Hey, did any of you catch the Olympic gymnastic trials airing last eve?

As a fan of gymnastics, I tuned in. The typical bunch of cute little American teens tumbled and flipped, did splits and backhand springs in their individual efforts to win a spot on the Olympic team.

Last nights program was different from others in the past. The camera angle was weird! I wanted to see the front and side of the gymnast(like other years), instead the shots were all taken from "behind" the gymnasts. Lots of "behind" shots, on the matt and off the matt! The cameras were clearly focused on the girls back sides. Gone were the sweat pants the athletes normally doned after leaving the apparatus (better behind shots!). Instead, of sitting down quietly focusing on the competition, these teens were blackberrying their friends, joking with one another..even coyishly kissing each other (on the cheeks) while looking come hitherly into the camera lens.

Hollywood, am I watching American Idol or an athletic competition? One without judges! No judges at a gymnastic competition? They were invisible because the best of that day may not be chosen to go to Beijing. Like a mini Democratic Primary, superdelegates (judges and officials) select the gymnasts moving on to the next level - the Olympics by the gymnast's past record and the gymnasts they feel will score the USA more points, regardless of which athlete wins the trials!

Since when did sports take on the appearance of reality TV? I wonder which "Little Brittany" will be "chosen" for the box of Wheaties? The one that really won..or the one created by Hollywood?

Which brings up the question of judging. Gymnastics, like the other Olympic sports which do not rely upon a stopwatch or the breaking of a ribbon to determine the winner, depends upon the subjective observations of judges.

This topic can command its own thread. But regarding your specific comments, Chocolate, did it appear to you that the actual judges of the competition were being influenced by who had the cutest butt, or by the more traditional, though still subjective judging standards?

Are you suggesting that this year's Womens Olympic Team may be chosen, NOT for their accomplishments on the balance beam, the un-even parallel bars and the floor mat, but by the perkiness of their little tushies?

Judging gymnastics is not subjective unless you consider that a judge doesn't know his/her job.

Every level of gymnastics has certain basic 'tricks' that are standard to that level. The judging then becomes how well the individual gymnast does those 'tricks.' To go beyond that level--to go beyond the 'field'--the gymnast has to introduce more difficult 'tricks.' It's like figure skating. There are cumpulsories to show that you can execute the basics flawlessly, and then there is the real competition. Gymnastics combines the two. How hard are the 'tricks' the gymnast or figure skater do? and how well does he or she do them.

Does the skater add another turn to his/her Lutz and land perfectly? Does the gymnast hit the horse and execute a triple twist in the air and land solidly?--No bounce?

Remember Kerri Skrug in the '90s. She landed a perfect, intricate vault on one foot because she'd sprained her ankle on her first pass.

If gymnastics were any harder, they call it football.

Judges? What judges? The competition I saw the other night showed no judges... They were there live, but invisible to the TV audience. TV viewers were left in the dark as how many points each competitor scored and the support commentary for those decisions. In it's place, was a mindless commentator talking about the giggling girls texting their friends. A coach...Bela Karoyli got lots of airtime. ...as well his ex wife (who is also a coach)! Chit chat about their nasty divorce and which ex spouse yields more power in the gymnastic's sub culture. Apparently she does...(I found out).

The girls were excellent... but lacking the judges scores and sports commentary, I may as well have been watching the Peking Circus...but with "tushies" (subtly, but there).
The TV version of this important competition was a *show*.. not a sports event.

Saying that gymnastics judging isn't subjective is simply inane. If the 100-meter dash was judged like the figure skating or gymnastics or the diving competition then you'd end up with official announcements like this: "Ladies and Gentleman. The winner of the 100-meter dash was the American John Smith with a time of 9.4 seconds, 9.6 seconds, 9.1 seconds, 9.1 seconds, 8.9 seconds and the French judge scored him at 11.6 seconds."

The only sports that are NOT judged subjectively are those contests where the winning performance can be measured by a stopwatch, a yardstick, a specific number of goals scored, or determined by who was the first to break an invisible vertical plane in a head to head competition.

My wife likes to watch the gymnastics. So, I watch too. I didn't notice any gratuitous or perverse camera work.

Oh, you mean like boxing, where only a knockout counts?

Somewhere around here I have a copy of the Gymnastics Judging Manual (its about an inch thick) which goes into great and gory detail of how to score each and every move. It must be effective, based on how closely each of the judges point scores are.

Badbird wrote:
"Careful I bite ears"

So does Mike Tyson....

Oh I don't know. I'll bet you can figure that out for yourself. Let's see, is the winner of a boxing match determined by:

1. A stopwatch
2. A yardstick
3. A specific number of goals scored
4. Breaking an invisible vertical plane
5. None of the above

If it's e) None of the above, then I'll bet we can conclude that (excluding a knockout) the judging of a boxing match is subjective.


I see. But it's still "subjective" in nature, else why the need for multiple judges, hmmm?

The judging of which camera angles to promote is subjective. The audience is unlikely obtain the official judging manual and therefore require access to the total performance. And afterall, who is the official of judge of advertising rates?