Judge’s Inquiry: Social Media Requests from Weeks 1 & 2

The first two weeks of the NCAA season did not disappoint, delivering standout freshman debuts, plenty of excellent gymnastics, and the year’s first perfect 10. As athletes settle into the competitive rhythm, judges are also working through their own early-season growing pains. The opening weeks inevitably bring scoring inconsistencies, conferences, and inquiries, with the hope that those conversations help prevent mistakes from significantly impacting final results.

In this week’s article, I’ll break down some of the more questionable scores and confusing moments from Weeks 1 and 2, focusing specifically on balance beam and floor exercise.

Floor

Anya Pilgrim, Florida

Deductions: 

Full-in: low chest on landing (0.050-0.100), leg form (0.050), hop forward (0.100)

Tour-jete full: bent leg (0.050)

Double back: low chest on landing (0.050), small hop forward (0.050)

I would also consider taking artistry for this routine: 0.050 (quality of expression)

There was a long conference following Pilgrim’s routine, most likely because the scores were out of range. As a reminder, the judges have to be within two-tenths if the score average is between 9.500 and 9.800. If the initial judges’ scores are more than two-tenths apart, they have a judging conference to discuss the routine deductions, start value discrepancies, and other such factors until they can bring their scores to within two-tenths. Judge 1 has final say on the score and can ask Judge 2 to move their score as needed to be in range, or they can both move their score toward the middle.

I’m with Judge 1 on this routine.

Judge 1: 9.650

Judge 2: 9.800

My Score: 9.600

Ciena Alipio, UCLA

Deductions: 

Double pike: balance on landing (0.050)

Double wolf turn: control/precision on landing (0.050) 

Back layout one and a half: leg form (0.050)

Front layout: pike (0.050) and balance on landing (0.050)

I can see why some fans might be surprised by Alipio’s 9.800, as none of her mistakes were extremely obvious. It was a lot of small bobbles that added up to a lower-than-expected score in her floor debut.

Judge 1: 9.750

Judge 2: 9.850

My Score: 9.750

Addison Fatta, Oklahoma

Deductions:

Back layout two and a half: hop and adjustment (0.150)

Front double full: large hop forward (0.150)

This was a pretty clean routine from Fatta, other than the obvious errors on her landings. I’m not sure why Judge 1 thought it was appropriate to only take half a tenth on each of those landings. I could even see taking a full two-tenths on the second very large step forward. 

This score is also out of range, and both Judge 1 and the meet referee should have intervened and had a conference. If the average is a 9.800 or above, scores must be within one-tenth. Most likely, the judges would have each moved their score toward the average by a half-tenth, not changing the final score. However, this score is technically in violation of the NCAA Rules and Policies.

Judge 1: 9.900

Judge 2: 9.700

My Score: 9.700

Beam

Konnor McClain, LSU

Deductions:

Leap series connection broken: 0.200 from the start value for missing a special requirement

Switch leap: wobble (0.050)

Switch half: wobble (0.150)

Front aerial: leg bent (0.050)

Side aerial: wobble (0.100)

Gainer full dismount: hop on landing (0.050)

Start Value: 9.400 – 0.200 missing special requirement + 0.400 in bonus = 9.600

These scores to me are…interesting. If you’re Judge 2 and completely ignore the fact that McClain dropped her shoulder and wobbled in the middle of her dance pass, I still don’t know how you can be as high as a 9.750 with the other obvious deductions. If Judge 1 breaks the connection, then the start value should be 9.600, since she’s missing a special requirement leap series (0.200 off the start value). And, she’s short two-tenths in bonus from breaking the C+E leap series connection. So in my opinion, both judges messed this one up. 

Judge 1: 9.550 (9.800 SV)

Judge 2: 9.750 (10.000 SV)

My Score: 9.200 (9.600 SV)

Ella Zirbes, Utah

Deductions:

Layout stepout: Fall (0.500), loses bonus

Leap series: foot movement between elements, breaking series, 0.200 off the start value.

Switch half: under-rotated (0.050)

Start value: 9.400 – 0.200 missing special requirement + 0.200 in bonus = 9.400

Based on her routine composition, I think she was supposed to do a triple series but fell on her back layout. I also would have broken her leap series, as she doesn’t fully rotate her switch half and scoots her feet around before the stag jump, which breaks the series. The judges did not break that series. Overall, it’s a very clean routine with high scoring potential, as long as she can make her series and rotate her switch half all the way around.

Judge 1: 9.100 (9.700 SV)

Judge 2: 9.050 (9.700 SV)

My Score: 8.850 (9.400 SV)

Avery Neff, Utah

Deductions:

Side aerial to two feet: Low chest on landing (0.050)

Gainer full dismount: low chest on landing (0.050)

Here’s another case where I disagree with the judges. I honestly would not give Neff credit for her straddle quarter to front support (C), as she doesn’t show a clear 180-degree straddle position during the skill. This is what the skill should look like according to the code of points: 

This is what Neff’s looks like: 

To me, she never stands up and shows a 180-degree straddle, so I would honestly devalue this to an A. She also moves her front foot on her acro landing and breaks the connection. As a result, she loses two-tenths from her start value for missing her leap special requirement, and she would also be missing a B value part, which would be another three-tenths off the start value. She has five-tenths in bonus, though, which gives her a start value of 9.400.

Judge 1: 9.650 (9.700 SV)

Judge 2: 9.650 (9.700 SV)

My Score: 9.300 (9.400 SV)

READ THIS NEXT: Questions, Comments, Concerns: Week 2

---

Article by Rhiannon Franck

Rhiannon Franck is a former national-rated NAWGJ women’s gymnastics judge with over 15 years of USAG judging experience and nine seasons judging NCAA gymnastics. Outside of gymnastics, Franck works at a university as a nursing professor and loves to travel. You can follow her on Instagram and Twitter.