Event (FIG) Scoring Worlds Routines

[tsarinajen]

When most of the people heavily involved with a sport can't make sense of the scores, it's a big problem. Keeping the deductions in the dark means the athletes, coaches, federations, and judges themselves don't have a clear way to assess routines. If for example everyone knew that someone was losing a full point for a Stalder 1/2 + Jaeger without a major error, then commentators would be able directly call that out and criticize the scoring system, giving clear feedback about exactly why something is wrong and should be changed.

Fans being able to criticize judges online is not a valid reason for secrecy. That's the reality of nearly every facet of life these days. Gymnastics judges are not some special group whose actions need to be hidden. They aren't holding nuclear codes and there are far less eyes on them compared to officials in more popular sports, or actual judges who make truly significant decisions, like Supreme Court justices, whose votes are public.

The Australian judge after the 2008 bar final may disagree about keeping scores/deductions in the dark. U.S. fans got her email address and it got ugly for a bit.

 

[Pisenlit3]

Idk. Gymnasts like skinner, roberson, and even Carey only make sense to the team when the depth is not there. They start getting passed on floor and beam despite their tumbling ability, but at the end of the day they're the last ones standing.

You can point to all three as having medal success due to extenuating circumstances. Jade went the individual route, Skinner won a vault medal bc of simone's Twisties (and was not named to the team), and Roberson only made finals here bc Leanne sat down a tucked dty

The audacity of you to compare Jade to them !!

 

[KristyJ]

When most of the people heavily involved with a sport can't make sense of the scores, it's a big problem. Keeping the deductions in the dark means the athletes, coaches, federations, and judges themselves don't have a clear way to assess routines. If for example everyone knew that someone was losing a full point for a Stalder 1/2 + Jaeger without a major error, then commentators would be able directly call that out and criticize the scoring system, giving clear feedback about exactly why something is wrong and should be changed.

Fans being able to criticize judges online is not a valid reason for secrecy. That's the reality of nearly every facet of life these days. Gymnastics judges are not some special group whose actions need to be hidden. They aren't holding nuclear codes and there are far less eyes on them compared to officials in more popular sports, or actual judges who make truly significant decisions, like Supreme Court justices, whose votes are public.

I did suggest that the aggregate deductions on each element might be published post facto, averaged across judges. That would give the actual deduction taken on the element via average without requiring every single deduction from every single judge be listed. This would, however, require inputting every element into a database, likely after the meet ends because shorthand really is much quicker than typing in codes.

 

[FrolovasDoubleLayout]

I did suggest that the aggregate deductions on each element might be published post facto, averaged across judges. That would give the actual deduction taken on the element via average without requiring every single deduction from every single judge be listed. This would, however, require inputting every element into a database, likely after the meet ends because shorthand really is much quicker than typing in codes.

If the hand-held scoring was ever to be implemented, this would be doable. As I mentioned in another post, the entered deductions are reconciled with the video time-line, so the computer program could average all seven of the E-panels deductions for each element and then output a document.

 

[Denn]

If the hand-held scoring was ever to be implemented, this would be doable. As I mentioned in another post, the entered deductions are reconciled with the video time-line, so the computer program could average all seven of the E-panels deductions for each element and then output a document.

I like it in theory, but the grunt work there would be inputting every element in every video... or the video would need to be published...

 

[FrolovasDoubleLayout]

I like it in theory, but the grunt work there would be inputting every element in every video... or the video would need to be published...

As I mentioned previously, the program is an Elevian-initiated, and I believe that it works in conjunction WITH the video in that the deductions correspond WITH the key frames in the video. Elevian already posts videos in their app. If FIG were to implement this (or a similar) system, it would just as easy - since the FIG DOES publish the videos.

 

[Puffin]

I think that FIG could possibly put D scores up and show which are downgraded like they do for skating as I think many "fans" don't realise that leaps/spins can be worth more than acro - a possible use for AI