2017 Women's Gymnastics National Championship

[oujour76]

Apr 17, 2017 19:35:50 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

Apr 17, 2017 17:55:47 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Kind of funny...UF finished ahead of LSU in vault, bars and floor and you clearly had no issues with the judging. But, when LSU finishes ahead of UF on the beam, you do have issues.

Never in the history of the Super 6 has any team scored that high on the beam let alone two. Take off your sooner glasses so you can see what was going on with the beam judges. Why the beam? It could be so simple that the beam judges knew what LSU had to do in their finish on the beam to finish second to match up with their season body of work and NCAA tournament seed. Surely, you understand this crapola happens in the sport of gymnastics. I've seen UF on both ends of this situation and likely will again in the near future, but that doesn't mean I have to like the judging tactics on either end. 

I understand gymnastics judging can sometimes be frustrating. But, you're talking some crazy stuff...rigging the beam scores just to advantage LSU? Wow.

[daleko]

Apr 17, 2017 20:42:11 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 17, 2017 19:35:50 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

Never in the history of the Super 6 has any team scored that high on the beam let alone two. Take off your sooner glasses so you can see what was going on with the beam judges. Why the beam? It could be so simple that the beam judges knew what LSU had to do in their finish on the beam to finish second to match up with their season body of work and NCAA tournament seed. Surely, you understand this crapola happens in the sport of gymnastics. I've seen UF on both ends of this situation and likely will again in the near future, but that doesn't mean I have to like the judging tactics on either end. 

I understand gymnastics judging can sometimes be frustrating. But, you're talking some crazy stuff...rigging the beam scores just to advantage LSU? Wow.

And for 2nd place. LOL.

[Deleted]

Apr 17, 2017 20:42:11 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 17, 2017 19:35:50 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

Never in the history of the Super 6 has any team scored that high on the beam let alone two. Take off your sooner glasses so you can see what was going on with the beam judges. Why the beam? It could be so simple that the beam judges knew what LSU had to do in their finish on the beam to finish second to match up with their season body of work and NCAA tournament seed. Surely, you understand this crapola happens in the sport of gymnastics. I've seen UF on both ends of this situation and likely will again in the near future, but that doesn't mean I have to like the judging tactics on either end. 

I understand gymnastics judging can sometimes be frustrating. But, you're talking some crazy stuff...rigging the beam scores just to advantage LSU? Wow.

OU's scores weren't nearly so good on the beam in the semifinal and OU's best gymnast fell off the beam. I'm saying the beam scores in the Super 6 were rigged in favor of both OU and LSU. It just happens that LSU's rigging in the final rotation of the night cost UF the second place trophy. Even if UF had received the same beam judging as OU and LSU, the Gators were .3 or so off of what the Sooners brought to the table as a team. Keep in mind, UF's 197.70 would have won the 2016 national championship.  

Again, it isn't a backhanded congrats to OU as I realize the Sooners are the best team in the nation in 2017.

UF is loaded headed into 2018 so the Gators will likely be the OU 17 of the 2018 season. I won't pass on questionable judging when I see it whether UF is on top or not. I've always tried to be fair when it comes to gymnastic judging process deficiencies whether it involves home cooking or the NCAA tourney.

[oujour76]

Apr 17, 2017 22:40:43 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

OU's scores weren't nearly so good on the beam in the semifinal and OU's best gymnast fell off the beam. I'm saying the beam scores in the Super 6 were rigged in favor of both OU and LSU. It just happens that LSU's rigging in the final rotation of the night cost UF the second place trophy. Even if UF had received the same beam judging as OU and LSU, the Gators were .3 or so off of what the Sooners brought to the table as a team. Keep in mind, UF's 197.70 would have won the 2016 national championship.  

Again, it isn't a backhanded congrats to OU as I realize the Sooners are the best team in the nation in 2017.

UF is loaded headed into 2018 so the Gators will likely be the OU 17 of the 2018 season. I won't pass on questionable judging when I see it whether UF is on top or not. I've always tried to be fair when it comes to gymnastic judging process deficiencies whether it involves home cooking or the NCAA tourney.

Why was only the balance beam scoring rigged? Why not the vault, floor and bars? I mean, if the idea is to manipulate the results, seems to me it would be done across the board, not just one event.

[Deleted]

Apr 18, 2017 0:05:43 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 17, 2017 22:40:43 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

OU's scores weren't nearly so good on the beam in the semifinal and OU's best gymnast fell off the beam. I'm saying the beam scores in the Super 6 were rigged in favor of both OU and LSU. It just happens that LSU's rigging in the final rotation of the night cost UF the second place trophy. Even if UF had received the same beam judging as OU and LSU, the Gators were .3 or so off of what the Sooners brought to the table as a team. Keep in mind, UF's 197.70 would have won the 2016 national championship.  

Again, it isn't a backhanded congrats to OU as I realize the Sooners are the best team in the nation in 2017.

UF is loaded headed into 2018 so the Gators will likely be the OU 17 of the 2018 season. I won't pass on questionable judging when I see it whether UF is on top or not. I've always tried to be fair when it comes to gymnastic judging process deficiencies whether it involves home cooking or the NCAA tourney.

Why was only the balance beam scoring rigged? Why not the vault, floor and bars? I mean, if the idea is to manipulate the results, seems to me it would be done across the board, not just one event.

The judges could do that, but the winning team would score 199+ out of 200. The simple answer is it isn't necessary to get the desired result.

[oujour76]

Apr 18, 2017 9:30:16 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

Apr 18, 2017 0:05:43 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Why was only the balance beam scoring rigged? Why not the vault, floor and bars? I mean, if the idea is to manipulate the results, seems to me it would be done across the board, not just one event.

The judges could do that, but the winning team would score 199+ out of 200. The simple answer is it isn't necessary to get the desired result.

If one wants to fix results, the way to do it is by keeping scores down, not pumping them up.

[Deleted]

Apr 18, 2017 10:10:31 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 18, 2017 9:30:16 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

The judges could do that, but the winning team would score 199+ out of 200. The simple answer is it isn't necessary to get the desired result.

If one wants to fix results, the way to do it is by keeping scores down, not pumping them up.

That's true too. As I said, I watched two UF beam routines that were better than LSU's Ashley Gnat's routine which received 9.95 yet the UF scores were less at 9.875 (Alicia Boren) and 9.9125 (Alex McMurtry). Giving Ashley Gnat's routine the benefit of the doubt that she successfully covered the slight bobbles with recoveries so well the judges chose not to penalize her. The hop back on the dismount is a standard .1 deduction, didn't stick her dismount. With a correct score of 9.90, UF would have brought home the second place trophy.

In the beam judging, it was a combination of scores given out that were too high for OU and LSU and scores for other teams, in this case UF which I'm concerned with, that were kept down based on the standards of the beam judging in the Super 6. Keeping OU out of the equation as they had no impact on UF's standing, there is no way LSU was that much better than UF on the balance beam and no way they truly scored the highest balance beam team score in the history of the Super 6.   

To UF's credit, they have behaved and commented on everything in exactly the way they should. However, as a fan who has watched a lot of college gymnastics over the years, I am not held to UF's standards so I get to speak my mind about what I witnessed.  

[oujour76]

Apr 18, 2017 10:50:33 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

Apr 18, 2017 10:10:31 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

If one wants to fix results, the way to do it is by keeping scores down, not pumping them up.

That's true too. As I said, I watched two UF beam routines that were better than LSU's Ashley Gnat's routine which received 9.95 yet the UF scores were less at 9.875 (Alicia Boren) and 9.9125 (Alex McMurtry). Giving Ashley Gnat's routine the benefit of the doubt that she successfully covered the slight bobbles with recoveries so well the judges chose not to penalize her. The hop back on the dismount is a standard .1 deduction, didn't stick her dismount. With a correct score of 9.90, UF would have brought home the second place trophy.

In the beam judging, it was a combination of scores given out that were too high for OU and LSU and scores for other teams, in this case UF which I'm concerned with, that were kept down based on the standards of the beam judging in the Super 6. Keeping OU out of the equation as they had no impact on UF's standing, there is no way LSU was that much better than UF on the balance beam and no way they truly scored the highest balance beam team score in the history of the Super 6.   

To UF's credit, they have behaved and commented on everything in exactly the way they should. However, as a fan who has watched a lot of college gymnastics over the years, I am not held to UF's standards so I get to speak my mind about what I witnessed.  

I think what you witnessed, but won't admit, is that beam was UF's weakest event. OU and LSU had 6 strong gymnasts on the beam. UF only had 5...there was one that consistently got 9.2 type scores. She wasn't as good as either her teammates or the rest of the field. End result? Because you only had 5, the Gators had a much smaller margin of error.

[Deleted]

Apr 18, 2017 13:04:21 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Apr 18, 2017 10:50:33 GMT -5 ETGator1 said:

That's true too. As I said, I watched two UF beam routines that were better than LSU's Ashley Gnat's routine which received 9.95 yet the UF scores were less at 9.875 (Alicia Boren) and 9.9125 (Alex McMurtry). Giving Ashley Gnat's routine the benefit of the doubt that she successfully covered the slight bobbles with recoveries so well the judges chose not to penalize her. The hop back on the dismount is a standard .1 deduction, didn't stick her dismount. With a correct score of 9.90, UF would have brought home the second place trophy.

In the beam judging, it was a combination of scores given out that were too high for OU and LSU and scores for other teams, in this case UF which I'm concerned with, that were kept down based on the standards of the beam judging in the Super 6. Keeping OU out of the equation as they had no impact on UF's standing, there is no way LSU was that much better than UF on the balance beam and no way they truly scored the highest balance beam team score in the history of the Super 6.   

To UF's credit, they have behaved and commented on everything in exactly the way they should. However, as a fan who has watched a lot of college gymnastics over the years, I am not held to UF's standards so I get to speak my mind about what I witnessed.  

I think what you witnessed, but won't admit, is that beam was UF's weakest event. OU and LSU had 6 strong gymnasts on the beam. UF only had 5...there was one that consistently got 9.2 type scores. She wasn't as good as either her teammates or the rest of the field. End result? Because you only had 5, the Gators had a much smaller margin of error.

UF could have had 1 gymnast score an all-time low on the beam and it wouldn't have mattered. The top 5 scores is all that counts.

Chayse Capps fell off the beam, a .5 deduction, in the semifinal, but it didn't matter as the other 5 performers covered her up.

UF had a fall off the uneven bars, Maegan Chant, in the Super 6, but the others covered her up and that turned out to be UF's best scoring event.

Bottom line, Alex McMurtry and Alicia Boren performed as well as anyone on LSU and OU, but they didn't get LSU or OU scoring. Such is life in an imperfect sport. Using false logic about the value of a 6th score that doesn't count for any team doesn't cover up what happened.

You seem to be having trouble with thinking that what I witnessed is disrespectful of OU's national championship. That is not true either as I have continually stated. When UF won their 3 straight national championships, you can be sure UF received the top billing benefit in the scoring.

What I'm having trouble with is LSU being treated like they should have had some beneficial scoring even though they were out of it against OU and were in effect competing with UF for the second and third place trophies.

UF's beam scores:

Kennedy Baker 9.8500 - didn't see it, but suspect it should have been higher.
Alicia Boren 9.8875 - saw it and it definitely should have been higher.
Amelia Hundley 9.8500 - same as Kennedy Baker.
Rachel Gowey 9.2550 - fell off the beam, but it didn't count in the score.
Grace McLaughlin 9.8000 - can't say anything about this one as that is par for the course for her - nothing flashy
Alex McMurtry 9.9125 - saw it and it definitely should have been higher.