Shane Brekon you are 100% correct. Nancy never did full run through with her programs and she would Freak out when she missed a jump. It was 100% psychological with Nancy.
Nancy may be stiff and the choreo unimaginative, but the technique the Scotvolds taught her in terms of skating skills, spins, spirals, and jumping technique are all textbook - very good basics that few of her competitors really had... if she were a more emotive and more consistent skater she would've won more titles..
Then that means all of the figure skaters before the 80s were robotic then? Because it's a classic mode of skating. Your lack of artistic sensibilities has been revealed here.
She is not capable of interpreting the music. Technically, when she is on, she is good. I have no emotional response whatsoever to her interpretation or lack thereof, it is so juvenile, but I love her costume and she has some beautiful lines on the ice.
@333mayhem She should have won the gold at the Olympics without the triple flip, but you are absolutely right. Had she tripled the flip, there wouldn't have been even the smallest of doubts that she deserved to be Olympic Champion. I personally still don't think there is, she out-skated everyone that night, technically and artistically. Baiul only landed 3 clean triple jumps in her long program at the Olympics, and still received five 5.8's and one 5.9 for tech merit, ridiculous...
As far as I know, this was the first time she managed 5 successful triple jumps in one free skate - something that must have been a significant achievement for her.
Here, she landed the triple flip jump and had a more secure combination spin, but she doubled her triple loop jump and travelled across the ice on her final scratch spin. At the 1994 Olympics, she doubled her triple flip jump and also wobbled on her combination spin, but she landed the triple loop and had a great finishing spin. But even had she nailed everything at the Olympics, it may not have mattered, judging being what it is.
The Czech judge who gave it to Baiul on technical mark would have had to go with her then. Jan Hoffmann who gave it to Baiul on the tiebreaker on the artistic mark which made sense (5.7 and 5.9 for Baiul to 5.8 and 5.8 for Kerrigan) admits she gives Kerrigan a 5.9 technically and his 1st place ordinal if she did all 6 triples and all else remains the same. Nancy wins for sure now, even if possibly still not unanimously.
@@dougierichardson484when did Hoffmann say that? (He, by the way, not she-Hoffmann was a two-time men’s World Champion and ‘80 Olympic silver medalist.) But yes, Hoffmann’s marks were the most defensible of the five who had Baiul winning since he still acknowledged Nancy’s technical edge, though not by enough. The three judges who had them tied on artistry but Baiul winning on technical marks were outrageous-Czech, Ukraine, and China-and even the Polish judge who tied them on technical but had Baiul winning based on artistry obviously missed something in watching the technical aspects.
@Parker528 If you look back, one of the judges that gave Oksana the higher Technical was the UKRAINIAN judge, along with the Czech and the Polish, I believe. Also, Nancy had a better variety of spins that show cased forward and back camels, layback spin, back scratch spins, and forward and back sit spins. Oksana did a back camel spin, a flying camel into a back camel spin and a death drop into a back sit spin. She avoided doing a layback and forward spins, which were her weaknesses.
@Parker528 The donut spin does warrant a good deal of flexibility, but that's only 1 spin. You will see that Oksana, holding onto the skate will gradually lower herself out of both back camel spins, which is a good disguise for what might be weak exits out of those camels. The donut spin is not inferior in difficulty, but Nancy showcased a greater variety of spins both forward and back positions. Like I said, Zmievskaya was smart to choreograph only Oksana's strong spins into the program.
@Parker528 It wasn't the Czech judge. That judge gave Boitano and Orser 5.9 for Technical, but gave Orser the 1st Place ordinal by giving him a 6.0 for Artistic Impression. That made the total of the 2 marks 11.8 for Boitano to 11.9 for Orser. If post 1988 Long Programs uses the higher Artistic Impression mark as the 1st tiebreaker, the pre-1988 uses the Technical Merit mark. I cannot understand how you keep being in the cloud about all of this after all this time?
@Parker528 That wasn't really the problem, her artistic marks--she got the same artistic marks for this program at the Olympics as she did here--six 5.9's and three 5.8's (and Baiul got this exact same distribution, just from different judges). CBS sports played up the East German angle with Hoffmann portraying him as the biased one when I think really his was the most defensible of the five who put Baiul 1st because he at least acknowledge Kerrigan's technical edge, even if not by enough.
Technically this program was very similar to what she did in the Olympics--here she doubled what should have been a triple loop, at the olympics it was the flip she doubled (and here it looks like the Lutz may have been slightly two footed as well), but actually she also got the same technical marks here as she got in the Olympics--six 5.8's and three 5.7's. The problem in the Olympics was really that Baiul's technical marks were MUCH too high, including a 5.9 from the Czech judge
@Parker528 Well, it was the Chinese judge not the Polish that scored Baiul higher in Technical. We know what we saw, but judging is very subjective. There are other factors that could have influenced the outcome -- sympathy from some of the judges because of the injury Oksana sustained from her crash into Szewczenko the day before, the disgust with the US skaters because of the media frenzy they brought, and remember Baiul's the reigning World Champion. Nancy was 5th the year before.
That's the real problem--the three judges at the Olympics--Czech, Ukraine, and China--who had Kerrigan and Baiul TIED on the second mark but gave Baiul higher FIRST marks despite trailing Kerrigan in clean triples 5-3, having none of her triples combination, while Kerrigan had a triple-triple, etc. As to the bias angle, it is worth noting that the Ukrainian judge in the Olympics--Alfred Korytek--was actually the father of Baiul's former coach. Hoffmann wasn't really the villain
@getoutofmyway01 exactly! I think she had something to prove to herself in the Olympics whereas here, it was more for everyone else. What a crazy two years for her!
@Parker528 BTW, Denise Biellmann has been doing a variation of the donut spin (and a forward one to boot) throughout her career, most prominent in he 1981 Worlds LP, and Caryn Kadavy did a variation of it in her 1988 Olympic SP.
@Parker528 How is Kerrigan's spins weak? She is a strong spinner but only during slight moments of rushing or lack of concentration is she off during the first revolutions of her camel spins. Baiul is the weaker spinner.
None of the 3 medalists in Lillehammer was a strong spinner. Lu Chen might have even been the best of the 3, which is kind of a joke when the rest of her career her spins were the weakest of all the top women. If the judges valued spins and other elements that much Sato would have won the LP as she had much better spins, obviously by far the best footwork, the most speed, best stroking, and she did land 6 clean triples even if some were shaky.
Kerrigan was indeed a bad spinner. She always seemed to rapidly lose speed the second she began them. They were the weakest feature of her skating. Her positions were ok and they were done with precision but her scratch spins should speed up as she does one, not slow down. Hers never sped up.
This must have been very satisfying for her to beat the competitors that were ahead her in the worlds Championship. If she would have skated like this she would have been world champion!
True, but remember this performance and competition was already after she implemented a new training strategy and her seeing a sports psychologist. That is why this 93-94 season was her best ever. She got better with time.
@Parker528 I just jot down the scores posted toward the end of each video clip and then make the comparison. Or you can do a search under 1994 winter olympic games figure skating and click on the Wikipedia page.
Nancy is really overrated artistically. I dont get where her reputation as being such an artistic skater ever came from. Especialy her being "elegant", no. She was a strong technical skater and jumper when she landed them, although inconsistent.
Спорт
Awesome jump technique!!🏆
The 2 best long programs of her entire career took place in the same ice arena. Nancy Kerrigan-Hamar !
Nancy although somewhat robotic and formulated is a fantastic jumper! Technically always correct. Great stroking and kneed bend. Beautiful edges.
skatergirl if she was so technically sound, why didn't she ever have a fully executed program with all her jumps?
Shane Brekon you are 100% correct. Nancy never did full run through with her programs and she would Freak out when she missed a jump. It was 100% psychological with Nancy.
In a way, she has a lot in common competitively with Sacha Cohen
@@Bnizzofashizzo disagree completely. Sasha was extremely emotional and expressive when she skated. The passion was always there.
You can tell how well she understands her technique when she talks about being on top of (vs. inside) her toe on the triple toe-triple toe combination
Nancy may be stiff and the choreo unimaginative, but the technique the Scotvolds taught her in terms of skating skills, spins, spirals, and jumping technique are all textbook - very good basics that few of her competitors really had... if she were a more emotive and more consistent skater she would've won more titles..
Shes graceful and pretty as Grace Kelly
You can’t do 18 triples Scott we all know that they can only do seven triples and she did five so I’m confused why you would bump it up from 5 to 18
Robotic is a proper word to describe the "Skating-by-Numbers" Kerrigan's choreo and style.
Then that means all of the figure skaters before the 80s were robotic then? Because it's a classic mode of skating. Your lack of artistic sensibilities has been revealed here.
Piznoc, I agree 100% and I've watched figure skating since the early 70s - present.
Go HELL!! U STINKY DICKHEAD!! Nancy is beautiful,stylish and elegant !!
There is not much choreography to this program....Compare to Chen Lu...Which was jammed packed with jumps and choreography..
She is not capable of interpreting the music. Technically, when she is on, she is good. I have no emotional response whatsoever to her interpretation or lack thereof, it is so juvenile, but I love her costume and she has some beautiful lines on the ice.
@333mayhem She should have won the gold at the Olympics without the triple flip, but you are absolutely right. Had she tripled the flip, there wouldn't have been even the smallest of doubts that she deserved to be Olympic Champion. I personally still don't think there is, she out-skated everyone that night, technically and artistically. Baiul only landed 3 clean triple jumps in her long program at the Olympics, and still received five 5.8's and one 5.9 for tech merit, ridiculous...
@The Name Thing Is Not Happening RUclips perhaps, but still not a reason to give technical marks that were completely undeserved.
Few people know Nancy was landing 3T-3T when she was a Novice skater.
As far as I know, this was the first time she managed 5 successful triple jumps in one free skate - something that must have been a significant achievement for her.
She did five triples in her long at the Olympics in 94."
Here, she landed the triple flip jump and had a more secure combination spin, but she doubled her triple loop jump and travelled across the ice on her final scratch spin. At the 1994 Olympics, she doubled her triple flip jump and also wobbled on her combination spin, but she landed the triple loop and had a great finishing spin. But even had she nailed everything at the Olympics, it may not have mattered, judging being what it is.
The Czech judge who gave it to Baiul on technical mark would have had to go with her then. Jan Hoffmann who gave it to Baiul on the tiebreaker on the artistic mark which made sense (5.7 and 5.9 for Baiul to 5.8 and 5.8 for Kerrigan) admits she gives Kerrigan a 5.9 technically and his 1st place ordinal if she did all 6 triples and all else remains the same. Nancy wins for sure now, even if possibly still not unanimously.
@@dougierichardson484when did Hoffmann say that? (He, by the way, not she-Hoffmann was a two-time men’s World Champion and ‘80 Olympic silver medalist.) But yes, Hoffmann’s marks were the most defensible of the five who had Baiul winning since he still acknowledged Nancy’s technical edge, though not by enough. The three judges who had them tied on artistry but Baiul winning on technical marks were outrageous-Czech, Ukraine, and China-and even the Polish judge who tied them on technical but had Baiul winning based on artistry obviously missed something in watching the technical aspects.
@Parker528 If you look back, one of the judges that gave Oksana the higher Technical was the UKRAINIAN judge, along with the Czech and the Polish, I believe. Also, Nancy had a better variety of spins that show cased forward and back camels, layback spin, back scratch spins, and forward and back sit spins. Oksana did a back camel spin, a flying camel into a back camel spin and a death drop into a back sit spin. She avoided doing a layback and forward spins, which were her weaknesses.
@Parker528 The donut spin does warrant a good deal of flexibility, but that's only 1 spin. You will see that Oksana, holding onto the skate will gradually lower herself out of both back camel spins, which is a good disguise for what might be weak exits out of those camels. The donut spin is not inferior in difficulty, but Nancy showcased a greater variety of spins both forward and back positions. Like I said, Zmievskaya was smart to choreograph only Oksana's strong spins into the program.
"The worst thing that could happen did happen." Way to jinx it, Scott.
@Parker528 It wasn't the Czech judge. That judge gave Boitano and Orser 5.9 for Technical, but gave Orser the 1st Place ordinal by giving him a 6.0 for Artistic Impression. That made the total of the 2 marks 11.8 for Boitano to 11.9 for Orser.
If post 1988 Long Programs uses the higher Artistic Impression mark as the 1st tiebreaker, the pre-1988 uses the Technical Merit mark. I cannot understand how you keep being in the cloud about all of this after all this time?
@Parker528 That wasn't really the problem, her artistic marks--she got the same artistic marks for this program at the Olympics as she did here--six 5.9's and three 5.8's (and Baiul got this exact same distribution, just from different judges). CBS sports played up the East German angle with Hoffmann portraying him as the biased one when I think really his was the most defensible of the five who put Baiul 1st because he at least acknowledge Kerrigan's technical edge, even if not by enough.
Technically this program was very similar to what she did in the Olympics--here she doubled what should have been a triple loop, at the olympics it was the flip she doubled (and here it looks like the Lutz may have been slightly two footed as well), but actually she also got the same technical marks here as she got in the Olympics--six 5.8's and three 5.7's. The problem in the Olympics was really that Baiul's technical marks were MUCH too high, including a 5.9 from the Czech judge
@Parker528 Well, it was the Chinese judge not the Polish that scored Baiul higher in Technical. We know what we saw, but judging is very subjective. There are other factors that could have influenced the outcome -- sympathy from some of the judges because of the injury Oksana sustained from her crash into Szewczenko the day before, the disgust with the US skaters because of the media frenzy they brought, and remember Baiul's the reigning World Champion. Nancy was 5th the year before.
That's the real problem--the three judges at the Olympics--Czech, Ukraine, and China--who had Kerrigan and Baiul TIED on the second mark but gave Baiul higher FIRST marks despite trailing Kerrigan in clean triples 5-3, having none of her triples combination, while Kerrigan had a triple-triple, etc. As to the bias angle, it is worth noting that the Ukrainian judge in the Olympics--Alfred Korytek--was actually the father of Baiul's former coach. Hoffmann wasn't really the villain
@getoutofmyway01 exactly! I think she had something to prove to herself in the Olympics whereas here, it was more for everyone else. What a crazy two years for her!
@Parker528 BTW, Denise Biellmann has been doing a variation of the donut spin (and a forward one to boot) throughout her career, most prominent in he 1981 Worlds LP, and Caryn Kadavy did a variation of it in her 1988 Olympic SP.
@Parker528 How is Kerrigan's spins weak? She is a strong spinner but only during slight moments of rushing or lack of concentration is she off during the first revolutions of her camel spins. Baiul is the weaker spinner.
None of the 3 medalists in Lillehammer was a strong spinner. Lu Chen might have even been the best of the 3, which is kind of a joke when the rest of her career her spins were the weakest of all the top women. If the judges valued spins and other elements that much Sato would have won the LP as she had much better spins, obviously by far the best footwork, the most speed, best stroking, and she did land 6 clean triples even if some were shaky.
Kerrigan was indeed a bad spinner. She always seemed to rapidly lose speed the second she began them. They were the weakest feature of her skating.
Her positions were ok and they were done with precision but her scratch spins should speed up as she does one, not slow down. Hers never sped up.
What are you talking about Nancy had perfect speed and positioning Chen was weakest spinner
This must have been very satisfying for her to beat the competitors that were ahead her in the worlds
Championship. If she would have skated like this she would have been world champion!
True, but remember this performance and competition was already after she implemented a new training strategy and her seeing a sports psychologist. That is why this 93-94 season was her best ever. She got better with time.
@Parker528 I just jot down the scores posted toward the end of each video clip and then make the comparison. Or you can do a search under 1994 winter olympic games figure skating and click on the Wikipedia page.
Nancy is really overrated artistically. I dont get where her reputation as being such an artistic skater ever came from. Especialy her being "elegant", no. She was a strong technical skater and jumper when she landed them, although inconsistent.