2022-2024 CoP Analysis | Nastia Liukin 2008 9.8 E Score Beam
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 ноя 2022
- PLEASE be respectful in the comments thank you.
Feel free to comment requests and questions!
Custom floor music requests - www.fiverr.com/flippingunicor...
Support me on Patreon - / flipflytumble
I do not own any of the music or footage. Videos are for educational purposes. 
Спорт
So you’ve chose violence, I see.
😅😅😅
Kkkkkkkk
😂😂😂
This video must have taken forever because the editing is insane! Amazing job this video is like professional level quality and really informative. I wonder how Shawn Johnson’s 2008 routine would hold up in the current COP.
I think Shawn's beam routine can actually hold up well because her beam has tons of acro elements instead of dance elements.
@@cocoroni1031 Her low chest on the standing full would be absolutely hammered though
@@quokpaka8365 Acro elements aren't judged as heavily as dance. It's at most 0.1 posture deduction.
Thank you for your appreciation 🥹 Yes it really does 😅 I pour my heart and soul into these haha. Thanks for the suggestion I’ll definitely look into it!!
Thank you kindly for doing this. I'm sure it must've taken quite some time. Please know that it is appreciated.
Thank you so much ❤
This is brilliant and just proves that judging is a lot stricter than it was in the 2000s.
ETA: please can you do this on a perfect 10 from Comaneci's era?
Sounds interesting. I might try 🤔
@@FlipFlyTumble I'd love to see your thoughts on the leaps from that era especially, but I know the requirements were very different.
@@FlipFlyTumble Yes please, I'd love to see that as well.
The actual first 10 (Comaneci's bar score) probably not possible -- too many elements that just aren't in the code at all due to the radical apparatus changes -- but Vault, Beam, and Floor would probably work for this format. :) spoiler alert: current CoP says no such thing as perfect!! ;)
@@_padfoot I meant beam in my original comment 😊
VERY cool video with editing to show “ideal” positioning. Everything is different now, but this was and is a stunning, beautiful, and iconic beam routine.
I will always love that routine, flaws and all. 😂 seriously though, thank you for sharing such informative, high quality content. The time and effort you put in is obvious. I am a smarter gym fan because of you! 💐
Yess it’s iconic tbh! & Thank you so much for the kind words 🥹
That's so interesting about rings that even if you get your back leg super high, you can still get a ton of deductions if you don't have any head release because the criteria is based on the foot being above the crown of the head.
Hence the term "ring!"
The rule is foot must be AT the crown of the head and Nastia's should be considered high enough. The line from the foot to the head at apex appears to touch in real time, it doesn't matter about the head release. It's just a .1 deduction (along with the skill being called as just a switch leap) for lack of head release if the foot is high enough.
@@Zuranthiumno head release then it isn’t a ring and actually you need to read the code, it’s now written that the foot must be past the crown of the head.
@@Bxyxox You are wrong, the rule is the foot must be at the crown of the head.
The fact that Nastia Liukin would get 1.1 in body position deductions for dance elements shows how crazy the current code is
I've learned even more from your channel. Excellent editing to explain where all those deductions came from. Thank you so much ❤
The moment we all been waiting for
SO insightful, thank you!! And as others have mentioned - this video is incredibly well made!
Thanks so much for this. I *always* look forward to your videos - I learn so much!
thank you it really means a lot!
this was SUPER informative and really well presented
This video editing is top notch!
The editing is amazing!
Dance elements are so heavily deducted in the current beam judging. All these 0.3 came from these elements, but I think she will not attempt the elements / do it according to the code if required. Thank you for this helpful analysis from judge! I like that switch ring graphic a lot!
I think she would definitely tick the boxes on these (composition) artistry deductions if she competes this quad, and her gymnastics can fit this quad really well.
Sadly I don’t think you should hold your breath expecting Nastia to make a comeback this quad 😭
@@alexi8741 I mean if 2022-2024 code were applied in the 2008 quad, then she would've made the adjustments for the code. The chance of her coming back is zero.
So 8.0E is almost a perfect score under the current code.
By the way, can't imagine Nastia's sheep and ring position were actually quite lacking. Maybe due to her extremely fluffy and gorgeous lines, those faults were usually "not as obvious" in real time.
Looking forward to more comparison video of the previous quads.
It was always obvious that her ring was not good, in real time or not
Yeah she never had full head release on the ring but was lucky that in her time the judges were primarily just looking for hitting the split/over split on dance elements
@@ojk46 I don't think the judges were being blind on purpose (cause I agree it was quite obvious), but her form was so good and her splits so spectacular they were being soft on the judging
@@youarerien8874 nah, that’s not how it used to work. She doesn’t have perfect form and even failed to hit 180 in her switch half. Those deductions were always obvious, the judges were just much more lenient back then
@@ojk46 No argument that her switch ring was often sub-par even for the standards of 2008, but I contend that her switch half is absolutely hitting 180 here, and just about in every beam routine she did. Her simple split jump is even better because she's doing oversplits > 180, but I have to disagree with the way this graphic chooses to construct that line graphic.... If you set her down on the floor she would absolutely be in a split position, the optics are off a bit because she's not perfectly parallel to the balance beam.
Crazy and crazy useful breakdown.
nothing you can say will change this competition. Nastia 😍❤️
Am I the only one who thinks there are WAY too many deductions in present day?
yes, yes you are
@@notafrog4967 no, no he’s not
No 😁
Thank you so much, very interesting. Hi from The Netherlands!
This clip set to such soulful music elevates this to a whole other level. Gotta love soul music 🎶 Nothing but dopeness! Thank you, thank you, thank you❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Thank you for this!! I've been wanting something like this so badly. I've seen videos breaking down the D score between differen CoPs but I haven't seen anything breaking down the E score and I've been so curious as to how routines from this era with their high 9s E scores would fare in this much stricter CoP.
LMAO the new code is brutal! 😂😂😂
It's truthful. We need judges to be this truthful with everyone
I HATE this beam code. While I agree that this routine had more than .2 in deductions, its just insane.
Quite a shame. This routine is beautiful
This video was excellent especially how deductions were explained.
Hi, @FlipFlyTumble, could you do a video on optimal arm positions on dance elements? I feel like there are lots of ways gymnasts use their arms in leaps and jumps but it's not that clear to me what arm positions would receive an actual deduction. For example on the switch half here, I wouldn't even have noticed her arms were a little off. Thanks for the video!
I would love to see the same series being judged on different scoring codes to see the difference between them, it would be super interesting
your video are awesome
Basically: *falls off beam* “I’ve got nothing so far, no deductions. no reason for the judges to look down”
Thanks so much for this, Emily! I'm curious - can you think of any recent gymnasts who *aren't* receiving deductions on their switch-half?
She is perfect... ❤
This is fascinating! Now that I think about it, getting a 7.9 E score is... not terrible, actually? Now I'm curious to see if there are any beam routines that could get close to a 9. (I'm probably asking too much for 9+ routines, haha.) Thanks for making this!
YES YES YES FINALLY
Can you do the same for one of Kyla Ross' beam routines?
Can you do Shawn Johnson BB as well
Yes! Her beam routine is my favorite of all time!
I’ve wanted this video for so long thanks so much
GORGEOUS GYMNAST!!!!!!!!!
For the first 2 “slow connection” deductions, I always thought that as long as the arms keep moving then it shouldn’t receive any deduction, so if I were a judge I wouldn’t take off. But for her Onodi + wolf full I would take off since there was a slight pause.
and that is why you are not a judge
@@notafrog4967 Calling the split jump into her sheep jump a slow connection was ridiculous. Every single element in her routine should be a slow connection then.
For the most part it was a good breakdown but completely missed the mark with that assessment.
her arms swing forward which is considered and extra swing and breaking the connection in this code.
@@FlipFlyTumble Forward arm swing doesn't inherently break the connection, it's if the arms are starting high AND reversing direction. If she had kept her arms lower on the front aerial landing and then done that same backward + forward arm movement, it would have been credited.
Thanks so much for this,it was very much detailed and it helped me understand better.
A 7.9 E score for today's code would not be that bad since that's what most gumnasts are getting nowadays
thanks for watching! and yes absolutely. plus 0 landing deductions is insanely impressive on beam!!
@@FlipFlyTumble Could you do this same video for Daniela Silivas beam routine from 1988?
7.9 E score is terrible judging, this routine is much better than that and absolutely better than others getting that kind of score. The point of judging is to differentiate routines properly and come up with the correct winner. This routine from Nastia deserves to beat any from 2022 Worlds.
@@Zuranthiumi totally agree with you. Despite what this video says, in my opinion this routine is cleaner than any we are seeing this quad. I’m not sure how the difficulty would measure up though
@@Zuranthium and it probably would, I think a couple of the deductions wouldn’t be taken, she would likely get somewhere around a 8.2 imo
Pretty much what I expected. Nastia would get destroyed on connections. If she were to compete today, her beam would be more like her 2005 beam with a 2.5 dismount.
The connection bonuses are ... totally cancelled out by these slow deductions☠
so interessting, scoring is so diffrent now
Omg your job is flawless 😮
7 months later, this is an AMAZING video. I'm just coming across it now. Great work. If you ever have time to make more, I will be watching closely! In the meantime, this is awesome. Thank you for much.
Thank you so much that means a lot!!
Love this video, Pleaase could you do Daiane Dos Santos Floor 2008 Beijing?
Thanks for explaining why I hate the new code.
This was so well done. I’ve seen so many people saying this would score like a 9.6 in the current code and it confuses me so much
That was great! Can you make Ponor Athens EF?
Brilliant, please compare AA of Shawn and Nastia.
Could you do the same for Anna Pavlova beam in the all around at Beijing?
I've seen a few of these videos from you now, and I really appreciate them - they're a super informative resource. But I have a few questions that I'd appreciate some clarification on:
- Several times I've seen you say a gymnast would get a body position deduction for not having her arms in the "ideal position". Some of these the arms are clearly bent or just kind of thrown wherever, but on others it seems like an unfair deduction - the gymnast's arms are extended or controlled, just in an alternate position like second or opposition rather than in high side-middle or crown/fifth. (For example, the leap Nastia does around 1:00 - it's not a standard position but it's clearly a variation on third with the left arm pressed back because the leap turns.) Surely the FIG has not declared those to be the only two allowable arm positions for dance skills? What is the list and where is it mentioned in the Code? I haven't done a full read-through of 22-24 yet but I don't recall such a thing in previous Codes?
- In beam routines there are several times when you point out "adjustments" (i.e. steps without choreography) where the gymnast is *clearly* ... doing choreography? She takes the steps while changing the position of her arms and body in a manner clearly meant to be aesthetic, not a balance check? Please explain
Arm position is included in body shape deduction on beam in all codes. Anything (arm, feet, etc) that is not ideal can be a small deduction on beam. Arm position for the switch half (after 1:00) should ideally be what gymnasts do in switch leap.
The current code execution has strict definition of choreography. The choreography should not be simple arm / leg movement or posing. Another video on Gadirova's beam show what choreography should be (complicated movement, body / head coordinating along with arm / leg).
@@cocoroni1031 Thanks for the explanation. That's dumb as shit. Once again, for the 142nd year running, no one hates gymnastics more than the FIG.
Can you do Fan Ye 2003 BB Final?
So do we know what the judges deducted in 2008? What were the .2 for?
Could you please do Aly Raisman’s Gold medal winning floor routine from London 2012 finals?
wait what start value did you give her
Ii believe the "slow connection" is because she's taller than most gymnasts, so it gives the appearance of being slower
No she pauses significantly
Do you think her ring, sheep jump and full turn at horizontal would get downgraded in this code? or just deducted?
Curious about this as well! They have been very tough on ring leaps and the full turn with leg at horizontal, I wouldn't be surprised if they were both downgraded! Especially since her leg was below horizontal even at the start of the turn, not just at the end.
I think her switch ring would be 100% devalued, judges are very iffy on those, for sheep jump and turn I think they just deduct for body shape, they would probably max out the shape deductions for her sheep jump because judges are also so so strict on those
yup they would all be downgraded
Basically, these days, besides on vault, you get an automatic minimum 1 point deduction before you even start your routine. With how strict the judging has progressed over the years, I wouldn’t be surprised if they started taking tenths off for blinking in the next quad.
Yes. And somehow those deductions are unnecessarily harsh. Back then judges used to deduct obvious form errors or landing faults, now the code is just being overly nitpicky.
Truly. Only one that I would love to see hit a 9+ would be Luo Rui on bars. But I’m sure on her best day they’d still find 1.5 off of it
i love nastia's beam could you do her d grade please
Old video but awesome editing!
People choose to see perfection watching Nastia perform because her look. She was super skinny and super white. So people ranted about those “lines” and failed to recognize all that lacked. She still was top at her time flaws and all though. She was just way overhyped compared to many others that had their time in spotlight and were much cleaner in form. She was sometimes quite sloppy but finished and the comments were insane about how perfect it was. Gymnast less thin & less white will not blind people with love of those features and they will get way more deductions now and then
You sound so racist . It is insane .
@@junglesuperstar9270not a single lie was told. Nastias execution was subpar
@@junglesuperstar9270 gurl be fr
Some of those steps I consider part of her choreography and enjoy very much. She made great shapes at times. Are steps not allowed for choreo?
Not on their own, no.
@@OpenEyes94Video yes of course and I agree but some that were counted as steps were definitely her style of choreo, showing her fluid movements and extension in the body as well as flexibility. I hope they wouldn’t deduct for that
@@CutestMostSweetest the current code is very clear that choreo has to be more than simple steps with some vague arm movement. Maybe not all of them would be deducted depending on the judging, but a lot would have been. She's absolutely capable of incorporating them into more complex choreo like the current code demands but what she shows here would not be classed as choreo under the current code.
And that would still be a very high score. 8 e is like 10 now.
How can the front walkover into back handspring have 0.1 for slow connection when under the current COP it's no longer eligible for any CV? Or is it that because it's eligible for 0.1 SB, the slow connection deduction still applies?
It's a non-rebounding connection, so it's eligible for slow / rhythm deduction.
@@cocoroni1031 I dont think it's eligible for connection bonus at all because of that fact ? Wouldn't it have to be mixed acro/dance or rebounding.
@@_padfoot Yes, connection bonuses (cv) are rewarded only for rebounding or mixed connection. Non-recounding acro connection has no longer been eligible since 2017.
It isn't eligible for cv because it's a non-rebounding connection from acro to acro. Rhythm / slow deduction can apply to all non-rebounding connections except rebounding connections.
slow connection ≠ no connection
@@cocoroni1031 I do realise that for the purposes of SB and CR two elements can be "connected" even if they don't get CV (e.g. Sanne Wevers doing 2 aerials in a row for her acrobatic series in the 2021 quad). In that situation, where the routine submits the non-rebounding acro series as a connection for CR purposes, the slow connection deduction definitely would apply. However (and imagine Nastia doesn't do the layout step-out so no SB is claimed for 3 elements in a row), in Nastia's routine she already has a rebounding acro series elsewhere so under today's COP surely that front aerial to back handspring would not be submitted as any sort of connection, so the slow connection deduction shouldn't apply. Obviously though this is all theoretical since under the current COP nobody would do the front aerial into back handspring in the first place. But for this video to count that slow connection deduction is therefore also theoretical and artificial.
Interesting
After seeing the worlds this year. I don’t think that would be her execration score. We saw mid to high 8’s in election
amazing work!
shouldn't you take a tenth for low relevee on the L turn too?
it is an overall deduction so still just 0.1. wasn’t overall bad enough for a 0.3
It's oficial, FIG hates gymnastics. Imagine that you stuck a routine like that on 2022 and gets a 7.9 score... What they want? Cyborgs? Or everybody doing easier skills every year because it's so annoying how hard is just walk on beam without a 0.3 descont
I do agree with this score since now a days the rules are different then what it was back then
This is very subjective everyone…keep in mind judges do NOT have the ability to look at the slow motion…they only judge what they see…this is a very critical video (looking very very closely)…judges dont look at the routines this closely.
yes we do
@@FlipFlyTumble E-judges do not view in slow motion, they don't even get replay at all.
Still a world class and better than really 99.9% of the beamers right now
Lmao if you think this is world class you need to watch more gymnastics.
This is the prove nowadays' COP is so savage on beam, you can lose many many tenths on dance elements.
Nastia was the biggest benefactor of the '08 code. 10 skills with next to no execution deductions meant the ideal routine across all events was doing a bunch of medium difficulty skills poorly but being able to cover them up well, which she did.
I so appreciate these videos and find them fascinating having a judge’s insight. I do feel like the current judging climate is extraordinarily demoralizing for gymnasts. I understand the COP exists to inform execution, but they need to allow for SOME minute deviations without deduction. The human body is not a protractor lol.
you are very strict!
Didn’t the close beam choreo happen at the start of the routine?
I personally wouldn't give her the slow connection or artistry deductions as they catered specifically to her code, similar to the steps without choreo. So, around a 8.4 isn't bad at all
well the purpose of THIS video is to judge THIS routine under the CURRENT code
@@blockvoting i know that lol. I was just saying since they didn’t do the steps without choreo deduction that I PERSONALLY considered them the same thing.
@@GymFan-ts4pq Yes - like deducting from a 2022 routine for not holding a scale.
thsie adjustment deductions seem ridiculous. I feel like an 8 or more is equivalent to a 10 from the old CoP
Adjustment deductions are applied to kill routines that are not well choreographed between elements. The fact that there's no cap on the adjustment deductions show how important choreography is on the beam.
The fast this is probably true is a little ridiculous, some of it it just too picky for me lmao
But Tim & Elfi saw little deductions?
Her quad is a transition from 10.0 score to D/E score. So the deductions were not applied as extensively as now (based on real time judging).
Tim & Elfi's analysis was basically correct, as this scored a 9.80 execution score.
The sheep jump reductions are ridiculous. If they are going to make it THAT difficult, then it needs to be worth E on beam and D on floor. No wonder we ever see them any more.
IMO it should definitely be a D on beam since they increased the requirements for credit or keep it as a C but with more lenient requirements.
What I hate about E score judging now is there really is such a lack of parity between execution scores. When a very well executed routine is only looking to be .3 more than just a routine done “well” without a major mistake, either the good routine is getting hit unnecessarily for every nitpicking thing, or the just “done well” routine isn’t getting the appropriate deductions then.
It’s stupid. Essentially it just comes down to D score if no matter what you do, the E score will never get above a certain amount. I’m kind of over it and it makes me not enjoy watching elite gymnastics anymore.
Let's see blood was drawn with Nastia. Try shawn and the blood will flow down hill lol.
I'm excited to see if you've done routines from these past Worlds!
I will have more coming soon!
@@FlipFlyTumble I watched your one on Gadirova. I'm curious why you didn't take any form deductions on her Korbut?
Incredible video. Thank you, you made it extremely clear.
I am losing almost all interest in the sport because of all the ridiculous deductions these days. If this trend continues, then a perfect looking routine won't score above a 6 in execution.
9.8 E score in 2008?
That was a good one. Now tell another.
The whole - any time you lean back in a leap/jump we're going to consider it a ring leap adn your foot has to be at your forehead - just wasn't a thing back then. Pretty sure you had some room to stylize your jumps. You'll see all sorts of shapes used in previous decades - like double stag jumps - done well and without deduction. It wasn't about "strictness' of judging.
Basically, it is as if, in the past CoP she would’ve fallen from the apparatus. Such a shame. It makes good gymnasts not try difficult skills to execute easy ones more properly.
Goes to show how the current CoP is absolute trash. This is deserving of a very high E score. Why try to do a beautiful routine perfectly when you’re going to get an 8.0 E score?
Her switch ring shouldn't get credited at all. What were those judges thinking?
Her back leg is sufficiently high. The position here is objectively good, it's just the lack of head release that makes it imperfect, if trying to judge it only as a Switch Ring with head release. In a good scoring system the skill would be evaluated as "ring without head release", which is still beautiful and more difficult than a normal switch leap.
@@Zuranthiumit’s ugly
This is stupid because the rules were different. If the rules were the same then as they are today she would have performed differently. Especially regarding the slow connections
I feel like she always got bigger scores than what she deserved
Her connections were always super slow, they were even slower in Beijng and somehow the judges always gave her all her difficulty, I think it was more because of her nationality than her gymnastics
It would be extremely crimal if this routine got only 7.9 E-Score ,
I miss a fairer less strict judging system. Like the 93-96 or even 97-00 quads
She did have side choreo in her PacRim routine, you just didn’t show it
Rule of thumb is you need at least 3 moving / traveling side choreographies to fulfill the composition requirement. She only moved her leg one time when she did the side choreographies, and it doesn't fulfill the requirement (she would've easily fixed that had she competed this quad).
i didn't cut anything out here. she had side and close to beam choreo but not enough for today's standard
@@FlipFlyTumble Her close beam choreography is enough for today's standard. She shows two choreographic low beam touches (descending from the hold and then full body forward on the beam). The amount of side choreography shown here should be sufficient too, it's dumb how the rule currently requires it all in a single sequence rather than spread throughout the routine. She has two different side choreographies - the opening and the later part with dynamic arms and step + leg raise + turnout movement.
I think your deductions and analysis are correct, however I also think that judging is very biased and judges have favorites. I don’t think they would be as strict as this even if she competed this identical routine in todays code. they would still be obsessed with her and give her many favors as many of the “favorites” are currently getting today.
Please, I don't understand anything of score
Overly nitpicky on your part and wouldn't be obvious in real time.
No this is pretty realistic. That ring and sheep jump were awful
As far as judging is concerned (and myself to that matter) there is no such thing as perfect execution in gymnastics. But no doubt, that routine is damn close to it.
it's right there in the video that it's not
landings, yes.. acro elements, close. dance elements, nooo 😅
For me, it’s kinda ridiculous the amount of deductions they take nowadays. It seems actually easier to overlook something while judging one athlete or another