tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7353917441739196825.post9006901978726545649..comments2024-03-15T00:15:25.922-07:00Comments on The E Panel: Born This WayLloydMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15341630229725069671noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7353917441739196825.post-19178867538374727232011-12-26T04:17:57.554-08:002011-12-26T04:17:57.554-08:00Definitely Atler. That girl was just amazing and r...Definitely Atler. That girl was just amazing and rather than be recognized for is she spent her entire career being punished for her weakness. Its frustrating because there is literally no reason for it. I didn't mention her here though because I wrote about her not long ago (about her DLO-punch-stag combination).<br /><br />Lauren Mitchell and Romania are great examples that I hadn't thought of. Its weird that with Romania is is clearly to do with their program and coaching - why not just concentrate on bars a little more? (I realise it will be vastly more complicated than that, but it seems so simple). <br /><br />"equally frustrating when the old code didn't care about difficulty much" - exactly. I am one of the biggest whiners ever but I still appreciate why it had to happen. I feel like towards the end of the 10 system there were some scores that just made no sense, particularly in Sydney. This is an example I have used recently but I keep thinking about it and getting riled: Khorkina outscored Lobaz on floor in the TF. This would make sense if Lobaz's routine was tricky but wobbly, but it was, I think, the superior routine in every aspect. <br /><br />I always think it is such a shame about Mo, she could have been the star of those Olympics. Sad, really. <br /><br />There obv needs to be a balance that we have yet to find. One that prevents code whoring but doesn't reward difficulty to a chucking level.LloydMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15341630229725069671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7353917441739196825.post-90191777676940411542011-12-25T14:10:25.301-08:002011-12-25T14:10:25.301-08:00Definitely, Vanessa Atler would have been incredib...Definitely, Vanessa Atler would have been incredibly more successful in a code that favored the use of specialist. She is virtually ASac. Rudi vault, great beam, powerful floor but dismal bars.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7353917441739196825.post-55446324646643396252011-12-25T05:01:34.240-08:002011-12-25T05:01:34.240-08:00Wonderful, love this :)
Yea many of the less per...Wonderful, love this :) <br /><br />Yea many of the less perfect tricksters would have benefitted from the new code. Gina Gogean VS Kui Yuan Yuan in Beam EF Worlds 1997. The code was much less forgiving on bobbles then. Mo Huilan missed both BB and UB EFs in Atlanta, while in 2008 both Nastia and He Kexin made UB EF with a fall. Strange, while people complain about how the code values difficulty too much now, it was equally frustrating when the old code didn't care about difficulty much. <br /><br />I would also add Vanessa Atler to the list. Bars were her nemesis, but her quad valued AAers. She could have been really successful like ASac. <br /><br />Lauren Mitchell. For being a BB and FX specialist in a quad where UB and VT scores high. Dunno where she will fit in though. <br /><br />Pretty much the entire romanian gymnastics program got screwed with the new code. Well they were always weak on bars, but they used to lose maybe 0.2 in difficulty/scores. Right now, they lose 3 points, which is much harder to make up, especially since bars is still a higher scoring apparatus. <br /><br />/rant/ Merry Christmas :)Elanymirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08140273464032721524noreply@blogger.com