I’d love to see Oklahoma win the 2010 Team title.
They just beat #1 ranked Alabama.
Why are so few pundits predicting OK to win?
One of the biggest complaints about College Gymnastics is that only 4 teams have won, ever. If that continues, why not put UCLA, Alabama, Georgia and Utah in the Final Four (starting 2011) automatically. No need to run the regular season.
It would be great for the sport to see Oklahoma win. Go Sooners!
The second biggest complaint about College gymnastics is the high scoring. Yet I feel the alternative (F.I.G.) rules are far worse. An example from this past weekend’s ScAmerican Cup:
… Aly Raisman’s beam score was LUDICROUS. I’m surprised the commentators didn’t make a bigger deal about that routine. She did one of the most perfectly executed routines I have seen from ANYONE in a really long time, all as a virtual rookie on live television. Not even a hint of a wobble on a single skill, and a NAILED a brand new double Arabian dismount. I would say that was probably the most impressive “rookie” routine I have ever seen before, and the judges rewarded her with a whopping 9.15 E-Score.
What in the world were they watching? Then, Rebecca Bross, whom everyone knew was going to win anyway, nearly falls on her full turn, has a couple of jittery bobbles in between her skills and minor checks on the side somi and front tuck, and then takes a huge lunge forward on her dismount, and receives a 9.1 E-Score. It really is unbelievable. If Bross’s routine was a 9.1, then Raisman’s was a 9.85, not a 9.15. It’s a perfect example of the biggest problem in judging today…an absolute REFUSAL to reward perfect routines with high execution scores, particularly on the women’s side. Those judges should be fired. …
Andy likes Raisman’s beam (video) more than I do. But his criticism of F.I.G. judging is totally valid. They box Execution scores atrociously.
7 comments ↓
I think FIG rules and open-ended scoring would knock more schools out of contention than the present system, so that would be a terrible idea.
When I try to find a “solution” I toy around with this idea: 6 girls up, 5 scores count, BUT you MUST designate 2 all-arounders and count their scores no matter what (as in, you can’t drop the all-arounder’s score, even if it is lower). This way, schools like LSU and Missouri which have the top two AAs at the moment might get a little more value out of that. Utah and Georgia don’t have a top-10 AA, so their piecemeal-scores would be less effective. The U. of Michigan might become much more of a contender because it has two girls in the top 14. And if you look to the top 20, Arkansas, Illinois, and Florida all have 2 and smoke Georgia, which has nobody, and UCLA, which has one.
I haven’t “crunched” any numbers to see how a particular meet would turn out, if any differently, but I think it might help some of those schools who are left recruiting all-around girls from high school instead of super-heavy event specialists.
Oh, and Oklahoma doesn’t even have anyone on the list. So, that’d have an impact.
I think it’s funny that people use SCAM as a reference in complaints about the FIG system. Scam is not an FIG competition. Not to say that boxing doesn’t happen, but that’s just a poor example to use. I think the scoring was very fair at 2009 worlds for the most part. The scoring was harsh, but the best executed routines stood out among the rest, E score wise. For example, Bross owned her beam routine in the AA, and she scored a 9.1 execution for it, whereas everyone else was mid 8. Williams and Sloan scored 9.175 and 9.125 respectively for their best vaults while the rest of the field was around 8.6-8.8. That high E score on VT was enough to tip Sloan into the top spot in the end.
8.5 – 9.1 is “boxed”, I feel, Marcus.
Compare the difference in Execution scores between MAG and WAG.
The MAG judges are actually applying the rules. The WAG judges simply trying not to be caught “out of range”.
I beg to differ. For example, in the London high bar final, the E scores for places 1-7 were between 8.375 and 8.925. That’s a smaller separation than 8.5 and 9.1.
Ha. You got me, Marcus.
But that’s for Finals. A small sample. And horizontal bar judging is the worst apparatus for Men. (They still change meet to meet on angle deductions.)
I’m talking meet wide, lowest to highest E scores for the entire competition. All apparatus. The range, I foolishly predict, is 3 times wider than for WAG.
I agree with both Marcus and Coach Rick. As long as scoring is fair and consistent, it shouldn’t really matter the actual score as much as the score in relation to other competitors. If I get a 9.1 for a damn near perfect beam routine and someone else has major wobbles and balance checks and gets an 8.3 I think that’s fair within the meet (you can never ever compare scores meet to meet in gymnastics IMHO).
HOWEVER, to agree with Coach Rick, if I perform an Aly Raisman-esque beam routine, there is no way in hell that I would be happy with a 9.15. There is no justice in that. I wonder what it would take to get a high E score. I could see taking a tenth off here and there for incomplete splits and artistry, but 9 tenths? Absolutely insane. There needs to be a change in the way judging is done.
Leave a Comment