New Olympics Scoring: No More Perfect 10.0

Dekortage writes "If you watch the Olympics gymnastics this year, you may be confused by the new scoring system which will let athletes score 14, 17, or even higher. The new rules are 'heavy on math' and employ two panels of judges: one for technical difficulty, which adds points up from a score of zero; the other for execution and technique, which starts at 10.0 and subtracts for errors. The two numbers are then combined for the final score. As one judge put it, 'The system rewards difficulty. But the mistakes are also more costly.' The new rules were adopted after South Korea protested a scoring at the 2004 Olympics." Now I'm sure that no Slashdot reader will intentionally watch any "sport" that has judges determine the winner, but their wives/girlfriends might seize control of the remote because they want to know who is the best at that ribbon-twirling thing.

Comments

Huh

[Aaron_Pike]

And people wonder why there is a perception of sexism in technical fields.

Re:Huh

[jfclavette]

Seriously. I'd expect more open-mindedness from a bunch of people whose hobbies are such interesting things as soldering and typing in a text editor.

Re:Huh

[TheoMurpse]

I'm going to chime in, too. I find Taco's comments offensive. I suppose the code obfuscation contests are worthless as well, since there are judges for that event, too?

Also, there are no ribbons in gymnastics. That's rhythmic gymnastics, sir.

I wish I could mod down the editorialization.

Re:Huh

[PlatyPaul]

To play devil's advocate, it really does seem stupid to include Rhythmic Gymnastics in addition to the tried-and-true Artistic Gymnastics, as the demonstration of ability is almost exclusively artistic in nature.

If they have rhythmic gymnastics, they should have professional dance. Seriously.

Re:Huh

[1u3hr]

I'm sure there are plenty of homosexual men that enjoy gymnastics, this is just Slashdot being sexist.

On the other hand, watching nubile athletic girls contort themselves does it for me.

Re:Huh

[lilomar]

I think the point is that anything that needs judges is not a sport, due to it being subjectively instead of objectively scored.

Re:Huh

[Xupa]

What I wonder is why they made entertainment that only chicks dig more math-heavy. Now I'm gonna have to watch it just so I can explain it to her.

Re:Huh

[jfclavette]

What about referees ? They can have a lot of influence. As much as judge can since they have well-established guidelines too.

Re:Huh

[Monokeros]

Actually, What we need are a lot more good programmers. The sex of these good programmers is irrelevant.

Re:Huh

[Methuseus]

I find that those girls are too contorted and their body shapes too scary for my tastes. Any girl whose shoulders are twice as wide as her hips looks freakish to me. Even guys that are that abnormal look weird to me.

Re:Huh

[icegreentea]

That's the most BS definition of a sport ever. You take the group of commonly held to be sports activities. Basketball, football (both of them), baseball. With the exception of basketball, the majority of points scored in the three other sports could easily be called objective. The remainder is ridiculously subjective. A baseball umpire calling the safe or out at home is a really subjective thing. You might not have the best angle, there's dust in the air, and crap is moving fast. Until the rise of instant replay, and slow motion, it was completely impossible for borderline cases to be 'objective'.

Re:Huh

[PlatyPaul]

Wrong.

Sure, DanceSport (which I'd say is a subset of non-amateur competitive dancing) is an IOC recognized sport, but it is not in the current set of events for the Olympic Games.

Yes, they may add it in the future. I'd argue that they should, if they're keeping Rhythmic Gymnastics.

Re:Huh

[Anonymous Coward]

I usually look for their age first. Like that US blond softball player. She is legal. As long as they are legal, all is good. Which as a side note I wish the Olympics athletes were 18+. They are handed condoms at the Olympic village (they were in past Olympics anyway). I see that 13-15 year old girl bending twisting into all sorts of positions, then remember that she was given condoms to be safe back in her room. At least is she was 18 I wouldn't feel evil thinking that way.

Re:Huh

[MoxFulder]

Now I'm sure that no Slashdot reader will intentionally watch any "sport" that has judges determine the winner, but their wives/girlfriends might seize control of the remote because they want to know who is the best at that ribbon twirling thing.

I don't **HAVE** a wife or girlfriend, you insensitive clods!!!

Gosh, why does Slashdot always have to rub it in my face.

Re:Huh

[lilomar]

Theoretically, Referees shouldn't have any influence. They do, because people aren't perfect.

But the difference between judges and referees is that judges determine things subjectively, referees objectively.

In a sport, you can say, "If I do X I will get Y number of points." In a judged competition, you can't do that.

I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with judged competitions, I'm just saying that they aren't sports.

Re:Huh

[lilomar]

But in theory the scoring is objective. People make mistakes, but in a perfect game there would be no subjectivity about who had how many points.

Re:Huh

[blane.bramble]

In which case you are arguing that a boxing match that is won by a knock-out is a sport, but if it's a points decision it's not.

Re:Huh

[lilomar]

Interesting. Boxing falls into both categories depending on the outcome.

So we've learned that not everything fits into a nice, neat category. :-p

Re:Huh

[jemminger]

System message: topic devolution complete.

Re:Huh

[Intron]

Since a moderator decides on objective criteria, slashdot posting is therefore a sport.

I fully expect this post to be moderated objectively.

Re:Huh

[caluml]

The main reason women are lacking in the tech industry is because of perception that women do not belong there.

Not really. Most women don't like techie stuff, just as most men don't like flower arranging. As with everything though, there are overlaps. Some women can lift heavier things than some men. Most men can lift heavier things than most women. That's due to their bodies being different. If their bones and muscles can be different, so can the brain.

Please, please take notice of the "most"s there.

Re:Huh

[iworm]

"Gosh, why does Slashdot always have to rub it in my face."

Well, since you've no girlfriend to rub it in your face, it's better than nothing...

Re:Huh

[Amouth]

but if you take something - say ice skateing and make it so that x gives y points.. then everyone will just learn to perfect the move with the highest y and then you will just see a chain of them for the lenght of the event..

it is perfectly acceptiable for it to be subjective - this is why there is more than one judge - and they do have guide lines for quality and preformance..

while i agree it might be better to call it a compitition than a sport - i do belive it has just as much a place in the Olympics as sports.

pure artistic stuff i don't think is right for the Olympics but if it is a good hybrid between art and athletics then go for it.

Re:Huh

[initdeep]

you do realize that they did change the rules a few years ago so only over 16 athletes are allowed?

right?

this was directly caused by both gymnastics (women's) and diving (women's) where 13 year old athletes were starting to be very common (chinese divers especially).

Re:Huh

[initdeep]

do you even understand scoring in gymnastics?

in other words, do you have a clue or are you just randomly spewing?

as in many other "subjectively scored" sports, the previous system had a very defined set of scoring rules. And I'm willing to bet this is merely a refinement of said system. (much like the "refinement" that goes on with the BCS rankings almost yearly)

a particular vault for example has a maximum starting value based upon the "degree of difficulty".

that is the maximum you can score regardless of how perfect you do it.

from there, there are certain WRITTEN deductions for defects in the performance.

legs open when the should be closed? minus 0.03
hand not on the vault in the same plane? minus 0.01

etc.

its not nearly as subjective as people want to make it out to be.

And i realize that I'm not the average /.er and actually understand many different sports, but damn, merely watching a gymnastics television broadcast would teach you this. (I learned mine taking a niece to gymnastics competitions and talking with the coach).

Re:Huh

[scheme]

In a sport, you can say, "If I do X I will get Y number of points." In a judged competition, you can't do that.

I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with judged competitions, I'm just saying that they aren't sports.

In gymnastics, you know that given a certain routine you will get x points for technical difficulty, likewise if you make mistake y you use z points for execution.

That matches your definition of a sport fairly well.

Re:Huh

[SatanicPuppy]

Yea, ya think? The way I read it was as more of a "I know all you guys watch this stuff and care, but I'm going to pretend like I believe that the only reason you watch it is because your girl makes you."

Shit. Geeks are as gooey as anyone else. I went over to a buddies house last weekend, drank a few beers hacked on some linux, talked about xen virtualization and shit like that. Then we went up to let the dogs out, and got sucked in to the last 12 minutes of Castaway and the first fucking two hours of goddamn Titanic.

The whole "we're just watching it because of the VR-controlled submersibles and the picture of the hot chick" argument wears a little thin after a while since that stuff happens bed for christs sake. But if you'd asked us we'd have blamed it on her anyway; it's not only women who have defined gender roles in this society.

The hyper political correctness gets old after a while. The worst thing he suggested in the damn title is that women might like to watch the ribbon twirling, which, judging by the fact that my wife likes to watch it, I don't think is that far fetched or degrading.

Re:Huh

[aproposofwhat]

Er...

wrong.

Great Britain has a 14 year old, Tom Daley competing in the diving.

You must be thinking of some other competition.

Re:Huh

[DragonWriter]

If they have rhythmic gymnastics, they should have professional dance. Seriously.

Well, no, there is no requirement that the Olympics have everything that qualifies as a "sport" under whatever definition applies.

That aside, Ice Dancing. Seriously.

Re:Huh

[Alpha830RulZ]

Wait until you're a parent of a 16 yr old daughter, and all her friends start looking hot to you.

-Must- -not- -stare-...

Re:Huh

[Anonymous Coward]

in the fall of 2000, approximately 40% of the entering class were women.

Most of the entering class were men.

And most of these initiatives involve special scholarships & programs for women. It's rarely surprising that you can attract more women into programs that favor them over their male counterparts. It's maybe more surprising that men still outnumber women once those intiatives are in place.

Re:Huh

[Target Practice]

I find that those girls are too contorted and their body shapes too scary for my tastes. Any girl whose shoulders are twice as wide as her hips looks freakish to me. Even guys that are that abnormal look weird to me.

I agree. The divers and swimmer women are where it's at. There are some hot Canuck divers this year!

No, I don't watch it for patriotism, or for the sports. Just the babes.

Re:Huh

[Anonymous Coward]

I've always thought the olympics should include breakdancing. It already has a large body of international practitioners, qualified judges, it requires massive amounts of skill and it looks awesome. That may just be me.

Re:Huh

[spazdor]

The legitimacy of rhythmic gymnastics as a "sport" is certainly up for debate. The objection raised, though, was to the "ha ha chicks don't like real sports" bit of childish misogyny in the OP.

Re:Huh

[spazdor]

Hey, uh, welcome to Internet. You must be new here, I'll show you around.

Re:Huh

[Wandering Wombat]

Yes, but you'd scare away all the old people and rednecks who'd wonder "why dem young dark kids is on the telly havin's a seizure"...

Seriously, though, I love to watch it as a performance (except when they make a movie out of it).

Re:Huh

[glgraca]

Hey, they should have weight categories for dance, as well, so we could have medals for Heavywheight Mambo or Flyweight Waltz.

Re:Huh

[Xupa]

I was talking about stripping. We start'em pretty young, too. GO TEAM MYSPACE!

Re:Huh

[street struttin']

Why don't I see big long strings of 3-pointers in basketball, then?

Re:Huh

[KevinKnSC]

I know, except for those 894 gold medals, the U.S. hardly wins anything!

Re:Huh

[CheeseTroll]

Ah, but the difficulty of his post was high enough to qualify him for the finals.

Re:Huh

[smoker2]

Insightful ?
Fucking coward more like !
I quite often look at the cash in the till when in the supermarket - does that make me an armed robber ?
There are countries in the world where 12 or 14 is the normal age for marriage and sex - does that make the whole country paedophiles ?

Re:Huh

[poopdeville]

A "subjective" judgement that has BEEN CODIFIED. EVERYBODY who does a triple whammy spin flip starts off with 10 or 17 or whatever points, depending on the technique they're attempting. Points are deducted depending on the actual performance.

This is no different than saying that basketball's three point shots are harder than two point shots, and so should be worth more.

Re:Huh

[Anpheus]

In strawmanistan, the most free and enlightened society of all, 15 is the age of consent.

Re:Huh

[KernelMuncher]

How about an archery competition where you have to shoot it high and then catch it in some sort of bin. Extra points if you catch it by hand. Points are subtracted if the arrow ends up in your body. Now that's something I'd watch.

Re:Huh

[Wandering Wombat]

So because I make fun of the racists... I'm a racist?

If you're making fun of ME for being a racist, then by your own logic, you are a racist yourself, in which case, I'll be glad when you're hung from a pole, too.

Re:Huh

[grahamd0]

Since a moderator decides on objective criteria, slashdot posting is therefore a sport.

Your premise is false.

I objectively determine that I disagree with a poster before I mod them down.

</sarcasm>

Hot chicks at the olympics

[JWSmythe]

I just wait for someone to tell me there are hot chicks in skin tight clothes doing something. Otherwise, I could care less.

Re:Hot chicks at the olympics

[SpeedyDX]

I was gonna say the same thing. Then I remembered all gymnasts look 12 years old.

Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, amiright? ...

Re:Hot chicks at the olympics

[value_added]

Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, amiright? ...

Dunno. Are you attracted to powerful shoulders, an over-developed torso, flat chest, and short (Russian style) muscular legs?

If you are, you might be interested in the stocking clerk that works at my local grocery store. His name is Billy.

Re:Hot chicks at the olympics

[BitterOldGUy]

I was gonna say the same thing. Then I remembered all gymnasts look 12 years old.

Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, amiright? ...

Rhythmic Gymnastics - nothing but dance and "judged" by the most subjective methods you'll ever see. Part of the score is how the girls look. That's right, look; not entirely how well they performed. Many of these girls develop eating disorders when they hit puberty so that their looks and subsequently "careers" aren't destroyed.

They make the child beauty pageants look tame.

Re:Hot chicks at the olympics

[JWSmythe]

Your second comment is appropriate. I could care less. It doesn't mean that I do care more. If you were to assign a scoring system of 1 to 10 to my level of care, where 1 is absolute lack of care, and 10 is absolute care, the Olympics may rate a 3, at which point there is room in the scale to raise or lower my level of care. I could care less, but it wouldn't even matter, because it's lower than a neutral level of care (5), and has no direct impact on myself.

    If there were to be a direct impact upon myself by the event, then that level of care would be more significant. Take the scenario "There's a truck coming down the road". If I were not in the road, I could care less, at a care level of 3, and it wouldn't matter. If I were standing in the road in front of the truck, at a care level of 3, and I did care less, that would definitely be a sign of deep depression, which would be resolved rather quickly, assuming the truck does it's job appropriately and runs me over. :)

    It becomes a moot point, as the phrase "I could care less" entered colloquial English approximately 40 years, and it is already commonly understood to mean the same, either in the positive or negative syntax. It is found in print as far back as 1966. I'm only 35 years old, and I started speaking at 1 year old, so both versions of the phrase were already in common usage for 8 years.

http://incompetech.com/gallimaufry/care_less.html
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/couldcare.html
http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/g09.html
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm

Not everyone uses metric you insensitive clod!

[m3j00]

Where is America's perfect 12?

For anyone confused by the summary

[JohnHegarty]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girlfriend

Yeah right

[Anonymous Coward]

No single male would ever switch the gymnastics on and watch a bunch of young ladies do physical exercise in leotards.

In other news, the last porn site finally died, citing a "lack of market" for its product.

Re:Yeah right

[Lord_Frederick]

What if the single male wanking off is also pre-teenage or early teens?

Boxing anyone?

[night_flyer]

how about martial arts... last time I checked they are scored by judges...

Re:Boxing anyone?

[rob1980]

But aren't those scores based on hard values? Punches thrown vs. landed, that sort of thing. It's not like they're judging the artistic quality of the fight or something.

Re:Boxing anyone?

[Flying Scotsman]

Some martial arts scoring systems have aspects that are non-quantative. For example, in judo competitions penalties (which are essentially points for the non-penalized player) can be assigned on things like "non-combativity," where you aren't attacking enough or hard enough in the eyes of the judge. Perhaps not as subjective as gymnastics scoring, but there's no hard metric for it.

What's with the jackass summary?

[Theaetetus]

Why the need to throw in the condescending misogynist comment, Taco? What does it have to do with math or sports? Can we moderate you offtopic flamebait?

Re:What's with the jackass summary?

[CopaceticOpus]

News for mysogynists. Stuff that matters if you're not some dumb chick.

Just call it part of the game

[kahei]

Sure, the 2004 Olympics (and the next Winter Olympics perhaps even more so) contained judging that didn't necessarily reward the 'best' contestant. But that's part of the sport; it's not about being the 'best', which is pretty well impossible to define except in straightforward running/throwing events. It's about getting the highest score.

Nobody really thinks Tour de France cyclists don't store blood and take drugs; part of the game is the tradeoff between higher performance and higher chance of getting disqualified. Look at the way football is played in south america; taking a fall is just seen as part of the game, a judgement call like any other with particular risks and rewards. Argentina beat England in 1986 by pushing the ball in the net by hand; that may mean they won by taking a particular risk, but it doesn't mean they didn't win. They won the game of 'being allowed the most goals, by whatever means', which is the game they were actually playing.

I don't think the answer is to change the scoring. The answer is to take a more holistic approach, and say: "Ok, he was maybe the second best at *gymnastics*. But he was the best at *getting points for gymnastics*!"

Lame.

[Just Some Guy]

Now I'm sure that no Slashdot reader will intentionally watch any "sport" that has judges determine the winner, but their wives/girlfriends might seize control of the remote because they want to know who is the best at that ribbon twirling thing.

First, if you can't appreciate the beauty and artistry in judged events, then you're missing something wonderful. From the guys doing iron crosses on the rings (which makes my shoulders hurt sympathetically) to the girls seeming to ignore gravity, there's something there to move any soul.

Second, my wife was a college swimmer and completed Army Airborne training. She's about as into ribbon twirling things as I presume girls are into you.

Yes, and I didn't like the implication

[Chrisq]

Yes, and I didn't like the implication that any /. geek would not be able to override a TV remote.

No more 10?

[MiniMike]

Are you saying that our gymnasts now go to eleven?

Re:For a system that's math heavy

[squidfood]

You would think they could have just increased the floating point size to 10.00 instead!

But it goes to 11.

At last!

[Centurix]

I get to use my slide rule again!

Numeric inflation

[Moryath]

isn't restricted just to the Olympics - though it's sad to see it happening.

Look at all (american) professional sports. Every time they're in a slump, some "rule change" comes along to bump scores. Basketball got laxer and laxer on obvious rules violations (watch any of the running leaps a "slam dunk" guy takes). Football implemented letting q-backs throw the ball into the stands. Baseball juiced up the ball itself, but thankfully drew the line on allowing metal bats.

And it's not even restricted to physical sports. Look at a pinball table today - you could easily chop off the last 3 digits of the score, because they never read anything meaningful anyways. Look at the numbers for damage ratings in "rpgs" like the Final Fantasy series - you used to start with characters doing 5-6 points of damage a hit, now you do 500-1000 and go from there.

Re:Numeric inflation

[nuttycom]

Not everyone eats crappy food and has a sedentary lifestyle. Particularly not the sort who end up as Olympic athletes, who on average have a lot more time to train and a lot more research on how to train effectively than at any time in history.

</obvious>

Re:China controlling even this?

[Enderandrew]

The IOC made this call a few years back actually. I believe most international competitions leading up the Olympics have been using this new scoring system.

I'm not in the slightest bit offended but..

[sleeponthemic]

Surely there are plenty of geeks out there that recognise that the pursuit of excellence (no matter if it is in a GAME) is far more commendable than the average person's pursuit of an encyclopedic knowledge of televisional (i likes to makes the new words) general knowledge. If you hate sport, at least admire the anti-apathy.

Kind of like going to the airport. It's uplifting. Just about everybody has a purpose, a direction, an empty wallet after that $8 coffee.

Re:I really dont care for olympics

[Gotung]

So you don't think its cool to watch somebody that can not only do a back flip, but throw in a full twist in the middle of said back flip?

Now add in that they did this not on the ground, but on a balance beam only inches wide and they nailed the landing with narry a wobble?

Regardless of the politics surround this year's Olympics, you seriously can't see why anybody would enjoy watching a human being pull off amazing shit like that?

Scoring...

[PottedMeat]

Scoring only enters my mind when I watch the women's beach volleyball.

Obligatory jokes below.

PM

Re:No Thanks.

[PlatyPaul]

It's already in the Olympics.

Go USA!

I beg to differ

[Cathoderoytube]

"Now I'm sure that no Slashdot reader will intentionally watch any "sport" that has judges determine the winner"

I dunno. There's talk of finally approving the thong for women's figure skating...

More fair, less accessible.

[bziman]

As a former gymnast, I can say that the new system is definitely more fair -- if you have two perfect routines, the one with the higher difficulty wins. Also, it means that you don't have to keep changing the system -- as routines include more difficult elements, the start value becomes higher. And you can keep a standard set of deductions for things like bending your knees, or not maintaining a toe point, or falling on your ass.

On the other hand, as a fan of the sport, the new system is more confusing, because when it was out of ten, everyone knows that a 9.9 is really good, but now, is a 16.5 really good? Or a 17.3? As it turns out, a 16.5 might win gold on one event, but not even medal on another. But I think anyone who actually follows the sport will be able to keep up, for the casual once-every-four-years viewer, they can just concentrate on the shiny medal thingie hanging around the necks of the folks on the podium at the end.

Re:Easy Gold

[lilomar]

That's known as multiplication in the math world...

Real purpose of Olympics

[BitterOldGUy]

No, no, no. Today's Olympics exist for the purposes of:

1. Allowing an athlete (only the Gold medal winner) to create a very lucrative endorsement career.
2. Very large corporations to advertise with the illusion of supporting something altruistic and for the peace of all mankind
3. Countries to show how progressive they are and show they're now part of the modern World - China
4. Advertisements for the newest sports enhancing drugs, well not public anyway. Other athletes will see that so and so didn't get caught using a certain brand of steroid and then profit for company.
5. Certain (hot) female athletes who may or may not do well will get some lucrative modeling and TV deals out of it.
6. Citizens of countries whose athletes win Gold Medals can sit on their asses in front of the TV, drinking beer, eating taco chips and pizza and getting fatter and feel superior to other countries because "they" won the Gold!
7. IOC managers get rich while they award cities the right to host olympics
8. IOC get even richer selling the Rings to the highest bidder.

Help me continue here....This is getting fun!

Save it for Digg

[stewbacca]

Now I'm sure that no Slashdot reader will intentionally watch any "sport" that has judges determine the winner,

What's up with the quality of summaries these days? Do we really need the editorial comment? Are you SURE that NO slashdot reader would watch, oh, I dunno, diving and/or gymnastics (two of the bigger Olympic events)? I for one don't appreciate being summed up into one big ball referred to as "Slashdot reader"--especially by editors. I can handle the occasional name-flame by Anonymous Coward.

Speaking as a former collegiate gymnast

[thoughtcancer]

I can help clarify some misunderstandings with regards to the impartiality of the gymnastics scoring system (Note: I am a former USAG Judge as well as a former competitive gymnast at the collegiate level).

1) Gymnastics routines are made up of a series of interconnected skills
2) Each skill in the routine has a "perfect" execution form; that is, straight legs, pointed toes, straight arms, clean shoulder-to-knee lines, or whatever the skill calls for.
3) If a gymnast performs a skill, and the execution of the skill does not meet the "perfect" execution form, points are deducted for each imperfection within the skill
3a) Gymnastics judges are, for the most part, former competitive gymnasts with an intimate understanding of the execution of the skills which they are judging, and undergo extensive training for identifying imperfections in the execution of said skills.
4) Depending on the severity of the imperfection, points are deducted (minor bends in the limbs account for small deductions, while falls or failure to execute skills correctly or in sequence account for large deductions).
5) Add up all the deductions for each skill in a routine, and you've got your execution deductions.

Now, the new scoring system is based on a response to the ridiculous difficulty of modern gymnastics. Each skill in any given event is given a difficulty rating depending on how difficult it is to execute the skill flawlessly. In mens gymnastics, for example, difficulty ratings go from an A-level (skills like a basic back flip) to F-level (skills like a triple twisting double back flip). It makes sense that gymnasts who perform more difficult skills should be rewarded with higher scores, so that's where the new system comes into play.

In the old days, no matter how difficult your routine was, everyone started off with a "10" and was deducted for execution of skills. So, a gymnast who performed a triple back flip (an F-level skill) in his routine would be on the same level as a gymnast who only did a double front flip (a D-level skill); judges would solely deduct based on execution rather than take into account the difficulty of the skill. So now, instead of you starting with a perfect score, have to BUILD towards the perfect score by creating a routine with high level skills (that is, graded D, E, and F).

Now, back to judges. Judges can now take into account skill difficulty as well as skill execution when judging a routine. Keep in mind that judges aren't judging a routine based on their personal opinion. They judge based on universally accepted "perfect" forms and the skills are directed in the FIG code of points (created by gymnasts for gymnasts, by congress). As a former judge, I can tell you that our judging performance is also graded by how well we can spot imperfections in execution; judges don't get to the Olympic level unless they are eagle-eyed and impartial.

I hope this helps everyone as they continue their discussions on the matter.

Re:100m?

[Reality Master 101]

Personally, I have always felt that the most stupid event at the Olympics is the 100m sprint. Paradoxically this seems to be the viewers favourite, despite the fact that it is the event most determined by luck and, frankly, rule bending.

Huh? How is luck involved in running against an absolute clock? And how do you bend the rules of "fastest to the finish line wins"? Unless you're talking about drugs, and that's a problem of every performance sport.

The reason the 100m sprint is popular is because the runners hit the highest speeds, and thus earn the title "the fastest man on Earth."

Re:100m?

[CastrTroy]

Except when a Canadian wins, and then some America claims to be the worlds fastest man, because he broke a record for the 200m. After which they decide to have a showdown, at a race of 150m, which the Canadian won. Apparently Johnson, the America, pulled his quadriceps muscle, which caused him to drop out halfway through the race. There's controversy as to whether or not he actually had injured himself, or decided to throw the race after he realized he was going to lose.

Re:100m?

[Reality Master 101]

Except when a Canadian wins, and then some America claims to be the worlds fastest man, because he broke a record for the 200m.

Who cares what people claim? The question is who hits the highest speed, and the 100m sprinter (usually) does. You'll note that Michael Johnson didn't bother to try and challenge in the 100m.