WAG Interesting regarding the end of the 10

[ladybird]

^^^^^Yes, yes and yes!!!

 

[raenndrops]

Thank you for posting! That was a really interesting read. The new scoring system is so controversial. Some love it, some hate it. I will admit that execution is being sacrificed in a lot of cases for the sake of difficulty. And I wonder when we will hit the ceiling on difficulty, like how much harder skills can you add before you are risking significant life threatening injury to the athlete (in a way they are already facing that risk, but with the greater difficulty adds greater risk.) But then when you sit down and watch Simone Biles, it truly is a WOW, years ago no one could have predicted that it was possible to do some of the skills she seems to do with ease. And I like that being tiny and light isn't as favorable anymore, these gymnasts have to eat good and healthy (but calorie rich) diets in order to sustain the muscle and power required to do some of these new skills. Not that they still aren't small but not to the extreme you saw in years prior. As a matter of fact this new system favors a completely different type of gymnast, a very muscular, powerful one like Simone Biles.

I had heard that Simone was working on basically an Amanar with an extra 1/2 twist… or a triple twisting yurchenko. ORIGINALLY, she was supposed to be getting it Rio Ready (but I haven't heard any more about it in a while).

 

[raenndrops]

With that odd deduction code with the shapes, just makes it more complicated.

Those odd deduction codes are telling you that if they scored an 8.7 or better E score, then they did great (green triangle)… Yellow square means the E score was 8.1 - 8.6. Red means they got an 8.0 or below.

It is supposed to help you know that if say, Simone scored a 14.8 on vault, that would really be a way worse score than if Madison Kocian scored the same thing.

But that tells me that an 8.7 is definitely a perfectly acceptable score for JO and Xcel because if it is good enough for the Elites, it is good enough for us.

 

[Empowered]

I had heard that Simone was working on basically an Amanar with an extra 1/2 twist… or a triple twisting yurchenko. ORIGINALLY, she was supposed to be getting it Rio Ready (but I haven't heard any more about it in a while).

Her coach responded to a question about if she had ever tried this vault on Twitter. She said yes she's tried it, but no she will never compete it because "she likes her ACL"

As Aimee seems fond of saying, the risk has to be greater than the reward and it's not.

 

[1canadiangymmom]

I actually love the new system - being able to see how much of the score is because they did harder skills and how much is cause they had good technique is great. What's really hard to understand is the older scores where they get something between 9.0 and 9.9 and I have no idea how they came up w/ it. If people think that form is being sacrificed for difficultly, I'd rather them just make the execution deductions higher before they go back to the old system.

I actually like the new system so much, to be honest, I wouldn't hate it if they did a flavor of it in JO optionals. Like at least for L9 and L10. Maybe even L8.

And I definitely think College scoring needs revamped in some way - like every score is somewhere between 9.8 and 9.975 (unless the gymnast falls and then they get a 9.2). It's just crazy how high the scores are and it's hard to understand where they are coming up w/ the differences between the routines.

Funny, so in Canada we just changed last year from a scoring system that was a D score + E score, (plus bonuses) like the Olympics, to move to the JO scoring system out of 10. It was challenging to move from the harder skills = higher D score = usually better placement, to perfecting skills so the less deductions the better.

 

[Empowered]

As Aimee seems fond of saying, the risk has to be greater than the reward and it's not.

Or the reward greater than the risk, but you get the idea... Minor thought mixup there