This lack of Sportsmanship needs to stop!

I have mentioned a few things that I do not like about gymnastics. One is the way that people criticise the weight of gymnasts and former gymnasts when it is absolutely none of their business. But I think in general, some fans are very hard on certain gymnasts and attack them for simply... doing gymnastics their way, or winning a competition they feel another gymnast should win. I am not going to name the blogs or message boards that I am thinking of. I do not want to encourage traffic to go to these sites.

Jordyn Wieber won the All Around. In my opinion, she deserved it, but to use a cliche, it could have gone either way.

Vika Komova was not performing all the difficulty she was capable of. Her Amanar was MIA and it is possible that she is still recovering from her ankle injury. I few months ago, some bloggers were hinting that she would not be at worlds, which was thankfully wrong. Considering this, I think silver is an excellent result.

Jordyn has crazy difficulty. Her own coach mentioned that she did not have an ideal competition. I think that she will only get better and better, as she has been doing ever since I became aware of her gymnastics. Maybe she does not have ballerina moves, but she has a certain attitude and pizzazz about her which I enjoy watching. I LOVE her floor routine. Her beam is also lovely, and you can say that bars is her weakest event but you cannot say that her routine lacks uniqueness. She was the only all arounder with an Amanar vault. Nuff said. Maybe she does not wave about like a mad thing as some of the others do, but if she has asthma, she might need to save her energy for... um... tumbles. It makes sense, since tumbles give her points and waving of arms, while pretty, gives little discernible advantage under the current code.

So I do not think that pouring scorn on her is classy at all. In the other finals, there has been less scorn, but still some controversy. It is the opposite of classy. Some people just need to get a life.

Also, this expression "code whoring." I have mentioned before that I hate it. If you put rules out there, people are bound to work out ways to make those rules help them win. What gymnast is going to do a pretty routine for the fans when they know that it gives them zero chance of a medal? If that is their goal, cirque or gymnastics tours make more sense than elite gymnastics.

I mean, in other sports, is working out a technique that makes you run a race faster (without drug taking/blood doping) cheating or I dunno, race-whoring? At the last rugby world cup, the winner, England, won most games by kicking goals rather than running across the line with a ball in their hands as rugby players generally do. Lots of rugby commentators hated that they could win games like this, but they directed their scorn at the rules. Not the players or the team. Gymnastics people need to take a leaf out of their book, seriously!

I really hope that Jordyn is patting herself on the back right now (she is definitely flexible enough to do that!). She has a lot more maturity and class than the haters. I hope people are wrapping support around her, and sheltering her from the ugliness. Unfortunately, I am sure she is smart enough to be aware of what is happening. It's not fair. You can argue all you can over unfairness of results, but attacking people who have nothing to do with the results is creating two wrongs. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Rant over.

Scams and Execution

I am sorry about the lack of posts. I started a new job about a month ago, and it has already taken over my life in that I have not been able to leave work before 10pm for two nights in a row. So much for the nine to five job I was offered.

Anyway.

The scam cup came and went. Like Spanny and Lauren Hopkins, I think the right decision was made. Many have said that Wieber did not earn her score in floor, but I agree with many others who say that Mustafina did not earn her scores in beam and vault.

However, if the code of points punished crap execution more, there would be no debate.

Consider this, exhibit A:

Look at the last pass. In that pass, in case you did not notice, Zmeskal did not control her power sufficiently and she stepped out. That was the competition done for her right there. In that moment, the commentators could confidently say she would not take home a medal. They were right.

Now, there is exhibit B:

It is hard to miss her fall, which is a much bigger mistake that Zmeskal's. The commentators thought the gold medal was gone for her. They were wrong. In the American cup, the ladies in first and second both had falls, as did most of the competitors.

Why? The bottom line is that Zmeskal and her competitors knew that they could not step out, let alone fall. Now, competitors chuck all the difficulty they can, and hope the will stay on.

Even if they don't, winning is still possible.

Once the new COP revision comes up, FIG is going to have to work out what it really wants. Does it want ever-increasing difficulty with people chucking skills to get a few tenths whilst knowing that crappy form is a-o-kay. Or do they want some cleaner gymnastics.

If we have to stay open ended, falls need to be docked at least two points. Small deductions need to be 0.3 or more. 0.1 is not enough. A huge bobble needs to be 1.0.

Right now, chucking fugly skills is worth it. This risks falls, injury and sore eyes for spectators. When a Patterson is well done, like Patterson herself did it, I want to watch. Ditto Tweedle on bars, ditto Rosu's Amanar. But I prefer a well done layout full over any of those skills done with ugly form.

My Reflections on last year: Part 2 - Judging Confusion

Many people have put forward various parts of the Worlds as the greatest judging stuff ups and while I agree with them I think I will highlight some crazy judging that took place in another championship. The vault of the Commonwealth games had some fairly funky judging which changed the results between the end of the competition and the podium ceremony.

Jennifer Khwela is the first South African to win a world cup. She has an amazing story. Being involved in the Commonwealth games must have been a thrill for her. Here are her vaults:

Khwela's landing positions were caught in the pictures below:

According to the judges in that particular meet, both vaults warranted a 0.10 neutral deduction.

The FIG rules, which are from the Gymnastics Coaching website, are shown below:

I would assume from the rules stated above that this meant the Khwela's vaults were deducted for being too close to the corridor.

Imogen Cairns did two rather awesome vaults which are in the video below.

Pictures of the landings are below. The first landing also originally had a 0.10 neutral deduction. The second did not. I do not see why this is the case. The first and second landings are roughly the same distance from the corridor. Cairns pulled her second vault in faster, but the rules say the initial contact is decisive, so if the first was penalised, the second should have been as well.

Gabby May did a great job of her vaults as well, but a number of steps on the second vault probably cost her a higher placing.

Here are the screen shots of May's landings, none of which got a neutral deduction. I think that if any of these vaults deserved a neutral deduction, the one on the right did. In fact, I am pretty sure her toe touches the line in the photo. To me, the judging in this meet was very inconsistent. I am not sure if the judges knew when to take neutral deductions.

Kristin Klarenbach did not get any neutral deductions, and I don't think she should have. Her vaults are in the video below. They are high, with beautiful form and good distance. I thoroughly enjoyed watching them. Unfortunately, her difficulty scores were not as high as the three ladies shown above.

Originally, the scores looked roughly like this:

Name	Rank	Country	Vault	D score	E score	Penalty	Total score	Overall score
CAIRNS Imogen	1	ENG	1	5.3	8.85	0.1	14.05	13.73
			2	4.8	8.6		13.4
MAY G.	2	CAN	1	5	8.78		13.78	13.71
			2	5.2	8.45		13.65
KLARENBACH K.	3	CAN	1	5	8.83		13.83	13.64
			2	4.7	8.75		13.45
KHWELA J.	4	RSA	1	5	8.7	0.1	13.6	13.64
			2	5	8.78	0.1	13.68

Obviously, Khwela and Klarenbach had the same score, but since Klarenbach had a better execution score, I guess the tie went her way.

But Khwela contested the scores, and they were changed. In the end, no-one in the top four had any neutral deductions, which implies that the judges made mistakes with Cairns as well as Khwela in the first instance. Yet Tracie Ang whose first landing was almost the same as Khwela, continued to have a neutral deduction of 0.1. I guess the figured that keeping her neutral deduction would not affect the final outcome, so they kept it.

Name	Rank	Country	Vault	D score	E score	Penalty	Total score	Overall score
CAIRNS Imogen	1	ENG	1	5.3	8.85		14.15	13.78
			2	4.8	8.6		13.4
KHWELA J.	2	RSA	1	5	8.7		13.7	13.74
			2	5	8.78		13.78
MAY G.	3	CAN	1	5	8.78		13.78	13.71
			2	5.2	8.45		13.65
KLARENBACH K.	4	CAN	1	5	8.83		13.83	13.64
			2	4.7	8.75		13.45

I cannot help feeling sorry for Klarenbach. She thought she had won a medal, and then suddenly, she was in the dreaded position of 4th place. Klarenbach did not participate in the floor later that day. Was it related to the vault drama? Possibly. I hope that Klarenbach does NCCA. I think any team would be lucky to have her.

Obviously, the confusion around these deductions was an issue at the Commonwealths, and at the Worlds as well. I am not sure that it is fair to blame the judges. They had different interpretations of the rule, but I can see why this confusion exists. I think that it is up to FIG to provide pictures and examples to make sure the judges make the right decisions first time without any of this confusion. Or even change the wording to "on the line" as Rick suggests. This is more fair on the gymnasts, and coaches and the fans.