Parity Continues to Rise: Parity in the NCAA continues to rise. The talent level of the athletes has risen, and the pool of talent has become deeper, with more and more athletes capable of 10.0 start values (SV) on each event. It is now a rarity that a Top 36 team does not have six attempted 10.0 SVs, with a few exceptions on vault. Most of the athletes on Division I teams are not only hitting 10.0 SVs, but the vast majority are also hitting the compositional requirements that they need to avoid automatic deductions.
Scoring Variation on the Rise: During the month, we saw a large amount of scoring variation across the country, from meet to meet at the same host site, and even between judges on the same event. During the past few years, the NCAA and the National Association of Women's Gymnastics Judges made a concerted effort to provide education and training, in an effort to improve the uniformity of judging standards across the country. The Judges Assignment System (JAS) and a set of new regulations for judge-coach contact were also created on the women's side in order to foster variety in the judging panels and to remove the appearance of undue influence. While we saw perhaps even increased variance in the month of January, these types of issues have tended to"self resolve" in the past. As the season progresses, we will typically see several factors come into play: executions improves; problems in routine construction (missing requirements) are corrected; judges travel from meet to meet across the country; and finally, judges seem to achieve a "common ground" in the level of strictness that is acceptable.
What'd I Miss?: Low scores can sometimes perplex fans, boosters, and our staff. But you have to remember, it is far easier to miss a deduction than it is to make one up. Simple counting the falls, steps, missed handstands, leg separations, flexed feet and balance checks is no longer good enough. The ability of the athletes has risen so high, the judges are increasingly left to rely on other execution deductions in order to provide separation between the performances. These deductions, unfortunately, can be difficult to understand. The NCAA modifications still rely on the underlying USA Gymnastics Junior Olympics code for evaluating execution deductions. The deductions give the judge wide latitude in evaluating other, less well known aspects of execution. For example, body position errors (like excessive arch or looseness) are a fault on the uneven bars. Problems in rhythm, excessive pauses (> 2 seconds), and uncertainty of movement are deductions on BB. Body positions in the air and upon landing are not always easy to see from a distance on floor and on vault, but can cause deductions to be taken from a "stuck" landing. Many outstanding tumblers with high difficulty on floor are losing a tenth or more in their dance due to an overall lack of flexibility or an incomplete (not 360 degree) turning jumps. The list goes on and on: we'll try to recap them in an article later in the season.
The "Soft Bottom": The issue with score escalation is not typically with the highest scores, but with the lowest. There seems to be an unwillingness among some judges to award scores below a 9.6. At the same time, there is also an unwillingness to throw out a 9.95+, perhaps for fear of being labeled as being too generous. The result is a sliding "curve" where a relatively small error on a nearly flawless performance is docked a full deduction for a step, whereby a routine filled with a number of small and medium faults is judged less stringently, especially if they are less readily apparent. This helps with parity amongst the teams, but it can also contribute to the scoring variation we are seeing.
The Code is Showing Its Age: When you combine the first four factors together, they add up to a set of NCAA modifications (the "code") that is showing its age. The ability of the athletes has outpaced the evolution of the code, which has remained static for several season. In fact, on floor and bars it is actually easier now than a few seasons back. A slight strengthening, combined with strict evaluation will provide the tools for greater separation between the athletes, while still maintaining good parity.
Early Leaders: Utah is off to a fast start and looks set to challenge for the title. They are competing a high level of difficulty but will need to work on seasoning their frosh and polishing fine details on UB and BB. After a slower start, Florida appears set for a run at the title as well. With a roster filled with powerhouse athletes, you can see the progress they are making in improving consistency on the beam. UCLA and Bama are off to somewhat slower starts, with injuries and inconsistency combined with flashes of brilliance. You can be assured that both teams will be ready at the end of the season. Arkansas is also another early standout. With comparatively few graduation and injury losses, the Gym'Backs are out of the gate early. Also showing continued strength is Oklahoma, despite the loss of star Natasha Kelley.
On the Rise: Nebraska rose quickly to number one, but a recent upset loss at home showed their relative lack of depth. Georgia is continuing to make progress, and is on the rise. Although this squad does not display the high level of "power" gymnastics as some of the past UGA squads, it is counterbalanced by a high level of execution and style. Also scoring well early in the season are programs like Auburn, DU, LSU, Missouri, Ohio State, PSU, and WVU, although some of them have issues with consistency that need to be resolved and others have yet to be truly tested on the road. And, many other programs could also challenge by the end of the season, especially as frosh gain experience and key athletes return from minor injury, like Arizona, Boise State, Illinois and Washington.
Depth Issues: As we predicted in our previews, several top teams with smaller rosters are showing issues with depth in the early season, although others are still doing quite well. Injuries and illness can further whittle down the depth. Teams like Michigan, the aforementioned NU, Oregon State (who is doing quite well) and Stanford are not as deep as in years past. Several other squads, like PSU, are relying on a large numbers of all-arounders (five for the Nittany Lions). Fortunately the season is still just in its first month, and there is time for the frosh to mature and injuries to heal. But, on the other hand, depth issues can sometimes compound. The lack of depth can sometimes mean increased wear and tear on the athletes, increased pressure, and inconsistency.
Fab Frosh: Frosh are making an early impact, with former elites Rheagan Courville (LSU), Georgia Dabritz (Utah), Chelsea Davis (UGA), Jessie DeZiel (NU), Kytra Hunter (UF), and Mattie Larson (UCLA) posting big early scores. But other elite, former elite, and L10 athletes are also making an impact, like Kailah Delaney at Utah, McKenzie Fechter at Washington, Brianna Guy at Auburn, Lloimincia Hall and Jessie Jordan at LSU, Sachi Sugiyama at Michigan, Rachel Updike at Missouri, Emma Willis at Iowa and Becky Wing at Stanford.
In the Wings: We're still waiting, however, to see some top gymnasts get some more competitive experience. Some have yet to compete or are still restricted a single event. This includes Ivana Hong (Stanford), Kristen Klarenbach (Arizona), Jackie McCartin (Washington), Samantha Shapiro (Stanford), Cassie Whitcomb (UCLA), and Kayla Williams (Bama).
Not Taking the Bait: The NCAA raised the value of several dismounts in the code modifications for this season (such as the front layout 1 1/2 twist). Despite these change, we're not (yet) seeing coaches and athletes incorporate these skills. These D and E level dismounts not only provide bonus but also satisfy the "up to the level" requirement for difficulty. And, a tough dismount may negate any potential for a "distribution" deduction for a routine with "declining" difficulty at the end of the routine. Despite all these incentives, we're not seeing too many of these newly upgraded dismounts being thrown. Perhaps we will next season, after a full summer of training.
Did You See? Vault Edition: We'll be updating our list of "Superlatives" later in the season, which recognizes athletes throwing a high level of difficulty. But we'd also like to take a moment to recognize some athletes throwing some unusual skills, combinations or typical skills with exceptional execution (click on the video links). On vault, Katherine Grable of Arkansas is throwing a terrific round-off 1/2 on, pike front with a half off (Pike Podkopayeva). In an ocean full of Yurchenko Layout Fulls, Vanessa Zamarripa is showing what height above the table are supposed to look like.
Did You See? UB Edition: Ashley Preiss stands out among so many look-a-like routines for a combo normally seen in elite gymnastics. She's throwing a toe full to Tkachev to immediate Pak at 4:10 in this video. We also hope to see the return of the Comaneci salto in Georgia Dabritz' routine (at 9 seconds). And Nicole Pechanec's signature release adds variety as well.
Did You See? BB Edition: Rheagan Courville opened the season with perhaps the toughest BB routine we've seen in some time at the NCAA level: a standing arabian, bhs layout, punch front, and two back handsprings to a double back. Marissa King throws two rarely seen skills: a front aerial to two feet and a true back layout to two feet. Cynthia LeMieux-Guillemette (UIC) connects a side aerial to a side somi, while Shayla Worley includes not only a full twisting backhandspring but an Onodi as well..
Did You See?: FX Edition: By now, manys fans have heard that Georgia Dabritz ends her floor with a triple twist... but she also opens with either a double Arabian or a pike full in. A now healthy Brianna Guy (AU, at 7:28) opens with a double layout and then throws a front double full to punch pike front. And Gator frosh sensation Kytra Hunter has a double layout you can walk under.