Gymnast Social Media Megathread

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would disagree with it being “wildly” overscored. Yes there’s visible errors, but I think her execution is quite comparable to Nina Derwael’s. Her routine construction is the kind that does optimize your E scoring potential (no KCH 1/2 turns, and her full turn elements are both difficulty-adding and rather close to handstand on completion). Remember that per the code of points, a kip cast handstand is supposed to have 30 degrees of leeway from vertical before even taking a single tenth.
 
I really want to send some dog poo in the post to whoever is responsible for the decision not to release her. Or at least sign them up to a lot of spam mailing lists.
 
Last edited:
I had Nemour at an 8.4. That routine is legit. The Tkachev 1/2 variation would hold up, I think.

Yeah, the two best UB workers in the world won’t be at Worlds…
 
Thanks for the perspectives. I can admit that my assessment was mostly vibes-based, and I’d forgotten how lenient the COP is on cast handstand positions.

Who is the other best bar worker who won’t be at Worlds?
 
Nina Derwael? She was too injured for Euros.
 
Listunova. I think her new set is a 6.9 but it has 5 KCH and seems far too long. Her shorter routine might score higher internationally. But she’s looking at 15+ too.

Qiu Qiyuan could also probably score 15+ depending on which upgrades she incorporates, and Luo Rui and Wei Xiaoyuan are basically there too. Derwael could score ~15 if she brings her fake Nabs back. And it is anyone’s guess what Suni could realistically score this year
 
Can you give a video of her doing the 6.9 exercise? I can only find a 6.6, though it COULD be 6.8 if she connects out of the Pak I suppose.

 
I agree with others that the 8.55 E-score is not high — in fact, I had her at 8.7, and I also agree that the discrepancy with your intuition is likely due to you thinking that she’s losing a ton for her cast handstands, when, at the least, her angles are all okay per FIG rules.

They do weird things — they don’t credit the handstand if it’s more than 10° from handstand, but they don’t deduct it, so almost no elites will get penalized unless it’s really bad (more than 30° from HS).
 
I so don’t understand that orphan half. Couldn’t she just do a half turn when she does her last kip cast? The she’d be facing the right way without that stupid orphan half (does that not get deducted for going not going vertical? Because no one seems to get it vertical.)
 
They do weird things — they don’t credit the handstand if it’s more than 10° from handstand, but they don’t deduct it, so almost no elites will get penalized unless it’s really bad (more than 30° from HS).
Correct me if I’m wrong - isn’t there a potential for a “body alignment” or some kind of “lack of extension in cast to handstand”-type deduction if the handstand is piked, even though you’re not taking a deduction for angle of completion?
 
Yes. Who knows how these decisions get made…
 
Yes. The apparatus specific deductions include two deductions for casts:
  • “Body alignment in HSTD and cast to HSTD” (either 0.1 or 0.3)
  • “Amplitude of casts” (either 0.1 or 0.3)
Frankly, that deduction is poorly phrased. It should be phrased “Angle of completion of casts without turn” so that it is both consistent and contrasting to the line right above it:
  • Angle of completion of elements (0.1, 0.3, or 0.5)
The “Help Desk” document has a diagram that, frankly, should just be included in the COP, but the WAG Technical Committee communicates inefficiently. Casts to handstand are also downgraded to 0 value if not within 10° of handstand in addition to the deduction. That’s super busybody, in my opinion, but are we surprised?

image


(I LOVE that I can copy and paste images directly into the text editor with this software!)

Full deduction chart for apparatus specific deductions on uneven bars:
image
 
Last edited:
So under the Code, casts can be deducted up to 0.6? 0, 1 or 3 for body alignment and 0, 1 or 3 for amplitude of cast?

This could appear to go against the “The Code doesn’t deduct casts anymore” argument, no?

What is the difference between the two?
 
My understanding has always been that if a gymnast casts with, say, a lot of arch and doesn’t get anywhere near vertical either, then yes, it could be 0.6 AND possible deductions for leg separation, foot form, leg bend…
 
Last edited:
“Amplitude” is also a nonsense concept when applied to a swinging (non-flight/non-acro) skill. Shouldn’t the technical issue it refers to already be covered by the deduction ranges for deviation from handstand?
 
Last edited:
Denn,

I don’t think there is a video of the 6.9. If she connected everything and added the Fabrichnova does that get her there?

And I don’t remember her doing about double layout off bars but apparently she did at one point.

 
The DLO is nicer than that weird tuck/pike position in her current dismount.
 
Petition to get France to release Nemour to Algiers in time!

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads

Back