Though some scores at the Beijing Olympics have been unexpectedly low or high, it is unlikely that actual bias is involved, or even that results have been affected.
Many gymnastics fans, including NBC's Olympic gymnastics commentator Tim Daggett, have been surprised by the scoring in the women's individual all around final and the event finals, particularly vault. Gymnastics, however, is a subjective sport, and safeguards are built in to avoid bias. There have been no serious accusations of bias, and in fact in most cases a change in the scores would not have yielded a different result.
Johnson and Liukin Scoring Low in the All Around; Yang Scoring High
Though Tim Daggett pointed out in his NBC commentary on the all around final that several scores were unexpected – Nastia Liukin's vault and bars scores and Shawn Johnson's bars score were both low, while Yang Yilin's bars and beam scores were high – he also pointed out that there was no suggestion of biased judging, and that the panels are not made up of Chinese judges. In fact, the panels are composed of judges from different countries, and they change for each event, which is why scores may differ slightly on the average.
Though Daggett is right – it is hard to see why those particular routines were scored the way they were – it would not have changed the results in the all around. Had Liukin received the scores expected, she would only have won with a higher margin, and Johnson would not have caught her considering the six-tenths of a point between their final scores and the fact that Johnson's score only seemed low on one event. Yang, again, had such a margin between herself and the next highest placed Semenova that a few tenths would not have mattered.
Analysis of Cheng's Bronze Medal on Vault over Alicia Sacramone Despite a Fall
Though it seemed strange to many that Chinese gymnast Cheng Fei would finish above American Alicia Sacramone, who landed both vaults when Cheng fell to her knees on the vault named after her, the result was not obviously unfair. Both of her vaults were much harder than Sacramone's, making her A-score higher. The A and B scores are added together, and the scores for the two vaults are averaged. She got a large B-score deduction for the fall, but performed very well on her first vault – significantly better even than the winner. She bested Sacramone by a very small margin, but the reason does not appear to be judging bias.
Safeguards Built in to Avoid Judging Bias
In women's gymnastics, there are several safeguards built into the system to avoid bias. First, as mentioned, the judges come from different countries and the panels rotate. Second, the judges work in panels, with the high and low B-score thrown out and the rest averaged. Third, if there is a greater difference in the scores than a certain acceptable margin, a head judge can ask the judges to conference again and the deviating judge to change his score.
Fans should also note that judges have very tight deduction parameters within which to work. Their job is to assess very specific things – was the gymnast's body in a full 180-degree split position; was the handstand less than thirty degrees from vertical; did the gymnast stay inside the lines? Once they determine what happened in the routine, they have a narrow range of choice in terms of what deduction to take. It is still a subjective sport, but only just.
The copyright of the article 2008 Olympic Women's Gymnastics Scoring in Gymnastics is owned by Judith Faucette. Permission to republish 2008 Olympic Women's Gymnastics Scoring in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
Cheng's Bronze Medal on Vault over Alicia Sacramone Despite a Fall
this is where we differ. I agree 100% that sacramone's vault wasn’t high
enough and she also didn’t hit her landings as hard as she should have. but
cheng hits a very difficult vault, with horrible execution (both hands did
not touch) and lands on her knees (not falls to her knees, after landing on
her feet. she just fell straight on her knees) and you are going to tell me
because the difficulty was higher she gets a 15.0 vault? are you kidding
me? I was thinking ok it was harder, but it wasn’t all that great maybe a
14.8 or 14.9! it’s amazing how she scored JUST a tad above sacarmone.
Amazing, I mean why wouldn’t she? you don’t want to let her WIN with this
vault, but we ARE IN CHINA so give her something. it’s just retarded.
one of two things are wrong with the women’s gymnastics, either the
judges or the scoring. or maybe both!
Aug 18, 2008 10:54 AM
Guest
:
There does not have to be a "conspiracy" for one particular
country (say, China) to score well, and there probably isn't because yes,
the judges come from all over the world. However, if there is a bias by
multiple nations held against the USA (and let's face it, we're not very
popular)... then it would be easy for more than one judge to take one or
more tiny deductions off a U.S. athlete that they would not necessarily
have taken off an athlete from any other nation. If more than one judge has
a slight bias against the USA, that will add up across judges and across
events in the long run. They may not even know they're doing it.
Aug 18, 2008 8:40 PM
Guest
:
I believe as a gymnastic community have lost our common sense and are
placing the emphasis in the wrong area. Your explanation gives the very
detailed technical description of the reason a gymnast could land a vault
on her knees, not land first on her feet and then fall to her knees, yet
still come out with a higher score than a lower valued vault without major
errors. I feel that with the final score, the emphasis should be placed on
successfully completed routines over harder routines with major errors. As
a gymnastic community, we have taken a large step backwards (an .8
deduction as opposed to a .5 deduction) with the new scoring system.
Sue-from MI
Aug 18, 2008 9:35 PM
Guest
:
Why is this even an issue? China should not even be competing because they
are not old enough. Why do they get to be the only ones to cheat?
Aug 18, 2008 9:59 PM
Guest
:
it is amazing to think someone who had many mistakes and many other little
errors could actually mean GOLD! and BEST in the WORLD! That means
that... screw practice to make it perfect! just practice... and i guess
with this new thing, is that.. if you fall on your face and land out of
bounce then you can still win GOLD! screw the perfect landings and none
mistakes.. i disagree with whatever was said. I am mexican not
american and even thought it was truly incredible what happened in this
event! its terrible! Also today! again.. US vs CHINA... both got the
same scoring while in fact the other had a mistake (CHINA) and other didn't
(USA)... truly amazing... so i guess anyone can go compete land on your
knees and kick the other girls ass!
Aug 18, 2008 10:22 PM
Guest
:
This article represents an example of cognitive dissonance. The judging of
women's gymnastics -- something obviously does not make any logical sense
-- is now "explained away" by blaming it on the scoring system.
Aug 18, 2008 10:38 PM
Guest
:
I agree with the 10:54 commenter, but I DO think the judges are fully aware
of what they're doing. The American commentators have repeated time and
again that the judges can CHOOSE to take off tenths for this or that, and
they clearly CHOSE to take off those tenths for the Americans but not for
the Chinese in several instances. And the so-called safeguards only work
if you have one or two unscrupulous judges. What happens if there's an
anti-American sentiment among numerous judges, as may have happened on the
beam panel?
And frankly, there is something wrong with any
scoring system in which you can win just by ATTEMPTING an element whether
or not you perform it adequately. I'm going to make a comparison to figure
skating here since it's another subjective sport. In figure skating, a
triple-triple combination is more difficult than a triple-double, but if
you don't land the triple-triple, you're not going to get a better score
than someone who lands a triple-double just because you TRIED it. Now, if
two skaters successfully land a triple-triple, then you can start comparing
speed, height, position in the air, the quality of the landing, etc. But
if you don't land it, you don't have a triple-triple. Gymnastics shouldn't
be any different. It's useless to have a harder vault, dismount, etc. if
you don't actually DO it.
Aug 19, 2008 1:34 AM
Guest
:
The idea that a gymnast could land on her knee and put her hands down, and
have other mistakes (that led to that landing) would outscore someone that
landed on her feet (small jump, not even a step back) is against everything
I've seen in gymnastics. This new system meant to eliminate bias only
concealed the judge that is purposely voting one way due to politics or it
is evidence of corruption (someone being paid to add or deduct a few tenths
here and there.)
Tonight's high bar event only adds to the
unfair policies that the judges seem to make-up as they go. I'm pretty sure
I heard that there was no provision for a ruling on a second tie after
eliminating the high and low score. So, they arbitrarily decide to get rid
of the low score from each. Now it seems to me, that if you were to follow
the rules, they would have had to eliminate the high and low from each
again, since it follows an existing rule. At that point, the girls would
have still been tied, and hence, both should have gotten the gold.
Now if you look at the landing from tonight's gold medalist, and
then look back at some harsh deductions they took off from Shawn's scores
for doing the same thing, would lead you to believe that once again, the
scores favored the Chinese team. Of course, since she was not eligible
age-wise, the medal shouldn't be hers anyhow. (The Chinese did wonderful
routines, but not following the rules is cheating - same goes for doping --
it's cheating because it isn't following a rule. Now while doping seems to
be "more" wrong, it can't be - breaking a rule is breaking a rule
and disqualification is the consequence.)
I love to watch
gymnastics, but I HATE the biased judging. Scored events always are,
although these Olympic games rank right up there with other scoring
fiascoes of the past in figure skating - from Torval and Dean's 2nd place
finish to the Canadian pair being clearly wronged. If judging was
consistent, and point deductions enforced, the outcomes would be different.
But some judges will deduct from one person/team and not deduct from
another for the exact same problem. It's a real shame, because problems
with judging make people like me feel so fed up, that I have a difficult
time watching without getting upset - and then I don't enjoy it. I used to
love to watch figure skating competitions, but I rarely watch now for this
reason. And I still like gymnastics, but judging like this, aside from
being unfair, really hurts the sport.
Aug 19, 2008 10:15 AM
Guest
:
The guest comment from Aug. 18, 2008 10:54 AM is exactly correct. There
can be a case made for judge bias without defining it in the narrow terms
this author uses - in other words, it's fauly logic to say "None of
the judges are Chinese, therefore it's less likely there was judge
bias".
There's a pretty simple way to prove this. Why not
display the score of each judge on the screen? Like they do with Diving
for instance? I think this would do a lot to either expose bias if it
existed, and more positively, to keep the judges "honest".
Finally, do away with the "tie breaker" system. It's
arbitrary and unfair, and certainly uncessesary, when so many other Olypic
sports award two golds for ties all the time.
Aug 19, 2008 2:01 PM
Guest
:
I think I want my two daughters to quit gymnastics since they are never
going to get a fair judgement. After this Olympic games, it's evident that
no matter how hard they work, someone with a grudge can take it all away. I
agree it only hurts the sport. They should figure out some computer
recognition/video capture and have one of the judges be a computer. You
know that one won't be biased...
If the new scoring system was so great and made it difficult for judges to
deviate from each other in scoring (because they can only score based on
mistakes), why do scores from different judges still deviate so much? Why
isn't there simply one score that accounts for all technical mistakes then?
Who needs judges? They should become a panel that works on finding all
errors in a routine together and then decide, as a unit, what each error
was worth. That would produce the most consistent method of judging because
everyone will see the mistakes that are pointed out. But no, judges are
still adding and subtracting arbitrarily to end up with vastly different
scores... that's why they are still throwing out the highest and lowest
scores. The numbers are too inconsistent. In the women's uneven bar
finals, SEMENOVA's scores ranged from 8.7 to 9.3. Even with the top and
bottom numbers thrown out, her score ranged from 8.8 to 9.1. TWEDDLE's
scores ranged from 8.7 to 9.1, and after the top and bottom scores were
thrown out, it was still 8.7 to 9.1. The scoring is simply too inconsistent
if they are supposed to focus on technical errors.
The
tie-breaking rule for the uneven bars simply gave the competitor with
higher variance between scores the win. Why? HE had a larger variance
between her valid scores (8.9, 9.0, 9.1, 9.1) while LIUKAN's were more
consistent (9.0, 9.0, 9.0, 9.1). It will always be the case that if there
is a tie, the person with higher variance wins, because the system took
away the bottom score resulting in a higher average. LIUKAN's score barely
changed because taking away the bottom score from a set of consistent
numbers won't affect the score much. The tie-breaking system used simply
favors biased scores (aka higher variance btwn scores) and is an insult to
statistics.
nbcolympics.com
Aug 19, 2008 4:44 PM
Guest
:
Another way to reduce scoring bias is to simply increase the number of
judges. Averaging the scores of 20 judges will create a much fairer score
than taking just 4. They could have something like 24 or 28 judges and
throw out 2 or 3 top and bottom scores which would greatly eliminate biased
scoring.
Aug 19, 2008 4:48 PM
Guest
:
Sorry I didn't proof-read my Aug 19, 2008 4:36 PM post. I didn't
finish my last section which was to say you can visit nbcolympics.com for
the scores. Also, TWEDDLE's scores after the top and bottom were
thrown out ranged from 8.7 to 9.0, not 8.7 to 9.1.
Thanks
Aug 19, 2008 5:05 PM
Guest
:
Does this mean if you attempt a more difficult vault but CAN'T execute it
that you should get a better score? This does not make sense. You should
be scored on what you are capable of and can prove you are the athlete that
can perform it. Otherwise we would see lots of attempts and failures and we
would be scoring on the failures.
Aug 19, 2008 6:39 PM
Guest
:
Funny how the Chinese win all the events with SUBJECTIVE judging... When it
comes to OBJECTIVE events they are no where to be found.
Hmm...
just a tad suspicious.
Wonder if the Chinese
"government" has put some pressure on these IOC judges to favor
Chinese athletes?
Nah, not in a Communist country.
Aug 19, 2008 8:49 PM
Guest
:
I don't think the scoring has to do with a bias so much as unpolished
judging. The scoring has been (I felt) inconsistent all round, not just
between the US and Chinese women.
As commentators have pointed
out, many of the judges are from countries that have not produced the same
class of gymnasts as countries like the US, China and Russia, among
others. I initially thought that Cheng should have received a lower score
on her second vault. She had so many mistakes the deduction should have
been around a point and a half. But assume a 10 in execution and then look
at her execution score of 8.550 and that is about right, much as I wish
Alicia had medaled. You can argue that it should have been lower, but at
that point it becomes subjective, and unfortunately gymnastics scoring is
just that: subjective.
And keep in mind, Nastia fell on her back
after her uneven bars dismount in qualifications and still got a 15.9,
because the rest of her routine was that amazing. So it's not impossible.
Aug 19, 2008 8:59 PM
Guest
:
The message I'm getting from this Olympic competition is that trying is
more important than knowing. Next time the Americans should simply max out
the difficulty and just try not to fall too much. At least then there will
be scores of 15-16 without any real problem.
Think about it,
start at a 10 difficulty get about 5.5 on execution and you end up with a
5.5 which is a solid score in most events. Of course a 5.5 on execution is
horrible but whatever. Then again so is falling on your knees and she gets
the bronze.
Aug 19, 2008 10:08 PM
Guest
:
I love watching all the games, but I really do agree that the games with
judges are unfair. The only fair games are those that are timed or when the
athletes compete against each other based on their talents and abilities,
such as the marathon, track and field, swimming, etc. That's pure and fair
competition! Just because some or all of the judges are politically against
a certain country, the athletes deserve a fair chance. This is the
Olympics, not an election. They should save their biased judgement or
whatever for like a meeting with NATO or all the other world peace
committee. The judges should execute their duty with honesty and integrity
to reflect their professional judgement and intelligence in the field
(that's why they were chosen as judges - I hope!!!) to give the athletes a
fair chance and a score that truly reflect their abilities. It wasn't just
the women's gymnastics, the scoring for most events with judges are
screwed!!! Most of the gold medals that China got were from judged
events. I agree 1000.9999% that scores should be weighted more on the
actual ability to execute a routine or performance; not on the ATTEMPT of a
difficult one. If that's the case then that would set the tone for future
athletes that "go ahead, as long as you tried for a performance that's
considered difficult; you can fall, slip, trip or whatever and we'll still
save you". And it's not just the US, athletes from other countries did
well or made the same mistake got deductions too. I have nothing
against the Chinese athletes at all; but, I truly believe the Olympics
should be based on the athletes - their talents and ability to perform
their specialties - they worked their butts off throughout their career to
have the opportunity to show the world the perfect performance ONCE - who
cares if he/she is American, French, Chinese, Romanian, or whereever the
heck they represent.
I even think another way to rule out any
bias is to have the athletes perform with a mask on and no markings of who
they are or where they come from - their identity then call be revealed at
the end. they can still show their good/bad moments, but then the score
will be based on how well they actually perform...just on the games with
judges.
Aug 19, 2008 10:20 PM
Guest
:
What's up with stupid tie breaker deal??!! If they're good, they're good!
If they put out the best performance and execution, give them what they
deserve! Is there really anywhere in the Olympics rule that there is
absolutely no 2 gold medals given in any one event? There's been 2 silver
medals in the past. That was a childish and teasing thing: "Oh you got
a really high score, here's the...oh wait just kidding, since you tied with
another athlete, you can't have the title and medal". I thought
that was emotionally disruptive as a viewer, imagine the athlete and trying
to mentally prepare for the next events. Yeah she knew she did good and was
strong enough to continue to perform well, but come on, that whole thing
was just retarded.
Aug 20, 2008 1:17 AM
Guest
:
I agree. I doubt that there is bias on the judges' part.
First
off, all these bias, all these speculations over scoring, were all started
by NBC's commenter, and by Bela Karolyi, which is what NBC really wanted.
NBC wanted attention and they wanted to have attention through their bias
remarks. The one who is bias is NBC and Karolyi. He is obviously only
rooting exclusively for the American team and people easily believes his
thoughts and his remarks because he was a coach before. Apparently, no one
said that his wife was also a U.S. team coordinator. Unlike the judges who
were judges from different countries (not from China), Karolyi has more
reasons to be bias and side towards the American team because his wife,
after all, is a U.S. coordinator. A proper coach would not look like he
would rejoice for the loss of another athlete, and from the looks of it,
Karolyi is one of those people who smiles until it reaches his butt at
another athlete's loss.
Aug 20, 2008 6:43 AM
Guest
:
The system's broke. I'd prefer to go with the method used for diving - much
simplier and less controversial. This is the first year I've actually
watched gymnastics, and now I realize that I wasn't missing anything new -
another sport decided by judges rather than performance.
Anyway,
there has to be a better trade off between degree of difficulty and
execution. I'd much rather prefer a backflip that sticks the landing over a
triple backflip that lands on her head. If you can't perform it, then don't
do it. Here's my idea:
How is 8.55 execution
score for a vault with multiple mistakes is fair? This is the problem
everyone has. There should be at least 1.4 in deductions if not more - .65
for bad plant on the vault and multiple other mistakes and .8 for landing
on all four. How can she get 8.55 execution with all these mistakes? 8.55
is only about 1 point less than the execution score of the first vault, so
how come they only deducted so little for so many mistakes?
Aug 20, 2008 11:38 AM
Guest
:
I am no judge and I have never competed in any kind of gymnastics
competition, but I have been watching gymnastics since I could say the
word. And what happened the other night with Cheng what ever the heck her
name is and Alicia Sacramone is just not right. I also don't know the rules
that the judges have to judge by. But as far as I, and the rest of the
world knows for that matter...landing a vault no matter how difficult it
was on your feet is much better than landing on your knees! I agree 110%
with a comment left earlier by someone is totally true. A conspiracy
doesn't have to exist to have one country or one team to receive better
scores than another country or team. Gymnastics is the most enjoyable sport
in the Olympics for me, but if it means that team members that have been
working their butts off for years and years to get lower scores for events
and talents that were obviously performed better than other individuals (I
don't know say Cheng blah blah blah) and did it legally meaning being of
legal age to compete in the Olympics which is 16 not 12, unfortunately I
will not be watching any more gymnastics.
Obviously Alicia
Sacramone did not have the best Olympic experience at these olympic games,
but judging her performance on the vault with closed eyes it seems is just
wrong. That girl has worked hard for what she can do. They all have. I
would love to see those judges try to attempt those routines.
If
there is any question of whether the athlete is of age, why are they
competing?
And to Aug 20 1:17 am, you have got to admit the
scoring has been unfair. Not only for the Americans. Landing on your feet
is how you are supposed to land. Not on your knees. And just because you
attempt a more difficult routine, dismount, release whatever, doesn't mean
you get a higher score. If you attempt those things and execute them as
they are to be executed then yes you would get a higher score. But Alicia
landed her routine. She landed ON HER FEET. NOT ON HER KNEES. Just because
Cheng attempted a more complicated routine doesn't mean she should get a
higher score. Especially because she landed on her KNEES. I don't know what
the heck kind of gymnastics you are watching but they aren't the Olympics.
Try a different channel.
Aug 21, 2008 12:56 AM
Guest
:
It amazes me how many people think they are suddenly gymnastics experts
after watching it for a few days. Gymnastics mistakes are virtually
imperceptible to the untrained eye unless they are really obvious. Wobbles
and landing are NOT the only deductions. Nastia had major issues with her
form during her tumbles on the floor exercise and the tiebreaker point is
moot. Most people who watch gymnastics outside the olympics will tell you
that Yang yi lin should have won uneven bars. Her routine was cleaner and
the same difficulty as He Kexin and Nastia's.
Aug 21, 2008 5:39 AM
Guest
:
i want to touch on nastia's bar routine! WOW! WHAT?!? SERIOUSLY?!?
i cant believe in the Olympics, of all competions, THAT is how we
break a tie. oh wow. so basically you want one big score (well two they
throw the highest out) and a few smaller ones from other judges. because if
your scores are consistent across the board. (like nastia's 9.0s) then your
2nd lowest get thrown out anyway... WOW!
its sad that these
judges don’t know how to use this new scoring system. i mean not only
should you be judged on how high your routine is, you should also be judged
based on how well it sticks (i.e. execution).
i really think its
a mixture of judges being completely incompetent and the scoring added to
their incompetentice.
also, just throwing it out there, someone
on another board said someone is talking about maybe separating them by
weight. what does everyone think about this? i personally like it. i mean
wrestling does it.
Aug 21, 2008 11:41 AM
Guest
:
Those saying the chinese vaulters score was about right - my understanding
that she got .8 off just for landing on her knees - There were lots of
other errors that caused the fall which should have resulted in more
deduction - I think her hands were crossed and she didn't block. How is
her vualt worthy of a 9.35 absent the fall? There simply were NOT enough
deductions taken from her score.
Aug 23, 2008 9:38 PM
Guest
:
"Tonight's high bar event only adds to the unfair policies that the
judges seem to make-up as they go. I'm pretty sure I heard that there was
no provision for a ruling on a second tie after eliminating the high and
low score. So, they arbitrarily decide to get rid of the low score from
each. Now it seems to me, that if you were to follow the rules, they would
have had to eliminate the high and low from each again, since it follows an
existing rule. At that point, the girls would have still been tied, and
hence, both should have gotten the gold."
Actually, if you
eliminate the high and low scores again for the tie breaker, Kexin still
wins. Kexin would have two scores of 9.1 and 9.0, while Liukin would have
two scores of 9.0 and 9.0.
Aug 23, 2008 9:56 PM
Guest
:
Let me say that the NBC commentators were the worst. They only bitched and
complained when they thought the Americans got low scores, but didn't do
the same for other gymnasts from other countries who got low scores that
deserved higher scores.
If those NBC commentators were truly
about challenging the new scoring system and the judging biases, then they
should be fighting for other gymnasts from other countries as well, and not
just for the US. Unfortunately, they showed lack of professionalism and
homerism on their parts. Shame on them!
Sep 8, 2008 8:49 AM
Guest
:
China cheated with people who arn't even elligable to be in the olympics
yet! They need to crack down on ages of olympions or its going to get
worse. Also with Sacramones perfect landings she should of won the bronze
who cares if it did'nt have more difficulty atleast she landed it and
didn't fall.
Mar 17, 2009 5:01 PM
Guest
:
the americans were scored poorly the entire competition. they do the
tiniest things that would affect the scoring. Such as Shawn Johnson being
"randomly" selected to go first on the floor in finals, and her
competition ( a romanian girl) also "randomly" gets to go last,
giving her an edge. During the uneven bars final an australian judge took
off an entire point for a single error in nastia's routine. can someone
point out an error in that routine that needs an entire point taken off?
the judges didnt care if team usa got silver or bronze, they wanted to make
sure gold wasn't in their future.
May 5, 2009 12:24 PM
Guest
:
Go shawn Johnson!!
May 31, 2009 3:19 PM
Guest
:
Shawn Johnson was underscored on beam and floor as well--she usually gets
16+ on floor! To suggest that Nastia is anywhere near as good as Shawn is
ridiculous; her gymnastics looks pretty, but she really only has one event
that she owns (uneven bars). Shawn Johnson's difficulty is remarkably
higher than Nastia's--she can do a double-double (2 twists and 2 flips in
one piece of air). Nastia only does a double front with a half twist
(frontwards is easier than backwards, btw). Most people that don't really
know much about gymnastics fail to notice that Nastia's vault has a full
twist LESS than Shawn's--Shawn does a vault that mostly only men do, and it
has only been completed by 2 other women in the world. A Yurchenko 1.5
(Nastia's vault), on the other hand, is the easiest vault in the
competition. On beam, Nastia's gymnastics look pretty and elegant, but
it's Shawn who can do back handspring, back handspring, layout with all the
speed on floor and without so much as the tiniest balance check. She can
also do a STANDING full, and has a G-level dismount (double back with a
full twist). There is a REASON that the ONLY time Nastia has ever
outscored/beaten Shawn, INCLUDING when Shawn was a junior, prior to the
Olympics was when Shawn FELL. And the fact that team USA put Shawn up on
all 4 events in team finals and Nastia on 3 (she was lucky to even compete
on floor for team finals, it was only because Chellsie Memmel and Sam
Peszek were injured). Shawn Johnson's difficulty is SO much higher than
Nastia's, and rarely does she make a mistake...2008 Olympics were full of
incredibly crooked scoring. It makes me so mad that this was probably the
only chance Shawn had or will ever have to win all-around gold (she also
deserved a gold on floor, as Sandra Izbasa's mount is not hard--I CAN DO
IT, THEY DID IT IN THE 80'S!!!!!!! a full-in. Mary Lou Retton even says
Shawn is truly the number one gymnast in the world. Anyone that has
watched other competitions to get a broader idea of correct scoring and
that can appreciate huge athletic skills versus artistry and elegance would
know who the world's greatest really and truly is.
Aug 18, 2008
