Sooners Strong as Always

Oklahoma seemingly is always ready to compete in January, and this year has been no exception.  With a deep squad of athletes that train four events, they have also been able to weather the injuries that inevitably can slow the team down. 

Rise of Cal and Kentucky

With Cal at #2 and Kentucky #5, these two programs have culminated a rise over the last several seasons to become challengers for a spot in the National finals.  Cal has supplemented their traditionally strong UB and excellent execution on BB with some improved vaulting.  Kentucky has turned VT into a strength and is leading the nation, while retaining their trademark consistency on the other three events.  Some recent injuries have hit the Wildcat depth chart, and they'll look to have their best lineups ready for the post-season.  The two teams will look to continue their progress while further avoiding the injury bug.  We've also seen some strong moves by other teams, including MSU and Ohio State.

Injury and Illness Taking their Toll

Unfortunately, injuries and illness have been taking their toll.  Illnesses have caused some gymnasts to have a late start or miss a weekend or two.  Injuries also have played a role, resulting in a delayed start for some, while sidelining standouts like Riley McCusker of Florida, Haley De Jong and Vanessa Deniz of UGA, Adeline Kenlin of Iowa, Alyona Shchennikova of LSU, and Danae Fletcher of OU,

Frosh Settling In

With six weeks of competition, the frosh are settling in, and some are seeing some significant lineup time.  Lily Smith has become a top AAer at UGA, and Delaynee Rodriguez, as we predicted, has become a steady and consistent lead-off AAer for Kentucky.  Anya Pilgrim and Skylar Draser are settling in nicely at Florida, as is Ella Zirbes at Utah and Madison Ulrich at Denver.  Elsewhere, Konnor McClain is quickly adjusting to college competition at LSU and Katelyn Rosen has been steady from the get-go for UCLA.     

The Weekend that Broke NCAA Gymnastics

We reach the off-season, a single weekend will standout this season.  Unfortunately, it was the weekend where the problem with lax scoring manifested in some extreme, resulting in record breaking scores.  It is never the athlete's fault when scores run rampant.  The blame falls rather on a code that has not kept up with the athlete’s improving capability and does not provide for enough separation  To this, we add the absence of true accountability for judges.  Ultimately, the coaches bear some responsibility for reinforcing this cycle.  Why the coaches?  They are the ones that drive the code modifications and the ones that are executing the system of judging evaluations.  

But it is more than one meet and one set of judging panels.  Those same judges reappear in other meets, and other judge at other meets are also being extremely lax in their evaluations.  We've seen hops on "perfect 10s", bobbles on "10" BB sets, and 9.8/10 judging panel splits (or worse).  While the imperfect 10s get a lot of attention, ultimately the much more harmful practice occurs when routines that should get 9.6s get 9.85s.  These lower scoring routines, often with medium sized faults, have an even greater impact on a team’s total.  In the end, these routines that should be scoring moderate scores but aren’t, are the real drivers of the team-based scoring variation.  We're seeing teams score 2 to 3 points from their season highs, with the same number of falls, between meets on the road and those at home (or in their home state).  This problem of the “soft bottom”, or scores that rarely dip below 9.75, will cause distortions in the final team results and in the qualification for the post-season.

Two Passes Dominating

The two-pass floor routine is nothing new.  The rules making it easier to fulfill the requirements with relatively easy tumbling are a product of the relatively recent era.  This year, teams saw the success that other teams had with the two pass routines and have increased their usage.  Two minor changes enacted last season have also contributed to the trend:  the need for a 3 element acro series has been eliminated and the switch side 1/2 was upgraded to a D.   

The two-pass routine was originally offered as an alternative to reduce wear and tear on athletes and to allow strong dancers another pathway to score well on the event.  Unfortunately, these good intentions have been plagued by loopholes in the rules, a lack of opportunities to separate the routines, and an increase in subjectivity.  Also on the rise is fan dissatisfaction, as the excitement value of the routines has diminished and the confusion on what merits a great score has grown.  It is frankly, too easy to start from a 10 on the event.  Teams have figured out they can winnow the skills down to the ones that are easiest for the athlete to execute cleanly.  And unfortunately, many of these skills are identical from athlete to athlete, and team to team.  In a recent Division 3 meet, teams struggled to put up 10.0 start values on VT, UB and FX.  Their start values on those events ranged mostly from 9.4 to 9.9.  However, in the quad meet, all four teams were able to put up six routines starting from a 10 on FX.  This is a marked difference in achieveable difficulty levels, and as a result FX has become the sport's highest scoring team event.   

There are some inherent flaws in the NCAA Code Modifications that have added fuel to this trend.  The NCAA provides a 0.1 bonus value to a double salto or E salto performed as the last acro series.  Unfortunately, some gymnasts are doing both of their passes in the first 30 seconds of the routine and then filling the rest of the routine with dance.  And too often, there are no skills of value associated with this dance, and truly great dance execution and musicality is relatively rare.  There is a very clear mechanism to deal with unequal difficulty in a routine, called “progressive distribution”.  However, in the NCAA, it is just a 0.05 deduction and it is not always taken.  There are also potential deductions for artistry, but these deduction s begin to enter into a highly subjective area and judges seem reluctant to take them, except for some severe cases. 

A few simple solutions could help improve the event, while addressing concerns regarding athlete safety while rewarding strong dancers:

• The bonus 0.1 for a double salto or E acro should be moved to skills that occur after the 60 second mark.   
• The two pass routines leave fewer opportunities for deductions than the three-pass alternative.  This creates an imbalanced motivation to stay with two passes.  A two-pass routine should be required to add a 2nd dance passage with bonus, to even out the opportunities for deductions. 
• The deduction for "progressive distribution" should be increased to 0.1, with guidelines clarified for deductions.   

Uneven Enforcement Proliferates

The overall level of talent in the NCAA has risen.  Gymnasts can largely construct routines that start from a 10.  Most are able to minimize the most obvious deductions like steps, flexed feet, leg bends, leg separations and missed handstands.  However, we are seeing very uneven enforcement of faults, especially as it relates to the next level of deductions beyond the most obvious.  Inadequate split positon, inadequate amplitude, poor dynamics, lack of height/distance, body position faults, and muscled/labored execution are just some of the faults that are not being equally assessed.  While efforts have been made on training the judging community on common standards of evaluation, we are still left with problems.  The system also lacks true accountability.  Evaluations are done by coaches, who are under pressure to produce high scores and qualify for post-season competition (based on scores).  It is a feedback loop that can cause problems to fester and proliferate.  An independent yet private system of audit with a system of warnings and consequences could drive more accountability.   

The "One Second Rule" Off to Uneven Start

The NCAA (and USA Gymnastics) instituted a new 1 second hold of the finishing position on VT/UB/BB this year.  This requires the gymnasts to hold the finishing position, in the same direction they've landed.  The gymnast is required to finish with both hands above their head, legs straight, heels together, and any steps closed back to the finishing position.  This has been very unevenly enforced, as evidenced from some high scores given to dubious "one second" holds.  The most common problem that has emerged is when a gymnast holds a crouched position to a stick but does not properly extend her legs, close her heals and present and hold for one second.  Another issue is when gymnasts are still in the habit of using the “college stick”.  They will land slightly off-balance, and then quickly turn and salute, incurring a 0.05 for the step and 0.05 for not holding their finishing position (well, rather, they should be incurring these deductions).  It will be interesting to see if the teams and judges get on the same page on this new deduction before the end of the season.  If they don’t, we may see some teams faced with some surprises in the post-season. 

The Uneven Bars Compulsory

Variety and interesting composition have lost out to code quirks, consistency and the pursuit of the 9.9+ on UB.  The near compulsory routines of a Maloney (or Shaposhnikova) to bail handstand or Pak, plus a dismount, requires three key skills and as few as two handstands.  The routine has fewer opportunities for obvious deductions, once mastered, and yet meets all the requirements.  The most common execution errors are often hard to see from the judges vantage point on the side.  This routine composition has taken over both the NCAA and the USA Gymnastics Development Program Level 10 ranks, spreading the routine like an invasive species. 

Rise of the Pike Front 1/2

The Pike Front 1/2 is seeing increased popularity in the NCAA.  We are seeing athletes capable of doing this 10.0 start value vault without major form issues.  In the past, gymnasts struggled with their pre-flight from and with keeping their chest high on landing.  Panels are also not being as rigorous on height, distance and dynamics on this vault as in the past.  The number #1 vault team in the country, Kentucky, uses this vault extensively.  Also rising in popularity are the roundoff back handspring with 3/4 to 1/1 twist on vaults --- the ability to do a 3/4 twist rather than full without incurring a deduction allows the gymnast to get to a strong shape that enables the gymnast to get more height on their post-flight phase, minimizing deductions.     

We'll check in later as the season evolves, to comment on other new trends.