Test event Ned-Bel

[ArnoldRimmer]

I think she pretty much lost hers during the EF.

 

[RichardL]

We could say the same thing about the bronze medalist, but one could argue whether or not she ever really “had” a laid-out triple full in the first place…

 

[Doug1233]

Lol bent knees doesn’t make a layout into a tuck. You need to look at the hip angle, not the knee angle.

It was a layout with deductions.

 

[RichardL]

I’m aware, Doug! But you knew exactly what I meant

 

[RichardL]

About halfway through that triple full, utter chaos ensued

 

[RedBirdie]

2012 floor was…not a beautiful final.

 

[Doug1233]

And yet it was the most “qualified” Olympic final in decades. We had:

• 2004 Olympic FX Champion
• 2006 World AA Champion and FX Bronze
• 2008 Olympic FX Champion
• 2010 World FX Champion
• 2010 World AA Champion and FX Silver
• 2011 World FX Champion
• 2011 World AA Champion…

And the eventual winner - who was the least “qualified” out of all of them!

It’s interesting to look at the individual judges scores for the final (page 184 of this PDF).

For Ponor, there was 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.3 and … 8.5?!? But then the reference judges were 8.7 and 8.9. I wonder why there was such a disagreement across the panel. 8 tenths was a hell of a lot in those days! For example, for both Ferrari and Afan, the spread between all seven judges was only 3 tenths.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

And also the silver medallist.

 

[Concorde]

Ponor’s floor exercise started from a 6.3, but she was only credited with a 6.2. If she wasn’t given connection bonus for the full-in + back tuck, her D score would have dropped to 6.1. Therefore, it was most likely one of the Gomez or the Gogean being downgraded, though both were short. If I remember correctly from the FIG WTC report on London, IRCOS was not used so judges had to give the benefit of the doubt to the gymnast on borderline calls.

 

[Doug1233]

Back to topic - I’m watching the full meet here:



Klinckharts beam (at about 6:00) Wtf do you do with that illusion turn? It’s 3/4 - so shouldn’t get credit, right? But what else can you credit it with? It basically isn’t an element, so a 0, right?

It’s very important because without it, she has no turn. So she loses the 0.5 CR. Awful routine construction.

 

[Concorde]

Doug1233 - Downgrade to 3.206 - 1/2 Illusion Turn, which is a B, and would still earn CR, since the requirement is just for a turn from Group 3, but does not specify a minimum of 360 degrees.

 

[Doug1233]

Amazing! Thank you! I didn’t know a half illusion was a thing!

 

[onodian]

Who’s doing the commentary?

 

[Dex]

Two junior gymnasts

 

[Doug1233]

What E panel deductions would you give? I presume precision, body shape, and wobble?

 

[Concorde]

Yes:

• Precision (0.1), for the overrotation
• Body Shape (0.5), for the lack of split (>20 - 45 degrees short of a 180 degree split, which is 0.3), plus the bent arm (0.1 for slight bend), which based on the way the COP works would bump up to 0.5
• Balance Adjustment (0.5), large fault with the torso breaking completely and the head almost going down to knee height

 

[Doug1233]

I think I’d give 3 for body shape. But yes - huge error. And all that for a B!

 

[Doug1233]

Tisha Volleman’s new Switch Ring upgrade.