Comments on: Post Nationals Thoughts about Overscoring and Underscoring

By: Catherine

Catherine — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 00:52:43 +0000

sorry i don’t agree that shawn was underscored on beam at all. they should deduct her for every split leap that she does, her legs come part on her first sequence, she lands her full with the head next to her shins! yes, she does have very good landings on beam but that is not everything. she is and should be getting deducted for her flexibility and chest positions when landing

yes nastia got a big score on bars – there is no point in repeating it but i think that the judges here were only following the trend that happened at worlds. i.e judges would be lenient on routines that were very very difficult with high starts. For example, cheng fei would take a big step on her amanar and still only get 5 tenths off, while someone with a small step on a DTY would get 8 tenths off. If this is in fact a legit ‘thing’ then they should create some parity in ALL the events and make sure they are doing this for ALL routines that OD in start value (including nastias bars) i dont see how its OK and permissible to overscore shawn’s vault (just because they saw this trend at worlds) whereas ppl freakout when nastia gets overscored on UB even tho she is equally OD as shawn’s vault IMO

also i think both gymnasts have those ‘in-grown’ deductions. e.g shawn gets at least a tenth off every time she attempts a split or has a low landing while nastia gets the same for crossing her legs

Let’s consider their starts:

Nastia: 6.2 6.7 7.7 5.5 AA=26.1

Shawn: 6.6 6.9 6.2 6.5 AA=26.2

Note: this includes shawn getting credited for her whip to triple (DV AND CV) as well as her 3/2 straddle (C) which should get downgraded to a 1/1 straddle (B) and her rudi, which she normally does well, but did not complete at nationals day 2. (i forgot what day 1 looked like, someone should check) and getting credit for the amanar. (now some ppl on message boards have claimed that she was about 45 degrees short one night, but not 100% sure about this at all)

say shawn gets .3-.4 less in starts then that gives nastia a big advantage

oh i am forgetting shawn’s ring leap which they DID credit at worlds, but i personally think it should not have been (has anyone seen the pictures??)

regardless i think the favorites are yang yilin and jiang yilin. I know this is contrary to the myth of American Exceptionalism but nastia and shawn do NOT have the most difficulty in the world. If these two chinese girls hit their sets, they are actually a few tenths higher. And i think they are the serious favorites because theyre CHINESE

By: gymnastics08

gymnastics08 — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:53:45 +0000

There is no Nastia hate going on here. There is gymnastics discussion. I don’t think anyone blames Nastia for herself being over scored.

Pointing out the flaws in her gymnastics is not bashing. Just like pointing out Shawn’s leaps is not bashing.

By: audgator

audgator — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:08:05 +0000

THanks for the info David!!!!

I am going to make a quick post

By: david

david — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:03:22 +0000

audgator, could you delete the scores I posted previously?

I don’t want to post any score here because I like you and some other bloggers to post them along with your insights and thoughts.

By: PortrHaus

PortrHaus — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 20:45:11 +0000

Sorry for the threadjack, but this makes me look forward even more to Sales Associate Robot . Good post, smart and accessible for those of us trying to study up before Beijing.

By: amy

amy — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 18:22:54 +0000

Alot of Nastia hating going on
It is not her fault she is overscored I agree that her second day bar set was overscored! but I think she was underscored for her first day vault how is it she got the same score the next day without sticking the landing
I also think both of shawns vaults were overscored and her floor. But beam she was underscored.
I also don’t think Nastia is at all far behind Shawn by an means her A score is only .3 away from Shawns ahd her lines and flexabilty it much better than Shawns, but Shawn is a better tumbler so I think as far as those to go it all depends on the day they are having
I think its anybodies game!

By: gymnastics08

gymnastics08 — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:48:02 +0000

I don’t think Ivana has a chance at all of making this team. Last year at worlds she was killed on all events because of issue’s not related to form and you are right it makes no sense that her B scores aren’t better then Nastia’s.
Or at least as good. IMO she is a lot cleaner then Nastia.

I also want to thank you all for excepting my views on Nastia not being perfect. That is rarely allowed and I appreciate it.

By: Nik

Nik — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:03:37 +0000

That was really well-written. Another point: I think it also insults the gymnasts intelligence. Nastia KNEW they day two routine was worse than day one, Alicia KNEW she didn’t do well on beam day 2 (to the point where she almost laughed when the score came up). They’re not stupid but giving them scores is insulting when they know that it wasn’t the best they could do. They would want to know they can make it on their OWN MERIT not by being the favourites.

I think as competitors they would want to know what they really deserved and giving them the ridiculous scores at nationals makes them go into the Olympics not knowing what a realistic score would be for their new routine/upgraded routines. I think that Nastia would want to know just how close she will get to Shawn in the AA with real scores. Reaslitically, I dont think Nastia is THAT close to Shawn in the AA and I dont think she was better on day two. I think USAGA wants to show these are the top two, these are the locks (especially since they are the two most publicised) but they could have done it by scoring everyone fairly.

Also, to a lay audience its confusing. While I think a non-gymnastics audience would see the differences between Nastia and Jana I dont know how to explain to my non-gym friends why Nastia score SO much higher than Ivana, or why Shawn’s B-scores are higher than Ivana’s. Ivan’s form is beautiful- why doesn’t she get the B-scores to prove it even if her A-scores are a bit lower?

By: audgator

audgator — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:04:03 +0000

MMR- Thanks for pointing out my typo!! I hate posting wrong information!!! And “Shawn, Nast, and A-Sac are all HUGE assets to the team and they need to be well-informed about what specific deductions they are getting on each event.” That is SUCH a good point!

Dave- THanks for the compliment!!! And I think you are right, I think the major overscoring is to send China a message. Awesome point.

Gymnastics080- You made me think of a couple more things I should include in the post!!! Yeah, I think Shawn was underscored on beam. And I think you are right about Jana. Again, it makes me angry how the best gymnasts’ mistakes are overlooked more than the ones they don’t want on the team. It isn’t right.

You guys are all awesome. The comments on the page are always so great and I always look forward to reading them.

By: MRR

MRR — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:50:03 +0000

Audrey, Nastia’s day two bars routine was actually a 17.1, not a 17.3. USAG’s political tactics are most confusing. First off, the stars get special scoring treatment, but for what? Shawn, Nast, and A-Sac are all HUGE assets to the team and they need to be well-informed about what specific deductions they are getting on each event. I think that all three of these girls are intelligent enough to realize these scores were nonsence, but I am still worried about whether Shawn will go back and get her whip + triple twist all the way around. And then Jana gets low-balled, for what? Martha K. knows what she is doing, and she is unlikely to pick Jana for a team member spot because of her failing to contribute majorly on any event. So do the judges have to be harsh with her to make this clear to Martha? Great post by the way.