Redoing Olympic Qualification: A Proposal

What do people think of this proposal for Olympic qualification? I tried to remove lots of issues with nominal vs. non-nominal and all the craziness with the World Cup points. However, I tried to make sure the very best individuals qualify as the results this week showed that event specialists qualifying through the process won medals.

2023 Worlds

  • Teams 1-3 get 4 team + 2 individual slot (non-nominal) or 5 + 1
  • Teams 4-6 get 4 team + 1 individual slot (non-nominal) or 5 team
  • Teams 7-12 qualify
  • All remaining spots are finalists from Worlds taken in rank order and competition order (for women, it’s Team, AA, VT, UB, BB, FX) until 81 women and 75 men are chosen.

2024 World Cup Final / Test Event
Any gymnast who medals at a Category I World Cup or a Continental Championships is invited to an this event. All medalists (15 women + 21 men) qualify to the Olympics.

Then host nation + tri-partite

Any open spots come from World Cup final in rank order and competition order.

Is there a max number of gymnasts a team can qualify? Or could a top 3 nation try for World Cup spots also?

Max 4, I guess.

1 Like

Deleted

Im confused I thought the lunacy of plus one spots were for Tokyo only and going forwards we have a 5 person team again?

1 Like

I don’t know what the actual plan is right now, and whether it’s etched in stone. And even if this is that way for Paris, then for the following quad.

One way or another, allowing top nations to bring 6 was valuable. Many of the plus ones medaled. It’s something to keep.

(And even with 5-member teams, there’s still individual spots to award!)

oh thank you. I wasn’t sure.

I hated the plus ones. Pointless and naff. Just have 6 on a team if you want 6 in. It’s not a relay like in athletics and swimming where you are on a team within a team. All in the team please.

But I loved all gymnasts doing AA in qualifications.
So I would settle for a 5 man team all in team all doing AA in Qualifications.

2 Likes

I like this because it rewards the countries who are serious about gymnastics but still includes countries who aren’t.

(Disclaimer: I was a gymnast, then later a coach, but it’s been many years since I was either. I’m not extremely code-savvy right now so I can’t pretend that I’m as knowledgeable as some of you. But I follow the sport pretty closely, regardless.)

This is where the benefit of lengthening EFs would come in. If you include more gymnasts in EFs you could potentially get specialists from lesser known countries, therefore giving them some visibility in the sport (think Dipa from India on vault)

2 Likes

I’d keep both the World Cup and Continental routes. They were fun. The problem was the whole weirdness with who was allowed to participate. I think I’m on the side of just making it open to anyone, and maybe creating a date to decline spots if the gymnast opts to do team instead.

Well thought out but not a fan of the +1 for full teams.
5 per country and move to 5-5-3 prelims, 3-3-3 TF.
This way all athletes can do all around if they wish or a team is able to put up 4 or even just 3 per event in qualifications. This automatically accounts for specialists on the team.
Teams 13-18 get 2 athletes non-nominative, teams 19-24 get one athlete non nominative.

  • 12 teams x 5 gymnasts= 60
  • 6 teams X 2 gymnasts= 12 (72)
  • 6 teams x 1 gymnast= (6) 78
  • Tripartite, Africa, Host= 3 (81) Africa and host can reallocate if qualified outright
  • World Cup Apparatus Winners 4 (85) unavailable to top 12 teams- apparatus winner may ONLY compete on the event they won so no other events or all around*
  • All Around Qualifications at Worlds 13 (98)

I have heard that FIG is thinking of making Team Finals a mixed gender event. 3 men and 3 women.

Hmmmm, I’d be in favour if this was an extra event but not if it replaced both TFs. How is the team event working out in figure skating?

Perhaps this should be a separate thread so it doesn’t distract from qualification systems?

Did you see my way of handling that? Basically all World Cup and Continentals would be open to everyone, and then all the medalists at all of those events would do one competition for 3 more slots per apparatus / AA. I think that addresses your concern in a way that could be very clear-cut but also lots of fun.

This is basically the same error made over and over years ago. It was scrapped because it prevented TONS of specialists from participating. And look at the medals this week — TONS of specialists came through and medaled. Why take anyone from Teams 13-24? These are usually non-competitive athletes or people who would qualify as specialists anyway.

I don’t think the top teams need 2 individual spots. Geramisova and Skinner were pretty much a waste of a spot; it took extraordinary circumstances to make Skinner not redundant. Both of China’s +1s were successful, but you would imagine that they would have picked a different team if it wasn’t 4-4-4 and 4-3-3.

ETA: Jack is apparently proposing 5 + 1. I was not proposing 5 + 2. I was proposing 4 + 2.

I’m shocked at this comment. It’s as if you already forgot that by NOT giving the top 3 nations spots from the get-go, FIG didn’t create the disastrous qualification to begin with. This whole “does this country get a +1 from here or here or here” is what CAUSED the whole damn situation!

And you’re also just plain wrong — 5 of the 6 top 3 teams had 2 serious medal contenders. Just the Russian men did not.
(a) including Skinner would be the norm, not anything involving Biles, who is always an exception to begin with
(b) Gerasimova could have made beam finals, and in other years, Paseka and Iliankova could have both come
(c) You completely ignored MAG, where China had BOTH guys medal. Japan was one crazy mistake away from 2 guys medaling.

All of those spots would be covered by 5+1. 5+2 doesn’t seem necessary, as it would likely be at the expense of gymnasts like Andrade, Iordache, and Chuso. There is no way that the FIG Is going to take steps to reduce the number of nations represented, no matter how much it strengthens the field.

Let’s see based on 2020
#13 Australia- 2 athletes
#14 Brazil- 2 athetes
#15 Ukraine- 1 athlete
#16 South Korea- 2 athletes
#17 Switzerland- 1 athlete
#18 Hungary- 1 athlete
so half of these teams already ended up qualifying a 2nd athlete already.

As nice as it was to see African countries competing, we did not need 2 for Egypt and 2 from South Africa.
I would have rather seen an additional athlete from Ukraine (Motak or Bachnskya) Switzerland (Kaeslin), Hungary (Szekely, Boczogo)

And your point remains, 13-24 if they are a specialist and would have qualified anyway, then that country will end up sending them anyway.

When I said +2, I was building on the 4-member team idea. I am agnostic on 4-member vs. 5 member as long as top teams can send 6. (I edited my first post to reflect that.)

If you are proposing 5 + 1, then that’s fine, I think.

So we’re in agreement now on that — cool.