#winter olympics

Following the theme of my Alina-Zhenya post, I decided to reheat 32 years old drama and explain why Oksana Baiul beat the favorite for gold, knee-bashing survivor and Disney Parks hater Nancy Kerrigan. The most objective way to do so is by listing their technical components:

Nancy SP: 3Lz-2T, 2A, 2F

Oksana SP: 3Lz-2T, 2F, 2A

Nancy finishes 1st place, Oksana 2nd.

Nancy LP: 2F (Meant to be a triple but she popped it; done on an outside edge), 3T-3T, 3Lo, 3S-2T, 3Lz, 2A

Oksana LP: 3Lz, 3F (two-footed), 3Lo, 3S, 2A, 2T (Meant to be a triple but she popped it), 3T, 2A-2T

Nancy landed 5 triples, with 8 jumps total. Oksana landed 5 triples, with 9 jumps total. The media talked a lot about Oksana throwing an extra jump, the 3T, to beat Nancy, but what sticks out to me is that Oksana had two 2As while Nancy only had one. You could argue that Nancy having a 3-3 combination should given her the advantage, but Oksana’s triples had a higher degree of difficulty (3Lz, 3F, 3Lo, 3S and 3T; listed by value) than Nancy’s (3Lz, 3Lo, 3S, 3T, 3T). Oksana also had more variation in her spins (Biellmann, donut) and higher artistry.

Also, Oksana’s two-footed landing caused much controversy. Nancy even claimed that she deserved to win because she “skated clean” while Oksana didn’t. However, Nancy also made a mistake in her flip!

This is a screenshot of an ISU video explaining how the flip jump needs a clear inside edge during the take off.

These are Nancy and Oksana’s flip jumps + Oksana’s two-footing. My point is, if you argue that Oksana deserved deducted points for her landing, then Nancy deserved deducted points for her takeoff and we’re back at square one.

Schuss from the 1968 Winter Olympics is gay and a femboy!