Tom Forster resigns

[RedBirdie]

I’m still surprised he resigned. That takes a certain level of self-awareness I frankly didn’t feel he possessed.

He may have been encouraged to step down. Tom resigning saves face for everyone involved. Tom doesn’t have the embarrassment of being fired, USAG doesn’t to deal with “oh my god you fired ANOTHER HPC?” reactions. Gracefully allowing everyone to pretend there weren’t very serious problems that will continue to go unaddressed.

 

[makam]

I don’t know if a “strictly by the numbers” selection process is ideal. Japan uses that and there have definitely been times it has nearly bitten them in the ass. Russia’s “what Valentina wants goes” approach is the opposite and it too has had its issues and probably discouraged potential medalists who didn’t fit the body type preferences Valentina has consistently espoused. While the Japanese athletes know they are on the team months in advance and can focus on peaking and injury protection, you get the issue that if an athlete wasn’t ready on that one particular day, their year is basically done. But with the Valentina method (and the Martha method) the athlete has to be constantly showing themselves in top form which could lead to burnout or injury.

I don’t know if a hybrid of the styles is the answer or even possible but what Tom had been doing with the “everything is transparent” statements but then making up new rules/requirements after the fact to defend his opaque decisions was clearly not the correct way, especially in a federation trying to rebuild from decades of abuse and scandal.

Splitting the position into someone who works with the elite-track gymnasts on routines that emphasize their strengths and minimize their weaknesses (like, dear god, why were they letting Jordan Chiles do those wolf turns on floor? Why did Tom not stop them?). Like travel to the different regions and have a “come to jesus” here is where you are being deducted and how much, let’s see you do this alternate skill instead sit down meeting with all the elites and junior elites. Second, someone to interface with the media in a way that Tom absolutely failed to do and Marta was poor at but was loved because it just came across as catty and diva-ish.

And then maybe a committee of more than just 3 to select teams, based largely on recent scores but taking into account trajectory and potential and consistency. I feel like the gymnasts will accept that they missed out on the team because Gymnast B who got about the same scores as them is clearly recovering from injury and just needed a little more time to start producing better scores. Like, these ladies know generally how they stack up against each other. And someone with some media savvy would be able to convey that information in a way that was praise and credit to both gymnasts rather than just a “we liked Gymnast B better than Gymnast A” or “Gymnast B didn’t jump through this hoop that she didn’t know about the way we wanted her to but never told her.”

With cameras and video chat these days, it shouldn’t be a difficult thing to have a gymnast submit a video whenever they want for an on the spot judging and feedback from the national team if the coordinator isn’t able to get to a gym (as Tom apparently only visited “favorites”).

And the final, impossible thing is to change the leadership of USAG to one that prioritized the athletes over the profits.

 

[Doug1233]

 

[irichluck21]

That’s not a viable option anymore, and credit to Tom, he appeared to get that. The programme would never have got away with failing to offer an explanation in this climate. He or someone able to speak on the committee’s behalf had to provide some justification or his position would’ve been untenable. The expectation now is transparency, it’s a million miles from the Marta era. That doesn’t mean he has to answer every question immediately, but there does always have to be an explanation.

With that in mind, the focus needs to be on making sure that what’s said is sensible. If you want to take the top 4 AA in a 4-3-3 format, say that, and make a good case. Don’t say tenths don’t matter, say in these covid times we want to be risk averse. Don’t bullshit about petition decisions, just say that unfortunately Morgan did not show readiness to compete and thus we did not accept her petition. That sort of thing.

This is exactly my thinking and the basis for my argument previously.

 

[irichluck21]

I don’t know if a hybrid of the styles is the answer or even possible but what Tom had been doing with the “everything is transparent” statements but then making up new rules/requirements after the fact to defend his opaque decisions was clearly not the correct way, especially in a federation trying to rebuild from decades of abuse and scandal.

The funny thing is, other than Junior Worlds, his selection for teams was never questionable IMO, and he made the right choice for teams each time. I personally would have had McClain on the 2019 Junior Worlds team instead of Barros, due to McClain having a miss at Team Trials. But clearly McClain was the best junior athlete in the US and could have used that competition experience.

McCallum instead of Skinner in 2019 even though Skinner finished ahead of McCallum at Trials.
McCallum instead of Skinner in 2021 even though Skinner was technically on the highest scoring team. He was correct that it was tenths and the basis of those tenths was relying on a Skinner vault that was .6 higher in value and gave an advantage as without Carey her vault was always on the highest scoring team by default.

What is comes back to is his lack of proper communication or in a nutshell pulling stuff out of his arse.
There were multiple comments made to various media that he blundered or completely made up on the spot.
You can’t do that these days.

 

[Doug1233]

I don’t know if a “strictly by the numbers” selection process is ideal.

It’s mostly not ideal because the “numbers” are fucking trash.

And what numbers? Do you count classics? Do you weight Trials more than Nationals? Do you let the gymnasts drop a lowest score or do you take an average? What if a top gymnast (like Maroney and her concussion) doesn’t compete one night - do you average her remaining scores? That’s not fair to those who fell that same night.

Etc etc etc. There is a million ways to calculate what the “numbers” are. I don’t even know how Gymcastic calculated this supposed “highest scoring team”. Did they even use Nationals or Classics scores? If not, why not?

Coupled with the Cat 1 judge on the Selection Committee being better placed to score the routines than anything the USAG judges give - makes me question the point of even using USAG numbers at all.

I’d buy three Cat 1/2 judges for 4 hours, and ask them to score the routines and decide the team themselves. They’d probably do a better job.

 

[QuietColours]

Agreed that there are so many different ways to make the numbers work. I had a spreadsheet going this summer that had something like 12,000 team comparisons, pulling numbers in different ways (high, average, low, average if you drop high, average if you drop low, average if you drop high and low, etc). I know Gymcastic primarily looks at high scores when calculating the best scoring team; my personal preference is to drop the low to allow for a fluke and peaking and then take the average, on the grounds that past average performance is the best predictor of future performances. You can make arguments for a dozen different ways of doing it. The best formula would also take into account general score trends (are the athlete’s scores rising, falling, or holding steady as the season progresses?).

And of course, all of that only matters if the scores being given are accurate reflections of how the routines will be judged at the competition they are selecting for. GIGO

 

[Hatsumomo]

The domestic scoring definitely needs work. Not only to give a realistic idea of international judging outcomes, but going by numbers doesn’t become a farce. Can we really say these gymnasts’ scores comprise the highest-scoring team when the numbers aren’t accurate? Skinner didn’t break 15 in Tokyo on vault in either qualifications or finals, but Trials had her at 15.133/15.233. Nationals were slightly closer to reality, but her E scores were still 2-3 tenths higher than she got in Tokyo. I don’t remember what the margins were in the WWGym/Gymnaverse score tallies as to what team makeup has the highest scoring potential, but those tenths make a difference.

 

[Doug1233]

We were slightly lower.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Na4VJ_GfPgNNsYf8u_f4jPFscKysZbxKenKjBEWLrSo/edit

 

[MRR]

Going back to whether the HPC/NTC role is necessary, I marvel how we’re still discussing a position that hastily came about during a tumultuous, not exactly successful period for USAG in 1999/2000.

The NTC was designed with one person in mind, and Bela was a rare combo of retired coach and media star in an era when the federation could afford somebody like him (monetarily and otherwise). I question whether TPTB was convinced he could transform a 6th place team to one that could take down ROM/RUS/CHN, but if nothing else he was great for ratings, and the climate at the time meant the athletes would take the fall, not him.

It was convenient Martha took over the next four quads as a decorated former coach without a conflict of interest, but would the position still exist if she hadn’t taken it? The talent in those cycles was perfectly capable of materializing on its own, and the MAG 7 didn’t need an NTC en route to gold. Valeri was probably pegged for 2-3 Olympics, but once that fell through there weren’t many options. Whatever you think of his predecessors, Tom’s pedigree was comparatively bargain basement.

Still, for his obvious faults, Tom was not one to be a particularly loose cannon, rock the boat or throw away medals. The Simone twisties couldn’t have been foreseen, but a positive Covid case or injury was always possible, and he actually sent the best equipped roster to handle team and individual medal haul largely without her. So I agree with AR’s critique above, but his bowing out so quickly will also discourage what few remaining candidates there are. I don’t know why anyone would want the job at this point, and the National Team will be better off left to their own devices than working under someone unqualified.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

Skinner’s vaults aren’t even a particularly egregious example. Several of them, not the 15.233 obviously, were probably no more than a tenth or so off what she’d have got if she’d done them in Tokyo, bearing in mind her vault landings during the Games weren’t her best. No dafter than the 14.9s getting thrown out for the best DTYs at Trials. Because vault E scores tend to bunch and the deductions aren’t applied in the same way to Chengs in particular, it’s harder even for completely dipshit domestic scoring to deliver a truly ridiculous number. Much more scope for beam and floor in particular to be miles off.

You’re right though, the fundamental problem is that the US judges don’t score accurately. Not the team contenders, anyway. So the programme is on a bit of a collision course really. There’s an increasing move towards selecting using ‘the numbers’, whatever it’s decided that means. But that’s going to be an issue when the numbers are nonsense. Hopefully the US will get more opportunities to compete abroad, but that’s only part of the problem.

 

[Doug1233]

Yeah “the numbers” aren’t usually an issue on vault or even bars. It’s beam and floor where they get kooky.

Skinner’s Cheng was always likely to make it onto the “highest scoring team” because it was the perfect complement to the three great AAers they were already taking. That doesn’t mean Skinner was the best gymnast for the 4th spot. Although, to be fair to her, her AA prelims score beat the AA scores of BOTH Jordan and Grace in BOTH TQ and TF. Yes it was only because neither Grace nor Jordan had their best days. But Skinner did. We have no idea how she would have done if she had done AA in TF. There’s a whole different game of pressure when you know it counts for the team.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

Ultimately, none of Skinner’s scores in Tokyo came as much of a surprise to us, did they? It was always clear to any reasonably informed observer that she’d probably be in the very high 14s to max out about 15 on vault, and dinged by E panels on the other events. The question was always whether that’s what you want or not, rather than what was going to happen.

Grace and Jordan were more of a shock. I’m not someone who had particularly high expectations of Grace, but I really didn’t envisage that both her hit floor routines would score below Mykayla’s, for example.

 

[irichluck21]

But Skinner did. We have no idea how she would have done if she had done AA in TF. There’s a whole different game of pressure when you know it counts for the team.

Skinner also had the luxury in qualifications of going up 5th or 6th and after Simone.
Whereas Grace was the leadoff on all but VT.
Skinner had the additional luxury of competing as an individual and not having to worry about her score being included as part of the team. She could compete without having anything to lose.

 

[choclatechip45]

It was time to move on from Tom, but I think he should be ultimately be remembered as someone who let the gymnasts eat what they want and made camp a more positive atmosphere. No way does a documentary series like Golden gets made with anyone else as HPC or Skinner’s Youtube series is allowed. While those two things are minor they do let fans see more of what is going on which is a good thing.

I think both the Morgan and Shilese situations are unfortunate and Tom should have communicated things better and given everyone equal attention. Morgan’s placements were 3rd to bottom and last in the two events she competed. I don’t know how her knowing she had to be in the top 3 would have made a difference. Ultimately Slava should have known she shouldn’t finish last in an event.

 

[Doug1233]

I don’t know how her knowing she had to be in the top 3 would have made a difference.

This is exactly right. Telling her “you need to make top 3 to make Trials” wouldnt have helped anything. In fact, it could have easily made things worse. It’s not as if she came last because Tom hadn’t told her what she needed.

To be clear, I’m NOT saying that excuses what Tom said AFTER selection. That was stupid. He shouldn’t have said anything. He only made things worse. Classic Tom Forster “foot in mouth” syndrome.

The HPC doesn’t have to tell each individual gymnast what they need to achieve to make it to the next round. That’s what the selection criteria should spell out. And if such criteria include “discretion”, then so be it. Discretion is needed in certain circumstances. Otherwise, we might as well just write a computer program and have that pick the team (based on numbers that may or may not be reliable).

 

[QuietColours]

I disagree. If she had known she had to be top three, I bet it would have affected her training–she may have chosen to spend more time or only compete beam, for instance, and the increased training focus might have resulted in better consistency. Or she may have looked at that requirement and compared it to the amount of pain she was in and how far behind she was in her recovery and chosen to bow out on her terms.

She should have been informed of what was required of her. It should have been in the petition documents AND the NTC should have made sure she knew. Either where the information was, if it were properly documented, or communicated the expectation if it wasn’t.

 

[ArnoldRimmer]

There are two reasonable options available.

1. Have a particular selection criteria, be it top 3 on an event, 54 AA or whatever, and make sure the gymnast is aware of it.
2. Don’t have those specific criteria. That means at any point in the process, including as retrospective justification for a decision you’ve made.

That’s it. If they’re going to exist, they can’t be a secret.

 

[Doug1233]

I seriously doubt she would have gone from 23rd to 3rd if she had known what Tom was looking for.

To be frank - she already knew what she needed to do. She needed to hit clean and reliable beam and floor routines.

And that was only to make it to Trials. Tom wasn’t gonna take her if she was only doing bars and beam she would have still needed to train bars and vault.

 

[QuietColours]

I don’t think she had a chance at the team, unfortunately. And I do think she knew mostly knew that. If she could stay on the beam, though, she might have had a shot at 3rd.

But as far as I can tell, the injury petition requirements were exactly the same between for Trials as they were to Nationals–and her petition to Nationals had been accepted, despite a performance at Classics that obviously wasn’t Olympic-team ready. The “top 3 on an event” requirement was a concrete requirement not in the documents that the athlete wasn’t informed of.

If Hurd had known ahead of time what she actually had to do, she would have had choices. She would have been able to refocus her training, if she thought it would help. She could have chosen to bow out of the process, ending her career on her terms and with dignity. Or she could have gone to Nationals and known it was probably a last stand, and had a Nastia 2012 moment with crowd when she didn’t make it. By not informing her of the actual requirements, she was robbed of her agency. Even knowing when it happened that she had failed would have been a less devastating blow then having it come completely out of the blue to her, the way she’s expressed it did.

Tom had the option to make one of the worst moments of someone’s life easier by giving them very basic foreknowledge and some choices, and he couldn’t be bothered. That’s both cruel and inexcusable.