2025 World Championships: Women’s Qualifications Day 1 October 20/ Day 2 October 21

[KristyJ]

I think Bullock is going to be the first time Capital Gymnastics produces a top contender, so I can't say what their track record is. Bullock's UB alone could get her a specialist role, but they need to refine her routine and get her up to snuff with at least another TF-worthy event.

Ashley Postell was from Capital, IIRC. But of course that was a couple of decades ago.

Edit-- of course someone beat me to that

 

[KristyJ]

Aiko is doing too much face on FX. It’s annoying

So, you're saying wrong face?

 

[dweiss324]

I would never put my child into elite gymnastics... But it's precisely because I would expect someone like Martha to be at the helm.

If I were in charge of the US's gymnastics medal results, I would not hire sweet Minnesotan bee Chellsie F'n Memmel.

Double edged sword.

 

[navyblue]

I dunno. Sacramone is a Marta survivor. When she ruptured her Achilles at 2011 (?) Worlds, didn't Marta scream "I hate you?" The softer approach is understandable, but it might be an overcorrection. Perhaps it will take some time to find a happy medium.

Speaking as a parent, I never want to subject my daughter to the psychological abuse I endured. My mom was batshit about grades. If I got anything lower than an A, I was afraid to go home. Today I have a Ph.D , but I'm neurotic AF. I don't want my kid to be like that.

That's totally fine and fair and good, but I would probably just suggest you likely don't want to route your child toward elite level athletics then!

If I were writing my goals for a National Coordinator role, "having fun" and teaching "life lessons" and "maybe winning sometimes" would be absurd. As a big tent goal for USAG as a whole, those are absolutely great. But somewhere down the line, you are separating the very exceptional athletes, yes the neurotic, perfectionist ones who want to win at all costs. I don't think approach is inherently abusive.

And hey, maybe finding those athletes in a humane way means that USAG does have to shift to a strategy that favors adults (NCAA or post-NCAA athletes) instead of teenagers. And maybe that crop of talent is going to need different norms for pacing, such that your post-Olympic years will predictably yield results like this, where you get to field some newcomers and let them have fun and learn life lessons. And then, maybe you need to take absolutely painstaking efforts to make sure that you can entice your Jade Careys and Shilese Jones types back to high level come 2027+, etc. Or even entice someone like Leanne Wong to superior elite level coaching, somehow.

Just saying, it's an interesting set of trends to observe in the scheme of the national program.

 

[Concorde]

They gave Dulcy the Memmel on floor. That’s… generous lol.

The D panel didn't credit the Memmel. Caylor's potential D Score is 5.7:

Acro DV : F x 1, D x 2, C x 1 = 1.7 DV
Dance DV: E x 1, D x 1, C x 2 = 1.5 DV
Acro CV: C + D Indirect x 1 + D + A Direct x 1 = 0.3 CV
Dismount Bonus: D -> 0.2

Total D Score - 5.7

Downgrading the Memmel to either a double turn or a full turn with leg held in split cost her 0.2 in DV and brought her D score down to the credited 5.5.

 

[Puffin]

This is what a good nationalized program would do. Of course, Americans are too individualistic and they would catch a ton of heat for pulling a "Galieva".

It's funny to me how course correction has lead to an overcorrection in the face of the incompetence and abuse from the past.

This line from Alicia Sacramone in that World Trials documentary they just put out was very telling,
"We're fun loving... We work hard play hard, make it a good time, help teach some life lessons and maybe win some medals in the process."

^ The above is a perfectly acceptable M.O. for 98% of USAG-member gyms and J.O. programs, but absolutely not what I want to hear as the goals of the highest level elite coordination group. Yikes.

edit to add - right, Leanne was actually like 22nd in vault as someone pointed out, not actually Galievaed. But my other sentiments stand.

Yeah but Wong wasn't 2-pered out of vt final - she was 22nd in quals

 

[JaJa]

I dunno. Sacramone is a Marta survivor. When she ruptured her Achilles at 2011 (?) Worlds, didn't Marta scream "I hate you?" The softer approach is understandable, but it might be an overcorrection. Perhaps it will take some time to find a happy medium.

Speaking as a parent, I never want to subject my daughter to the psychological abuse I endured. My mom was batshit about grades. If I got anything lower than an A, I was afraid to go home. Today I have a Ph.D , but I'm neurotic AF. I don't want my kid to be like that.

There is a price to pay for very high achievement. In most areas of endeavor. It’s a simple as that. And the more inherently difficult and competitive the endeavor, the greater the price.

 

[BB12]

I don't know that she has the self-awareness to realize the problem is her foundations are garbage. She doesn't strike me as the sort that would willingly spend six months reworking her basics and drilling day after day after day to fix these problems. She's a big difficulty skill chucker. That's been her thing since she was five years old and everyone was fawning over her. She's not about to give that up to focus on "easy" gymnastics.

The fact that she downgraded floor and vault tell me she's pretty injured and quite literally incapable of doing those skills. This is the same gymnast that threw high difficulty with shit form and looked about half and inch away from career-ending injuries on damn near every vault and floor pass at 2024 classics and nationals. She's not not one to fail it make in the name of increased E scores (or in the name of reducing the chance of injury)

It's a shame that many people out there will see her making these teams and think that chucking big skills at a young age without knowing the basics is something that is fine to do.

But it should be the opposite - coaches need to see her E score as an example what happens when you don't correctly teach technique to your young gymnasts and how difficult it is to go back and fix it.

 

[Concorde]

I don’t think they credited Leanne’s switch ring on floor. there’s no other way I can get it to 5.3. her triple wolf and switch half looked ok to me.

Wong's floor exercise starts out of a 5.3:

Acro DV: H x 1, D x 1 C x 1, B x 1 = 1.7 DV
Dance DV: E x 1, C x 3 = 1.4 DV
CV: None
Dismount Bonus: D -> 0.2
CR - 2.0
Total D Score - 5.3

 

[Doug1233]

The D panel didn't credit the Memmel. Caylor's potential D Score is 5.7:

Acro DV : F x 1, D x 2, C x 1 = 1.7 DV
Dance DV: E x 1, D x 1, C x 2 = 1.5 DV
Acro CV: C + D Indirect x 1 + D + A Direct x 1 = 0.3 CV
Dismount Bonus: D -> 0.2

Total D Score - 5.7

Downgrading the Memmel to either a double turn or a full turn with leg held in split cost her 0.2 in DV and brought her D score down to the credited 5.5.

For some reason I thought the whip full was a B. So I gave her second line 0.2CV and a B, instead of 0.3CV and a C. Which explains the 0.2 discrepancy.

Why on earth is a whip full a C and a layout full a B?

 

[Doug1233]

Wong's floor exercise starts out of a 5.3:

Acro DV: H x 1, D x 1 C x 1, B x 1 = 1.7 DV
Dance DV: E x 1, C x 3 = 1.4 DV
CV: None
Dismount Bonus: D -> 0.2
CR - 2.0
Total D Score - 5.3

Wong's floor exercise starts out of a 5.3:

Acro DV: H x 1, D x 1 C x 1, B x 1 = 1.7 DV
Dance DV: E x 1, C x 3 = 1.4 DV
CV: None
Dismount Bonus: D -> 0.2
CR - 2.0
Total D Score - 5.3

you’re right. I was adding it up on my fingers and didn’t count the B. Most American girls don’t count Bs on floor!

 

[KristyJ]

For some reason I thought the whip full was a B. So I gave her second line 0.2CV and a B, instead of 0.3CV and a C. Which explains the 0.2 discrepancy.

Why on earth is a whip full a C and a layout full a B?

I think people have been asking that all year

 

[KristyJ]

If I were writing my goals for a National Coordinator role, "having fun" and teaching "life lessons" and "maybe winning sometimes" would be absurd. As a big tent goal for USAG as a whole, those are absolutely great. But somewhere down the line, you are separating the very exceptional athletes, yes the neurotic, perfectionist ones who want to win at all costs. I don't think approach is inherently abusive.

To a degree, I do think you're saying the quiet part out loud and someone needs to say it. I feel like as a nation we've let some of the details slide. We don't necessarily have to go back to Marta, as cognitive warfare to force little soldiers to flip better isn't good either, but there's a balance that hasn't been found. While it's fine for an athlete to decide that pursuing those 1% gains isn't how they want to spend their time or effort or worth the cost, I think that suggesting those 1% improvements needs to happen at a program level. Then again, maybe that is happening and life is getting in the way for whatever reason. I remember several years ago Chellsie said something along the lines of athletes needing to do more hard landings than they had been because they weren't competition ready and I don't know if we see the evidence of her being taken seriously.

 

[barbara_dewey]

I will be smiling maniacally across the rim of my martini glass if Caylor rotates in the top AA group.

Sabrina got dinged on E score for a "hit" routine - 7.633. But the D score of 6.2 carried her through

She has terrible basics. She has gotten this far because she is strong and determined. Had she received decent fundamental training, she would be AMAZING. Fortunately, she doesn't have much competition here, so I expect she'll be pretty successful.

 

[RedBirdie]

I would never put my child into elite gymnastics... But it's precisely because I would expect someone like Martha to be at the helm.

If I were in charge of the US's gymnastics medal results, I would not hire sweet Minnesotan bee Chellsie F'n Memmel.

Double edged sword.

Hey, she's from Wisconsin. Calling her Minnesotan is damn near a declaration of hostilities.

 

[IratePanda]

There is a price to pay for very high achievement. In most areas of endeavor. It’s a simple as that. And the more inherently difficult and competitive the endeavor, the greater the price.

I have no answers. My daughter doesn't do any sports. Her ADHD is significant enough that we're just focusing on academics right now because fifth grade is a big milestone. But she has several friends who are very promising gymnasts, and their families are trying to figure out if they want to go for broke on elite or focus on L10 and the more realistic possiblity of a college scholarship.

 

[RedBirdie]

I have no answers. My daughter doesn't do any sports. Her ADHD is significant enough that we're just focusing on academics right now because fifth grade is a big milestone. But she has several friends who are very promising gymnasts, and their families are trying to figure out if they want to go for broke on elite or focus on L10 and the more realistic possiblity of a college scholarship.

Unless their kids are really really really exceptional, level 10 is the rational choice. In the grand scheme of things, there are but a handful of gymnasts that are good enough to qualify elite. It's so hard! And gets harder every year because FIG WTC hates the sport and makes it damn near impossible to score above a 7.5 e score (but that's really another rant). And of that handful, a teeny tiny number will be so superior to the rest that they represent the US at worlds or the Olympics.

And elite is a relentless grind, even in this post-Marta world. All of that work to get 2-4 domestic meets and an assignment to DTB? Why would you do that to yourself, or your child? Be a great level 10, compete a whole bunch, enjoy those 9.5s, 9.6s, 9.7s, 9.8s, get that college scholarship and rack up the 9.9s.

 

[Ms Motts]

From the outside looking in (eg, not from the USA) the handwringing about the USA’s performance (particularly on social media) seems so extra. No country got more gymnasts to finals than the USA. The USA is the only country that will be represented in every final. USA gymnasts could realistically take home a medal on any event (although gold on bars and vault might be out of reach), and they are literally the only program in the world that can say this right now.

They are objectively doing well.

I do actually agree that some low hanging fruit could be addressed. Make it a requirement of national team participation that composition advice is adhered to, that sort of thing.

But honestly, a big issue at play is the idea that they should dominate everything every single time and that ‘only’ six finalists across five events is a sign of a program in trouble. It doesn’t account for other programs getting better, or for phenoms like Kayla Nemour originating somewhere other than the USA. I know that on social media there’s some talk of the new approach being too soft, but there are still gymnasts being coached using older philosophies, and they’re at home injured.

 

[RedBirdie]

And now re-reading what I wrote, yeah, duh, this is why the junior pipeline is not bursting with talent and options. Why pursue elite when level 10.is so much more rewarding? Unless your kid is so obviously at a completely different level, elite isn't worth it.

 

[KristyJ]

And now re-reading what I wrote, yeah, duh, this is why the junior pipeline is not bursting with talent and options. Why pursue elite when level 10.is so much more rewarding? Unless your kid is so obviously at a completely different level, elite isn't worth it.

Everyone here is talking about parents deciding for their kids, but some kids will want to have that continuous skill gain beyond level 10. Sure it's a family decision but parents of self-motivated kids aren't just "doing that to their kids," and sometimes to stick with level 10 might be limiting what the gymnast wants to do.
Someone in this thread or the other also mentioned forcing coaches to take advice, and at some point it is the athlete that needs to take the advice, too. Perhaps after a certain age the staff should be talking with both the coach and the athlete.
It definitely takes a certain degree of obsession to excel in elite sport (or at the top 0.1% of anything), but some athletes have the personality for it, and I think we need to be sure not to forget that.