I felt that she was underscored slightly for technical, as I said, but I agreed with her placement as 4th: Kwan, Tara, and Maria were all clealy superior in terms of overall package. Kwan was as artistic, and the elements were stronger, and Tara and Maria had harder programs (Both did triple lutz-double loop, and Tara did triple flip and Maria did triple loop).
This is one of those programs that I never grow tired of. Artistically this was the best short at the Olympic games in my opinion. Michelle Kwan is well balanced and I'm a fan of hers as well. Great Masterpiece programs from both of them through the years. In My mind Lulu had superb presentation skills that few have been able to match.
One of the very, very best artistic short programs; she simply put all of her contemporaries to shame except for Kwan. The marks were ridiculous; this was a lady skating amongst girls, and you couldn't find a better layback anywhere back then. Lu Chen was the best all-around skater between Witt or Kadavy in the 80's and Arakawa in the 2000's. Ito of course had the best jumps ever, but artistically she was just so stiff (except for the unforgettable 88 Olympics SP).
@Aldobrandini Chen was the best all around skater afer Witt and before Arakawa? First of all even if that were true in her prime from 93-96 she was clearly past her prime especialy technically here. And even in her prime I would disagree. Kwan has similar jumps, better spins, better footwork, better spirals, and similar artistry to "prime" Chen. Ito is much better at all technical elements and faster than prime Chen. Even Sato has better spins, footwork, spirals, basic skating, and speed.
@ants2876 Thanks for your comments, even if we do disagree. I knew there'd be at least one comment making a case for Ito, but I still stick by my claim that Chen was the best all-around skater between Witt and Arakawa, emphasis on the "all-around". While Ito had the best jumps ever, and wonderfully-centered spins, she also had a poor spiral style -- very precarious positions -- and an awkward, stiff style in general. But anyway, it's all a question of taste, isn't it?
@Aldobrandini True it is a matter of opinion and taste. What is it that you think makes Chen a better all around skater than Kwan though. Also funny you mention Witt as I dont think she was even the best all around skater of her own time. Kadavy and Thomas were better all around skaters. Witt was just great at what she did and was a killer competitor.
The only thing I can come up with is that the Australian judge thought that she two-footed the lutz, and then took deductions on the traveling spin and the slow double axel. Regardless, that judge should no longer be allowed to judge competitions; 4.9 is uncalled for, particularly for a world champion and olympic medalist.
@mlc2005 The first mark is for elements and is all about the quality of the 8 elements. Since her elements- jumps, spins, footwork and spiral sequence were average at best (and some of them weak) why should her marks have been high. Saying because she is a former World Champion and Olympic medalist is to encourage the kind of protocal judging that is so wrong about figure skating anyway. The 4.9 was actually probably the fairest technical mark she got for about 5 average and 3 poor elements.
@mlc2005 So she could get high technical marks just because of her name. What kind of fair logic is that. Tell me if this were an unknown would you be surprised at a 4.9 for elements. Artistically this program is quite strong (though not exactly one of her masterpieces) but technically her name aside it is quite average. The only good thing is it was fairly clean in that she didnt make a major mistake.
@ants2876 I agree wit h you on her technique, I was just surprised by the 4.9 and 5.1 markings. I completely agree with the rankings (Kwan first, Lepinski Second, and Maria third) ...well, maybe Maria second and Lepinski third, but jsut am surprised by such low marks.. and come up, 5.3 for a world class artist such as Chen. She did sell that program.
@mlc2005 So what would you have given her technically. I mean I find 5.5 or 5.6 too high really. The elements on this program overall were average. Weak double axel, combination spin, and even flying camel. Nice triple toe (but simpler solo jump), spiral sequence. OK layback, average triple lutz combo (good other than being cheated a bit), and layback. I would have given only 5.2 or 5.3 for elements really so I think the 5.6 is worse than the 4.9. I agree the artistic was strong.
The Australian judge was too harsh, but I see where the deductions came from. The triple lutz was cheated a bit, the double axel was slow and her combination spin was very weak. 5.4 to 5.5 was very fair. What I'm more offended by are the 5.3's for artistry. Whatever her weaknesses, she sold that program like the beautiful and elegant lady that she is. Those should at least be 5.7's across the board. There's no way Lipinski's artistic scores should have been better than Lulu's.
I think 5.4 to 5.5 for elements is much too high. 5.1 or 5.2 would be an appropriate score. Yeah the 4.9 is harsh but it is probably closer to correct than the U.S judge giving a 5.6. Her jumps and spins are not good at all compared to the top women.
@russianskatingfan Her artistic marks from those judges were too low though. They should have been 5.6-5.7s across the board in my opinion. When it comes to style and presentation, Lulu was the class of the field. Her choreography wasn't complex/intricate enough to warrant higher than that however.
Actually her required elements marks are too high in some cases. Her 3 spins all suck, her footwork sequence is simple, her double axel is stalked and slow, and a triple toe is a simple solo jump. Anything higher than a 5.3 for required elements would make no sense. The 4.9 is closer to reasonable than the 5.6 is, which is simply ridiculously high for her first mark here.
@safehaven11 Way way way too low. What was going on in 1998..even the commentators were shocked. Lu Lu deserved so much better but she came back to win the Bronze. I don't get those scores at all:(
In fact, for me the standings after the SP should be: 1st Butyrskaya, 2nd Chen, 3rd Kwan and 4th Lipinski. Both Maria and Lu were outstanding and they should be way over both americans after the SP.
The marks were def. way too low... she should have been a solid second behind Maria, based on the techinical diffiuculty being higher with Maria; the judges who put her in 4th and 5th place were insane. It was like she had been writtedn off and they didnt have a place for her... luckily they couldnt push her to the side after the stunning free!
Ummm I am not sure what you are smoking. Kwan was the clear winner of the short. Tara and Maria also clearly had better shorts than Lu. This was pretty clean without a big technical mistake and very strong on artistic but her technical elements were well below the other top skaters quality wise by then. 4th in the short where she ended up was reasonable since Irina, Nicole, and others botched but no higher than that. You think Lu had a better short than Michelle or Tara, ROTFL!
@russianskatingfan Predetermined winner of the short, yes, Kwan was but I think Tara's was the best. As far as Lu Lu..she is a lovely classy skater and will be remembered always for her grace, dignity, and courage. Not to mention the humility and lack of any sense of entitlement. All three winners in Nagano were great and should take great pride in their accomplishments. Tara was the absolute best, most courageous and exemplified the Olympic Spirit..the USA's Golden Girl!
My God, the Australia judge totally sucked, cannot believe give 4.9 for such a beautiful SP. Just look at the score range, such a huge, something must happen with that years judge system.
5.3 for presentation! Oh my, that's so far off the mark! And so that means that Lapinski should have got, errr 4.5 for presentation then from that judge?...;)...
@JP852 I never understood why the judges never gave Lulu the mark she deserved for presentation. She is undoubtedly the most artistic skater to grace the ice that even a 5.7 for presentation is a joke for her.
Such a beautiful short program from Lulu! Simply can't hold back tears every time I watch this, the sheer beauty of her skating! Just wonder what the Australian judge was doing at the moment, probably dozing off, please 4.9! Outrageous, he or she really should have been sanctioned for rendering totally inapproriate marks.
@ondinegb I cant remember the other short programs in comparison, but I saw three glaring technical issues in program. A tilted and small 3Lz-2T combo (which the commentators noted that is was off-azis), footwork only into a 3T and then her spins were travelling a lot. Correct me if I am wrong something like uncentered spins will impact presentation mark also? Otherwise, it was nice skate and don't get me wrong, I liked Lu Chen but some of the lower marks were justified.
@1andonlyCobra You're right. There was definitely a deduction for the combination and for some of the spins. But a 4.9 and a 5.3? No justifying that. Mid 5's was accurate for the required elements. But I think the choreography of the program and the presentation was second only to Kwan that night and that set of marks should have been higher.
Her program was miles ahead musically to Kwans and the same at 1996 Worlds.
Mikelandscaper 6 months ago
No one would have thought Shizuka would have been an Olympic champion eight years later.
brunofttt 7 months ago
I am Australian and I apologise for the AUS Judges mark.
AleAleAlejandro1 9 months ago
The AUS and HUN judges had her 7th in the short when all was said and done. What on EARTH were they smoking?
AsksOneThing 11 months ago
@AsksOneThing the judges are day dreaming!
Turkury 11 months ago
Just look at how beautiful she is! I loved Chen Lu.
Karosanyo 1 year ago
I felt that she was underscored slightly for technical, as I said, but I agreed with her placement as 4th: Kwan, Tara, and Maria were all clealy superior in terms of overall package. Kwan was as artistic, and the elements were stronger, and Tara and Maria had harder programs (Both did triple lutz-double loop, and Tara did triple flip and Maria did triple loop).
mlc2005 1 year ago
This is one of those programs that I never grow tired of. Artistically this was the best short at the Olympic games in my opinion. Michelle Kwan is well balanced and I'm a fan of hers as well. Great Masterpiece programs from both of them through the years. In My mind Lulu had superb presentation skills that few have been able to match.
Mikelandscaper 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
this video will never reach 10000 viewers
butlov 1 year ago
I love her face at 0:35-0:39. And that red dress looked great on her :)
criminaljournalism 1 year ago
@criminaljournalism I agree. She's a great beauty.
Karosanyo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THIS VIDEO WILL NEVER REACH 9000 VIEWERS
butlov 1 year ago
One of the very, very best artistic short programs; she simply put all of her contemporaries to shame except for Kwan. The marks were ridiculous; this was a lady skating amongst girls, and you couldn't find a better layback anywhere back then. Lu Chen was the best all-around skater between Witt or Kadavy in the 80's and Arakawa in the 2000's. Ito of course had the best jumps ever, but artistically she was just so stiff (except for the unforgettable 88 Olympics SP).
Aldobrandini 1 year ago
@Aldobrandini Chen was the best all around skater afer Witt and before Arakawa? First of all even if that were true in her prime from 93-96 she was clearly past her prime especialy technically here. And even in her prime I would disagree. Kwan has similar jumps, better spins, better footwork, better spirals, and similar artistry to "prime" Chen. Ito is much better at all technical elements and faster than prime Chen. Even Sato has better spins, footwork, spirals, basic skating, and speed.
ants2876 1 year ago
@ants2876 Thanks for your comments, even if we do disagree. I knew there'd be at least one comment making a case for Ito, but I still stick by my claim that Chen was the best all-around skater between Witt and Arakawa, emphasis on the "all-around". While Ito had the best jumps ever, and wonderfully-centered spins, she also had a poor spiral style -- very precarious positions -- and an awkward, stiff style in general. But anyway, it's all a question of taste, isn't it?
Aldobrandini 1 year ago
@Aldobrandini True it is a matter of opinion and taste. What is it that you think makes Chen a better all around skater than Kwan though. Also funny you mention Witt as I dont think she was even the best all around skater of her own time. Kadavy and Thomas were better all around skaters. Witt was just great at what she did and was a killer competitor.
ants2876 1 year ago
The only thing I can come up with is that the Australian judge thought that she two-footed the lutz, and then took deductions on the traveling spin and the slow double axel. Regardless, that judge should no longer be allowed to judge competitions; 4.9 is uncalled for, particularly for a world champion and olympic medalist.
mlc2005 1 year ago
@mlc2005 The first mark is for elements and is all about the quality of the 8 elements. Since her elements- jumps, spins, footwork and spiral sequence were average at best (and some of them weak) why should her marks have been high. Saying because she is a former World Champion and Olympic medalist is to encourage the kind of protocal judging that is so wrong about figure skating anyway. The 4.9 was actually probably the fairest technical mark she got for about 5 average and 3 poor elements.
lambielkwanfan 1 year ago
@mlc2005 So she could get high technical marks just because of her name. What kind of fair logic is that. Tell me if this were an unknown would you be surprised at a 4.9 for elements. Artistically this program is quite strong (though not exactly one of her masterpieces) but technically her name aside it is quite average. The only good thing is it was fairly clean in that she didnt make a major mistake.
ants2876 1 year ago
@ants2876 I agree wit h you on her technique, I was just surprised by the 4.9 and 5.1 markings. I completely agree with the rankings (Kwan first, Lepinski Second, and Maria third) ...well, maybe Maria second and Lepinski third, but jsut am surprised by such low marks.. and come up, 5.3 for a world class artist such as Chen. She did sell that program.
mlc2005 1 year ago
@mlc2005 So what would you have given her technically. I mean I find 5.5 or 5.6 too high really. The elements on this program overall were average. Weak double axel, combination spin, and even flying camel. Nice triple toe (but simpler solo jump), spiral sequence. OK layback, average triple lutz combo (good other than being cheated a bit), and layback. I would have given only 5.2 or 5.3 for elements really so I think the 5.6 is worse than the 4.9. I agree the artistic was strong.
ants2876 1 year ago
Somebody please tell me WHO are the COMMENTATORS? I love them. Always save the UKTV version when its good quality, though I'm American.
Chutson353 1 year ago 2
It's Simon Reed and Chris Howarth
spenceAMS 1 year ago
She has such an incomparable artistic quality ! every single movement is so beautiful to watch ! no one can reach her talent. miss heer so much
hkparody 1 year ago
In this COP, the actual marks didn't matter...just where you ranked in relation to the other skaters.
The Australian Judge might have just been scoring everyone low.
MTVMANN 1 year ago
The Australian judge was too harsh, but I see where the deductions came from. The triple lutz was cheated a bit, the double axel was slow and her combination spin was very weak. 5.4 to 5.5 was very fair. What I'm more offended by are the 5.3's for artistry. Whatever her weaknesses, she sold that program like the beautiful and elegant lady that she is. Those should at least be 5.7's across the board. There's no way Lipinski's artistic scores should have been better than Lulu's.
intldawn 1 year ago
I think 5.4 to 5.5 for elements is much too high. 5.1 or 5.2 would be an appropriate score. Yeah the 4.9 is harsh but it is probably closer to correct than the U.S judge giving a 5.6. Her jumps and spins are not good at all compared to the top women.
russianskatingfan 1 year ago 2
@russianskatingfan Her artistic marks from those judges were too low though. They should have been 5.6-5.7s across the board in my opinion. When it comes to style and presentation, Lulu was the class of the field. Her choreography wasn't complex/intricate enough to warrant higher than that however.
fong03 1 year ago
The Australian judge was seriously blind.This is the Olympics. If you can't be a good judge, you ought not to be here even.
ViVi80 2 years ago
Her skating is sooooooooooooooooooooo beautiful!!!!
dmsullen 2 years ago
Not even her skating. She´s so beatiful. A woman, not a machine.
naprdel 2 years ago
She is the most graceful skater and ever seen in the history of ladies singles. Elegant!!!!!!!!
amandakova 2 years ago 4
OMG, those marks have to be a mistake. No way. I don't believe it.
safehaven11 2 years ago
Actually her required elements marks are too high in some cases. Her 3 spins all suck, her footwork sequence is simple, her double axel is stalked and slow, and a triple toe is a simple solo jump. Anything higher than a 5.3 for required elements would make no sense. The 4.9 is closer to reasonable than the 5.6 is, which is simply ridiculously high for her first mark here.
lambielkwanfan 2 years ago
@safehaven11 Way way way too low. What was going on in 1998..even the commentators were shocked. Lu Lu deserved so much better but she came back to win the Bronze. I don't get those scores at all:(
getrealandsee 2 years ago
I am so glad she came back doing well in 98. Always love her style.
Cosucoman 2 years ago 3
and she was able to win olympic medal again. It's inbelievable !!!
butlov 2 years ago
In fact, for me the standings after the SP should be: 1st Butyrskaya, 2nd Chen, 3rd Kwan and 4th Lipinski. Both Maria and Lu were outstanding and they should be way over both americans after the SP.
warriorgr 2 years ago
Yay for the American judge... this was a terrific short!
uncchristine99 2 years ago
Actually phooey to the American judge who foolishly put this above Maria who had by far a better short program.
russianskatingfan 2 years ago
The marks were def. way too low... she should have been a solid second behind Maria, based on the techinical diffiuculty being higher with Maria; the judges who put her in 4th and 5th place were insane. It was like she had been writtedn off and they didnt have a place for her... luckily they couldnt push her to the side after the stunning free!
mlc2005 2 years ago
Ummm I am not sure what you are smoking. Kwan was the clear winner of the short. Tara and Maria also clearly had better shorts than Lu. This was pretty clean without a big technical mistake and very strong on artistic but her technical elements were well below the other top skaters quality wise by then. 4th in the short where she ended up was reasonable since Irina, Nicole, and others botched but no higher than that. You think Lu had a better short than Michelle or Tara, ROTFL!
russianskatingfan 2 years ago 5
@russianskatingfan Predetermined winner of the short, yes, Kwan was but I think Tara's was the best. As far as Lu Lu..she is a lovely classy skater and will be remembered always for her grace, dignity, and courage. Not to mention the humility and lack of any sense of entitlement. All three winners in Nagano were great and should take great pride in their accomplishments. Tara was the absolute best, most courageous and exemplified the Olympic Spirit..the USA's Golden Girl!
getrealandsee 2 years ago
My God, the Australia judge totally sucked, cannot believe give 4.9 for such a beautiful SP. Just look at the score range, such a huge, something must happen with that years judge system.
longfeiyu 2 years ago 4
I guess Australia was just bitter it's never produced half of anything for the winter games.
Pity
Tromkick 2 years ago 3
Aussies should stick to cricket.
grafgirl27 3 years ago 14
5.3 for presentation! Oh my, that's so far off the mark! And so that means that Lapinski should have got, errr 4.5 for presentation then from that judge?...;)...
JP852 3 years ago 8
@JP852 I never understood why the judges never gave Lulu the mark she deserved for presentation. She is undoubtedly the most artistic skater to grace the ice that even a 5.7 for presentation is a joke for her.
smartskater1 1 year ago
lulu was soooo cute! even when she frowned at the marks, she as still so elegent and lovely, wow!!!! such sportsmanship!
i love her indeed
piutommy 3 years ago 5
Classy, classy performance!! I really do think she was in a league of her own in terms of maturity, artistry and sophistication.
uwoeric 3 years ago 4
Such a beautiful short program from Lulu! Simply can't hold back tears every time I watch this, the sheer beauty of her skating! Just wonder what the Australian judge was doing at the moment, probably dozing off, please 4.9! Outrageous, he or she really should have been sanctioned for rendering totally inapproriate marks.
ondinegb 3 years ago 15
I have to say I pretty much agree with you - it's pure charisma from start to finish.
spenceAMS 3 years ago
@ondinegb I cant remember the other short programs in comparison, but I saw three glaring technical issues in program. A tilted and small 3Lz-2T combo (which the commentators noted that is was off-azis), footwork only into a 3T and then her spins were travelling a lot. Correct me if I am wrong something like uncentered spins will impact presentation mark also? Otherwise, it was nice skate and don't get me wrong, I liked Lu Chen but some of the lower marks were justified.
1andonlyCobra 9 months ago
@1andonlyCobra You're right. There was definitely a deduction for the combination and for some of the spins. But a 4.9 and a 5.3? No justifying that. Mid 5's was accurate for the required elements. But I think the choreography of the program and the presentation was second only to Kwan that night and that set of marks should have been higher.
intldawn 1 month ago
Thank you for uploading! I haven't seen this version of her Short program!
escaflowne9282 4 years ago
Thank you for putting this up. The commentators were right about the marks.
suraaldy 4 years ago 6