The NCAA News - News and Features

March 2, 1998

Higher talent, lower scores

Coaches work together to make new code of points help maintain the integrity of gymnastics

BY VANESSA L. ABELL
STAFF WRITER

A seasoned woman gymnast is expected to earn higher scores as she gains more collegiate competition experience.

So why would she score lower this year than last year if she performed exactly the same routine exactly the same way? It's because the rules have changed.

Since November 1, women's gymnastics has been following the International Gymnastics Federation Women's Code of Points (modified rules) and Junior Olympic (Level 10) modifications.

College gymnastics is only one level in the sport that is being affected by the international overhaul of the code of points, or rules.

When the international rules were first changed, the United States

gymnastics community was concerned because the changes

were so drastic. Among the changes in the new code are significant alterations in routines, resulting in collegiate women's gymnasts needing to learn and accomplish new skills. The gymnastics community had to deal with the changes by altering formerly high-scoring routines to accommodate the new code of points.

Another deep concern in collegiate gymnastics is whether judges across the country will apply the rules uniformly. That concern focuses on whether different regions of the country will adapt quickly to the new standards or continue to cling to the old.

Coaches, NCAA work together

The National Association of Collegiate Gymnastics Coaches (Women) spent last summer's annual convention directing its full attention to the newly established code of points and developing a new set of collegiate rules.

The focus of the NACGC/W was to differentiate the top teams and retain parity with other teams.

The NCAA Women's Gymnastics Committee was receptive to the work accomplished by the coaches association. The two groups worked together in establishing the rules changes and educating NCAA institutions about them.

"It was a wonderful experience of coaches working together on what would be the best for the long term," said Meg Stephenson, assistant women's gymnastics coach at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, and NACGC/W president. "The new code of points will be a positive change."

The new code of points also has brought together USA Gymnastics and the NCAA.

Typically, college gymnastics scores are higher than those of the club-level scores. One possible reason is that judges are more lenient when scoring the college student-athlete.

Stephenson, however, disagrees with that view; she believes the skills are more advanced than at the club level.

"Taking girls from the club level and training them for four years in college allows them to refine their execution and skill," she said. "The programs are clean. We have been able to get rid of a lot of execution errors and techniques and that is reflected in the scores."

Bigger deduction

Each event has a list of special requirements. The most difficult change coaches are dealing with is a bigger deduction for failing to achieve a required segment of a routine.

In the past, such a failure resulted in only a 0.1 deduction. Under the new code of points, it is a 0.2 deduction. The change raised the question of whether the risk of the required segment would outweigh the possible deduction.

The combination of skills that used to earn a scoring bonus also changed. Some skills within previously performed combinations have been devalued.

Stephenson offered evidence that skills requirements have changed.

"My team had to change three requirements on the floor exercise because all the requirements utilized last year had been devalued," she said. "The former start value with all requirements and no bonus was 9.6. This year, the start value of all requirements with no bonus is 9.5."

Valorie Kondos, head coach at the University of California, Los Angeles, agreed that the change is for the better.

"The new code of points will maintain the integrity of women's gymnastics," she said. "It is exciting to see coaches coaching and gymnasts learning. It isn't a strain for the gymnasts. Even the seniors have embraced the new challenges.

"College is a place for gymnasts to diversify and learn new skills. In the 1980s, colleges were felt to be a place where a gymnast would get out of shape and die."

Since the '80s, efforts have been made to change that perception, including implementation of stricter standards such as the new code of points.

Concern about judging

Even with such enthusiasm about change, however, there is concern about inconsistent judging.

Kondos "definitely" is seeing such differences this year. She said UCLA went to the University of Georgia for a meet in early January, then returned home to compete and collected markedly lower scores for the same routines.

One judge went through the routines with Kondos after the meet and showed why the gymnasts' routines were not based on 10 points from the start.

"The new system is not being followed accurately," Kondos said. "There needs to be a check and balance on the judges."

Kondos believes there should be parity among the teams and regions in scoring. "I have a hard time getting teams to California for competition because judging is tougher," she said.

Pat Panichas, chair of the NCAA Women's Gymnastics Committee and head coach at Southern Connecticut State University, hopes that judges will be consistent not only across the country but also within the regions. "If the rules are applied, the judging should have an emphasis on the quality of the performance and the artistry," Panichas said. "Hopefully with the coaches' encouragement, the judges will apply the deductions consistently."

Panichas admits that "judging is the subjective part of the sport. There will always be some differences between judges."

This year, the consequences of

regional judging differences are minor. But those differences are creating concerns about the 1999 women's season.

Next year, teams from all regions will be seeded nationally for the National Collegiate Women's Gymnastics Championships. This year, regional scores are used only to determine seeding in regions. If one region's judges are tougher scorers than those in another, that region could end up being represented unfairly in seeding for the championships.