6 gymnasts are allowed to compete at Team Worlds

[Denn]

Using this rule as a strategy to beef up event finals does make sense for a team that’s not worried about prelims and has an athlete they trust in team finals. So @Aeris I appreciate you bringing this up. (I hadn’t even noticed Lin Chaopan replacing Shi Cong and then being replaced back, honestly.)

And I do see a difference between this use of the rule and the use of the rule brought up by @ArnoldRimmer and @MaryClare mentioned — that’s a more single-faceted purpose.

 

[Passion]

It was interesting that China’s gamble by not having Lin Chaopan do qualifications almost backfired and they nearly missed team finals.

They weren’t gambling, they never planned to use Lin Chaopan at all. He was flown in to replace Yang Jiaxing (original alternate) who got sick right after the team arrived in Belgium. Then Shi Cong hurt his ankle on vault in qualifications. This is why he withdrew from competing FX in qualifications mid-competition. Shi Cong and Sun Wei were China’s two AAers here. A healthy Shi Cong would have been in the medal threat in the AA Final.

Remember Shi Cong won silver AA behind Zhang Boheng at the University Games. He finished top 3 AA during the internal test that chose the Asian Games/World teams as well. He was literally the best gymnast on this team. China 100% wanted to be using a healthy Shi Cong in team finals to win gold in team finals. Not Lin Chaopan’s 4.8 D-scores on vault and pommels that they were left with to try to salvage a medal after Shi Cong was injured. He was physically able to still compete in EF the same way Nastia was still able to compete on UB in '06 and Memmel/Peszek in '08 after busting their foot. By gritting his teeth on the landing.

This isn’t even the first time this has happened to Shi Cong. At the 2022 Asian Championships he ruptured ligaments in his ankle on a vault landing. China won team gold and he still won the AA, they had to Kerri Strug him up onto the podium.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

It isn’t against the rules, but it comes across as shady to the general public and even informed fans.
People were generally confused about the substitution and then when Shi Cong came back to compete in event finals it further confused people.

Hmm, I’m not so sure about that. There’s a lot of noise made about substitutions in gymnastics generally, but I wouldn’t say it was universal across the fanbase and there are probably elements of this being culturally determined too.

It probably is confusing, because people aren’t too familiar with the rules. I just don’t think it’s something that’s going to happen much, because most countries wouldn’t be in a position to benefit. Teams would need another usable gymnast who was healthy, and reliable enough to be able to sub in at short notice whilst also being able to do without them in prelims. Most programmes just won’t have that.

 

[irichluck21]

They weren’t gambling, they never planned to use Lin Chaopan at all. He was flown in to replace Yang Jiaxing (original alternate) who got sick right after the team arrived in Belgium. Then Shi Cong hurt his ankle on vault in qualifications. This is why he withdrew from competing FX in qualifications mid-competition. Shi Cong and Sun Wei were China’s two AAers here. A healthy Shi Cong would have been in the medal threat in the AA Final.

Remember Shi Cong won silver AA behind Zhang Boheng at the University Games. He finished top 3 AA during the internal test that chose the Asian Games/World teams as well. He was literally the best gymnast on this team. China 100% wanted to be using a healthy Shi Cong in team finals to win gold in team finals. Not Lin Chaopan’s 4.8 D-scores on vault and pommels that they were left with to try to salvage a medal after Shi Cong was injured. He was physically able to still compete in EF the same way Nastia was still able to compete on UB in '06 and Memmel/Peszek in '08 after busting their foot. By gritting his teeth on the landing.

Thank you for the explanation.

Now it makes sense.

 

[irichluck21]

I want to clarify that when I said “shady” it was in reference to those fans not as knowledgable of the sport. Typically when an alternate is used it is because of injury.
Shi Cong then competing in event finals was confusing because it was assumed he was injured (which we did see on floor).

I myself thought if you were replaced it meant you were done for the rest of the meet.

IIRC, there was talk that the Soviet team was going to replace Boguinskaya with Gutsu in 1992 Olympic AA but she was too well known and had made event finals, which she would forfeit if Gutsu replaced her. This is why they chose Galieva, because she was not well known and had not made event finals. So they “faked an injury” and subbed in Gutsu.

But then in 1996 the Romanians replaced Marinescu with Amanar and Marinescu came back to do beam finals. So the rule must have changed between those Olympics.

 

[MaryClare]

I want to clarify that when I said “shady” it was in reference to those fans not as knowledgable of the sport. Typically when an alternate is used it is because of injury.
Shi Cong then competing in event finals was confusing because it was assumed he was injured (which we did see on floor).

I myself thought if you were replaced it meant you were done for the rest of the meet.

IIRC, there was talk that the Soviet team was going to replace Boguinskaya with Gutsu in 1992 Olympic AA but she was too well known and had made event finals, which she would forfeit if Gutsu replaced her. This is why they chose Galieva, because she was not well known and had not made event finals. So they “faked an injury” and subbed in Gutsu.

But then in 1996 the Romanians replaced Marinescu with Amanar and Marinescu came back to do beam finals. So the rule must have changed between those Olympics.

Team rules 1993-1996 were a bit of an anomaly due to the 7 person teams.

Something I’d be interested in learning about but have not seen discussed is what were the reasons and arguments surrounding the move to 7 person teams. The only thing I’ve been told about it, which I don’t necessarily believe was it was to make it harder for newly independent ex soviet countries to dominate team competitions

 

[irichluck21]

Something I’d be interested in learning about but have not seen discussed is what were the reasons and arguments surrounding the move to 7 person teams. The only thing I’ve been told about it, which I don’t necessarily believe was it was to make it harder for newly independent ex soviet countries to dominate team competitions

I agree. Even with 7 member teams ex Soviets dominated. In Atlanta WAG Russia finished 2nd and Ukraine was just edged out of 4th by China, though Ukraine had finished 4th after compulsories and with a stronger optionals by Podkopayeva, they would have been 4th. Lilia stepped out of bounds on floor, which alone made up the difference, but she also struggled on vault and her score was dropped. Belarus was 6th.
IIRC for MAG Russia was 1st, Ukraine 3rd, and Belarus 4th.

1995 WAG Russia was 4th, Ukraine 5th, Belarus 8th. 1995 MAG Russia was 4th (due to bad compulsories) Ukraine 5th, Belarus 6th. The same year the Romanian men shocked everyone and won bronze.

1994 Team Worlds WAG:Russia 3rd, Ukraine 5th, Belarus 6th.
1994 Team Worlds MAG: Russia 2nd, Ukraine 3rd, Belarus 4th.

So I don’t know if the 7th athlete added was to benefit other countries, because the ex-Soviets still did well.
FIG did experiment that 93-96 quad. 1993 was an individual only Worlds, 1994 had two Worlds individual AA/EF and a separate team worlds (which I loved this format). 1995 was a regular full Worlds, and 1996 individual event finals worlds. 5 Worlds in one quad was unusual.

So maybe 7th athlete was part of the experiments.

I had read (decades ago now, probably two) that the FIG had toyed with the idea with allowing 12 athletes into each event final instead of 8.

 

[RichardL]

5 Worlds in one quad was unusual.

And so they had to follow it up with a quad with only two Worlds, depriving us of what could have been an amazing contest in 1998. Such a bummer.

 

[Aeris]

Worlds should be every year, with full team competition. It’s especially bad marketing for the sport that after the Olympics, when the most amount of people are watching, there’s no more gymnastics competitions for the remainder of the year (and then only a limited Worlds the next year).

I love the Worlds that happen in Olympic years for figure skating. There are so many redemption stories to come out of it, including many people who didn’t get to participate in the Olympics being given a chance to compete. For the newly crowned Olympic champs who decide to compete, it also gives them a way to continue their story with all of their recent fans.

 

[irichluck21]

Worlds should be every year, with full team competition. It’s especially bad marketing for the sport that after the Olympics, when the most amount of people are watching, there’s no more gymnastics competitions for the remainder of the year (and then only a limited Worlds the next year).

I don’t think this is possible because of the lack of countries wanting to host.

 

[Aeris]

I don’t think this is possible because of the lack of countries wanting to host.

How peculiar, what is the issue? It’s not like they are paying the travel/hotel expenses of the gymnasts. Surely the ticket sales from Worlds are not less than the amount it’s costing to rent the venue space? Better venues need to be selected if that’s the case.

 

[MaryClare]

Countries don’t want to host because they don’t get a return on investment. But womens TF is the event that sells out second after women’s AA at every worlds and Olympics.

It’s the qualifying rounds that are costly. Perhaps post Olympic worlds should be “by invitation”

Regarding 93-96- I think the prospect of former soviets dominating the judging tables than the competition floor was the bigger concern.

For instance, the central Asian former soviet counties had, and still have an incredibly large number of brevet judges versus the number of elite international competitors from these countries. It wasn’t inconceivable that you’d get “soviet majority” panels.

 

[MaryClare]

How peculiar, what is the issue? It’s not like they are paying the travel/hotel expenses of the gymnasts. Surely the ticket sales from Worlds are not less than the amount it’s costing to rent the venue space? Better venues need to be selected if that’s the case.

They struggle to find host cities even for pre Olympic worlds. IIRC, Antwerp was the only candidate for this year.

 

[irichluck21]

How peculiar, what is the issue? It’s not like they are paying the travel/hotel expenses of the gymnasts. Surely the ticket sales from Worlds are not less than the amount it’s costing to rent the venue space? Better venues need to be selected if that’s the case.

The expenses to holding full Worlds. Which is why they changed the qualifications to Worlds via Continentals.
Also 2025 individual worlds are going from 4 gymnasts, 3 compete each event, to 3 gymnasts, 2 compete each event.

 

[Aeris]

The expenses to holding full Worlds. Which is why they changed the qualifications to Worlds via Continentals.
Also 2025 individual worlds are going from 4 gymnasts, 3 compete each event, to 3 gymnasts, 2 compete each event.

A travesty.

There are arenas going unused all the time. There must be a way to find suitable ones to use, those locations want business!

 

[MaryClare]

A travesty.

There are arenas going unused all the time. There must be a way to find suitable ones to use, those locations want business!

They don’t let you use them for free!

 

[Aeris]

Yes of course, but they get ticket sales. Any amount of business is better than having 0 business in that space of time instead.

 

[irichluck21]

There are arenas going unused all the time. There must be a way to find suitable ones to use, those locations want business!

FIG is scrambling to find hosts.
They have Rotterdam hosting 2026 (again they host) but there is still no confirmed 2025 host, which is about two year out.

 

[Aeris]

I don’t know the exact scouting and negotiations they’ve tried to do, but there has to be something wrong happening there.

The marketing of gymnastics as a whole is surely part of the problem, and it isn’t helped by not having exciting events for people to get into. Taking a good hard look at how to improve the spectator appeal of men’s gymnastics should be a priority if we’re at a point where it’s not even viable to host the most important gymnastics competition of the year. The attendance for the men’s events at this worlds was abysmal.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

I want to clarify that when I said “shady” it was in reference to those fans not as knowledgable of the sport. Typically when an alternate is used it is because of injury.
Shi Cong then competing in event finals was confusing because it was assumed he was injured (which we did see on floor).

I myself thought if you were replaced it meant you were done for the rest of the meet.

IIRC, there was talk that the Soviet team was going to replace Boguinskaya with Gutsu in 1992 Olympic AA but she was too well known and had made event finals, which she would forfeit if Gutsu replaced her. This is why they chose Galieva, because she was not well known and had not made event finals. So they “faked an injury” and subbed in Gutsu.

But then in 1996 the Romanians replaced Marinescu with Amanar and Marinescu came back to do beam finals. So the rule must have changed between those Olympics.

That’s an interesting topic in itself. I’d believed the NBC narrative that countries weren’t allowed to substitute without an injury and a withdrawal for the other athlete, ie that the Gutsu sub wasn’t within the rules. I only learned on the gymternet that this seems to come from them. Because looking at 91 worlds, the Soviets withdrew Boginskaya from bars and then she competed on beam. Like Marinescu and Amanar in 96.

This is the subject of occasional shitstorms on Twitter, and some Online Discourse Havers claimed the rule was different for the Olympics. But I’ve never seen anyone actually come up with proof of this Olympic specific rule.

And I think it’s fair to say the Gutsu and Galieva thing, resulting as it did in a narrow win over an American and an epic batshit fluff piece for the ages has had a significant cultural impact on discussions about substitutions. There’s a reason it’s all of our go to example.