UB advantage in the AA

[glaundry]

Originally Posted by NastiaFan101

then she'd probably switch the double front with a triple twist and lose less because a double salto was not required then

You're right, she could've still won. I don't know if she would've because the thing with the 10 system is it evens out the playing field. Nastia wouldn't have had a head start.

I don't think she'd do the triple twist. For the same reason she didn't do it in Beijing.

[NastiaFan101]

What do you mean by that? Nastia always had trouble with the triple twist at the end of her FX routine, and the double front is only there because it has to be. She probably wouldn't have even learned it had it not been a requirement.

If you put the triple twist in the second pass, she'd have an easier time doing it than at the end

as for the headstart, Nastia stuck more landings than Shawn, that's where she'd probably come out on top because her form is better than Shawns on VT and BB and she wouldn't have lost too much on UB and FX because deductions were smaller then.

[lepetitpoulet]

I think what glaundry meant was that Nastia wouldn't do the triple twist so as to not land backwards, given she had hurt her foot pretty bad previously and ever since she came back from that injury has changed the great majority of her landings to forwards ones.

[turbojon811]

Originally Posted by lepetitpoulet

One factor I haven't seen raised by anyone is that, although UB routines for instance can rake in a lot in CV, there are also much more elements on which to get deducted on!!!

3 out of 4 events (VT + FX + BB) are "feet" or "leg" events. Then you have UB which is the only event where you spend the entire time on your hands. (that's why that "time restriction on UB" thread was ridiculous to me... You cannot rest for a split second when you are on your hands). I know from experience that it takes a completely different set of conditionning discipline targetting the upper body, especially shoulders, to be good at UB. So I think it's fair that UB should score little higher, to reward the sepcial effort and extra time spent to achieve this added conditionning and preparation.

Otherwise the risk here is a lot gymnasts like Cheng, Alicia etc... who are very good at "leg" stuff would go on to dominate the AA albeit negleting bars. Standards in UB would quickly fall, and we'd soon see very crappy bar sets, like a lot of romanian UB stuff from the 90's just to give an example. UB is very important to GYMNASTICS because it's what sets the real gymnasts appart from pure tumblers. Tumbling is another sport. Gymnastics is not just tumbling, it's also (or should be) dance and artistry, PLUS mastery of "hand" apparatus. I would like to note that in MAG, 4 out of the 6 apparatus are hand apparatus. that's 2/3!! as opposed to 1/4 in WAG...

Agree with so many things here - even with a 7.4 He Kexin may be looking at 0.6 off for the dismount's big step and posture fault, 0.1 for the overuse deduction, plus any missed handstands, lack of control in piro's, and lack of amplitude on the straddled Jaeger. Point being it wouldn't surprise me to see a really great Amanar score higher than HKX, JYY, Nastia, or Tweddle on their best days.

If the tumblers don't want to learn bars, then they should at least focus on artistry and flexibility. For instance Shawn probably could have won in Beijing with better leaps/dance on BB and FX.

Originally Posted by glaundry

You're right, she could've still won. I don't know if she would've because the thing with the 10 system is it evens out the playing field. Nastia wouldn't have had a head start.

Execution is what allowed her to win so decisively in Beijing. I believe she and her Russian sistaz had the highest execution scores of the Olympics.

[alexandrite105]

i disagree that bars being your best event gives you any sort of extra particular advantage. it gives you an advantage on bars insofar as that is your best event, just as floor would give you an advantage if that was your best event simply because that is your best event. look at how shawn, doing one extra half twist on vault, gets .7 higher in start value from a double twisting yurchenko- for just one more half twist! it makes sense, as the vault is very difficult, just as it makes sense to reward anyone with special ability on a particular apparatus.

[rock]

Originally Posted by alexandrite105

i disagree that bars being your best event gives you any sort of extra particular advantage. it gives you an advantage on bars insofar as that is your best event, just as floor would give you an advantage if that was your best event simply because that is your best event. look at how shawn, doing one extra half twist on vault, gets .7 higher in start value from a double twisting yurchenko- for just one more half twist! it makes sense, as the vault is very difficult, just as it makes sense to reward anyone with special ability on a particular apparatus.

You disagree, but the statistics clearly state otherwise?? If the bars scores are much higher than the other apparatus, that you clearly have an advantage in aa if bars are your best piece. It is not rocket science.

Shawn is very very good on floor, but she cant score nearly 17 like nastia could on bars, she could only score around 15. That is not fair.



It is also the scew of scores on bars compared to floor/beam that is a problem. Shawn qualified 10th on bars, people fail to realise that she is actually very good, but scores nearly 2 whole marks less than the leaders.

[lepetitpoulet]

Originally Posted by rock

You disagree, but the statistics clearly state otherwise?? If the bars scores are much higher than the other apparatus, that you clearly have an advantage in aa if bars are your best piece. It is not rocket science.

Shawn is very very good on floor, but she cant score nearly 17 like nastia could on bars, she could only score around 15. That is not fair.

It is also the scew of scores on bars compared to floor/beam that is a problem. Shawn qualified 10th on bars, people fail to realise that she is actually very good, but scores nearly 2 whole marks less than the leaders.

That is like SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 2 years ago. The code has changed. Go read the code. Actually just go read. Go and learn stuff. You need to exercise your brain too. WHAT~everrrrrrrrrrrrrrr you need a make-overrrrrr

[rock]

Originally Posted by lepetitpoulet

That is like SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 2 years ago. The code has changed. Go read the code. Actually just go read. Go and learn stuff. You need to exercise your brain too. WHAT~everrrrrrrrrrrrrrr you need a make-overrrrrr

This thread is about 2008 - go read the title

[lepetitpoulet]

Originally Posted by rock

This thread is about 2008 - go read the title

NECROPHILE

do you go hang out at cemeteries? pervert. Leave this thread alone. R.I.P.

[glaundry]

Originally Posted by lepetitpoulet

NECROPHILE

do you go hang out at cemeteries? pervert. Leave this thread alone. R.I.P.

I don't think there was any reason to be rude. I don't think reviving old threads is anywhere near the huge crime that some people make it out to be.