Mustafina EF FX 2014

[Doug1233]

Double Wolf turn - .1 balance, .1 arm swing

Where’s your bent knee deduction?

 

[Doug1233]

Mustafina: 7.9

Double L-turn - .1 underturn, .1 hop
Double Tuck full - .1 flex feet, .1 leg separation, .1 step
Triple I/Y turn - .1 preparation, .1 underturn, .1 balance, .1 hop
Double I/Y turn - .1 preparation
1.5 twist - .1 pike
Front full - .1 hop
Quad turn - .1 preparation, .1 underturn, .1 balance
Switch 1/2 - .1 body shape
Double Tuck - .1 flex feet, .1 leg separation, .1 step
Artistry - .1 musicality, .1 choreography, +.1 Russian bonus (I was instructed to give this bonus by FIG, but refused)

These just weren’t taken in 2016.

 

[Doug1233]

Front pike 1/2 - .1 step

Where’s your 0.1 chest deduction?

Arguably also an amplitude deduction for the Pike Barani.

 

[Doug1233]

Switch 1/2 - .1 body shape

What is wrong with Mustafina’s “body shape” in the Switch Half?

Switch 1/2 - .1 knee

By contrast, you gave Shang a “bent knee” deduction.

So it obviously wasn’t bent knees that you’re deducting Mustafina for. Obviously she hits a 180. What are you trying to deduct for? Body alignment? I would argue that Shang’s has even less alignment than Mustafina.

What body shape deduction are you taking?

 

[Doug1233]

Switch ring - .1 back leg

Not her front leg?

 

[Doug1233]

I could go on and on.

Shang was monsterously overscored on floor.

Quite frankly, so was Mustafina! That 8.9 from the R Panel judge was way too high, too.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

She pikes more here than any of Shang’s twists, and has some leg form issue too. Deduction on this element is deserved. Mustafina frequently had flawed twisting form, it’s quite strange someone would act like it’s a surprise she’s getting deduction there.

What you are showing there is a very minimal dish. You claim it’s deserved but the only rationale you offer is that it’s not as straight as Shang’s, as though that were the standard in the COP. And it’s evident you understand what a thin case you have here because you jump to general criticism of Mustafina’s twisting form per se, rather than the specific deduction you want to take. You want to blur your piking deduction with obvious and uncontroversial ones like crossed and bent legs, and it’s clear why.

Ultimately, if you are taking 0.1 for piking here ie throwing the book at Mustafina, you are not judging the two of them with the same pen. Hence of course you including other deductions that weren’t taken then and omitting ones for Shang like the bent leg. Either you ding both of them and take everything, or you’re lenient to both of them (the approach that the Rio judges took). You are clearly not doing that here.

 

[GymBeauty]

the screencap you posted literally looks like a side somi. Where’s your precision deduction?

No it literally doesn’t. It looks exactly like a great form front tuck, which is indeed what it is, and the combo is less than 1/8 turn short, so there’s no deduction.

Not her front leg?

Why are you posting a picture of her leap before she’s anywhere close to being in position? What a despicable manipulation. This is Shang’s switch ring, also showing another example from team competition that has clear side angle:

The only reason she gets any deduction is because of the stupid 2013-16 rule about rings needing to have a 90 degree bend on the back leg.

Where’s your bent knee deduction?

Her knee is not overly bent there.

This is obviously a 0.3. Even in 2016.

It’s not “obvious”, and I already took .5 total on her Double Pike, which is nitpicky enough.

What is wrong with Mustafina’s “body shape” in the Switch Half?

Her torso isn’t aligned with the legs in split position.

These just weren’t taken in 2016.

It’s a listed deduction and was definitely taken for some people. Mustafina received generous marks because of political favor, which is not good judging. You don’t need to make 8 posts btw. You can quote everything in one post.

What you are showing there is a very minimal dish. You claim it’s deserved but the only rationale you offer is that it’s not as straight as Shang’s. Ultimately, if you are taking 0.1 for piking here ie throwing the book at Mustafina, you are not judging the two of them with the same pen.

You calling it “very minimal” is quite the overlook. Use a protractor and measure the angle. Aside from that, I specifically pointed out the leg form too. Judging requires a degree of looking at things holistically. That element deserves a deduction, it doesn’t matter in the end what the label is. There is no “different pen” from me whatsoever. The things you write definitely show a bias though.

 

[onodian]

These screencap mudfights always make my day :smiling_face_with_three_hearts::smiling_face_with_three_hearts::smiling_face_with_three_hearts::smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

For clarity, my objection to your deduction on Mustafina’s 1.5 is the pike only. Which is not a sustainable deduction when you’re arguing that visible knee bends on Shang are ‘not overly bent’. It’s a good example of your double standard.

And your claim that it doesn’t matter what the label for the deduction is, well that’s just bizarre. Do you think Olympic judges look at an element, decide it feels like the vibe is X amount of deductions overall and fill in the blanks from there with no reference to what the code actually says about what can be deducted when?

But then we saw where you’re at with the claim that the FIG told you to take a deduction for Shang being Chinese. That is not a reality based view, not with the way this exercise got held up.

 

[GymBeauty]

For clarity, my objection to your deduction on Mustafina’s 1.5 is the pike only. Which is not a sustainable deduction when you’re arguing that visible knee bends on Shang are ‘not overly bent’. It’s a good example of your double standard.

Mustafina’s form is factually more bent than Shang’s in the example given. Again, use a protractor. That is not a double standard.

And your claim that it doesn’t matter what the label for the deduction is, well that’s just bizarre. Do you think Olympic judges look at an element, decide it feels like the vibe is X amount of deductions overall and fill in the blanks from there with no reference to what the code actually says about what can be deducted when?

The judges’ deductions are not publicly listed, and they HAVE frequently decided on an overall score “vibe” for competitors based on reputation.

But getting back to the point of holistically judging as per the rules, there frequently will be elements with multiple grey areas, and the goal needs to be scoring the element accurately. Taking 1 deduction is what’s most fair and it doesn’t really matter which close case of the 2 you decide upon, because it’s the same thing in the end.

If you were to take 0 or 2 deductions every time, that is a judging distortion. Numbers mean something. The scoring system does not work if numbers are just thrown around with disregard to the purpose they are supposed to serve.

But then we saw where you’re at with the claim that the FIG told you to take a deduction for Shang being Chinese. That is not a reality based view, not with the way this exercise got held up.

Shang’s exercise did not get “held up” in relation to others. People like Mustafina and Raisman are the ones who were held up. You don’t have a reality based view if you think political judging has not existed in the sport. Given that political judging does very clearly exist, you should then also look at the many unfair and outright racist things said by FIG leaders about Chinese gymnasts, including comments about wanting to punish them in competition as retribution for previous underage competitors.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

Mustafina’s form is factually more bent than Shang’s in the example given. Again, use a protractor. That is not a double standard.

Why do you think this would be the appropriate standard? Do you think Shang Chungsong having a less bent but still bent leg on a different element to Mustafina means she shouldn’t be deducted for it and if so, where in the code or helpdesk did you see this?

If you were to take 0 or 2 deductions every time, that is a judging distortion. Numbers mean something. The scoring system does not work if numbers are just thrown around with disregard to the purpose they are supposed to serve.

And who decided what’s ‘supposed’ to happen here? It comes down to vibes again. Certainly I’d agree the sport has seen plenty of bad judging over the years, but the idea that it doesn’t matter what deductions a judge takes is highly flawed.

Shang’s exercise did not get “held up” in relation to others. People like Mustafina and Raisman are the ones who were held up. You don’t have a reality based view if you think political judging has not existed in the sport.

Didn’t say it did. It got treated leniently by the E panel just as Mustafina’s did: they were both generously treated hence there was no unfairness to Shang Chungsong here. Also didn’t say political judging doesn’t exist in the sport, and indeed given that most people take the view that gymnasts from bigger teams tend to get more help than those from smaller federations, the two routines being discussed here may well be examples. I haven’t actually watched every floor routine from Rio so wouldn’t like to stick my neck out, but it wouldn’t be a great shock if the gymnast who finished 67th in prelims or whatever didn’t get the leniency shown to gymnasts from the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the world here.

 

[Yarotska]

It’s not “obvious”, and I already took .5 total on her Double Pike, which is nitpicky enough.

It was obvious. And you not taking more deductions to not be nitpicky when you nitpicked Mustafina’s entire exercise?

 

[Doug1233]

Why are you posting a picture of her leap before she’s anywhere close to being in position? What a despicable manipulation.

I can’t.

A bent free leg is absolutely a deduction. Whether she’s “in position” or not, is completely irrelevant.

This is Jordan Chiles doing a Switch Side Half in Tokyo. I’m guessing there’s no deduction because she’s not “in position” yet?

Her torso isn’t aligned with the legs in split position.

Shang has worse alignment in her Switch Half. But there’s magically no deduction for Shang on hers.

No it literally doesn’t. It looks exactly like a great form front tuck, which is indeed what it is, and the combo is less than 1/8 turn short, so there’s no deduction.

I mean, sure. I disagree. I have no idea where this “1/8th” rule came from. It was completely out of alignment and in fact there were several threads at the time talking about whether the new “you can be short and still get credit if you punch out of it” rule was stupid. But that short landing of the triple full showed a clear lack of precision. I’m still surprised she has ACLs left.

And in any event, you ignored my gif displaying her clear lack of amplitude. If you can’t see that needed an amplitude deduction, then I do not know what to say.

Her knee is not overly bent there.

It is clearly bent. 0.1 body shape.

It’s a listed deduction and was definitely taken for some people. Mustafina received generous marks because of political favor, which is not good judging.

And you deducted her 3 times for “preparation” when that deduction would never have been taken in that Code, for anyone with that same amount of preparation. I would suggest that it is you that is displaying “political favor” here.

It was obvious. And you not taking more deductions to not be nitpicky when you nitpicked Mustafina’s entire exercise?

It was probably the most obvious deduction in her entire exercise.

 

[YurchenkoLoop]

In a leap, the leg that leaves the floor first must be straight. I’m gonna take a stab at these routines with what memory I have of that code. Stork cornering was already in place since 2013, yeah?

Shang 6.8, Mustafina 7.4 lol what am I on. They both fudged turns and had .3 landings (Mustafina steps, Shang low chest). I took .3 for height for Shang’s punch front tuck, but only .1 for the punch front pike at the top

 

[Doug1233]

Shang 6.8, Mustafina 7.4 lol what am I on.

Ha right! This is why it’s impossible to judge from a few Codes ago. But it is clear that Shang had much worse execution than Mustafina. Trying to argue that they should have been deducted similarly is just not correct.

 

[GymBeauty]

Got a novel here! Read with hot chocolate or while otherwise pleasuring yourself.

Why do you think this would be the appropriate standard?

First of all it is the objectively correct standard. Before the convoluted modern judging systems appeared, these things were done entirely by comparison. Knowledgeable observers are able to look at elements and weigh their qualities and come up with an answer to “who did it better?” Whoever does something better should be the winner in sport. This is the most pure judgement possible, as it is free of lost-in-translation rules and fabricated mathematical values that don’t accurately represent the opinions of the people judging.

Continuing that thought, if we had pristine robot judging, then everything could be judged on a scale of every degree of difference and exact duration of position, down to the thousandth-of-a-point. If the robot and scoring system are coded so the ranges provide a favorable outcome for accurately assessing gymnastics in the way we want it to be, then this would also be quite a pure way of judging. The athletes would always be rewarded for exactly what they’ve done, and doing something better than another competitor would always be worth more, exactly as it’s supposed to be.

Now, moving on to judging properly within the current system we have:

if so, where in the code or helpdesk did you see this?

The code says more than 10 degrees of piking is a deduction. Mustafina is definitely in the deduction zone. This deduction will not always be taken though, it can easily blend in when watching in real time. I would not take it if the element has otherwise perfect form. She doesn’t though. There are several little errors, which create a clear picture of “the form is not good enough here”, and deserving of body shape deduction.

There is no minimum degree listed for .1 deduction with bent knee. I’m not going to take it if it’s not distracting. The “turn in tuckstand” in the first place does not have a free leg position specified for 2013-16.

it got treated leniently by the E panel just as Mustafina’s did: they were both generously treated hence there was no unfairness to Shang Chungsong here.

This is a complete fallacy. People can be treated different degrees of leniently. You keep repeating this statement, without much analysis, that Mustafina was not given special treatment and that Shang was either given the same level of treatment, or actually was the one who got held up. It looks like fandom bias.

To me, and to many others, Mustafina was treated much more generously in comparison (aka, the result was wrong). Given the very real history of favorites being held up in the sport, and Russia being a more favored nation, it should at least be considered the judging was flawed.

A bent free leg is absolutely a deduction. Whether she’s “in position” or not, is completely irrelevant.

Incorrect, and ignorant to how the human body works, AND hypocritical to positions you’ve taken elsewhere.

The leg HAS to bend at some point in order for most skills to happen (this can also be said about unpointed feet). Unless it’s a noticeably ugly thing while getting into a skill or coming out, it shouldn’t be a deduction. Those positions going in and out are more optional, just as there are numerous skills that specifically say the free leg position is optional.

Everyone would be getting clocked for bent knee and flexed feet with tremendously higher frequency otherwise. You definitely have not applied that standard.

It’s funny how you believe gymnasts should only barely have to hit a split position for the tiniest microsecond and that’s just fine, despite the skills looking clearly much uglier in real time, and yet a slightly bent knee for a hardly perceptible amount of time, which contributes less to how the element looks, is suddenly worse.

Shang has worse alignment in her Switch Half.

No she doesn’t, and this shows your blind fandom. Shang’s upper body aligned with the legs in split position. Mustafina’s upper body is twisted, pointing completely sideways while in split!

If you can’t see that needed an amplitude deduction, then I do not know what to say.

Try doing a snap rebound without piking down from the previous skill and see how high you get. By it’s very nature, a skill like that is going to be lower than the potential height you would get by doing a slower connection with more of a push. Shang wasn’t just tipping forward into a half-assed salto, or “headbutting” the ground as you tried to say. What she did took great skill and is very impressive.

you deducted her 3 times for “preparation” when that deduction would never have been taken in that Code, for anyone with that same amount of preparation. I would suggest that it is you that is displaying “political favor” here.

I took the same deduction for Shang, and again, the code specifically lists it and had quite strict wording. If the judges did not deduct it at the time, that shows their own error, or the disregard for the code in general, which means we also can frequently disregard things we dislike in the code if we see fit. After all, the Olympic judges have been doing it since always. There is no political bias from me, that’s a strawman from you, seemingly because you’re not interested in considering a different opinion.

It was obvious.

An obvious .3 deduction is a gymnast’s head being below their knees on landing. Hers was not. The judges likely wouldn’t be applying the deduction for feet apart as I did, and the bent leg in real time there is not that blatant either. Seemingly, flexed feet on piked skills wasn’t being taken at the time either. She absolutely did not receive more than .5 deduction total on that skill, which is what I gave.

you nitpicked Mustafina’s entire exercise

There are more deductions I could have taken for Mustafina. Your assumption that I somehow went after her harshly shows a line of thinking on your part that “goddess” Mustafina is special and must be judged above Shang because of who she is. Shang is hardly one of my favorites. She was simply better in the 2016 AA.

 

[Doug1233]

I can’t.

Except for…

Unless it’s a noticeably ugly thing while getting into a skill or coming out, it shouldn’t be a deduction.

Ding ding ding!

 

[GymBeauty]

Like I said, if you’re going to argue her leg is an actual problem there, then you need to take that deduction everywhere (a bad direction to take the sport, but at least it would be applied evenly). Eythora and Suni have similarly tiny knee bends or flexed feet in their leaps, and you made no mention of it at all in your recent looks at their elements.

Also regarding amplitude on punch fronts, go look at the Netherlands team at this Worlds. Those are punch fronts that deserve deduction. Trying to put Shang’s on the same level is a bastardization of judging and does not accurately reflect what is happening in the gymnastics.

 

[Doug1233]

Trying to put Shang’s on the same level is a bastardization of judging

They are absolutely on the same level. Shang’s were arguably worse.