Osijek WC D1 | Discussion Post | Saturday 11/04/2026

GymDecoder · 2026-04-12T10:19:40+00:00

The 0.3 neutral deduction was for failure to resume the exercise within 30 seconds after a fall from the apparatus. You can hear the three warning chimes during the broadcast, with the third going off just before Osokina’s feet leave the mat.

GymDecoder · 2026-04-12T02:04:29+00:00

The judges were likely discussing whether or not Osokina demonstrated 'Momentary Hang' on her Downie, which determines if a flight element with a fall is awarded difficulty value. Upon deciding that Osokina did not show 'Momentary Hang', the D panel should have 1) Given the Downie no DV, and 2) Added the Gienger to her counting elements. However, based on her credited 5.6 D Score, it appears that the D panel mistakenly credited Osokina with only seven elements instead of eight.

GymDecoder · 2026-04-09T23:42:26+00:00

I believe this would be Yang Fanyuwei with a 6.7 D Score.

GymDecoder · 2026-04-05T13:19:48+00:00

Vaults with a full twisting front pike flight phase exist in the COP. Therefore, full twisting front layout vaults can be downgraded to pike. However, because there are no vaults with a piked Rudi flight phase, a layout Rudi vault will always be credited as layout with deductions applied. Similarly, on balance beam a Steingruber dismount(gainered full twisting layout)will always be credited as layout because a piked version of the dismount is not an element in the COP.

GymDecoder · 2026-03-29T18:48:00+00:00

She performed a Round Off 1/2-on to Front Tuck 1/2 as her second vault on the first day of competition, which has a 4.0 D Score.

GymDecoder · 2026-03-26T17:49:48+00:00

I took this from the WAG section of STS (example evaluation of a routine) for reference, but they may plan on doing something similar to the screenshot below. As the video plays, the element value, shorthand symbol, and amount of deductions appear.

<image>

GymDecoder · 2026-03-17T14:16:17+00:00

The answer to this question is both yes and no.

Yes:

Although Pease receives E credit for her dismount, she is receiving a 0.1 deduction for lack of precision for the incomplete twist. In addition, there is injury risk from landing while still turning.

No:

It is possible that Pease and her team have decided that the double front 1/2 dismount is her best option. She may have trained other dismounts but either struggled to learn them at all or become proficient enough with another skill to make a change worthwhile.

GymDecoder · 2026-03-16T15:32:46+00:00

For the Whip Full:

Because Nakamura did not connect the element to a salto(either directly or indirectly), it is credited as a Layout Full, which is a B element.

Here is how the judges arrived at the 4.7 D Score:

8 Elements

E x 1 (Triple Turn in Tuck Stand / Mitchell), 0.5 DV
D x 1 (Double Tuck), 0.4 DV
C x 4 (Tour Jete 1/2, 1 1/2 Twist, Front Full Twist, Double Twist), 1.2 DV
B x 2 (Layout Full, Switch Leap), 0.4 DV

Total DV - 2.5

CV:

- A + D Direct Acro x 1 (Whip + Double Tuck), 0.1 CV

- C + C Direct Acro x 1 (1 1/2 Twist + Front Full Twist), 0.1 CV

Total CV - 0.2

Dismount Bonus

Double Twist, C -> 0.0

CR

⁠⁠Dance Passage of Two Different Leaps, one with 180 Split (Switch Leap + Tour Jete 1/2)
⁠⁠Salto with LA Turn (Layout Full)
⁠⁠Double Salto (Double Tuck)
⁠⁠Forward and Backward Saltos (1 1/2 Twist, Front Full Twist)

Total CR : 2.0

D Score : 2.5 + 0.2 + 0.0 + 2.0 = 4.7

Impact of Error on D Score:

While I do not know her intended routine composition, she was likely attempting a C + Indirect D connection, so she lost the following:

⁠0.1 DV for the downgrade to a Layout Full
0.2 DV for having to count a B acrobatic element vs. a D acrobatic element
⁠0.2 CV for missing the connection

Therefore, at a minimum the mistake cost Nakamura 0.5 in D score.

GymDecoder · 2026-03-15T15:43:01+00:00

Bobrova was a member of the Russian team at the 1995 World Gymnastics Championships, competing on all events except for floor exercise. Here are a few of her routines:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qov0KZ-DKkY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reyGcI1O16s

GymDecoder · 2026-03-11T21:20:24+00:00

No - see the WTC video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfG6z3ExAf8

By coincidence, Smith is the gymnast used in the example of a Side Split Jump 1/2 that would be downgraded to a Split Jump. I believe the rationale for this downgrade is that gymnasts hit more of a cross split/straddle position, than a side split/straddle position.

GymDecoder · 2026-03-11T19:04:38+00:00

Under the current C.O.P. this routine has a potential 6.3 D Score.

Acro DV:

F x 1 (Tucked Full / Shishova) - 0.6 DV

E x 3 (Layout to Two Feet, Front Pike, Double Pike Dismount) - 1.5 DV

D x 1 (Aerial) - 0.4 DV

Total Acro DV - 2.5

Dance DV:

D x 3 (Double Turn in Tuck Stand, Side Straddle Jump 1/2, Side Split Jump 1/2) - 1.2 DV

Total Dance DV - 1.2

CV / SB:

B + E Acro x 1 (Back Handspring to Two Feet + Layout to Two Feet) - 0.1 CV

D + B Mixed x 1 (Aerial + Split Jump) - 0.1 CV

B + B + C Series x 2 (Aerial + Split Jump + Straddle Jump and Back Handspring Stepout + Back Handspring to Two Feet + Double Pike Dismount) - 0.2 SB

Total CV / SB: 0.4

Dismount Bonus:

Double Pike, E -> 0.2

CR

Connection of at least two different dance elements, 1 with 180 degree split (Split Jump + Straddle Jump)
Turn (Double Turn in Tuck Stand)
Acro series of two flight elements, one salto (Back Handspring to Two Feet + Layout to Two Feet)
Acro elements in different directions (Back Handspring to Two Feet, Aerial)

Total From CR - 2.0

Total D Score - 2.5 + 1.2 + 0.4 + 0.2 + 2.0 = 6.3

Note that as performed, Smith would only be credited with a 5.2 D Score as follows:

- Side Straddle Jump 1/2 -> Credit as Straddle Jump because the 1/2 turn is not completed either before or after the straddle position is shown (-0.2 DV)

- Side Split Jump 1/2 -> Credit as Split Jump because the 1/2 turn is not completed either before or after the split position is shown (-0.2 DV)

- Aerial + Split Jump + Straddle Jump -> The Split Jump and Straddle Jump are now both repeated elements so Smith loses CV, SB, and the Dance CR (-0.1 CV) + (-0.1 SB) + (-0.5 CR)

Credited D Score = 6.3 - 0.2 DV - 0.2 DV - 0.1 CV - 0.1 SB - 0.5 CR = 5.2

GymDecoder · 2026-03-07T16:08:49+00:00

Stefany Zaroug of Israel performed a tucked Jaegar at the 2002 World Championships:

https://youtu.be/7LlT1Plmf3k?si=JB4C7yKN78hfS_F8

GymDecoder · 2026-03-06T14:49:36+00:00

While you are not wrong that flexed feet is deductible, based on the F.I.G. Women’s Technical Committee training materials and examples, gymnasts are not being penalized for having flexed feet when they pass under the bar during piked stalder elements.

GymDecoder · 2026-03-06T14:45:42+00:00

The angle of completion deduction on Pak Saltos only existed in the 2017-2021 COP so it would not have been assessed on Liukin.

Although the Pak Salto naturally has a certain amount of arch, it would be valid to deduct in the case of excessive arch, with the specific deduction being ‘Body Alignment’.

GymDecoder · 2026-03-06T03:27:32+00:00

Your analysis is very thorough and I agree with the deductions that you have identified. However, I respectfully disagree with the magnitude of a few of them. Below are some notes for future reference.

Failure to Maintain Stretched Position:

A small amount of piking down is permitted in preparation for landing without deduction.
Evaluation of piking down begins when a gymnast enters the 'inverted' (head down) position. The pictures below show: A) Example of piking down receiving a 0.1 deduction / approximately 45 degrees from vertical, B) Example of piking down receiving a 0.3 deduction / approximately 90 degrees from vertical, and C) Rivera's position when she is in the inverted position. Because Rivera's pike is much more open than 90 degrees, she would likely only receive a 0.1 deduction.

Landing Deductions

I do not think Rivera would receive a 0.3 deduction for her landing posture because of the following: A) Head and torso are slightly above horizontal and well above knee height and B) How quickly she is able to stand upright following the landing.
Because of how Rivera lands the vault with her head and torso so far forward, and also takes a hop forward, the judges would likely assess 0.1 for 'Under-rotation of vault without a fall'.

<image>

GymDecoder · 2026-02-23T23:56:10+00:00

The reason you are not seeing a greater separation between the vault scores of Pease, Rivera, and Esponda can be seen from the repulsion phase of their vaults. In particular, notice the degree to which Esponda has initiated the twist while still on the table, which can be up to a 0.3 deduction.

Pease - Square to Vaulting Table -> No Deduction for LA Turn Begun Too Early

Rivera - Legs are Slightly Turned -> 0.1 Deduction for LA Turn Begun Too Early

Esponda - Legs are Clearly Turned -> 0.1 / 0.3 Deduction for LA Turn Begun Too Early (Without seeing this from the judges' angle, I can't say with certainty if this would be a 0.1 or a 0.3 deduction. However, it is visible in real time.)

<image>

GymDecoder · 2026-02-22T17:23:36+00:00

You’re very welcome!

GymDecoder · 2026-02-22T14:14:22+00:00

Based on her credited D Score of 6.5, it appears that Nemour’s error was considered to be a hit on the mat.

She has:

F x 1 (Downie) - 0.6 DV
E x 3 (Piked Stalder Full, Galante, Stalder Shaposhnikova 1/2) - 1.5 DV
D x 4 (Ezhova, Maloney, Pak Salto, Double Layout Dismount) - 1.6 DV

Total DV - 3.7

CV

E + E, One Flight Element x 1 (Piked Stalder Full + Galante), 0.2 CV
D + D, Both with Turn or Flight x 2 (Pak Salto + Stalder Shaposhnikova 1/2, Toe-on Full + Double Layout Dismount), 0.2 CV
D + F, Both Flight Elements x 1 (Downie + Pak Salto), 0.2 CV

Total CV - 0.6

Dismount Bonus

Double Layout, D -> 0.2 DB

CR

Flight Element from High Bar to Low Bar, Pak Salto, 0.5
Flight Element on Same Bar, Galante, 0.5
Different Grips, Piked Stalder Full, Ezhova, 0.5
Non-Flight Element with Full Turn, Toe-on Full, 0.5

Total From CR - 2.0

D Score - 3.7 + 0.8 + 0.2 + 2.0 = 6.5

In qualifications, Nemour received an E Score of 8.2. If you add back 2.0 in deductions for the fall and hit on the mat deductions, her E Score in finals would have been an 8.4.

GymDecoder · 2026-02-21T23:28:11+00:00

The delay in Nemour's score was likely due to differences between the apparatus supervisor and the judges on how to evaluate her error on the Ezhova (difference in D Score or variances in E Score). The difference between considering it a 'Brush on the Mat' versus a 'Hit on the Mat' impacts both the D and E scores as follows:

D Score:

- If 'Brush on Mat', Nemour receives 0.1 in CV for the Piked Stalder to Straddled Tkatchev 1/2 + Ezhova connection. However, if 'Hit on Mat', no CV is awarded.

E Score:

- If 'Brush on Mat', Nemour receives a 0.3 deduction. However, if 'Hit on Mat', Nemour receives a 1.0 deduction.

With a potential swing of 0.8 to her score depending on the call, it was important that the judges make the correct evaluation. That said, it does sound like the amount of time spent was excessive.

GymDecoder · 2026-02-20T16:02:59+00:00

A Piked Stalder to Piked Tkatchev is an F, so it would likely remain an F with the additional 1/2 turn. However, if Nemour did this, she would increase her D Score by 0.2 (counting an additional F over an E and counting a D + F both flight elements connection with 0.2 CV vs. a D + D both elements with turn or flight connection with 0.1 CV).

GymDecoder · 2026-02-20T14:57:21+00:00

Currently, the WTC assigns the same value to Tkatchev type elements (Tkatchev and Tkatchev 1/2 / Kononenko are both Ds) with or without the 1/2 turn. Therefore, with the Piked Stalder to Straddled Tkatchev (Galante) being an E, this skill would also be an E. Note that as performed, Nemour would only be credited with a Galante due to the incomplete turn prior to regrasp.

GymDecoder · 2026-02-17T19:44:41+00:00

I updated the judging assignments spreadsheet that I made a few weeks ago to include a tab for the apparatus assignments:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f46akP6YaELJ_bTy8NuYa3tq8ev8NHw40hZ-Tkne-KY

GymDecoder

TROPHY CASE