I already accounted for those deductions in the 8.8
You didn’t though? You said most gymnasts can do Bhs + LOSO + LOSO with no deduction and that’s just not what is happening; it’s more like .1 form on each LOSO and a .1 balance at the end. The BHS Mount will likely get both form and balance. You gave just one rhythm deduction for the Front aerial + split + straddle when they’ve been hitting both connections lately. The dismount is prone to .1 low chest as well. I also don’t think judges would give this routine only .1 artistry deduction.
In the end we’re looking at a routine that can easily just be 8.0 execution and still has a fall risk (double LOSO series) and is still prone to losing .2 CV.
The routines similar to this that gymnasts are already doing have an A mount and then a different D skill in the routine, which is mostly the same thing in the end because these nothing mounts aren’t getting deducted, and then they also have a Switch Split in the routine - the easiest C skill in book and generally not losing more than .1, which ends up being the same in the end as the routine you’ve suggested.
The coaches make the routines, so it is about them. I don’t understand what isn’t clicking. I never said do watered down routines. I said do your best difficulty that is clean and make it consistent and confident.
Coaches are not the ones performing.
It’s
not possible to “do your best difficulty and make it consistent” in a way the judging won’t still irrationally deduct. Since this “best difficulty” is also inherently twisted around what the code demands, instead of what the gymnast would prefer to do or potentially could do if allowed to develop their artistic voice, it means we see routines that end up looking artificial instead of coming from the gymnast’s own inner self.
You’ve also completely ignored the point about the scoring system being inherently unbalanced. We should be collectively fighting and lobbying FIG to change things. That is what’s important. Not sitting around like slaves to a broken system and just taking it.
Also, gymnasts should intimately understand the code for themself and be capable of deciding on skills and routine construction for themselves. Coaches can teach and give feedback but ideally it shouldn’t be all on them. Personally I taught myself several skills, and came up with my own program ideas, and did much of the choreography myself.
shifting from beam, floor routines are better than they have been for a while. Last night’s team final had PLENTY of entertainment value, regardless of scores.
Not a single routine was on the level of Hernandez or Khorkina or Ohashi or the many routines that used to have tons of flair and freedom. The goal of a properly crafted scoring system should be to promote and reward routines of that nature. There have been significant flaws in the floor code and judging that impede artistry ever since 2001, but since 2017 many of these code issues are at an all-time worst state.
Now, in this regard, I would say coaching has a more important role to play. The routines clearly are not being worked on as much as they should be. The sense of putting on a show and needing to do something truly artistic has been significantly diminished, and little details like lifting the head before acro lines has been lost. Still, the reason for many of these problems is the artistry doesn’t get judged properly, and the athletes are constantly worried about “corner choreography” and pause deductions, and moving into executing their elements in the robotic manner demanded by the system.
