Okay... The Code of Points...
So it works like this:
Two separate panels of judges.
A-Panel -- A-score: Difficulty
B-Panel -- B-score: Execution
The A-score is based on three things: Difficulty Value, Connection Value, and Element Group Requirements.
Skills, or elements as they're officially called, are rated by letter value going from 'A' to 'G', each worth 0.1 more than the other. So an 'A' is worth 0.1 and a 'G' worth 0.7. Those points are called "Difficulty Value" (DV). Connections that fit a certain criteria based can get either 0.1 or 0.2, which is called "Connection Value" (CV). Then there's the "Element Group Requirements" (EGR), which are the new required elements. There are five requirements for the women and each is worth 0.5 regardless of the value of the element used to fulfill the requirement, so they're easy to get. I think men only have four EGRs per each event, but I'd have to check that to be sure.
For Difficulty Value, the A-panel takes the nine highest value skills in the exercise, plus the dismount, for a total of ten skills. On beam it's eight skills, plus the dismount and the turn on one foot.
For vault, each vault has a set A-score to begin with.
For Execution, the B-panel starts from 10.0 and may take deductions in increments of 0.1 for a small error, 0.3 for a medium, 0.5 for a large, and 0.8 for a fall. One element may have multiple errors to which multiple deductions can be taken.
Each panel's score is added together for the final score. There are also Neutral Penalties than will be deducted off the final score. These include certain compositional deductions noted by the A-panel, and going out-of-bounds on floor or vault, going overtime on beam or floor, or breaking competition rules which is very, very rare.
Here's an example of a routine I scored:
[/color][/b]
A-score:1. Thief Mount (A)
2. Back Flic Flac (B) + 3. Layout (E = 0.5); CV = 0.1
4. Aerial Cartwheel (D = 0.4)
5. Onodi (D = 0.4)
6. Aerial Walkover (D = 0.4) + 7. Back Flic Flac (-) + 8. Layout Stepout (C = 0.3); CV = 0.2
9. Wolf Jump (A) + 10. Split Jump (A)
11. 1 1/2 Turn (B = 0.2)
12. Switch Split Leap (C = 0.3)
13. Back Flic Flac 3/4 (C = 0.3)
14. Omeliantchik (D = 0.4)
15. Round-off (B) + 16. Double Pike Dismount (E = 0.5)
E: 2 -- 1.0
D: 4 -- 1.6
C: 3 -- 0.9
B: 1 -- 0.2
CV: 0.3
Total: 4.0; all EGRs met
A-score: 6.5B-score:[/b]
(#'s correspond to the above elements)
#3 -- Leg separation [0.1]; Trunk movement to maintain balance [0.1]; Insufficient amplitude [0.3]
#4 -- Body posture fault (leg) [0.1]
#10 -- Body posture fault (leg) [0.1]
#11 -- Precision [0.1]; Trunk movement to maintain balance [0.1]
Additional movement to maintain balance [0.1]
#12 -- Body posture fault (leg) [0.1]
Poor rhythm in connection [0.1]
#13 -- Precision [0.1]
Additional movement to maintain balance [0.1]
#16 -- Step [0.1]
Relaxed/incorrect body posture (leg) throughout the exercise -- [0.1]
Artistry deductions:
Sureness of performance -- [0.1]
Insufficient artistry of presentation: Creative choreography -- [0.1]
A-score: 8.2>>Total Score: 14.700<<[/i][/quote]
I took all of those deductions straight out of the Code of Points. However, it doesn't seem that the real judges are being that strict, seeing as her actual score for that routine was a
16.250.
The international judges are NOT applying the execution deductions like the Code of Points instructs them to. The big problem is that the B-panel judges have to be "in range" of one another. In the past this wasn't a big problem--the increments for deduction were 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, and 0.5. Even if one judge took 0.2 and another took 0.3, that's only 0.1 difference. But now with deductions being 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, and 0.8, with such a big divide between each deduction that's disproportionate to what we used to have, it's very likely for one judge to come up with a score in the mid-8s and another to come up with a score in the low-9s, and then, poof, out of range. Then the judges have to have a conference, taking time out of the competition. If a judge causes too many conferences they can be sanctioned by the FIG. Because the judges want to avoid being sanctioned, they often care more about staying in range with the other judges than they do scoring a routine properly. B-scores these days are almost all too generous, especially on beam. The Women's Technical Committee should see this and address it, but they clearly don't care. The result is that gymnasts just build up a huge A-score with big, sloppy tricks, and it's enough to offset their deductions because their B-score isn't being analyzed properly.
Because of the focus being displaced onto difficulty instead of execution and artistry, in 2006 the World All-Around Title was won by Vanessa Ferrari of Italy even though she fell off the balance beam. At this year's Worlds, Ferrari fell off the uneven bars but still tied for 3rd place with Jade Barbosa of Brazil who also fell on the floor exercise. Medaling in the World Championship All-Around Final with a fall would've been absolutely impossible before this new Code of Points came into place.
So yeah, I'm not a fan.
