Find results of this competition on the International Gymnast website.
Promise I will be back soon with some commentary!
Promise I will be back soon with some commentary!
In view of Nelli Kim's recent interview , Lupita and I thought it timely to revisit the performance of some of the WTC President's judges over past competitions ... this article from 27th August 2012 is reposted here, as a reminder. You will find a link to the FIG's newly published book of results at the Olympic Games here . This year, they have broken down the judge's execution scores so you can see exactly how each judge evaluated the gymnasts' performances. It makes for interesting reading - if only I had more time to analyse each judge's marking. A skim reading already highlights multiple inconsistencies in individual judges' marks and makes you wonder why they bother with the jury at all. I have taken the time to look at the reference judges' scores for the top four in the women's all around. The FIG explains here what their role is, and how they are selected. I even used my calculator, which is a risky thing in my hands. M
Sorry not related to this post! Can you comment on the IG online article about China's coach underestimating the Russian team? I am not an expert on WAG but I can see Nabieva's Amanar is really poorly executed but I thought Mustafina's was not that bad?
ReplyDeleteI'm not familiar with this article but wouldn't dream of contradicting a Chinese coach - he or she is bound to be more technically knowledgeable than me!
ReplyDeleteI love Nabieva for her adventurous style and crazy abandon. There are plenty of mediocre gymnasts out there who can execute acrobatic moves with reasonable form. Far fewer have the courage to risk the kind of turbo-powered originality that Nabieva attempts. She is pretty much unique in this respect at the present time, and continues the long-held tradition of tricksters such as Olga Korbut, Albina Shishova and, especially, the young Elena Shushunova. What she is attempting is incredibly hard psychologically, especially within the framework of a sporting Code that seems to prefer careful accuracy to a flamboyant spirit of adventure.
I'm sure the Russian coaches will be working hard with her to improve her execution, and I'm certain that if she competes at a major again, it will be with better execution. But I hope this isn't all people see when they watch Nabieva. How many of those wooden routines have you sat through that have perfectly adequate execution, but lack any flair or interest at all?
Anonymous-
ReplyDeleteI have written something about this on my blog if you would like to see it. There are a few pictures of the vaults/dismounts. I agree that he could have believed that Nabieva's would be devalued, but certainly not Mustafina's, which was landed perfectly forward and stuck in the one video that I have seen of it prior to worlds.
What really bugged me about what he said was that because of his "miscalculation," the chinese had to use their most difficult bars routines to make up for the loss, causing them to make mistakes. Huang missed a kip after her pak salto, which she must do to get credit for a transition. Jiang missed her pak salto as well. But unlike what he said, she did downgrade her routine. I suppose she could have left out her ricna or not connected it to the pak salto, but it sounds like Lu is trying to find excuses for his team not doing as well as the could have. They made a lot of mistakes that ultimately cost them gold.