NCAA Scores gone crazy?

[gym_dad32608]

Idk, how much folks have been watching college gymnastics this weekend, but I think there already have been 10 perfect 10's recorded and we still haven't had Oklahoma go! Michigan has the highest average ever at this point in the season, and there are more teams than ever above a 197 average at this point. I know gymnastics has been good, but I am not sure this generational good. At this rate will we see a 199 National Champion?! For sure its going to take a high 198 to win it.

I think increased exposure to college gymnastics and the bias of the remarkable freshman class has contributed to the score creep. What do you think? I still think the right programs are winning the meet regardless of the scores, or I haven't seen any squad lose a meet because of bad scoring. Idk if its good, bad or whatever.

 

[rlm's mom]

IMO watch the gymnastics, ignore the scores. They are useless. I sometimes wonder if the judges see the same routines as us

 

[gym_dad32608]

IMO watch the gymnastics, ignore the scores. They are useless. I sometimes wonder if the judges see the same routines as us

True, and I generally do. Like I said, I dont think anyone has lost a meet that should have won it because of scores. I am just bringing up discussion

 

[bookworm]

So I'll bite....yes I think the scores have gone crazier because they have BEEN crazy for a good long while. For the 10s this week, Michigan's Woijik was a true, no doubt about it, 10 on her vault...and Minnesota's Ona Loper had a similar one a few weeks ago...do a 1 1/2, 10.0 SV, beautiful in the air and land BAM, stuck, period (no bending or arm waving) ...like they just float into that spot and it is a thing of beauty. Guggino (MI) I thought was pretty legit.. some don't like that she bent a little at the knee in landing (but according to my 2 gymnasts it's "so she doesn't blow out her knees , mum" . Heiskell (MI) was more of a college stick for me but still lovely and I could see the 10.
Hayleigh Bryant's (LSU) vault was a 10 for me. She is a lovely gymnast with a torn plantar fascia that if they don't rest her, won't be of the tremendous value that she is in the post season....

Other 10s this week, Grace McCallum (Utah) on bars ....with those feet, I'd always be a 9.975 for her , Chiles (UCLA) seemed ok, Carey (Oregon) I'm ok with her getting the 10 this week (even with a minimally short handstand) because she has had other 10 worthy routines that got 9.95...and same with Suni (Auburn) with the short handstand...she's had 10 routines, but that wasn't one of them.

I do have to disagree that no squad has lost a meet because of crazy scoring ...I watched the Florida/Missouri meet and Missouri won that meet but Florida had a higher score. I think you will see scoring affect teams that aren't in the top echelon, or even Big 10 ...I'm actually pleasantly surprised to see Big 10 judges rewarding gymnasts with scores they deserve because for a long time , it never happened.

 

[gym_dad32608]

So I'll bite....yes I think the scores have gone crazier because they have BEEN crazy for a good long while. For the 10s this week, Michigan's Woijik was a true, no doubt about it, 10 on her vault...and Minnesota's Ona Loper had a similar one a few weeks ago...do a 1 1/2, 10.0 SV, beautiful in the air and land BAM, stuck, period (no bending or arm waving) ...like they just float into that spot and it is a thing of beauty. Guggino (MI) I thought was pretty legit.. some don't like that she bent a little at the knee in landing (but according to my 2 gymnasts it's "so she doesn't blow out her knees , mum" . Heiskell (MI) was more of a college stick for me but still lovely and I could see the 10.
Hayleigh Bryant's (LSU) vault was a 10 for me. She is a lovely gymnast with a torn plantar fascia that if they don't rest her, won't be of the tremendous value that she is in the post season....

Other 10s this week, Grace McCallum (Utah) on bars ....with those feet, I'd always be a 9.975 for her , Chiles (UCLA) seemed ok, Carey (Oregon) I'm ok with her getting the 10 this week (even with a minimally short handstand) because she has had other 10 worthy routines that got 9.95...and same with Suni (Auburn) with the short handstand...she's had 10 routines, but that wasn't one of them.

I do have to disagree that no squad has lost a meet because of crazy scoring ...I watched the Florida/Missouri meet and Missouri won that meet but Florida had a higher score. I think you will see scoring affect teams that aren't in the top echelon, or even Big 10 ...I'm actually pleasantly surprised to see Big 10 judges rewarding gymnasts with scores they deserve because for a long time , it never happened.

Ah the beauty of subjective scoring. I disagree on Guggino, I'm sorry, she squats the landing too much. If she is worried about her knees then she should be doing a different vault.

And I definitely disagree about Florida/Mizzou, there is no way Mizzou was the better squad. It was a close meet, but on balance evenly scored. But I understand, a lot of fans seem to hate Florida for some reason. And that bias feeds into perception when scores are close.

 

[gymgal]

I'll go back to my previous comment - a 10.0 score does not mean perfection. It means that the judge did not see anything to deduct according to the code. Yes, there may be bent legs or a foot shift, or handstands not quite vertical but the code allows for these very minor breaks from perfection without needing to deduct. Judging is not meant to be compare routines against each other for which is more deserving of a higher score - even though that does indeed happen all across the gym world

 

[bookworm]

Ragan Smith gets a 10 because we can't leave out any former Olympians/alternates....she had a slight balance check on her series so she wasn't a 10 for me ....9.975 but not a 10

 

[bookworm]

I'll go back to my previous comment - a 10.0 score does not mean perfection. It means that the judge did not see anything to deduct according to the code. Yes, there may be bent legs or a foot shift, or handstands not quite vertical but the code allows for these very minor breaks from perfection without needing to deduct. Judging is not meant to be compare routines against each other for which is more deserving of a higher score - even though that does indeed happen all across the gym world

I'm thinking if I, as a regular old gym mom, can see it, a trained judge can see it or should see it. Balance checks, missed handstands, front foot shifts etc are deductions because you hear the commentators note that they'll "get a slight deduction for that" . The way the scoring is going a 10 won't mean that it was perfection , it'll just mean that it was better than the 9.95 or 9.975s that were awarded at that meet. The whole NCAA judging needs an overhaul but that's a topic for another thread...

 

[bookworm]

Ah the beauty of subjective scoring. I disagree on Guggino, I'm sorry, she squats the landing too much. If she is worried about her knees then she should be doing a different vault.

And I definitely disagree about Florida/Mizzou, there is no way Mizzou was the better squad. It was a close meet, but on balance evenly scored. But I understand, a lot of fans seem to hate Florida for some reason. And that bias feeds into perception when scores are close.

Well we can agree to disagree on these ...and for the record, I don't hate Florida or "have a bias that feeds into perception when scores are close" so there's that.

 

[cmg]

I think the scores have gone crazy, but with all the elite athletes "coming down to the college level" I am not surprised. I guess my concerns are that with all the 10's does college move to the same scoring method as the Olympics and other elite meets? The men's teams have execution and difficulty scoring, why not the women? And why does women's JO especially at the higher levels not score based on difficulty and execution like the boy's JO? I am not opposed to this by the way it would just be a big change. I feel like JO women's gymnastics and women's college gymnastics are the only places where the scoring has remained 1-10.

I have talked about this before, from my perspective, although it is exciting to see the elites at college meets, to me they have been professionals in their field before they started college gymnastics and I do question their amateur status. I don't even know if amateur status means anything anymore in any college sports. I mean Suni Lee was on dancing with the stars before college, I am sure she got paid for that although it was not for gymnastics. Women's college gymnastics is now about how many elites you can get on your team which somehow, I guess I don't necessarily like. I guess I am saying I think women's college gymnastics should also move to the two-level scoring system, difficulty and execution.

I am old school when it comes to college sports. I think it was meant to be for amateurs not professionals, although I guess that is changing now and I have not changed with the times. The hard thing for female gymnasts is that they become professionals/elite before college not after as in most other sports. I suppose swimming has a few young elite swimmers. Even men's gymnastics most of the Olympic level men went to college and then went to the Olympics or were at least in college and then got onto the Olympic team. Rarely do you see a 16-year male Olympic gymnast. I realize this is because men's gymnastics is more of a strength sport and boys take longer to develop the strength necessary to get to the elite level.

I am happy to see more gymnastics teams being developed, mostly at Division 3, which would help get more real amateurs on teams but there are not a lot of options out there. I wish USA Gymnastics would help develop even more teams. After all its the average gymnast that helps pay for the organization, the least they could do is help provide teams that solid level 10's could compete.

 

[JBS]

Man... I was at a meet the whole weekend... I feel like I missed a bunch.

 

[gymgal]

I'm thinking if I, as a regular old gym mom, can see it, a trained judge can see it or should see it. Balance checks, missed handstands, front foot shifts etc are deductions because you hear the commentators note that they'll "get a slight deduction for that" . The way the scoring is going a 10 won't mean that it was perfection , it'll just mean that it was better than the 9.95 or 9.975s that were awarded at that meet. The whole NCAA judging needs an overhaul but that's a topic for another thread...

The commentators can say whatever they want. The code allows for slight foot shifts and up to 10 degrees either direction on the bar handstands without deduction.