SV Calculations on FX in 1998

Simona Amanar (ROM) competed the following FX routine at both at the European Championship and the World Cup final. Videos can be found on Youtube.

RO -FF- tucked full in (D)
front (A)RO-FF-3/1 twists (E)
tucked jump 1/1 (B)
2/1 turn ©-wolfe 1/1 ©-Shushunova ½ ©
RO-FF- Layout 2.5 twists (D)-piked front (A)
RO-FF-Double Pike (D)

Value Parts for 9.00 SV:

A: RO
B: tucked jump 1/1
B: double pike (D, substitution)
C: wolfe 1/1
C: Shushunova
D: layout 2.5 twists

Extra Ds/Es (0.3 total):

tucked full-in (D, 0.1)
3/1 twists (E, 0.2)

Connections (0.6 total):

whip(A)-FF- tucked full-in (0.1)
2/1 turn © -Wolfe 1/1 © (0.1)
wolfe 1/1 ©-SHushsunova © (0.1)
Layout 2.5 Twists(D)-oiked front (A) (0.2)
front (A)-RO-FF- 3/1 twists (E) (0.1)
SV: 9.90 by FIG Rules.

She scored 9.762 at Euros (indicating 10.0 SV), whereas she only scored 9.662 at the World Cup (indicating less than 10.00 SV.)

Did 1998 Euros have different SV calculations than FIG rules? For some reason a lot of gymnasts stopped doing 2 B elements on FX. It appears to me that at Euros you could substitute and not loose the skill for bonus. This method was not adopted by the FIG until the 2001 Code. Until then if you were missing an element you could sub in Ds/Es but lost the Ds/Es for bonus used this way.

By comparison Ungureanu won the 1998 Euro FX title and did NO B elements but still scored 9.787!

RO-whip(A)-layout 2.5 twists(D)-punch front tuck (A)
front handspring-Rudi(C)-Shushunova(C)
RO-FF- 3/1 Twists (E)
2/1 turn ©-wolfe 1/1 ©-Shushunova ½ ©
RO-FF-Double pike (D)

She had to have a SV of 10.00 pts.

This is why I have been asking for rules and publications. Jackie Fie published an update in Technique magazine in the USA in 1998. There was only one major change: gymnasts only had to do a three gym series or a mixed series and not both anymore.

1 Like

Under Article 5.2.2 it states that if a D or E element replaces another missing value part, then the D or E element will not earn bonus. However, a similar provision is not stated for elements lower in value. My guess is that C elements could be freely substituted for A and B elements without affecting eligibility for connection bonus.

Using Dantzcher’s 2000 floor routine as an example:

Value Parts
A - front tuck
B - full turn with leg in scale, with free leg above horizontal, Popa (C, substitute as B element)
C - full twisting wolf jump, Shushunova
D - double twisting tuck jump

Difficulty and Connection Bonus
double layout + front tuck (E + A), 0.2 DV, 0.2 CV
double twisting tuck jump (D), no DV → required D value part
Arabian double front (E), 0.2 DV
Popa + full twisting wolf jump + Shushunova (C + C + C), 0.2 CV
triple twist (E), 0.2 DV

Total DV - 0.6
Total CV - 0.4
Total Bonus - 1.0

Note that if the Popa did not ‘retain’ C value, the routine would have only started from a 9.9.

That may have been the case. I was only aware of Ds/Es because that was the case the cycle before because no one did extra Cs. Missing Bs really only shows up on FX.

I know that at the World Cup she did a tucked jump full which would be a B but maybe they didn’t credit for. I know she stopped in favor of the pike jump.

This whole substitution situation just showed how useless the SV system was.

Substituting makes perfect sense though? If they do a harder element of course it should count. All elements still got connection bonus too, the rules don’t say anything about a D element losing connection if it’s replacing a lower tier value part; it just loses the .1 bonus of the D element itself.

The whip is leading into the 2.5 twist, not the Full-in. Same thing in the end for the score though.

When I think about how base scores were compiled in the 10.0 era, it makes me happy now that all skills are counted as they are and requirements are set in a way that doesn’t cause any confusion. Well, mostly so, now that we have this whole “full turn” situation.

It was worse pre-1993 with value raising. That was horrible.