Rules we need changed after the Olympics

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads

Nothing new here but definitely one touch needs to return since they are so worried about safety. Same with tie breakers, I know the IOC doesn’t like it but if it is allowed in other Olympics sports, they should be for gymnastics
 
Especially since they have already had to make fewer medals than previously for gymnastics with 5 person and now 4 person teams.

Team final in Atlanta resulted in 21 medals. There are 27 medals in total for WAG in Tokyo.
 
It’s not a rule but I badly want .05 and .2 deduction available.

I also look forward to judgebots. I work in AI and I think that the broadcast innovations that the SEC Network brought us could be really easily added via computer vision. Vault and release height, vault distance, beam leap protractor, bars pirouette protractor - all super doable, and with just a camera for equipment. Floor is a little harder because of angle issues, but still. I’d love for the judges to get these facts, and possibly to have certain things like vault dynamics directly deducted with really fine grain - why not have a .375 deduction applied for vault height?
 
My proposal: The FIG’s president has to explain the Olympic qualification system to some rando who watches international gymnastics occasionally. It only goes into effect if the random spectator understands it after the first explanation.
 
Even better — cut the deductions in half on the apparatus other than vault. It’s not actually promoting artistic gymnastics, as was promised, and it leads to the judges essentially slaughtering the athletes.

–0.05 tiny errors or adjustments
–0.1 small
–0.2 medium
–0.4 large
–0.8 maximum total deductions for a non-fall
–1.0 fall
 
Last edited:
WOW! I never heard of such a thing. That’s frickin incredible. There’s a HUGE incentive to hold back in that case. You can guarantee a gold or risk a silver.

So weird!!!
 
Last edited:
The way to break ties, which mostly happens in apparatus finals at the Olympics, is to have more judges. The new panels will have 7, which already will break some ties. For apparatus finals, double the panel to 14 and use the middle 10 scores. This will vastly decrease the chance of a tie.

If there’s still a tie, add in more judges’ scores. And then use the E-score. And then let it be. There will almost never be a tie then.
 
Last edited:
How do you seat 14 judges in a way that gives them a correct vantage point?
 
I wish ties were allowed, but I’m willing to accept breaking a tie with the higher execution mark. BUT, if it’s still tied after that, then the tie stands.
 
Come to think of it, there already are almost that many judges. There’s the D and E panel as well as the reference judges. There’s also the apparatus supervisor and various assistants who are sitting there. It would be easy to seat them.

There’s also the superior jury that has to be able to see everything, too. So that’s 6 more people who are watching every apparatus final exercise. I mean, why not make their E-scores count, too?

It certainly would deal with fairness questions.
 
I just read a suggestion elsewhere that we submit a petition to the FIG for reinstatement of one-touch warmups.
That is a great idea. What is the process for doing this? Is there some formal submission process?
 
Denn: Are there enough judges? To do it at home USA is either short of judges or stupid at planning.
 
Last edited:
I respect your opinion, but I respectfully disagree. I feel that AA should remain at two (2) per country.

José M.
 

Talk Gymnastics With Us!

Join Today... Members See FEWER Ads

Similar threads

S
Replies
1
Views
936
system
S

Upcoming events

Back