenko/Massot are seed n.1, since they were second at last year’s Worlds; Ilyushechkina/Moscovitch are seed n. 2, thanks to their sixth place in Helsinki; Duhamel/Radford were seventh in Helsinki; James/Cipres had a top ten finish; Zabiiako/Enbert came close to top ten, and Peng/Jin couldn’t be at Worlds because China only had two spots - but they could have aimed at top ten had they been there. Too much quality to make a solid prediction, in my opinion this will be the highlight of the entire event.

(A): A spectacular competition, really. I’m very curious to see who will win here, in my opinion the clear favourites for podium are Duhamel/Radford, Savchenko/Massot and James/Cipres. But nothing is set in stone: Zabiiako/Enbert have many qualities, and they can take advantage of the smallest mistake by their competitors; I believe the Chinese pair is the “weakest” among those you mentioned because of Cheng Peng’s inconsistency on side by side jumps; and then of course, Ilyushechkina/Moscovitch, who were amazing at Worlds in Helsinki. In my opinion, they are a step back from the top three pairs I mentioned, but the competition will be tight and it’s really very hard to make a prediction. (M): “In the Ladies’, Osmond is the clear favourite, but there will be two interesting challenges: Pogorilaya vs Sotskova, and Wagner vs Chen. Pogorilya vs Sotskova is very interesting for many reasons; let’s remember that Pogorilaya wanted to move to Buyanova two years ago, but she turned her down and took Maria Sotskova; moreover, they will be fighting for the third spot in Olympic team. I’ve been told that Pogorilaya seemed to have lost motivation to train at some point this summer, she’s also on bad terms with her coach, so I really don’t know what to expect from her at Skate Canada. Among the others, there will be Marin Honda, who is a candidate for the top of the field in Japan. Hard to make a prediction here as well, there are at least five athletes who aim at the Final, and maybe two of them will be able to qualify in the end. (A): Hard call to make, the level will be high in this competition as well. Osmond is among the favourites, Marin Honda is a contender as well, for me. Russia doesn’t have its top skaters here maybe, but Sotskova is undoubtedly dangerous. Pogorilaya is a bit of a question mark, but last season she had very good results in the Grand Prix, as a matter of fact, she was the one who got closest to Medvedeva, back then. In my opinion, the Americans are a step lower, even though Karen Chen did fairly well at Worlds last season, and the US federation relies a lot on her. Wagner… it’ll depend a lot on the technical panel at Skate Canada. (M): This is true for Karen Chen as well, though, because they are very similar on some aspects. (A): I agree. (M): Then of course Karen has a good Lutz, which Ashley lacks, but overall they’re a step behind their competitors in my opinion. Maria Sotskova did pretty well at Finlandia Trophy, where she was arguably underscored in both short and free program, but she made very few mistakes. Her jump quality improved, she even added some features there. Pay attention to her, because Buyanova is able to bring her skaters to the top of their game for the most important events. Probably, CSKA’s coaching team isn’t on par with Sambo70’s yet, but there are some remarkable coaches there too, like Maxim Zavozin. I expect Sotskova to make further improvements, depending on what her limits are obviously. I think she can reach 210/215 points, and achieving these scores now would be a good sign for her future this season - even if the battle for Olympic medals will start from 220 points. (A): With a score between 210 and 215 she can even win this competition, to be honest. (M): Well, Osmond already went beyond 215. She’s hard to beat in the short program, but she’s more vulnerable in the free. Speaking of Osmond, we have a question. “Do you think Osmond could reach 77/78 points with a clean short program?“ (A): Hard for me. (M): You think so? But she has Lutz and Flip both, good quality on spins, she’s getting very positive scores on program components - even if some people disagree with this, but we’ll have time to discuss it better next week. Taking all of this into account, I don’t think 77/78 points in a short program is an impossible goal for her. (A): It’s a very high score. It’s true that she proved she can skate a clean short program many times, because this is the biggest issue when we talk about Osmond - consistency. I don’t know, 78 is still too high, for me. Theoretically, she may have the capabilities to get there. Theoretically. I do like her a lot, she has nicely choreographed programs, good charisma on the ice. I really hope she can become more and more consistent, I’d be delighted. (M): At the Autumn Classic International in Montreal, she succeeded in landing her jump-nemesis, the triple Loop. If that jump becomes consistent, then she can be a skater with two 2A and seven triples, which was never her thing, same as Kostner. They are comparable skaters somehow, as Osmond is arguably one of the fastest skaters right now and she does remind [us] of ‘old times’ Carolina. (A): Yeah great speed going into the jumps, great height, explosive and spectacular skater, no doubt. She does remind me of Kostner, particularly in the way she goes into her triple Flip and for the quality on that element. She’s skating on home ice - she did win Skate Canada in the past if I’m not wrong - and winning here would be very important, as her next event is in France and the competition will be tougher there. (M): Yeah she won Skate Canada some years ago, and was second last year behind Medvedeva, but she did skate very well there.

As far as Ice Dance is concerned, I’d say the table is set for Virtue/Moir, and it will be interesting to compare their results with the top two teams from Rostelecom Cup. The battle for second place will be between Weaver/Poje and Hubbell/Donohue: it’s hard to make a prediction here. Americans killed themselves in Helsinki and lost the chance to make the podium there, but that podium was very far for Weaver/Poje, at that time. (A): I think they still have nightmares of that free dance, they were doing great and then they made that mistake… Although, it was really naive of them, they only needed to skate clean to medal, even holding themselves back a little bit, but they rushed headlong and ended up far off that podium. That said, their potential is huge and there is no doubt about it of course. Weaver/Poje had a rougher season with lots of changes, you could see Morozov’s hand on some aspects already, different programs compared to the past… I’m very curious to see them now, I’ve always liked their skating, they have great presence, interesting programs, good speed and technique too. (M): Well, he does have some problems on the technical elements, twizzles in particular, and you can’t afford mistakes there, especially when you have to catch up with the top of your field. (A): For sure. Twizzles and pair spin are elements that can make you lose a competition, we’ve witnessed that many times. (M): Men’s competition will be interesting too, since we’ll have Shoma Uno as seed n. 1, and local idol, Patrick Chan who has already won Skate Canada countless times. Chan recently said he will be lowering his quad content for this competition - we know he was also trying quad Flip earlier this summer - and we have yet to see in what physical condition he is now, since he withdrew from a few competitions before this one, like Nebelhorn Trophy. Keep an eye on Orser’s Korean pupil, Jun Hwan Cha, the youngest skater in this competition. He has huge potential and his life coach is Yuzuru Hanyu, for better or for worse. We will have Alexander Samarin, from Russia, who will attempt the 4Lz in both his programs, and there will be Takahito Mura from Japan, who is coming back from a highly complex season. Overall, Men’s competition will be exciting as well, with many talented athletes, some of whom have yet to reach their full potential. Oh, and there’s Jason Brown too! (A): Yes many talented skaters indeed, but in my opinion, the battle for success will be between Uno and Chan and I’d say the Japanese is the favourite. Third place is quite open, we have Samarin, Brown and Cha, while Mura is behind these skaters in my opinion.

Part 3: Questions & Answers

(M): Time for our Q&A now, first question is about Max Aaron:

What do you think of the last two free programs by Max Aaron: The Lion King and The Phantom of the Opera?

Well, anything is better than Footloose to be honest.

(A): Really, anything. Erm… ok I’d say Phantom isn’t too bad a choice, considering the skater we’re talking about. I think The Gladiator could suit him too. (M): That’s it! That’s what I wanted to say, Gladiator. Something by Vangelis, like Alexander soundtrack, for instance. These are Max Aaron’s music c’mon, instead, he skates to Italian opera, or picks improbable American movie soundtracks like Footloose... (A): Which is very questionable and, yes, Footloose was the worst, I agree. (M): It’s clear he has been penalized by such wrong music choices. This season, it seems he’s trying to raise the bar, he looked good at the US International in Salt Lake City. For sure he has some limits, and his choreographies don’t really help him. (A): Surely Footloose didn’t help him, and I do think wiser music choices and choreographies could better help him hide his weakest points. That said, he is trying to up his ante by jumping two different types of quads, and if you recall, we described him as one of the most extreme skaters, already 4-5 years ago. (M): Yes he was already doing two different quads back then, but he lost the Toe Loop at some point, since he’s more of an edge jumper. Nevertheless, now he should be going for three quads and two triple Axels. Should he manage to land those jumps, he could be a contender for the Olympic team. Rippon and Brown should definitely keep an eye on him, to be honest. (A): Yes, Nathan Chen aside, he can definitely compete with the rest. With Zhou, they’re basically on par on PCS, because neither of them is exceptional in that aspect. With Rippon and Brown, it’s totally the opposite: he’s behind them on PCS, but he can beat them, thanks to the higher TES he has, as long as he lands the jumps of course.

(M): Next question: Do you think someone will attempt a tano or rippon quad? I think it’s almost impossible to be honest, better go for other bullets to raise the GOE. (A): I don’t know how to answer this one since I’ve never landed a quad myself, but from what I see it seems nearly impossible. Although I had never imagined we could see so many complex and “quad-packed” programs, so never say never.

(M): Another one: What are Medvedeva’s physical problems?

She has some problems in the ligaments of an ankle that are keeping her from training to the fullest. She usually trains a lot and really hard, paying attention to the tiniest details, so for now, she’s not able to train as she’s used to and that’s why she simplified her programs at the Rostelecom Cup.

(M): On with the questions, the next one says: What do you think of McLaren’s Report? Do you think there’s a chance we won’t see Russians skaters at the Olympics? As far as I’m concerned, McLaren’s Report has the same value of the toilet paper I have in my bathroom. It’s certainly not an investigation that could change the rules of the game. Not seeing Russian skaters at the Olympics would be a great damage for this sport and for the Games in general. I truly hope someone will realize it’s absurd to damage a whole country, like it’s happening for Russia. Sure, mistakes were made there, some crimes were confessed, someone was disqualified, but what happens in Russia happens everywhere. No kidding. (A): I think it’s really complicated separating politics from sport in this incident. It’s indisputable that Russia (and all former USSR countries, like East Germany for instance) has a sort of “tradition” in State doping, but among all sports, figure skating is the one in which doping has the least impact, in my opinion. But Russia aside, I think we should reflect upon what we’re seeing lately in the Men’s for example, because given the complexity of the programs, I think somebody might start suspecting possible doping in figure skating as well. It’s a mystery for me, too, how more and more skaters can jump quads almost towards the end of their programs, so probably the ISU should reflect upon this, and consider intensifying anti-doping tests. Obviously, this involves all the federations, not just one nation, just as you said. In our sport in particular, I think that training methods on children should be investigated as well, more than drug-related doping.

(M): Another question: “Artistic Roller Skating is trying to catch up with Figure Skating, introducing a new judging system similar to COP, do you think it could be a breakthrough? Could it finally become an Olympic sport?” Well there’s no certain answer here, you would need the Olympics to be hosted in a country with a big tradition in artistic roller skating, like Italy for example, but I don’t think the judging system is a factor. (A): No indeed, it’s a matter of the sport’s geopolitics.

(M): I just want to go back to the doping topic for a moment. Taking a position is really difficult. I’ve always said McLaren’s Report was useless, and even though there are disciplines where Russia passed the limit, nothing was proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

The Report stated that some test tubes were sabotaged, but that’s not enough to persecute an athlete for doping. It’s true that we had way too many doping cases in some disciplines lately, like biathlon, cross country skiing, and many athletes were disqualified. In my opinion, that was the right occasion to reinforce the rules, because when you have 12 athletes disqualified for doping, then you must punish the entire nation. Only in that particular sport though!

I think figure skating has nothing to do with doping in biathlon or skiing, and the McLaren Report is full of names and data, but nothing has been proven so far. Even more unsettling, there were athletes who were indefensible according to McLaren's Report, but have changed nationality and will compete at the upcoming Olympics! That’s why I have strong doubts on this document’s truthfulness.

(A): As I said there was too much politics involved, and it really turned into an open trial for an entire nation, which is simply unjust. Moreover, since nothing has been proven so far, there was also a damage to the image of some athletes, because doping accusations can really ruin your career. They can even end it, it’s like a life sentence basically. So you really need to be serious, careful, and unbiased when discussing these matters.

(M): To close the topic, there’s no doubt that the current system has flaws: an athlete who tests positive gets disqualified for two years, and during that time, they can still train and eventually come back. So, in some cases, they could intentionally risk to be disqualified in order to win, and then come back after two years, because the punishment is too light and somehow it’s worth it, if you win.

So, first of all, they need to adjust punishments, but most importantly, they need to reform the anti-doping rules completely, with the help of international legal experts who’d make sure the new set of rules won’t have any grey area.

As a former attorney myself, I can tell you that the current laws are full of flaws and really vulnerable. A good legislation has no grey areas and mustn’t leave room for interpretation. That’s fundamental, in my opinion.

And that’s all for Podcast #5!

Thanks and cheers for anyone who reached last line. As usual, we hope you enjoyed!

Cheers,

The-A-Team

90 notes · View notes