A D.U. Primer on Gymnastics Scoring!

This is getting lost in other threads, and I feel it is my duty to clear some things up.

The easy part--gymnastics, like figure skating and diving--are subjective sports in that judges decide who wins. True, there are objective parts to it, like mandatory deductions for mistakes, but even with those, it often comes down to what the judges like. This is particularly true with women's gymnastics, where the floor exercise (set to music) as well as the balance beam are supposed to have a certain "flow" (whatever the hell that means) and grace to them.

Ok, but what most people don't realize about these sports is that the scoring is also RELATIVE. By this I mean that a person's score is judged in "relation to" the preceding scores. There are objective parts to scoring, such as mandatory deductions, and the highest score that a person can get (9.9, 9.8, etc.) depending on a previoulsly determined difficulty factor for the routine. But since 10.0's are rare these days, the judges have a lot of leniency to compare routines to the ones before, and rate that person higher or lower than the previous best.

Regardless of the merits of such scoring, that's the way it is, and everyone involved--coaches, athletes, judges, etc, know these are the rules.

Ok. Yang's high bar routine came well before Hamm's. We all know that the judges made a mistake in giving Yang a lower starting point--they started him at 9.9, instead of 10.0.

Now, the reason why the SK coaches needed to protest IMMEDIATELY after the routine, and before the next rotation, was because, as I've stated before, gymnastics scoring is relative! Paul Hamm ended up getting the higest high bar score because he was LAST (on the high bar, and also the final routine of the entire competition) and the judges gave him the highest score largely based on what was the previous highest score. Paul's routine was flawless. Yang's was not, and he received quite a few deductions, which they did are not arguing about. If Yang and his coaches had protested at the appropriate time, Paul Hamm would have received an even higher score because it is clear that the judges felt his was the best routine in "relation to" this changed score. Scores build upon scores.

Remember, Paul's high bar routine was the absolute last routine in the entire competition. The judges were going to award his score RELATIVE to the highest high bar routine thus far, and also against the highest overall score. There were two relatives working here, and if Paul needed a higher score to get the gold (because Yang's score had been changed at the correct time) you damn well know they would have given it to him because his routine was flawless and that it was technically difficult enough to receive a higher score.

We could argue for days about the merits of this, but that's the way it is. EVERYONE involved in gymnastics knows this is the case.

What the South Korea coaches and delegation are trying to do (and much of the clueless scum media in this country) are doiung, is trying to make it look as if the scoring exists in a vacuum. It does not! It's not simply a mathematical mistake that would have given Yang the gold. They needed to change the score at the appropriate time because doing so affects the entire scoring dynamics for those who follow. If Yang had gotten the correct score at the right time, he still would not have won because the judges deemed Paul Hamm's the best routine and his score would have been higher RELATIVE to that new higher score.

And Paul's score would not have been the only score to change. Other scores of other competitors would have changed also. But I doubt if it would have affected the 1-2-3 outcome. That's why there is a window of opportunity to protest a score--remember, this is not a vacuum!

Sorry this is so long, but I feel it my duty to make many of you understand why Paul Hamm legitimately won the gold medal, because the intriciacies of scoring are getting lost in all this, which is what I'm sure the SK coaches want, and the lazy media scum can't comprehend!

Gymnastics like some other "sports" is completely subjective as you described. All "wins" are by judgement. If it is as you say, then how can a someone win if the judges are skewing their opinions of the performance.

I beleive these sports are more art than sport. These artists are also incredibly gifted. But it is still a judgement as to who won.

:shrug:

...you're never going to get away with flaws in the system because of human judgement. But my main point is that to simply say that if Yang had started at the correct difficulty level, he would have won. It does not work that way because of the relative value of scoring.

He's getting irritating.

He keeps insisting he did the best when he didn't really. He's technically the winner, but didn't do the best. He should have requested a shared gold.

And Alexi Nemov was totally ripped off.

I won't even say anything about Paul Hamm's voice.

....he was the best. The judges thought so. I don't see how you can say anyone else was better that night if you had watched it.

And you have to understand that saying that Yang would have won is totally off-base because you can't say the flaw existed in a vacuum. Scores build upon scores, and that's why there's an advantage in going last.

Wait - the South Korean's victory was denied by a scoring-table clerical error.

Hamm could have been sporting about it. He chose not to be.

Furthermore, Alexi Nemov was ROBBED.

yeah, that's my problem with the situation also. i want america to win, but what i want more is fair play and good sportsmanship.

every time he is asked about this situation, people just want to hear him say that if scoring errors were made, then they need to be corrected, and he will adhere to the final decisions. but he doesn't. instead he turns it into a him against them kind of thing, as if people were trying to craftily steal the gold away from him, and the koreans' complaints have no merit.

You know, I don't even need him to say scoring errors need to be corrected.

I'd be content if he said "There are scoring errors, and we all feel that from time to time. I don't think anyone's medal should be taken once given, including my own. But I would like to be able to share the Gold in this instance. It is the best way to be fair to everyone."

Instead, as you say, he turns it into him against them and insists that he did the best - and he didn't. I hate to say it, but he represents the worse face of America rather than the better.

A few nights ago there was a discrepancy regarding the award of the gold to an American swimmer - the guy in 2nd place said he thought the American should get the gold because he deserved it, even though it meant him only getting the silver. And that's what happened.

Too bad we didn't see that sort of thing from Hamm.

the Americans protested right away, which is the proper way to do it. Within 20 minutes the issue was resolved, and he got the gold. Actually, they had disqualified him, so he wouldn't have even gotten the silver--he would have gotten nothing without the protest. I have no idea what story you're talking about--where the other swimmer gives away his gold. Did you just make this up?

As for Hamm, the media scum came up to him anbd asked him if he was going to give up his medal even before he knew what was going on with the SK protests. Give the kid a break.

No, Hamm doesn't represent the worst of America, it's the South Koreans who are liars and represent the worst of anti-Americanism.

I'm not scoring about the judging process.

I'm saying Hamm's attitude SUCKS.

If you understood that Paul Hamm was being asked about giving away his medal even before he knew what was going on, you would be more sympathetic.

Besides, the SK have aboslute no basis in fact for wanting a second medal, they're a bunch of crybaby losers and liars.

"If you understood that Paul Hamm was being asked about giving away his medal even before he knew what was going on, you would be more sympathetic."

No - I'd still expect a more sporting response, both then and afterwards.

The swimmer who would have gotten the gold when Aaron Peirsol was (initially) disqualified said he thought Peirsol should get the gold, even though it meant he wouldn't. That was remarkable.

But Hamm states "I truly believe in my heart that I am the Olympic all-around champion. I did my job, and I competed with pride and integrity."

Well good for his heart. He reminds me of GW Bush who similarly thinks that what he believes in his heart counts for more than the facts. And in doing so Hamm ignores the fact that if the scorekeepers had done their job properly he'd only have the Silver.

much you don't face facts.

NO, if you read carefully, if the judges had corrected the error, it doesn't mean Yang would have gotten the silver. Re-read the post--I make it very clear. Please educate yourself about gymnastics and take a course in reading COMPREHENSION.

Scott Hamm has a bad attitude that you keep right on defending.

I don't know why, and it doesn't really matter.

He can live with the consequences of his choices.

A classless punk is Hamm. Extremely poor sportsmanship.

What the hell did he do wrong? Why are all you people picking on him? It was the judges fault if something got screwed up.

He's been arrogant, and a bad winner with no grace, and he's lucky I'm not handing out the decisions, because he would be sharing his gold medal, which is the fair, honorable and sportsmanlike thing to do under the circumstances. The USOC seems to have caught his arrogance, like some sort of contagion, because its attitude has been as obnoxious as Hamm's. He's coming off like Gollum with that damn medal.

but apparently not allowed in the gymnastics competition, at least at these Games. I'm still P.O.d about that annoying little "tie-breaker" that took a well-earned gold medal away from my beloved Marian Dragulescu. (I'm a big fan of the Romanians can you tell?!) And OMG do you remember that four-way tie for third a couple days ago?? What are these judges smoking???

the rules would be bent. Ultimately the judges are at fault, but it seems in keeping with the ideals of sportsmanship to leave the rulings somewhat flexible when mistakes are made.

I do not like him Sam I am!!

That he is a "punk" I agree not with you,
But my heart still belongs to Marian Dragulescu!

:loveya:

Poetry in motion.

That means "Thank you" in Romanian! :-)

I just love saying his name. "Dragulescu, Dragulescu...." :)

agreed, it's a very cool name. I had it mixed up at first and kept saying "Draganiescu"...does anybody here speak Romanian by any chance? I know about two words, one of which is something like "draga" which means "love"...so I suppose "Dragulescu" means "Beloved"?! How fitting! :loveya:

Marian my dear, if I weren't a pacifist, I would shoot those judges.

:thumbsup:

Adding points to the middle of an event goes against everything sports stands for -- when you change the middle of a competition, you can't assume that everything would have happened the same way afterwards. That's why you have to protest things immediately in EVERY sport. If you think a runner left too early on a sacrifice fly, you MUST appeal before the next pitch. If you want to go to instant replay in football, you MUST appeal before the next snap. It's the way sports is.

Also, one clear-cut mistake cost the Korean 0.1, and the other one (too many stops) saved him a deduction of 0.2. Hamm won the live competition, and if you go to the videotape looking for technicalities in the Korean's routine, he still wins.

you're saying that had yang's score been correct in the first place, or immediately corrected after the error, that would have changed everyone else's score and performance? you can't prove that, nor can you just change one variable and assume that all events from there on would unfold exactly the same. it's like saying, had gore been president, he would've conducted the iraq war a lot better.

further, the korean team said they did protest right after yang's routine, and they were told to formally file a complaint the next day, which they did. then, they find out that they should have formally complained right after yang's performance.

and i don't think scoring is based on a curve.

lastly, it is a legitimate medal b/c all events had already unfolded without any complaints or problems formally stated. you can't retroactively reexamine the videotape and change scores and such. otherwise every sports event will get re-scored in perpetuity.

is based on a curve. Well, what you think, and what is reality, are two differnt things. It is a FACT that judges score relatively, and if the score had been changed at the proper time, then future scores would have been different. Anyone involved in gymnastics knows this for a fACT! AndI DID NOT SAY it would have changed anyone's performance, it woiuld have changed the scores--please read my post before you put words in my mouth.

Further, the South Koreans DID NOT protest right after the fact. They are lying when they said they did. Even Yang bemoaned this fact after the event, saying he only had himself to blame for it. Then, suprrise, surprise, next day the SK coaches say they did protest. The IFC did not accept this part fo their arggument, nor can the SK's produce ONE person who even saw a SK coach or official approach the judges table at that time.

Sorry to inconvenience you with facts.

just more unprovable conjecture.
1st, where is the rule book that says judges score relatively? any sports broadcaster ever mention this? any athlete ever say this? why do you have access to this special information but no one else does?
2nd, i asked "you're saying that..." and ended the sentence with a question mark. - clearly, i did not put words in your mouth.
3rd, i said "the koreans said they did protest..." - were you standing right there, next to them, throughout yang's performance, to able to definitively tell me that they're lying about that? it's your word against there's.
lastly, even IF what you say is true, that scoring is based on a curve, then the olympic officials would just tell the koreans that even if they retroactively give yang the .100 that he deserves for that scoring error, that would just automatically push up every better score that came after him, INCLUDING hamm's... so hamm would still have a higher score anyways. and knowing that "anyone involved in gymnastics" knows about curved scoring, the koreans, therefore, should already know that bumping yang's score would automatically bump up hamm's too, so he'd still get the gold despite their protest. so then, they actually shouldn't even bother protesting b/c it wouldn't change the overall 1-2-3 results.

Did you watch any of the gymnastics? Do you ever watch fiure skating. The issue of relative scoring is ALWAYS mentioned. Good Lord, it's real hard for your to admit you're wrong, isn't it. I guess you're bias against American athletes is just too damn strong to look at things rationally.

Don't bother posting to this. I will not respond yet again to such idoicy!

now you're putting words in my mouth.

i have remained civil throughout this discussion, while you have questioned my patriotism, intelligence and honor. it is I who will not waste any more time on this thread.

and as a matter of fact yesterday I emailed P. Hamm and told him I thought he won the medal fair and square and to please keep it. The Koreans had their chance, blew it, etc. And I think Hamm is acting with an incredible amount of dignity and cool with all this crap swirling around him.

"I feel it is my duty to clear some things up"

Why? I've noticed you've gotten quite involved with this. Is there a particular reason?

his entire family was killed by a roving band of itinerant gymnastics judges.

made me burst out laughing. Good thing everyone else has left for the day.

DU Judges unanimously give Dookus a 10!

I was going to stay out of this thread, but I'm glad I ventured in just for that post. :thumbsup:

on the vault. I swear to God that was a perfect 10. Did our brilliant Romanian do ANYTHING wrong on that vault? No! It should have been a 10, and it was a 9.9. I know I'm being picky, but I'm a big fan of Marian Dragulescu and I was pretty P.O.d at that score. Do the judges have ten-phobia or something???

Oh and by the way...lay off Paul Hamm. It wasn't his fault if the judges f***ed something up. Pick on the judges, don't pick on Paul.

:wtf:

I think this column by Phil Mushnick is well reasoned and makes some good points . . .

http://www.nypost.com/sports/18993.htm

August 27, 2004 -- U.S. gymnast Paul Hamm strikes us as a decent and devoted young man. And a terrific lab rat. We owe him our gratitude for serving as these Olympics' go-to, case-study guy, the fellow who reminds us that the human condition needs work. After winning gold for the all-around — a win followed by the revelation that a scoring error should have placed him second and the bronze medalist, South Korean Yang Tae-young, first — Hamm and his coaches said, in essence, "Tough. Too late. Too bad."

(snip)

But let's say that the beneficiary of that scoring mistake had been, oh, a Cuban. And the fellow who finished third but should've won the gold was an American. You think we'd have stood up for that Cuban the way we've stood up for Hamm? Would we have cheered that Cuban if he adopted a "Too bad, I won" position? Or would we have screamed bloody murder because a Cuban owned a tainted prize that was technically won by an American?

(snip)

What remains too bad is that Hamm and his coaches, by clinging to that gold medal, passed on a golden opportunity to establish Hamm as the greatest sportsman of these Games. Had he relinquished claim to that medal and instead accepted the silver — the medal he earned — he'd have ignited a different kind of debate: Is Paul Hamm, we'd have asked aloud — and for decades to come — the finest person to have ever represented the U.S. in any athletic endeavor?

- more . . .

http://www.nypost.com/sports/18993.htm

Their entire article is based on the premise that the start score can be changed at the whim of the judge during the routine.

They are flat out wrong. It cannot. The only way a judge can legally change the score is if the gymnast changes or doesn't do the routine that was pre-judged to be a certain start value.

Edited: Ugh. They're. Their.

Which part of the article are you talking about? Also, what is your background in this area? Are you a former gymnast?

He says this:

Here's what happened -- and I warn you in advance, it's not easy to follow. Yang did his parallel bars routine, and was scored a 9.712 --a pretty good score.

Whether or not it is a "good score" is irrelevant, if it isn't the right score.

But, more to the point:

The two judges in charge of assigning start values for parallel bars in the all-around, Spain's Benjamin Bango and Colombia's Oscar Buitrago Reyes, decided Yang's start value was 9.9. The head judge on the parallel bars, George Beckstead, didn't overrule them.

This is the area where he makes it appear as though this was a "decision" on the judges part, and not a mistake. It implies that the judges had discretion here. They did not. Which is made evident by:

It was these three judges who eventually were suspended by the International Gymnastics Federation when, after studying the videotape, it was determined the start value for Yang should have been 10.0, as it had been in the team competition finals.

Now, why would they suspend the judges for making a decision in an area where they had discretion? The author, for accuracy's sake, had to include this, but he sneaks it in after biased statements making it appear as though this was not really a mistake. After all, it's a good score. And the judges made a "decision" Why all the whining?

I know what start value means. You do not have to be a gymnast to know this. In fact, I do have some experience as my sister was an elite gymnast at the state level. I went to countless meets before she retired. I do remember how scoring goes.

knowing IN ADVANCE that the Korean gymnast got a slightly higher score than he was told. Maybe he would have been put forth an even better performance regardless of judging. All of the gymnasts should have the benefit of accurate information before they go out to perform.

That is another reason why it is unfair to ask him to give up a medal after the fact.

as his routine was much better than Paul Hamm's.