Event (FIG) Scoring Worlds Routines

Gymnaverse was created from WWgym!

Join today & you can REMOVE the ads for FREE!

I think artistry is something that the US needs to work on more. Having watched Classic and Nationals it all seemed a bit "painting by numbers" and is giving me vibes of Tom Forster at junior world (??) where USA had a relatively poor meet because of downgraded leaps/spins - Tom said didn't realize that dance elements were that important as he had focussed on acro.

Now in the post-Simone era where the US no longer has anyone with a 1.0 point+ D score advantage - they really cannot afford to ignore the substantial number of tenths for artistry.
 
I think artistry is something that the US needs to work on more. Having watched Classic and Nationals it all seemed a bit "painting by numbers" and is giving me vibes of Tom Forster at junior world (??) where USA had a relatively poor meet because of downgraded leaps/spins - Tom said didn't realize that dance elements were that important as he had focussed on acro.

Now in the post-Simone era where the US no longer has anyone with a 1.0 point+ D score advantage - they really cannot afford to ignore the substantial number of tenths for artistry.

Memmel has been beating that drum for three years.
 
The big question I see is how do Memmel and Asac get that across or enforce it with coaches’ training? Another thread had a couple of posts about how they’ve tried to get the coaches to work on artistry with their gymnasts. It doesn’t seem to be taking hold.
 
Part of the problem is a depleted field. If there were ten people being appropriately scored above routines from people like Roberson, you have a lot of evidence to point out to coaches that artistry and execution are more valuable than chucked difficulty. But when the depth isn't there, there isn't anyone to take in place of Roberson, and there isn't an example to make of the approach. Roberson just won a world bronze. It's unfortunate positive reinforcement.
 
Random thought but did any of the gymnasts explicitly comment that the beam had too much friction, as new beams sometimes can when the leather isn't worn in at all? This seems like an obvious explanation for all the botched wolf turns I just saw in the All Around...
 
Part of the problem is a depleted field. If there were ten people being appropriately scored above routines from people like Roberson, you have a lot of evidence to point out to coaches that artistry and execution are more valuable than chucked difficulty. But when the depth isn't there, there isn't anyone to take in place of Roberson, and there isn't an example to make of the approach. Roberson just won a world bronze. It's unfortunate positive reinforcement.
On vault... not an apparatus with artistry judged. I don't think that is reinforcement... and her E scores were the reason she lost gold and silver. With great execution, she had enough to win even gold.
 
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
 
Last edited:
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
But all 3 of them got medals on vault. Carey is the only one to medal in a floor final, and she has better execution on floor -- maybe even MUCH better -- than Skinner and Roberson, right?

That's also a sort of unfair estimation of how Roberson made finals this week. She got unfairly treated for her layout pod in qualification. If Wong had hit the DTY, and Roberson had been credited the vault she obviously did, they'd both have made finals.
 
That's not really accurate. Skinner qualified 6th in the AA at Worlds and her form on vault was good. Roberson's form is bad with the legs always being separated and very bent. Skinner's vault form was better that Jade's, in fact, although she didn't get as much amplitude.
 
Part of the problem is a depleted field. If there were ten people being appropriately scored above routines from people like Roberson, you have a lot of evidence to point out to coaches that artistry and execution are more valuable than chucked difficulty. But when the depth isn't there, there isn't anyone to take in place of Roberson, and there isn't an example to make of the approach. Roberson just won a world bronze. It's unfortunate positive reinforcement.
It's not about artistry, but from a reinforcement point of view, I'd say Roberson's medal is actually an argument for prioritising execution. Her decision to do the mustafina instead of the Cheng was really, really smart. It cost her 0.4 in difficulty but she almost certainly made up at least 0.6 in form and landing deductions (and even her amplitude looked better at a quick eyeball, although I haven't done a direct comparison.). It was the best her post flight has looked for ages and it paid off for her.
 
You'd think all they would have to do is show some videos and lay out the deductions vs the value of the skill being performed to the coaches. Pick any of the difficulty chuckers, don't have to just focus on Joscelyn, and show how finals spots and medals are lost with poor execution. It would be nice if Finnegan had been scored the way some of the board judges say she should have been since that undercuts some of the argument that execution is a better thing to focus on than difficulty but still. They should be able to get the point after seeing how Josc's FX was scored.
 
Information shared with me today:
  • The WTC posted routines in advance and the judges for Worlds were required to submit their deductions in advance so the WTC could assess and address.
  • The judge briefing before Worlds was not heavy on discussion this time.
  • They did push — again, as they have before — that judges should pay MORE attention to artistry.
  • They also are judging wolf spins more strictly
Thanks Denn. If they're picking one sin to punish per year, next year can they do those dance passages with straight-legged gallops and wild arms?
 
You'd think all they would have to do is show some videos and lay out the deductions vs the value of the skill being performed to the coaches. Pick any of the difficulty chuckers, don't have to just focus on Joscelyn, and show how finals spots and medals are lost with poor execution.

I think a point that may also be getting lost is that relatively clean looking elements and connections can still incur substantial deductions. As an example, how much in deductions would you guess that Blakely incurred on her Stalder to Higgins Roll + Piked Jaegar during team finals of the 2023 World Championships?



Stalder to Higgins Roll - Angle of Completion, Between 31 and 45 Degrees Past Handstand (0.3)

Piked Jaegar - Insufficient Height (0.3) + Flexed Feet (0.1) + Bent Arms Upon Regrasp (0.3)

Total Deductions - 1.0

She incurred as many deductions on two skills as she did on the remaining 10 elements in the routine.

As you can see, Blakely and her team made a wise decision to change the composition of her routine.
 
Her decision to do the mustafina instead of the Cheng was really, really smart. It cost her 0.4 in difficulty but she almost certainly made up at least 0.6 in form and landing deductions (and even her amplitude looked better at a quick eyeball, although I haven't done a direct comparison.)
oh wow, so that mustafina is a form improvement for her? Thanks for the heads up, I'll steer way clear of watching her qualis cheng then.
 
The core problem in all of this is that the execution deductions are unintuitive — sometimes because of how much is deducted, and sometimes for what is deducted, and that Blakely example has a little of both.

It's no surprise that gymnasts and coaches don't understand them. It's at a point where the WTC has created this situation where only the most fastidious gymnerds can even process all of these rules, let alone internalize them well enough to apply them.

BTW, @Concorde , nice use of the spoiler feature. :-)
 

Gymnaverse was created from WWgym!

Join today & you can REMOVE the ads for FREE!

Back