Gabby Douglas Comeback Thread (New goal: LA 2028)

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads

Also Locklear was only useable on one other event and just barely at that. Douglas was mainly brought for UB, but an AAer, which complimented Kocian who was pretty much the UB specialist on the team. Better to have somebody that could be put up on the other three events at the last minute after alternates are no longer an option (see: 2004 TFs).
 
Last edited:
^^ agreed and Gabby was 3rd in the world after prelims and that would not have happened with someone else. I also doubt that Locklear would have scored so highly as she was nationally.
 
When we talk about Locklear only being usable on one other event, it also has to be clear–by not usable on vault or floor, she didn’t train them. She potentially could have thrown a front handspring to get the US a 9 instead of a 0 in an emergency, but she didn’t have any kind of rudimentary floor that could do the same thing. There’s a big difference between a specialist with some very basic routines on the other events (and Gabby’s other routines definitely weren’t basic, I’m speaking in general) and a specialist who literally cannot do the other events when you’re contingency planning for a major competition.
 
Which goes to show how talented Gabby was and how she wasted much of the beginning of 2016.

If she had been focused on the Olympics instead of her TV show and doing appearances and endorsements, Douglas could very well have been in the AA and placed 2nd instead of Raisman.

She was not prepared as she should have been for Nationals or Trials, and it showed.

We know Marta was horrible for many things but she did wonders for Douglas fitness in just a few short weeks.

Plus Douglas always seemed to peak at the right time.
 
The team already had 4 good AA’s, Kocian was not just a specialist, her AA was good enough to finish runner-up to Simone, had she been put in that position. Taking a 5th AA just for the sake of “backup” is not something I would ever do, unless there was no other option.

If I was in Marta’s position and felt Gabby could improve significantly still, especially on Bars, then yeah she was the right pick. But would that fly anymore? People want transparency and proof, actual competitive results, for justification of team selection.

The problem is Gabby went into the Olympic Trials being told she would already be on the team, and it showed. She didn’t compete like someone who was fighting for her spot on the team, and that’s not fair to the other athletes, nor to the spectators who are paying to watch the most important competition of the year. Olympic Trials is not supposed to be a mere exhibition.
 
WOW truly just yesterday I was watching her old elite routines and trying to think up what she could do in this code. I had decided she should make a run for 2025 Worlds, but hey why not 2024? This is going to be competitive af

To add to the Kocian conversations, during 2016 Trials she tore her labrum and had a minor dislocation while on the uneven bars. That February she had fractured her tibia. So while she was the best bet for UB, her AA status and health was questionable. Douglas was so needed
 
Last edited:
It wouldn’t fly any more, no. The flipside to that is that everyone knows it wouldn’t, so if that had also been true in 2016 then Gabby would’ve potentially approached the situation differently. That’s not a bad thing, either. For all that she did some beautiful work in Rio, it wasn’t very edifying to see her perform like that domestically.
 
Out of Gabby, Skinner, and Locklear, I was torn between Gabby and Ashton. I also agree that Kocian was an AA threat (with a DTY).
 
I don’t think Kocian needed a DTY, just the FTY was fine with her huge Bars score and nice clean Beam/Floor routines. Shang was only competing FTY herself and Mustafina had weak Beam/Floor.
 
Last edited:
I’m not talking about some peak Mustfina beam routine, I’m talking about what she actually did in the AA. Her performance there was weak and Kocian with just a FTY was capable of beating Mustafina in that AA.
 
I’m not talking about some peak Mustfina beam routine
She was literally the World Beam Champion in that quad and in the competition you’re talking about she hit a routine that would have easily won a medal.

That isn’t a “weak beamer” by even the most delusional standards. Of which yours, sadly, is.

But then again, I expect nothing less from the same person who thought Shang Chunsong’s triple full punch front did not deserve an amplitude deduction.
 
Whereas the same wasn’t true for her floor, she was just plain uncompetitive there.
The problem with her floor by Rio was the delusional overreliance on turns that she had a 20% or less hit rate on. I have no clue what her experienced Russian coaches were thinking. I don’t think I saw her hit one Double L or Double Attitude that whole year. And yet they trot her out into the Olympics with both.
 
Last edited:
classic Mustafina smile on the salute. Yeah, it was good, Musty

Right, she spent 2014-Rio changing her routine with the seasons. Her peak on beam was in 2014. Rio was not her peak, she didn’t even do the Arabian



Beam was her favorite event to train
 
That isn’t a “weak beamer” by even the most delusional standards.
Since you are having another comprehension problem I will restate yet again - the discussion was about the score Mustafina received in the AA. Which was factually weak.
I expect nothing less from the same person who thought Shang Chunsong’s triple full punch front did not deserve an amplitude deduction.
The amplitude in that connection is fine in any reasonable or historical standard of judging. You’ve yet to show an example of any other woman rebounding with that much snap and clean form who has done it higher.
 

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads

Back