Ja, das war ein total subjektives Bewertungssystem.

LOL they all did 2 triples and some got 5 8 5 9

Too bad her place in compulsories was too low, Tiffany should’ve been the bronze medalist imo

@@mht4908 Tiffany Chin was a very ladylike feminine skater. She actually performed the triple Axel when she was 13, but never used it in competition because it was not consistent enough.

That seemes to be one of Katerina's strengths. She might not have always had the most content but she was the toughest competitor out there.

You may want to revisit the 82 nationals program she didnt pop anything please educate yourself

@@grantnoroyan4083 No need to revisit. She told her interviewer after her skate that because her first triple went so well, she didn't want to do the one she had in the slow section of her program. Maybe not a pop in the purest sense of the word, but she didn't skate the program she had planned, something she had a terrible habit of doing in competitions.

@@matthough3590 LOL if you know anything she was injured and she had to take some jumps out she skated great that year was national champion and she was world champion in 1983 she generally skated well of course there were moments she didnt do well like katarina in 1986 when she was beaten by debi thomas and roz beat her in 1983

@@grantnoroyan4083 Yes, she had a hip injury, but in that same interview she said she wasn't in any pain, so again I say, she took out a jump she could and should have done. I didn't say she wasn't lovely and smooth on the ice. But she was not a gutsy skater generally speaking, and Katerina generally was. And I preferred Rosalynn's style to Katrina's one hundred fold. But Roz wasn't a pressure skater.

AS the great sandra bezic stated and it is 100 percent true rosalyn was always the better skater katarina was the better competitor!

Wie kann jemand die bessere Läuferin sein, wenn sie keinen Sprung fehlerfrei auf das Eis bekommt. 1983 hat sie bei der WM nur gewonnen, weil Katarina so schlecht in der Pflicht war.

STOP she was lovely

Was für ein Bullshit!!!!!

It was a time when being a reigning World Champion gave you a major advantage.

@@3Axel1996 I can see that happening with Katarina in 88 Worlds as well, as much as I’m a Katarina Stan, Elizabeth should’ve won that free skate, not her

Favoritism by the Eastern European Soviet bloc vs. the West, though that wasn't the case here with the draw of the judges. But you're right, the East German judge was right with both marks.

I agree, I think the worst robbery of those Olympics was that Rosalynn’s free skate places above Tiffany Chin’s despite popping so many jumps, Tiffany should’ve been on the podium despite the CP placement

@@mht4908 Chin needed to win the long program to win the bronze. So would have to be 1st over Witt in the long program. Granted she has a case for that too. Also you could argue ivanova being lower than 5th in the long, although everyone was pretty bad after the first 4 so hard to say.

The Italian judge must have been on a coffee break.

She only did 1 less triple than Witt (3 to 2) and probably had better artistry at this point in their careers, and was the world champ going in. I am not at all surprised it was very close still. I think if she had done the last double axel she would have won, oh well.

npe1 but

There's more to technical merit than jumping. There are spins, footwork, connecting steps, spirals, surety of edge, speed, positions, and other elements that come into play when determining the technical mark.

Michael Vaughn ,,,we all know, with the 6.0 system, known skaters with the jumps got the marks, and sometimes when they didn’t have the jumps. If you were an unknown, they simply marked you down.

Michael Vaughn, nobody ever won a medal with shoddy jumps just because they had great edges. If you want to throw the other aspects into play, Rosalynn was really a subpar spinner. They were labored and she didn't hold positions for that long.

@@Juice_Lover123 Where did I say that she should have won because she had great edges? I simply pointed out that the technical merit mark was determined by assessing multiple criteria and not just jumps. If the winner is determined based solely on the number of triple jumps she completes then let's just do away with the other aspects/components of the sport and call it ice jumping.

I know two 5.9s and four 5.8s!!! How is that justified?

I have to agree, Witt here is not finished and was very lucky to win. Sumners basically gave her the medal. You can tell she's incredibly nervous and where normally you get the beginning over and the nerves fly away, here it seems they got worse during the programme. Her first jumps were lovely.

I could not agree with you more !! Tiffany Chin absolutely DESERVED that bronze medal over Kira Ivanova.

Ivanova got 4 triple jumps. No one got more

Why? She still got paid.

patrick johnson Witt must have a skating fairy looking after her in the big competitions. Witt has always benefited from other skaters screwing up their LP. Debi Thomas F--ing up her LP in 88 Olympics was another gift to Katarina.

@@shihlin1 "gift" mentality and consistency won. In sports thats important and witt had, debi didnt.

But Zayak and Chin were 12th and 13th in figures.

renzy79 Sumners actually chickened out of THREE triple jumps and she popped TWO intended double axels. Those are some glaring mistakes and definitely not Gold medal worthy.

renzy79,,,you’re delusional !

When you're only doing 3 or 4 Triples and 2 Double Axels, omitting one of each is glaring. It's huge. Even getting 5.8s and a 5.9 on this technically showed bias. This was not worthy of that. The other American women did better and sat further back. If you want to reward her with good artistic marks, fine. Dick Button noted that she popped 2 Toe Loops. Why she had 2 more in there when she already completed one is beyond me, but either way that's 2 triples. Two of 4. She had great carriage, speed and command of the ice but the actual technical aspects easily went to Witt. "Transitions" are nice to consider but this is the 6.0 scale. Roz couldn't spin for shit. That combo spin was just not worthy. That meant more at that point than a good ina bauer. The jumps weren't there this time. She really placed better than she deserved, which was lower than expected. The results of competitions then leaned heavily on "expectation".

@@Juice_Lover123 No, it's not huge in this era. Vladimir Kovalev, a 2-time world champion would pack his program with the same jumps and pop half of them. You were given credit for what you did accomplish not penalized for what you didn't. If you credit Roz for ALL the jumps she did then she had MORE technical content than Witt. Period. Also, it appears that you don't know much about this era if you are counting toe loops and toe walleys as the same jump. Roz's programs were COMPLETE. Her speed, footwork, transitions in and out of the jumps all count toward the technical mark. In 1976, Dorothy Hamill beat women who landed clean triples and more double axels (Dianne de Leeuw and Christine Errath) for that reason. Your technical standards appear to based on the modern IJS era, but even if that approach is taken when you add the technical value of both programs, Roz wins the technical mark. The artistic mark isn't even in question. If Roz should have placed second to anyone in the long it should have been Tiffany Chin, not Katarina Witt, but Chin was too far behind and too new to the senior international scene to be given first in the long.

@@garysimmons1485 LOL. What about my comment is incorrect.