Recent Beam Judging

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads


So, we saw the judging on beam in this quad absolutely annihilate some routines. It took us all by surprise in Montreal, and we spent a lot of time coming on board with all the new deductions to try and make sense of it all.

But then again, some routines still don’t make sense to me. Take this for example, which received a 7.7 E:

I really cannot see how this got a 7.7. Judging with my regular pen, I had this at a mid to low 8 (8.6 plus 2 or 3 for artistry). Yes the switch ring wasn’t the best (although if you pause it, it clearly hits the requirements). And she had one pretty big 3/5 wobble. But otherwise, she is very very clean. It pains me to see this get 7.7 and then Skinner gets up, does six different dance elements with her feet poking up, and gets a 7.3 by USAG.

Also - we usually see an Olympic bump in E Scoring in the Olympic year, as compared to the prior Worlds year. For example, on bars, Maddie Kocian was scoring low 15’s in Glasgow, but was magically getting 15.8’s in Rio, for basically the same routine. Same for Gabby - her 9.266 E Scores in Rio were 8.7’s in Glasgow for pretty much the same routine.

Will we see the same in Tokyo?
Last edited:
With the Montreal pen, I think the score is fair. I’m inclined to think judges took .3 for height on the dismount. Judges may have gone really intense and deducted .5 for the switch half due to the lack of square hips, lack of split, not being parallel to beam, and the front leg bending fairly noticeably prior to landing. In real time, I took .3 for that split.

But I bet we’ll see at least one 15 on beam in Tokyo! There was only one 15+ on beam at Worlds this quad, and it was from Simone in 2019.
I feel like the montreal pen slipped a little in Stuttgart.

Would love to see your 7.7 breakdown.

And I think 0.5 for that switch half is too harsh. There were MYCH worse switch halves on show. Should they all get 0.5’s too? If so - there’s a failure to separate, right?

Last edited:
My bad, totally thought this was Montreal! That is surprisingly a little low. I too wouldn’t take .5 for the switch 1/2, but I think it’s a possibility some judges did maybe? Otherwise, I’m not sure what else they saw.

Candle mount - balance -0.1
Free cartwheel - flexed feet -0.1
FF - flexed feet -0.1
Pause in switch leap connection -0.1
Switch 1/2 - body shape and wobble -0.3 & -0.3
Cartwheel - flexed feet -0.1
1.5 twist - height, leg separation, hop -0.3 & -0.1 & -0.1
Lack of low-to-beam choreo -0.1
Lack of variation in rhythm -0.1
Lack of work in releve -0.1
Series of disconnected elements -0.1
E: 8.0
Looking at that Switch 1/2 screenshot - even 0.3 seems harsh to me. Especially when Skinner is probably getting 3 or 5 for hers.

One of the issues I see is that the “breadth” of the 0.3 body shape deduction seems insanely wide. You need to have a really great leap to get a 1, and judges are hesitant to give a 5 for all but the most egregious attempts. So most leaps get a 3, irrespective of where they sit in that 3 range.

I hate 0,1,3,5 for body shape. It really should be 0-5 with judges discretion.
I actually got a 7.7 after taking a few tenths for artistry. She has soft knees or feet on some skills (usually one or the other, and definitely not all skills) and nickles and dimes herself with them. These skills are in addition to the three or four larger errors. I was actually surprised to end this low.

Side note that I still hate the 1-3-5 deductions. I always feel like I am unnecessarily tanking the score when judging elite routines.
Adding this rather belated reply because I just saw this.
Last edited:
I can’t believe we are bemoaning the judging of this routine. Pro-British bias from a Brit, perhaps?

I also had a score in range, 7.8, and I only took 0.1 on the split ring position and 0.3 on the switch half which is both short of 180° and off axis in two different ways (not square hips and angled downward to the beam). That 0.3 is completely justified.

Fixing her feet would improve her score significantly. She loses 0.1 on damn cartwheel. Ridiculous.

You show your breakdown first, and then we’ll all pick at you instead of the other way around. 😛
Last edited:
I’ll need to actually write it down properly, but basically the main thing is the feet. She loses a half point on feet alone which is really unnecessary for a gymnast as skilled as she is. Also the switch half is an easy .4-.6 off depending on how hard you hit the split, and she loses on both the mount (it goes right over from the chest stand, no control) and dismount (I would take .1 for height and legs, and .3 for the hop, but end up at .5 like the above poster on it alone, as well). I also note wonky body position in the switch ring (.1). Watching again some of the perceived softness in her back leg may be due to calf shape and the lighting but even if I had passed up on those deductions in the arena, she’d be below an 8.

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads