First off, you have to understand that the scoring and judging for the Olympics is done just like in the World Cup circuit, which Americans don't do. This scoring especially emphasizes big air and goes by a 50 point scale, not a 100 point scale, like in the X-Games.
The reasoning to emphasize bigger air is because it raises the difficulty level by being much more dangerous if one falls. Also, a trick generally looks better the higher a rider gets out of the pipe. Finally, with a 50 point scale, scores can get close and judges have to get picky to differentiate between riders; so, bigger air comes in handy when one needs to separate a great run from a really good run.
This final point, of course, could be simplified if they just changed to a 100 point scale, which would offer more separation between the runs. Also, in my opinion, if a rider lands a whole, good, strong run, they should automatically be scored higher than someone whose run wasn't as good, but they went higher. Finally, if the pipe conditions aren't great and there's no way the riders will get bigger air, do you lower all the scores, or is it a comparative thing? On that note, if the conditions improve throughout the day (as happened Thursday, when the sun set and the pipe hardened again), do you score the later riders higher than the first ones, because they were lucky enough to go later and thus get air easier?
That being said, I didn't have a problem with any of the results except for how low they scored Louie Vito (I thought he deserved to be right with Scotty Lago and I. Pod. with a 41 something) and how high they scored Peetu Piiroinen (who eventually won silver).
I was disappointed to see how many riders went down throughout the competitions. I would prefer the final scores show who laid down the best run, with everyone doing their best, not who happened to finish. The ones I'm thinking of specifically: I. Pod.'s second run would have definitely raised his score; Kazuo didn't land either of his attempts and left the pipe bleeding with nothing to show for it; Gretchen Bleiler could have threatened Torah Bright's score had she landed either of her runs; Kelly Clark could have gone higher than third had she not clipped the lip and lost speed, forcing her to throw out the 1080 she had considered ending her run with; and I'm really sorry for Spain's Queralt Castellet, who was third after the women's qualifying run, then got injured in a training run, and couldn't even compete in the finals.
One thing I was glad to see was that the Chinese didn't win anything. See, the Chinese Federation's approach to snowboarding is the same as their approach to any other sport: harsh, regimental training focused solely on defeating your opponents and not enjoying yourself. While I can accept that something like this happening is the sad inevitability of the progression of the popularity of the sport, as NBC's analyst's said, "It's just not snowboarding."
The Chinese really need to look at all of the big names in women's snowboarding (Bright, Beiler, Clark, and Hannah Teter), and notice how they manage to be great, to stay focused on the sport, and yet enjoy themselves and not take it all so seriously. Hell, if the Chinese just got a foreign coach for the snowboarders who let them have fun like they did for the freestyle skiers, that would be a pleasant change, and the snowboarders might just get better like the skiers.
One final thought: Shaun White's run was EPIC! That will be remembered for quite some time as a moment that progressed snowboarding and brought the sport to a whole new level, and it left me cheering and feeling almost as good as if I had just landed it. It was just an awesome moment.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Update on Olympic Sports You Don't Care About
So here's what happened to Lindsey Jacobellis.
On the first jump of the semi-finals, she was too close to Canadian and eventual Gold winner Maelle Ricker, so Lindsey had to land on her side. This caused Lindsey to spin-out just a bit, go off course, and then recover herself.
The one problem was that the damn gate was right where she temporarily lost control. Lindsey had already regained from her sketchy landing and it is easily believably that she could recover and make it into the finals. But she hit the afore-mentioned damn gate, which is against the rules, and was disqualified.
And that was all it took.
PS,
The lack of parity in Women's Hockey is a little embarrassing.
On the first jump of the semi-finals, she was too close to Canadian and eventual Gold winner Maelle Ricker, so Lindsey had to land on her side. This caused Lindsey to spin-out just a bit, go off course, and then recover herself.
The one problem was that the damn gate was right where she temporarily lost control. Lindsey had already regained from her sketchy landing and it is easily believably that she could recover and make it into the finals. But she hit the afore-mentioned damn gate, which is against the rules, and was disqualified.
And that was all it took.
PS,
The lack of parity in Women's Hockey is a little embarrassing.
Olympic Sporting News You Don't Care About
The Snowboard Cross course is hard. There are multiple hops up to a tabletop (flat surface) which then drop off sharply, several jumps (two of them big ones), and sharp "Daytona" turns (they're quarter-pipes, like in Daytona, hence the name... duh). Then there's the weather, causing snow conditions to vary from slush to soft powder to ice all of which affect the racers' speed and control.
What this all means is that it is not surprising that heavy favorites Nate Holland and Pierre Vaultier didn't metal, it's actually a miracle that anyone could stand long enough to cross the finish line at all. So if Lindsey Jacobellis does not "redeem" herself and win gold in Snowboard Cross, don't be too hard on her, it might just be the course.
The one woman with the best chance of stopping an American sweep in Snowboard half-pipe is Australian (and Mormon, who knew they had those in Australia?) Torah Bright. Her one flaw, sadly, is also her greatest strength: Torah goes BIG. She wants those huge tricks even when it isn't wise to attempt them. Of course, if she lands all her tricks and completes a full run, she is unbelievably good, but it's that IF that gets her sometimes. Hell, she just suffered two concussions within three days while training the week before X-Games, which was about three weeks ago. As for her American competitors, Kelly Clark is the most consistent rider on the women's side, but she doesn't always go big enough in competition (which is partly why she's so consistent). Gretchen Bleiler and Hannah Teter have bigger tricks, it's just a question if they can put down a whole strong run.
For men's half-pipe, if Shaun White puts down a run like he had at X-Games, he is unbeatable. So, assuming that happens, it becomes a fight for second, where the other Americans might have some problems. Louie "Tiny Dancer" Vito (yes, they really call him that, now) hasn't put down a full, strong run in the finals of a competition in quite a while. This is partly because White has pushed everyone else to raise their games to a level not all of them have yet, but this also seems to be something of a mental problem with Vito. As for the other two Americans, Scotty Lago has good consistency, good air, and strong runs, but he has also been coming up short in recent competitions, and Greg Bretz is the other guy just lucky to make the team.
The men's biggest foreign competitors include I. Pod. (I'm not even going to try his real name), Kazuo, and several others who are landing double-corks and following them up with other big tricks. It's a deep field and it could be hard for the Americans to snatch more than one medal, based on how they've been riding recently.
What this all means is that it is not surprising that heavy favorites Nate Holland and Pierre Vaultier didn't metal, it's actually a miracle that anyone could stand long enough to cross the finish line at all. So if Lindsey Jacobellis does not "redeem" herself and win gold in Snowboard Cross, don't be too hard on her, it might just be the course.
The one woman with the best chance of stopping an American sweep in Snowboard half-pipe is Australian (and Mormon, who knew they had those in Australia?) Torah Bright. Her one flaw, sadly, is also her greatest strength: Torah goes BIG. She wants those huge tricks even when it isn't wise to attempt them. Of course, if she lands all her tricks and completes a full run, she is unbelievably good, but it's that IF that gets her sometimes. Hell, she just suffered two concussions within three days while training the week before X-Games, which was about three weeks ago. As for her American competitors, Kelly Clark is the most consistent rider on the women's side, but she doesn't always go big enough in competition (which is partly why she's so consistent). Gretchen Bleiler and Hannah Teter have bigger tricks, it's just a question if they can put down a whole strong run.
For men's half-pipe, if Shaun White puts down a run like he had at X-Games, he is unbeatable. So, assuming that happens, it becomes a fight for second, where the other Americans might have some problems. Louie "Tiny Dancer" Vito (yes, they really call him that, now) hasn't put down a full, strong run in the finals of a competition in quite a while. This is partly because White has pushed everyone else to raise their games to a level not all of them have yet, but this also seems to be something of a mental problem with Vito. As for the other two Americans, Scotty Lago has good consistency, good air, and strong runs, but he has also been coming up short in recent competitions, and Greg Bretz is the other guy just lucky to make the team.
The men's biggest foreign competitors include I. Pod. (I'm not even going to try his real name), Kazuo, and several others who are landing double-corks and following them up with other big tricks. It's a deep field and it could be hard for the Americans to snatch more than one medal, based on how they've been riding recently.
Hey NBC, SHUT UP!!
So, it's Olympics time again, and again I have the same old complaint about the television coverage. NBC regularly insists on going away from the actual Olympic games to show these incredibly boring supposed "human interest" stories which are never very interesting and in last night's primetime coverage, didn't even mention humans.
Hey, NBC, you paid millions to have exclusive coverage of the games, you're losing millions on the damn games, you might as well show the Olympic games themselves instead of whatever random crap you make Mary Carillo do.
One other complaint I have is that if NBC is planning to show any of a specific event in their primetime coverage, they will show none of it during their day coverage, or post any of it online. They will, however, provide live updates and a live blog on what's happening in that event, as well as provide a full written recap of said event. Now, I can understand ratings and I know why they want to force viewers to sit through hours of talking and events they don't care about to get to the one they do, but then why do they post a live blog and live results? Granted, this is information one can find almost anywhere online, but why is the station forcing me to watch at night to see what happened during the day, telling me what happened during the day?
Also, they might not show all of an event in primetime so (as an example) if you want to watch every run in freestyle snowboarding (which I do) you're probably not going to, but you can read how everyone does in the live blog.
Hey, NBC, you paid millions to have exclusive coverage of the games, you're losing millions on the damn games, you might as well show the Olympic games themselves instead of whatever random crap you make Mary Carillo do.
One other complaint I have is that if NBC is planning to show any of a specific event in their primetime coverage, they will show none of it during their day coverage, or post any of it online. They will, however, provide live updates and a live blog on what's happening in that event, as well as provide a full written recap of said event. Now, I can understand ratings and I know why they want to force viewers to sit through hours of talking and events they don't care about to get to the one they do, but then why do they post a live blog and live results? Granted, this is information one can find almost anywhere online, but why is the station forcing me to watch at night to see what happened during the day, telling me what happened during the day?
Also, they might not show all of an event in primetime so (as an example) if you want to watch every run in freestyle snowboarding (which I do) you're probably not going to, but you can read how everyone does in the live blog.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Heroes Finale: Good Ending, Bad Beginning?
So I'll start with the positive. I really liked this episode. I liked Peter and Sylar teaming up; I liked the new "hero" Sylar; I liked the pacing; and I liked how everyone teamed up in their own way to defeat Samuel.
And how they took out Samuel was brilliant! How do you beat a psychotic cult leader? By getting his cult to lose all faith in him. Instead of joining powers and beating him down like he was Sylar at the end of season one, the Heroes cast got his "family" to realize what kind of man he truly he is: a lunatic who's been using them this whole time for his own crazy, super-villain, Napoleon-complex ends. Granted, they had to use mind-control on one of Samuel's enforcers to do it, but still, the good ending was achieved.
And I LOVED the scenes with Hiro and Charlie. It was heart-breaking, but believable; hard to watch but inevitable. Masi Oka just does not get enough credit for how good he is on this show.
So, I really liked this episode, but the cliffhanger beginning of the next chapter.... well, I'm still not sure about that. For one thing, NBC seems undecided as to whether or not the show will be coming back at all, in which case this was as close to a finale as we're going to get. But even beyond that, did Claire really have to go there? Now yes, there are only so "gas pockets," "sinkholes," and random, barely-explainable things that can believably happen in our modern, worldwide massive multi-media culture before it just gets ridiculous that the public has yet to catch on to the existence of super-humans.
However, to force it out into the public view like Claire did seems... I don't know. It's definitely a new direction for the show (assuming we get another season at all), but it was just so rash, wasn't it? It was like an "F.U." to Noah's beliefs made in the heat of the moment that could very well change the world, and will, at least, change her life and that of her friend's dramatically.
As to why Claire specifically did it, that was like the actions of someone who's just tired of hiding the truth of herself from the world. And yeah, she'd been under a lot of stress lately, so you can kind of understand why she just suddenly "came out" like she did.
But still.... it's the kind of thing that irks me until I see how the show is specifically going to handle it. So I guess I'll see what happens next, if anything.
Overall, though, I really liked this season, and I pray to all the gods of television that we get at least one more; if only so I'll see whether or not I was right to be unsure about this season's ending.
And how they took out Samuel was brilliant! How do you beat a psychotic cult leader? By getting his cult to lose all faith in him. Instead of joining powers and beating him down like he was Sylar at the end of season one, the Heroes cast got his "family" to realize what kind of man he truly he is: a lunatic who's been using them this whole time for his own crazy, super-villain, Napoleon-complex ends. Granted, they had to use mind-control on one of Samuel's enforcers to do it, but still, the good ending was achieved.
And I LOVED the scenes with Hiro and Charlie. It was heart-breaking, but believable; hard to watch but inevitable. Masi Oka just does not get enough credit for how good he is on this show.
So, I really liked this episode, but the cliffhanger beginning of the next chapter.... well, I'm still not sure about that. For one thing, NBC seems undecided as to whether or not the show will be coming back at all, in which case this was as close to a finale as we're going to get. But even beyond that, did Claire really have to go there? Now yes, there are only so "gas pockets," "sinkholes," and random, barely-explainable things that can believably happen in our modern, worldwide massive multi-media culture before it just gets ridiculous that the public has yet to catch on to the existence of super-humans.
However, to force it out into the public view like Claire did seems... I don't know. It's definitely a new direction for the show (assuming we get another season at all), but it was just so rash, wasn't it? It was like an "F.U." to Noah's beliefs made in the heat of the moment that could very well change the world, and will, at least, change her life and that of her friend's dramatically.
As to why Claire specifically did it, that was like the actions of someone who's just tired of hiding the truth of herself from the world. And yeah, she'd been under a lot of stress lately, so you can kind of understand why she just suddenly "came out" like she did.
But still.... it's the kind of thing that irks me until I see how the show is specifically going to handle it. So I guess I'll see what happens next, if anything.
Overall, though, I really liked this season, and I pray to all the gods of television that we get at least one more; if only so I'll see whether or not I was right to be unsure about this season's ending.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Fearless Oscar Predictions
1. Sandra Bullock and Jeff Bridges will win Best Acting Oscars recognizing their careers as much as, if not more than, their nominated roles.
2. Mo'Nique and Christoph Waltz will win Best Supporting Oscars for their roles in Precious and Inglourious Basterds.
3. Jason Reitman and his writing partner Sheldon Turner will win for Best Adapted Screenplay while Quentin Tarantino will win for Best Original Screenplay.
4. Up will win Best Animated Feature, because Pixar always wins Best Animated Feature, that's the rule.
5. Kathryn Bigelo will become the first woman to ever win an Oscar for Best Director.
6. Best Picture: Now that's complicated.
See, when the Academy upped the nomination number to ten for Best Picture, they also changed the rules for how votes for Best Picture are counted. Now, voters rank all ten films and, in order to be considered, a film has to have a majority of top picks by the voters.
Here's how it works. Let's say this is your Oscar ballot for Best Picture:
1. An Education
2. Up
3. District 9
4. Precious
5. Inglourious Basterds
6. The Hurt Locker
7. Up in the Air
8. The Blind Side
9. Avatar
10. A Serious Man
Now let's say not enough people saw An Education and so didn't give it that high a ranking, so that vote of yours will be ignored and the Academy will move down to the next one. Older Academy members don't want to see an animated film win Best Picture, so they're not voting for Up, so that vote's out. None of the Directors of Photography are voting for District 9, because they all think the film over-used shaky cam (which it did), and Precious is being widely praised for its acting, but not enough voters think it classifies as "Best Picture material" so there goes those votes. Inglourious Batserds, however, has enough support to get high ranking votes, so that would be the one that counts on your ballot, even though you ranked it 5.
Get it?
Yeah, it didn't really make sense to me, either, but this will make the Best Picture race much more interesting than it usually is, because we're still not sure what exact impact this new voting procedure will have. Well, I'm actually sure of one impact this voting will have: negative campaigning (which the Academy has been trying to lower in recent years) now means more than it used to.
Notice how low I put Avatar on the sample ballot. If enough voters get enough support, they can effectively bury a film they don't want to see win, by just getting people to put it among their lowest numbers as I did with Avatar. Now how little voters want a film to win has as much to do with who wins as who voters would like to see win.
So no matter what happens Oscar night, one thing is certain: the Academy has successfully made the Oscars a little more dickish.
2. Mo'Nique and Christoph Waltz will win Best Supporting Oscars for their roles in Precious and Inglourious Basterds.
3. Jason Reitman and his writing partner Sheldon Turner will win for Best Adapted Screenplay while Quentin Tarantino will win for Best Original Screenplay.
4. Up will win Best Animated Feature, because Pixar always wins Best Animated Feature, that's the rule.
5. Kathryn Bigelo will become the first woman to ever win an Oscar for Best Director.
6. Best Picture: Now that's complicated.
See, when the Academy upped the nomination number to ten for Best Picture, they also changed the rules for how votes for Best Picture are counted. Now, voters rank all ten films and, in order to be considered, a film has to have a majority of top picks by the voters.
Here's how it works. Let's say this is your Oscar ballot for Best Picture:
1. An Education
2. Up
3. District 9
4. Precious
5. Inglourious Basterds
6. The Hurt Locker
7. Up in the Air
8. The Blind Side
9. Avatar
10. A Serious Man
Now let's say not enough people saw An Education and so didn't give it that high a ranking, so that vote of yours will be ignored and the Academy will move down to the next one. Older Academy members don't want to see an animated film win Best Picture, so they're not voting for Up, so that vote's out. None of the Directors of Photography are voting for District 9, because they all think the film over-used shaky cam (which it did), and Precious is being widely praised for its acting, but not enough voters think it classifies as "Best Picture material" so there goes those votes. Inglourious Batserds, however, has enough support to get high ranking votes, so that would be the one that counts on your ballot, even though you ranked it 5.
Get it?
Yeah, it didn't really make sense to me, either, but this will make the Best Picture race much more interesting than it usually is, because we're still not sure what exact impact this new voting procedure will have. Well, I'm actually sure of one impact this voting will have: negative campaigning (which the Academy has been trying to lower in recent years) now means more than it used to.
Notice how low I put Avatar on the sample ballot. If enough voters get enough support, they can effectively bury a film they don't want to see win, by just getting people to put it among their lowest numbers as I did with Avatar. Now how little voters want a film to win has as much to do with who wins as who voters would like to see win.
So no matter what happens Oscar night, one thing is certain: the Academy has successfully made the Oscars a little more dickish.
Monday, February 1, 2010
USA Minus Monk, Still Good
White Collar: I didn't watch last season, because the show was opposite something. I no longer remember what. So the first episode I saw was the second episode of the second season. I still had no problems following what was happening and I was really liking the show. The premise comes from the end of Catch Me If You Can, where Leonardo DiCaprio starts working with Tom Hanks to catch other forgers and the like. Except in White Collar there's also this whole thing with the bad guy's ex-girlfriend and some evil FBI agent, and whatever. If you've seen the commercials, you know the story.
Anyhoo, even without any previous experience with the show, it's still good. While the show goes with the whole pairing a straight-laced guy with the bad boy thing that's been done a thousand times, it messes with the concept by making the bad boy ex-con man a hopeless romantic and gives the straight-laced stiff guy a hot, fun wife (Tiffany Amber Thiessen, Kelly from Saved by the Bell, yes, she's still VERY hot) and something of a rebellious streak.
Burn Notice: The best thing about this show is that it refuses to remain static. Its set-up of a burned spy helping others while trying to find out what happened to his career could have been drawn out indefinitely. However, the hero/ MacGyver bad-ass spy Michael found the people responsible for ruining his life at the end of season one, spent season two dealing with them, and then spent season three trying to get back into the spy game while avoiding people he'd pissed off who now knew how to find him. Now in season four, Michael has to take down a lunatic assassin who has a problem with him. And , oh yeah, he ends up helping people in his own way every episode, cause that's just what kind of guy he is.
One thing that you might get tired of in the show is how the fact that Michael goes undercover as someone to make some bad guy come out and get caught can get a bit old sometimes. But, the show is fun, cool, and the way they've handled Michael's relationship with on-again/ off-again/ ex/ current/ it's complicated Fiona has been great, especially this season.
Psych: While watching the season premiere of Psych, something occurred to me. What professional wrestler John Cena's previous attempts at film acting had lacked wasn't that the hero was as stiff as a steel beam filled in with concrete who seemed to be reading his lines right off the page, it was that they weren't action film parodies starring big John as the straight man in a farce, coupled with two people who are not taking the situation nearly as serious as they should be.
I love this show, I loved this episode, and the scenes between Shawn (James Roday) and his girlfriend Abby (Rachel Leigh Cook) were so good, you can't help but notice how much talent these actors really have. This season's started great, and I can only hope that continues.
Anyhoo, even without any previous experience with the show, it's still good. While the show goes with the whole pairing a straight-laced guy with the bad boy thing that's been done a thousand times, it messes with the concept by making the bad boy ex-con man a hopeless romantic and gives the straight-laced stiff guy a hot, fun wife (Tiffany Amber Thiessen, Kelly from Saved by the Bell, yes, she's still VERY hot) and something of a rebellious streak.
Burn Notice: The best thing about this show is that it refuses to remain static. Its set-up of a burned spy helping others while trying to find out what happened to his career could have been drawn out indefinitely. However, the hero/ MacGyver bad-ass spy Michael found the people responsible for ruining his life at the end of season one, spent season two dealing with them, and then spent season three trying to get back into the spy game while avoiding people he'd pissed off who now knew how to find him. Now in season four, Michael has to take down a lunatic assassin who has a problem with him. And , oh yeah, he ends up helping people in his own way every episode, cause that's just what kind of guy he is.
One thing that you might get tired of in the show is how the fact that Michael goes undercover as someone to make some bad guy come out and get caught can get a bit old sometimes. But, the show is fun, cool, and the way they've handled Michael's relationship with on-again/ off-again/ ex/ current/ it's complicated Fiona has been great, especially this season.
Psych: While watching the season premiere of Psych, something occurred to me. What professional wrestler John Cena's previous attempts at film acting had lacked wasn't that the hero was as stiff as a steel beam filled in with concrete who seemed to be reading his lines right off the page, it was that they weren't action film parodies starring big John as the straight man in a farce, coupled with two people who are not taking the situation nearly as serious as they should be.
I love this show, I loved this episode, and the scenes between Shawn (James Roday) and his girlfriend Abby (Rachel Leigh Cook) were so good, you can't help but notice how much talent these actors really have. This season's started great, and I can only hope that continues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
