2024 Winter Cup

[MaryClare]

Not a popular opinion, but Sacramone was a bit of a deadweight on that team. Her scoring potential on beam and floor were never high enough.

Had Chellsie been at full fitness, I think Sacramone would only have vaulted during TF.

What do we think

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

The US lost by 2.375 and most of that was two misses from from an injured athlete who usually hit those events and wouldn't necessarily have been doing both/either anyway. Had Chellsie been healthy, she'd likely have done floor instead of Alicia which removes half of the loss straight away. She was the better of the two in 08, and Alicia struggled to get out of the low 15s internationally in that code. Beam is harder to call. I think they'd probably have just put the top 3 up from prelims, which could've been any of the four really.

It's true the US weren't going to be able to match China on bars whatever happened. But they didn't need to. China were about a point ahead after two events, then Cheng Fei fell on beam. As the US stepped up, there was nothing in it.

It also tends to get missed that Cheng Fei wasn't consistent with her full difficulty on floor, and that this could've been significant if things had worked out slightly differently. She was able to water down in TFs, safe in the knowledge that staying on her feet would be enough. Had there only been a few tenths in it, that wouldn't have happened. We all saw how that went in the EF, when a medal was on the line.

Shawn would also not have watered down her tumbling in TFs if it were going to come down to tenths, but unlike Cheng Fei she actually successfully competed her full difficulty in Beijing when medals were riding on it. There is evidence that Shawn could do it, but not that Cheng Fei could. Once Alicia had competed, the title was decided, and the subsequent floor performances wouldn't have been the same if it had still been up for grabs.

None of which is to say the US would definitely have won. And they couldn't have beaten a lights out China either. But had the Americans gone in healthy, they could've pipped the Chinese performance that day.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

Not a popular opinion, but Sacramone was a bit of a deadweight on that team. Her scoring potential on beam and floor were never high enough.

Had Chellsie been at full fitness, I think Sacramone would only have vaulted during TF.

What do we think

Suspect you're probably right on the second point. But I don't think that constitutes deadweight, not in a team that ended up taking two gymnasts for one DTY. The US just didn't have enough athletes who were top 3 on anything, and her rudi was very beneficial to the team.

 

[tempest]

Shawn beat Sloan on UB by .5 though in prelims. Memmel did compete on UB in TF.. who else could have they brought that would have given them more than .8 on UB though.. the US and China were pretty even on the other 3 events... UB was the deciding event.. No way the US was going to put up 3 16+ scores like China did

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

Shawn beat Sloan on UB by .5 though in prelims. Memmel did compete on UB in TF.. who else could have they brought that would have given them more than .8 on UB though.. the US and China were pretty even on the other 3 events... UB was the deciding event.. No way the US was going to put up 3 16+ scores like China did

The US couldn't have brought anyone else. But the six they had could've won, if healthy.

Had China been as good as the US on vault and then hit beam and floor cold, sure, they'd have been uncatchable. That's not what happened. The US were several tenths ahead on vault and then Cheng Fei fell on beam.

 

[Hatsumomo]

It was pretty clear early on in the year that the team was going to be Nastia, Shawn, Chellsie, and Alicia, and those four needed to be preserved. There was a considerable lack of depth, especially when compared to 2004.

There could also be an argument that if the gymnasts were better managed, there would have been a little more to pick from for the Beijing team. IIRC, Shayla Worley and Ashley Priess were the other top candidates for UB alone. But Worley broke her leg at the selection camp and Priess went to Nationals, said fuck it, and retired before the competition started. If the two of them were still options, you'd replace either Sam Peszek or Sloan in favor of increasing UB scoring potential.

It was just kind of ridiculous that only half of a six-person team was able to really perform; Sloan doing a DTY because that was better than putting up Nastia's 1.5TY and Chellsie once again having to nut up and grit through pain to dismount UB on a broken ankle. And Sacramone was held together by tape, Ace bandages, and prayer.

 

[Laura722]

Not a popular opinion, but Sacramone was a bit of a deadweight on that team. Her scoring potential on beam and floor were never high enough.

Had Chellsie been at full fitness, I think Sacramone would only have vaulted during TF.

What do we think

I don't think she was a deadweight, but she wasn't in her best shape. I remember even Alicia saying this somewhere. I thought she was better when she made a comeback in 2011 and 2012.

 

[MaryClare]

This probably deserves a thread of its own. As time marches on, the US in Beijing is rapidly becoming the new Russia in Sydney.

How much did Liukin and Johnson benefit from not just being locks, but then having no risk of being 2’perd?

 

[RedBirdie]

Chellsie once again having to nut up and grit through pain to dismount UB on a broken ankle.

Chelsie actually made the decision to compete. Granted, that she wasn't forced out tells you how little confidence Marta had in the alternates. But after how everything went down leading up to Athens for Chelsie, she wasn't going to miss another Olympics so long as she was breathing.

 

[RichardL]

This probably deserves a thread of its own. As time marches on, the US in Beijing is rapidly becoming the new Russia in Sydney.

How much did Liukin and Johnson benefit from not just being locks, but then having no risk of being 2’perd?

Sacramone was totally in the mix to 2-per either Johnson or Liukin on beam. .025 separated her from their scores, and you can easily find the correction that would've tipped the scale. She was 4th in qualifications. She was a VT/BB specialist by then but didn't admit it until 2010 lol.

 

[Denn]

I sometimes wonder what would have happened if Memmel and Sacramone had been on the Olympic team in 2004 instead of 2008.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

This probably deserves a thread of its own. As time marches on, the US in Beijing is rapidly becoming the new Russia in Sydney.

How much did Liukin and Johnson benefit from not just being locks, but then having no risk of being 2’perd?

Hugely from being locks. To the extent that we know Chellsie and Alicia should've been afforded the same, even if just informally.

I wouldn't say there was no risk at all of being 2 per'd though. In the AA, a downgraded Amanar or a splatted bars dismount/double front in prelims would've potentially let a healthy Chellsie in, and there wasn't a lot to choose between the core 4 on beam on a good day either.

 

[MaryClare]

Hugely from being locks. To the extent that we know Chellsie and Alicia should've been afforded the same, even if just informally.

I wouldn't say there was no risk at all of being 2 per'd though. In the AA, a downgraded Amanar or a splatted bars dismount/double front in prelims would've potentially let a healthy Chellsie in, and there wasn't a lot to choose between the core 4 on beam on a good day either.

That’s what I mean, it became apparent at that Chellsie wouldn’t be doing AA. That’s a huge amount of pressure lifted

 

[Hatsumomo]

Nastia did fall on UB in prelims (as did He Kexin), IIRC. She still ended up with a 15.950. Chellsie's UB D-score was a possible 7.2 but I think there was an element that could and did get downgraded so the D-score was 7.0 in prelims and she got a 15.050. She vaulted a DTY, so that would have made up the difference a little bit. I don't remember if they were more evenly matched on BB and FX

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

That’s what I mean, it became apparent at that Chellsie wouldn’t be doing AA. That’s a huge amount of pressure lifted

In that case, yes that part probably helped. I think the bigger deal was being clear and blatant locks for ages before, however. Chellsie was more of a question mark going into 08, but it was clear by what, April camp that they needed her.

@Hatsumomo there wasn't much difference on beam and floor. Nastia perhaps a little higher on beam, Chellsie more consistent on floor.

 

[MrSixkiller]

It’s interesting how very little depth there was that quad for any team except China. Was that a symptom of the new open-ended code?

 

[Hatsumomo]

It’s interesting how very little depth there was that quad for any team except China

Even China's perceived depth was artificial when they were dipping into the junior talent pool.

 

[MaryClare]

It’s interesting how very little depth there was that quad for any team except China. Was that a symptom of the new open-ended code?

Russia definitely struggled with getting to grips with the open ended code, plus there was restructuring following Arkaev’s retirement. The wasted talent that quad was obscene.

I’m not sure China particularly cracked it better than others, but it was very heavily weighted in favour of strong UB workers. Plus they found themselves in a one in 1.4 billion situation where they had a world class vault and floor gymnast

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

Mixture of reasons I think. New code and short quad, but also there were structural things that happened to be going on in some federations too, like Russia and Romania.

 

[MrSixkiller]

Even China's perceived depth was artificial when they were dipping into the junior talent pool.

And they paid for it next quad by having completely depleted their talent pool.