Gabby Douglas Comeback Thread (New goal: LA 2028)

[JaJa]

Ok, there’s plenty reasons for not wanting Jade on the Olympic team.

And there are plenty of reasons for wanting her too.

 

[GymBeauty]

To me she was one of the least exciting gymnasts ever.

Her sky-high releases mixed in with difficult pirouettes makes it impossible for me to understand that viewpoint!

I do think she was a lot less interesting after 2012 though. Her bars got less flighty and complex, there was less energy on floor, and no amanar.

 

[onodian]

she would have performed better in the Beam final and medaled there.

Yeah, i love komova, but no. If anything she’d have done better bars. Basically had she not hit her feet she would have medalled, right? That’s a relatively plausible scenario

Eta: if i checked correctly no bar hit gets her gold, even keeping the big step on dismount. Which, seeing how beautiful of a worker she is, i would have been ok with. If anybody is thinking of coming here to talk about petty bent elbow deductions know that i have plenty of spare time this December and i will haunt you forever with pictures of her leg extension

 

[Rich]

yeah but she could have performed equally because she won and did not sleep. Gabby could have wanted vengeance and won.

 

[GymBeauty]

If anything she’d have done better bars. Basically had she not hit her feet she would have medalled, right?

The foot hit thing can probably only be considered a fluke, something that might happen any time. Like I said the whole argument is silly, but it wouldn’t make sense for someone to argue “if Komova wasn’t depressed about being robbed in the AA, she wouldn’t have hit her foot on the bar”. Whereas her poor performance in the Beam event final could possibly be blamed on the AA “robbery”.

 

[Denn]

I was talking with @balabanov11 about Douglas today, and I do think that if she were VERY wise about routine construction — especially on beam and floor, where she overloaded her routines in 2016 — she could be very competitive as an AAer.

I think her ability to make a final would be limited to bars (and not a medal threat) and beam (definitely a medal threat with an efficient routine)

I would debate suggested exercises for her. It would be fun.

 

[Denn]

STRATEGIC BEAM EXERCISE FOR DOUGLAS IN 2023-2024

basic mount (A)
Triple wolf spin (E) because why not?
Back Full tucked (F)
Switch (C) + BHS + LOSO (C) + 0.1 Her switch + back pike was a fast connection, so this would work well I think
Front Aerial (D) + Split jump (B) + straddle jump (B) + 0.2 She could rock this
BHSO + BHS + Double Tuck (D) + 0.1 Her double pike was full of deductions

D-score: 2.0 in requirements + EFCCDBBD + 0.4 = 5.3

She had a good front tuck and a decent switch ring, but neither is not worth rushing. Her front pike and L spin need to go — too many deductions. She needs time to dance and do a couple creative things instead of just flicking her hands done like she did in 2016, looking as if she was just done with it all.

I genuinely think that, with practice, she could do this for an 8.6 - 8.8 E-score, which puts her in the 13.9 - 14.1 territory. That easily would have won Worlds this year.

Based on this video:

 

[Denn]

STRATEGIC FLOOR EXERCISE FOR DOUGLAS IN 2023-2024

1.5 through to 2.5 (C + D + 0.1) –0.3
Split ring C it’s actually great –0.1
Arabian double + stag (E) + 0.1 –0.2
full in + back tuck (E) + A + 0.2 –0.4
double needle D
Split or switch ring (C) to Strug (C) –0.2
Avoids downgrade and deductions on Gogean
double L + single L Creative choreo with an integrated spin instead
double pike (D) It’s quite good –0.1
double tuck Not worth it

With artistry full attended to, This would be an 8.5ish typically, and close to 9 if she hit the hell out of everything. She does need some legitimately creative choreo and probably a little more fluidity, but if she takes time to dance, she can totally sell dance, no doubt about it.

D-score: 2.0 in requirements + CDCEECCD + 0.4 = 5.4

Total score ≈ 13.9. Never going to win a floor final, but solid for an AAer.

 

[RedBirdie]

full in + back tuck (E) + A + 0.2 –0.4

Nooooooooooo! I detest this combination.

 

[Denn]

LOL, but she could actually make the connection and, because of that, it does help control landing deductions!!

 

[GymBeauty]

I mostly want to see an amazing UB routine from Gabby, in the idealized version of her comeback, including these two things specifically:

Healy (E) + Endo Jaeger (E) - gets named the Douglas
Stalder Nabieva (G) - she and Shilese need to work out a plan to get the skill named for both of them at the same time: the Douglas-Jones

full in (E) + back tuck (A) +0.2

I doubt this will get credit anymore, since it’s not rebounding. The floor code doesn’t currently state that acro connections need to be rebounding, but I predict Donatella will say no and immediately issue an errata if she sees it.

 

[Denn]

I disagree. salto + jump gets bonus without bounding. Why not salto + salto? There’s a deduction for rhythm of the connection, and Douglas has done this connection multiple times in competition very fluidly — not quite “bounding” but very smoothly, such as in the video I posted.

BTW, I included a deduction for rhythm of the connection for that pass.

 

[GymBeauty]

salto + jump gets bonus without bounding. Why not salto + salto?

They don’t allow it on Beam, so it’s likely they’re against it on Floor, and just haven’t thought to update that section of the code yet. No harm in trying I suppose (before the Olympics), but it seems like something the current WTC doesn’t want to credit. Did anyone do a connection like this on Floor last quad? I can’t remember any.

 

[Denn]

Nobody did it during the last quad as far as I am aware, but perhaps someone here knows of an example.

It’s not possible to draw a parallel with beam. I can’t think of a single case on beam of two saltos connected with two-foot bounding. One of the elements always involves hand support (roundoff, two-foot BHS). The closes I can think of is something like a jump to two feet into a front somie – rare, and no extra bonus for bounding.

In fact, on beam, you can land one foot at a time (like a LOSO) and launch into a second skill. What Douglas does in that video is more “bounding” than that and certainly would get credit on beam, probably without even getting a rhythm deduction.

 

[Doug1233]

Nobody did it during the last quad as far as I am aware

I think there’s a reason for that.

 

[Concorde]

I disagree. salto + jump gets bonus without bounding. Why not salto + salto? There’s a deduction for rhythm of the connection, and Douglas has done this connection multiple times in competition very fluidly — not quite “bounding” but very smoothly, such as in the video I posted.

Per the Help Desk, ‘absorption’ into the floor is permitted on both acro + dance and acro + acro connections.



Douglas could also potentially work toward connecting the two skills ala Myzdrikova out of her triple twist or Karbananeko and his double layout to avoid any issues.

 

[Denn]

I never even caught that line, but I am glad it is consistent with what I said — in fact, more generous because it doesn’t mention a rhythm deduction.

BTW, I have a huge problem with the Help Desk listing rules beyond what’s in the Code of Points.

 

[GymBeauty]

on beam, you can land one foot at a time (like a LOSO) and launch into a second skill. What Douglas does in that video is more “bounding” than that and certainly would get credit on beam

I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t get credit on beam, there isn’t constant motion between the skills to qualify it as rebounding. With the LOSO one foot coming down first is fine because it’s still moving and “developing speed” as the rules state.

The connection seems fine for floor, but I’ll be expecting a rule update. Or maybe it’s protected from Dontella since Ferrari did it, hmm. It’s hard to tell what Gabby will be capable of on floor at this point though. If she’s in super good condition I’d think she would want to try the Silivas. I’m more interested in how her dance turns out than her acro, TBH.

 

[Denn]

The video @Concorde shared shows Ferrari doing the same thing as Douglas and getting credited.

Her dance elements are the problem. That’s why I removed or downgraded most of them.

 

[JJS_5056]

It’s insane that the following would receive no CV per the BB requirements:

1. Stella Umeh’s: BHS + LO/Whip/Pike + BHS + LSO
2. Kuznetsova’s: RO + LO + FHS (even if this is a FWO - arguable since there’s clear flight in the beginning phase - the point stands that if she cleaned it up, it wouldn’t earn CV)
3. Khorkina’s: LO + BHS + LSO mount

…yet, on FLOOR, they’re allowing “absorption.” This further proves the sport has no direction whatsoever, as there needs to be (at min) consensus on which components define each apparatus, so every rule / recommendation is measured against whether they further advance those ideals.

There’s no place on FX for a connection like Douglas’ (or Ponor’s, Ferrari’s, etc.) Back Tuck, when Myzdrikova - as mentioned - has shown a true rebound is possible. And, in a COP where a stick is required, the Mixed CV shouldn’t be exempt from a Rhythm deduction.

BB ought to prioritize rhythm; CR that encourage 2 static jumps, adding B+D (mixed CV) / B+B+C (mixed, dance SB) while only bumping 2 static jumps to B, and chacking C/D+D (0.1 non-rebounding fwd CV) are things that have only encouraged the event to lose fluidity and diversity. 2013-2016 COP (Sheep at D, D+A mixed, C/D+D - 0.1 non-rebounding Acro, no Dance/Mixed SB) worked so much better.

Can anyone say they enjoy Eythora or Flavia’s 2017+ BB sets more than 2014 - 2016? We lost Saraiva’s gorgeous Front Tuck + Wolf, 2nd difficult dance shape (Sheep), and exciting climax with the Aerial + Aerial + Side Somi series at the end.