2024 US Nationals WAG Day 2 Session 2

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads

I'm just glad that so much has changed in terms of longevity over the years. Roberson would be in the picture if we didn't have all of our veterans sticking around and coming back. I love Hezley and Tiana and if we didn't have the experienced vets I'd have them on my team. Alternate positions would be great. I am excited to see them and a couple of the other younger girls over the next few years.
 
1.3.3.4. The Athlete Selection Committee may also select up to two (2) traveling replacement athletes and an additional two (2) nontraveling replacement athletes using the Discretionary Selection Criteria as set forth in Section 2.2.


I know they can, but what I wanted to know was why would they name 4? What would be the point? This is going to be a team with loads of AA back up, there aren’t any event specialists
 
I'm just glad that so much has changed in terms of longevity over the years. Roberson would be in the picture if we didn't have all of our veterans sticking around and coming back.

Roberson still is in the picture. There's a chance she outscores everyone besides Simone on FX at trials. If her Cheng also returns to where it was last year, that would make it very difficult not to take her, especially if she also hits in the AA, where she could conceivably finish 5th place.
 
Roberson still is in the picture. There's a chance she outscores everyone besides Simone on FX at trials. If her Cheng also returns to where it was last year, that would make it very difficult not to take her, especially if she also hits in the AA, where she could conceivably finish 5th place.
Yes. And she was actually 5th AA on the Xfinity night two. She also improved dramatically from US Classic to the Xfinity night two, so if she keeps improving (especially her Cheng needs to score over 14 I think, plus floor consistently in 14-range of course) and hits, it will depend on who hits and who misses what.
 
This is maybe the first time ever where I don’t care who makes the team, as long as Biles and Shilese are on it. There are lots of other gymnasts who could be pretty darn good in those other spots. They could potentially win gold with several different variations of the US team.
 
The best Cheng Josc has ever showed is still worse than Simone, Skye, and Jade's. And the way vault scoring has gone lately, I don't think she can even outscore Shilese or Jordan's DTYs.

I think being named one of the four alternates would be a success for her, but I would unequivocally put Jordan + Kayla + Leanne + Hezley + Kaliya + Tiana in front based on today.

She also improved dramatically from US Classic to the Xfinity night two,

Sorry in advance for this big digression, nothing personal -- but the implication here is that night 1 of the competition somehow represented a different, less prepared gymnast just 48 hours earlier and we are supposed to erase our memory of each gymnast's past performance due to this idea of "peaking"? To me, that's inconsistent performance, not a linear trend. In the same way that I wouldn't say 'wow Suni's really regressing on vault' based on her day 2 flub.

I feel like the concept of peaking is getting abused, at least by NBC commentators repeating questionable statements like "the gymnasts actually only want to be 80% at this meet!"... in reference to the National Championships of an Olympic year?! 🤔 I don't buy it; neither that it's an intentional strategy for most gymnasts, nor that it's a good strategy even when intentional. (Jade ought to have been showing 6.0+D-floor all year IMO if she was able). If Joscelyn happens to stick a Cheng at trials and gets a 14.6, I don't think we should take that to mean she has now 'peaked' on vault and inherently belongs to the highest scoring team. It's a fickle sport!
(And to defend Josc, she actually did a great job justifying her Worlds Team placement by scoring well on FX throughout the '23 season).

In any case, there are two locks on this US Olympic team, and each of them was ready last year, and at basically every single meet they've been in since. That's what makes them trustworthy shoo-ins to this team. We have so few data points in elite gymnastics and I just don't believe that hitting a beam routine at Trials or sticking a vault means you have finally just now "peaked" on those events and all your prior performances should be overlooked. Obviously, exceptions someone clawing their way back from a major injury or something. /endrant
 
but the implication here is that night 1 of the competition somehow represented a different, less prepared gymnast just 48 hours earlier and we are supposed to erase our memory of each gymnast's past performance due to this idea of "peaking"?
No. The implication here was that she didn't look great during US Classic (I actually wrote her off after that competition), but then she looked much better on Xfinity night one (she fell off beam but still scored better than at US Classic where she supposedly hit) and even better on the night two.

"you have finally just now "peaked" on those events and all your prior performances should be overlooked. Obviously, exceptions someone clawing their way back from a major injury or something. "
And that's exactly what Roberson is doing. She was injured in October and only started full training in March.
 
That would be quite the shock. Especially given how inconsistent she has been in the past. Glad she is finding her consistency at the right time. Not sure she would be selected over proven competitors like Wong, Chiles, Carey, DiCello, Lincoln, etc.
I really think it's going to be like last time where Trials rankings matter more than anything else, for better or worse. If Rivera hits 8-for-8 again and makes top 5/6, she'll be an alternate. I don't think they'll care about the previous track records of Wong, DiCello, and Chiles, who have all had their unfortunate moments as well.
 
I do think the words "lock" and "peak" are overused. You can't call someone a lock and then change your mind 2 weeks later. You can't say someone has peaked or hasn't peaked based off of two data points. You can't point to "trends" at domestic vs international if there are only a handful of data points to choose from.

Part of the frustration of picking this team is that most of them just haven't shown a lot over the last two years in elite. There just isn't a lot of data to go on.
 

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads

Back