A report was done by a guest writer in International Gymnastics Magazine about the overscoring at Nationals.
by Lorraine Hoey
The Visa (U.S.) National Championships are finally over, and I have to admit, I'm a little bit confused. I thought USA Gymnastics officials wanted to send the strongest team to Beijing in August. I thought they wanted the team to seriously contend for several gold medals. So why are they putting the gymnasts at such a disadvantage during the selection process? Why do they insist upon egregiously overscoring the best U.S. athletes?
Overscoring Americans isn't new to the U.S. Championships, or the American Cup, or just about any competition held within the U.S. But judges, coaches, and USAG officials have got to start realizing that such overscoring only puts their gymnasts at a disadvantage in international competitions.
I understand that American audiences like to see high scores from American gymnasts. But by allowing media hype to override fair judging, gymnasts and audiences alike are misled. The judges are disrespecting the audience, the athletes and the sport when they engage in this kind of blatant favoritism.
Applying the correct deductions helps gymnasts and coaches identity and address weaknesses. On Saturday, Shawn Johnson received a 16.2 for her floor exercise performance. Her A Score was credited at 6.6, and she received a 9.6 for the B Score. While her B Score is certainly debatable, her A Score is what confuses me the most. How did she receive credit for her whip "triple" full? She didn't pull it fully around (on either day). I hope the Johnson camp recognizes this and continues to work on that pass, because as far as I'm concerned, her 6.6 A score is only theoretical at this point.
Johnson wasn't the only one who misled by the judges. Nastia Liukin received a 17.100 on bars Saturday, which breaks down to a 7.7 A Score and a 9.4 B Score. I'm sorry, but did you see her dismount? Her feet were flexed, her legs were wide apart and uneven, her landing was low and she took an uncontrolled lunge forward. That alone is more than six tenths in deductions, never mind the smaller deductions within the routine itself. Don't get me wrong — Liukin is absolutely wonderful on this event. But she's not perfect. By taking minimal deductions at most, the judges are falsely promoting her routine. Unless Liukin cleans up her dismount, she won't break a 17 in Beijing.
Disrespectful judging wasn't limited to the A and B Scores. Even the neutral deductions took a hit. On the floor exercise, Alicia Sacramone went out of bounds on her second pass. I saw it. The commentators saw it. The 12-year-old girl sitting next to me saw it. The judges conveniently didn't. Sacramone was clearly the audience favorite, but she went out of bounds. Deductions like this shouldn't be ignored. The gymnasts shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt just because they're performing on American soil.
So why are the judges overscoring the top gymnasts? Are they afraid that a relative unknown will surpass the "chosen ones" in the rankings just prior to Beijing? Or is this just a misguided attempt to intimidate the Chinese team? Because all the Chinese have to do is log on to YouTube to judge the routines for themselves.
With the Olympic Games only months away, scoring is critically important. The athletes have only a limited amount of time to fix the major issues within their routines, and they need to know the problems exist. I hope Johnson, Liukin, Sacramone and the rest of the American gymnasts do their best to succeed in Beijing. This is why the judging in Boston was so disappointing. These gymnasts deserve better: They deserve to be judged with respect.
Link: http://www.intlgymnast.com/Online-Features/opinion/opinion_guest/378.htmlMY answer to this post: NO ONE CARES
And if you do, why!? Why waste your energy, it's not going to change any time soon, something is NOT going to be done about it, and it DOES NOT effect the gymnast unless the gymnast has never competed outside of the US in which case she shouldn't be selected for the team anyways.
Okay I'm not trying to be rude or anything but this whole report is just stupid. I'm sorry, but I don't agree with it. Yes there is obvious overscoring with the gymnast at nationals, but who cares as long as the best gymnast on that event that day wins. I don't think that Nastia are and Shawn are nieve enough to believe that they can score these scores on the international scene. And also National meets in a lot of countries are over scored. For example look at Chinese Nationals this year, Romanian internationals, and many other meets such as Pacific Rim or American cup, and sometimes Canadian Nationals. Its not uncommon. I think its odd (for lack of better terms) to say that the "gymnast deserve better". And I also think its odd that the author doubts the Olympic selection committee is not trying to send there best team to Beijing. That's the stupidest comment I've ever heard. Why would they NOT want to send their best gymnast to Beijing. The gymnast who are trying to make the team for 08 have all competed many times on the international scene and probably gone to at least one world championships.They know what their routines can score and what they need to improve upon. I don't think these gymnast or their coaches are gullible. Please Lorraine dear, find something else to write about because I'm tired of hearing about this every nationals, its like beating a dead horse. WE UNDERSTAND.
sorry, again nothing personal towards the author or anyone.
And I understand many people disagree with me, but listen you are causing your self to much stress.
On a much happier note Nancy Damianova won Canadian Nationals securing one of the two spots (along with Elyse) for the Olympic team! aka Kristina didn't make it. I feel bad but she has time, she's young.
yayy :)
12 comments:
I think the author is aware that overscoring is quite common at many competitions. She did not write the article to bring attention to it for the first time, however it needs to be addressed with Beijing coming up. Just because overscoring has become commonplace does not mean that it should go unquestioned. I'm sure that the gymnasts know where they score around, but by inflating scores competition after competition, gymnasts just like any everyday person are likely to see the score and focus less on the mistakes. Alicia Sacramone for example certainly did not deserve that 15.9 on the beam night 2. She was worried when she got off, she knew it wasn't right, but then the score came up and she was smiling, she shouldn't have been. Brushing that off and other mistakes leads to carelessness. If the US wants the gymnastics team to win gold in Beijing, they should be scoring them more harshly and encouraging harder work, more perfection; not giving them high scores and making it seem as though there is barely anything to fix or improve. I think this article was well-written and makes a good point. Just because something is common and "happens every year" does not make it right and does not mean it should go uncriticized. Just my opinion.
I'm the author of the article, "The Gymnasts Deserve Better."
I feel that the goal of writing perspective pieces is to generate discussion. By blogging about my article, not only have you have added to that discussion, you've also proved that people do indeed care about the subject of my article.
I have a few comments about your blog.
You think that writing about over scoring at national competitions is "stupid" (poor choice of words, by the way. You come across as immature when you use "stupid" as a way to invalidate someone else's opinion), and that everyone either does or should agree with you. By taking this attitude, you've already disenfranchised a large percentage of your audience. As a member of the gymnastics community for the past 16 years, I can assure you that many people do care about the quality of scoring at national and international events alike. By telling people not to "stress" over inflated scoring, you're attempting to invalidate their opinions. How can you expect your audience to respect your opinions, when you so easily dismiss theirs?
A more constructive way to respond to an article with which you disagree is to simply counter the arguments they made.
As an example, I'm going to counter several of the arguments you've made.
You said:
"I don't think that Nastia are and Shawn are nieve enough to believe that they can score these scores on the international scene."
Perhaps they aren't. But inaccurate scoring at Nationals can give one a false sense of security. For example, in 2006, Alicia Sacramone scored well on the floor exercise at national meets throughout the year. But when she got to worlds, she got hit with a significant deduction that kept her out of event finals because of a missing connection in her routine - a missing connection the national judges had failed to deduct for.
You said:
"And also National meets in a lot of countries are over scored."
Absolutely. But how is that a counter argument? True, I didn't mention the Chinese nationals or the Romanian nationals... but I wasn't writing about their nationals. The focus of the article was the scoring on day two of the US nationals. A good piece of writing maintains a narrow focus.
You said:
"The gymnast who are trying to make the team for 08 have all competed many times on the international scene and probably gone to at least one world championships."
Less than half of gymnasts who will compete at Trials have competed at a world championships. The rest have limited international experience. Are you saying that those girls aren't trying to make the Olympic team? They may not have as great of a chance as those who have competed in a world championships, but they're still trying. You need to either rethink your phrasing or your argument.
I want you to notice how I did not dismiss your opinions, I did not refer to you as stupid, and I did not patronize you ("Lorraine, dear..."). A good writer doesn't resort to that. A good writer doesn't need to preface their piece by saying, "sorry nothing personal...." A good writer knows their opinions, states their opinions, and supports their opinions.
I love you, meta...
I agree with Lorriane's arguments. Overscoring in any sport not competting on a pro level does lead many people to think they're better then they actually are. I've seen it in Gymnastics and I've even seen it in the dog show world. Its horrible in the dog show world and it lends itself to dogs placing higher and winning than then they should be which leads people into thinking they should breed with the dog but the dog is probably not the best standards.
Over-scoring is a major issue and should be stressed out.
Dear Lorraine,
First off, this is my blog and I'll post MY honest ideas about things. I understand your upset that I attacked your article and your arguments seem well thought out, but I still don't agree with half of them. Wait no, I don't agree with any of them.
Second of all, it's kind of pathetic your criticizing the writings of a teenager and telling me what to do. That just makes you look really full of yourself like you know everything about everything. Listen I'm not saying your really like this, I know nothing about you, the way you came off in your reply was flat out rude. I'm 16 for God sake, I still use the word stupid. SORRY that I'm too "immature" for you. Maybe I'll try growing up...
Do not tell me how to write my own blog. Again these are my thoughts. I think its very arrogant of you, to go on someone else's blog to post criticism about how they write! I can see if you're arguing with what I'm saying, but your criticizing how I wrote the article.
You say you know all about how to keep a wide audience, but you clearly criticize me for my ideas, and anyone who agrees with me. aka your wide audience just got a whole lot smaller.
Now lets get to your well thought out arguments. First of all, telling people not to stress about something does not mean I'm invalidating their opinions. Odd argument. How exactly does that invalidate their argument? Please elaborate since you know so much about blogging and writing, I would love to here your opinion.
How is it giving them a false sense of security if they already know what they are going to score? Do you honestly think their coaches and them think they are going to the international meets and scoring that well. Again I don't think they are that nieve. And your example is not the best choice. According to Sacramone, what happened in 2006 was her leap series wasn't counted. She had competed at international meets that year previous. She knew what it would score in the international scene. So what your saying is that the whole world over scores (except for at the olympics and the world championships)?? And once again I go back to the argument that the gymnast and the coaches know what the world championships and olympics scoring is like. They know that connections are looked at closely and mistakes and deductions are severe. At the gym where I train, we had gymnast training to make world championships, constantly my coaches would say "they aren't going to count that" and "it isn't going to be that easy"
How is stating that plenty of top countries meets are over scored, NOT an argument?? What I'm saying is that basically all of the top level gymnast around the world get over scored at their home meets, judges play to the crowd and get into it. For example, Nastia is hugely over scored here at home, does that stop her from getting two silvers and a gold at the past 3 world championships? no because she's not stupid.
yes I used the word stupid, get over it.
Cheng Fei is hugely over scored at Chinese Nationals, and did that stop her from becoming a three-peat world champion on vault and a world champion on floor?
clearly not. Catalina Ponor, over scored at Romanian Nationals, even more than at home, did that hinder her performance at 2003 world championships or 2004 olympics?
CLEARLY NOT. I can go on and on, but I'll spare you.
And SORRY let me clarify, the gymnast who have a legitamate shot at making the Olympic team have had some kind of international experience, not just anyone whose trying to make the team. You obviously knew what I was trying to say, because you are just oh so smart, but you were trying to make another argument and criticize my writings again. I understand :)
I dismiss your opinions becuase this argument has been made over and over again. How can you generalize about how I dismiss every opinion I don't agree with. Very bold of you to say such a statement.
I stated my opinions (that you didn't agree with), I supported my opinions (you again didn't agree) and I stood by my opinions. I don't know what your talking about.
I'm not a writer, I'm a 16 year old girl who happens to know a lot about gymnastics and wants to blog her ideas (only to get shot down by people who have nothing better to do than to criticize her posts). I will basically say what I want to say on this blog, within reason. You obviously don't agree with my opinions, so if you are not willing to accept that I might just have different opinions than you, than I advise you to not read blogs.
Thats what blogs are for.
PERHAPS you shouldn't waste your time arguing with me about something that I just don't care about.
I respect peoples opinions and I was glad you posted an article on it because I know a lot of people agree with you, but I don't. You're beating a dead horse. IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE unless you overtake USAG, fire all of the judges all over the world and find someway to replace them.
good luck!
Thanks Lorraine for all your great writing tips! Don't you just feel so much better now, you just helped me oh so much!
Gymnasticsbabe -
I never said you couldn't post anything you wanted on your blog. I was giving you advice on how to post in more constructive ways. Of course you don't have to listen to me. But there are ways to critique something and express a dislike for it without resorting to words like "stupid." Just because you're 16 doesn't mean you have to use words like that. I think you're quite intelligent. I think you know better.
It doesn't need to get personal.
I'm not going to respond to the points you made, which are valid. It's clear that we have a different perspective, and I'm not going to attempt to change yours. I've said my piece, you've said yours and from what I can tell, we fundamentally disagree.
Gymnasticsbabie, we may never agree about this particular subject. That's fine. But you are a writer. You take time to write blogs on gymnastics, post responses, and you obviously take your writing seriously, otherwise my post would not have upset you so much. I admire that you're 16 and a writer. I think we need more of you out there.
Believe it or not, I'm not mad at you or upset by you. But I wanted to engage you in discussion. I've worked with teenagers and preteens on writing for years and I enjoy it, even when they get mad or dismissive or sarcastic with me.
If you are ever open to it, I would like to work with you on your writing. Not because I think you're bad - but because I think you have potential to be quite good. I wouldn't waste my time otherwise.
I wanted to point out until this year the Chinese National Championships was very HARSHLY scored... So no Cheng Fei did not become a 5times world Champion (3 vault, floor, team) by being held up at Chinese Nationals.
Also, I think that Meta had a great point about Alicia's floor exercise two years ago.
Plus, to a huge problem is the fact that only certain gymnasts were overscored. If everyone was overscored it would be one thing, but when it's only the "chosen ones" it's a problem and it's called "fixing" the competition.
I think Ivana Hong is a perfect example of someone who is sometimes extremely UNDERscored. That girl does some of the most beautiful gymnastics and seems to get hit hard for no apparent reason.
everyone thinks ivana has such great form but she gets bad scores because she has low difciculty values and has problems with some of her skills: her releases on bars get no height, she has lack of flexibilty on her switch ring on beam, sheep jump, switch half on floor
AND I AGREE 100% WITH LORRAINE
'overscoring was not as terrible before. last yea nastia got a 16.2 at nationals and got a 16.375 at worlds. she got a 16.0 on beam at nationals and a 16.025on BB at worlds...not too far off. i think the only gymnasts this year that were overscored tremendously were the three locks: shawn, alicia, and nastia. i mean how did alicia beat chellsie memmel for the bronze medal on BB?? she wobbled on every skill! how did shawn get credited for the triple. better yet, how did shawn get credited for the stradle with 1.5 twists??
i also thought it was unfair that the A-panel did not credit nastia's front flip to scale day 1. and i can see that they overscored her bar routine but judges (even at worlds)tend to be lenient with higher-difficulty routines. for example, shawn took a big step on her vault and got .5 off while chellsie stuck hers and got about .8 off. if they r doing this 'overscoring for difficulty' on vt, shudnt they be doing this for bars as well
I agree Ivana lacks difficulty and amplitude on many skills. I just feel she pays the price more for stuff like that, than say, shawn johnson who doesn't come close to hitting 180 on her switch leap on beam but still manages such high B scores.
Dear Lorraine,
I'm always sarcastic, that is just how I naturally am (honestly ask anyone who knows me). I am open to learning more from you, I think you can never learn enough. So I'm up for it. Thanks :)
Lorraine,
Did you ever teach 7th grade? I think I had you as a teacher...can you e-mail me at scooby0864@yahoo.com. Thanks
Post a Comment