Paul Hamm's gold: what happened to good sportsmanship?

[tedzbear]

Hamm and his coach are furious with the dispute over his gold medal. As we all know, there was an unfortunate scoring error made by the judges where they mistakenly handicapped the South Korean gymnast with a lower start value than he deserved, costing him the gold. FIG protocol requires that an inquiry be filed within one event which I guess the Koreans did not do (they waited until the next day).

Hamm says," I guess it's up to them if I share the gold medal or give it up, but I don't feel that would be the right thing. I still feel like I'm the Olympic champion. And no matter what happens that's how I'll feel."

My thinking is that regardless of how he feels and the rules of protocol, the truth is that without the counting error, the Korean athlete won the event. Granted this is high stakes, high pressure competition, still, the Olympics is supposed to represent the international brotherhood of athletes who compete in the spirit of peace and fairness for all. Hamm seems to have forgotten this and is only thinking of himself (and the prospect of losing million dollar product endorsements). He and is coach have tossed the age old concept of good sportsmanship out of the window in favor of the American obsession with winning.
What a diplomatic coup it would have been for Hamm to call a press conference with the Korean and place the medal over his competitor's head, while saying, "No matter what the FIG decides, I feel this gold goes to the fine athlete next to me because he did earn the higher points."

[trotsky]

1. Yeah, I would have liked to see that too.

Any endorsements he may have lost by not "actually" winning the gold would have been more than made up for in publicity and good will.

On edit: I should add that if I were Hamm, I would never be able to look at that medal in my trophy case without thinking that I didn't REALLY win it. And in that case, why on earth would I want to be reminded of that all the time?

[hlthe2b]

3. I think Hamm would have been wise to ask for a shared "gold."

given the circumstances. Sadly, this whole incident only adds to the anti-American sentiment already rampant to the detriment of our athletes.

[stopbush]

18. Actually, he's offered to give up the Gold if asked to.

Hamm vows to give back gold if asked

August 22, 2004

ATHENS (AFP) - Paul Hamm , the American gymnast whose Olympic men's all-around victory has been protested by South Korean officials, said he would give back his gold medal if International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) officials declare that is the proper course.

"If they decide I should give back the gold medal, then I will," Hamm said.

"I personally believe I'm still the Olympic champion."

http://sports.yahoo.com/oly/news?slug=afp-oly_gymnastics_kor_usa&prov=afp&type=lgns

[hlthe2b]

21. THAT is good to know..... I'm sad he is caught up in all of this...

[Uzybone]

36. thats nothing special

there is nothing admirable in giving up something you didnt win when they come and ask you for it. What the original poster suggested is admirable.

[msmcghee]

37. He must be using Karl Rove as his PR advisor.

That's as good as naming legislation that pollutes our air, "The Clear Skies Initiative".

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

140. Why go that road?

For Christ's sake, Paul Hamm isn't Karl Rove. Explain to me why he should have to lose his medal because the judges screwed up. I've been thinking about it, and the sharing gold option isn't as bad an idea as it first seemed, but why is the Korean somehow more noble than Hamm?

[Scairp]

40. This is no more Paul's fault that it is the Korean's

He should not be penalized. If the IOC wants to make it right then they should award a second gold medal to the Korean, not take away Paul's. Anyone remember the figure skating pairs scandal? They made it right, and didn't reprive the original gold medalists' of anything. They can do the same here if they so desire.

[northzax]

134. but he's not being 'penalized' he'd be getting what he earned

look at it this way, if your bank mistakenly moves a decimal point in your account, turning $1,000 into $10,000, would you return it? you're not being penalized. Hamm stil gets the silver medal, the one he earned, and the Korean gets the Gold that he earned, under the rules.

Now Hamm is under no legal obligation to return the medal, as I understand it, there is no mechanism in the rules for this change, and I certainly feel for him, but the right thing to do is the right thing to do.

[tedzbear]

41. The big difference is "give up the gold IF ASKED TO."

The right thing would have been to give it up or share it with his competitor NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE SAID.

That is just good sportsmanship.

[Hoping4Change]

111. My understanding is that this is a non-starter because FIG

can't ask him to give his medal back. If this is so it is disingenuous for Hamm to make this comment.

[MuseRider]

2. I agree. n/t

[skygazer]

4. I was pretty disgusted

The message I got was it doesn't matter how you win it as long as you can keep it. I wonder how loudly he'd be hollering if the scoring error was NOT in his favor.....

[kskiska]

23. W's legacy to our youth

Doesn't matter how you win.

[BlueStateGirl]

5. He should returnit for the silver. BUt I don't blame him. It was a judging

error. Not his. He didn't cheat.

Just another reason why the Olympics have jumped the shark for me.

[tom_paine]

6. Hamm is merely the embodiment of Imperial Amerika

Like it or not, THAT is the true National Character.

I got mine. Now fuck you, die!

We are not finished tranisitioning so I think that still a large number of Imperial Subjects aren't like that, but will be in a decade or two.

[theboss]

12. Oh please

Was it the true character of South Korea when they stole the gold from Roy Jones in '88? That was far more egregious; the judges did everything but use a gun to steal that fight.

It's sports. An athlete is not responsible for enforcement of the rules (except in golf to some degree). I'm still pissed about a lousy spot against my football team during my senior year of high school. But the ref made the call and I have to live with it.

[Zuni]

42. Or is it the true character of Russia to steal a gold like they did in '02

from the Canadian girl in figure skating? Or is it just like the French character to take a bribe and fix the score so the undeserving can win, like in '02?

The case in '88 and '02 were far more grotesque than this.
I personally think Hamm should have won.

[theboss]

45. Or the 1972 Men's Basketball game

The US Men still don't have their silver medals because they refused to accept them.

If the judges were bribed or colluded to steal the event, I believe Hamm should give back the medal. If they made a mistake, they made a mistake and the ruling should stand.

[VelmaD]

50. Get your facts straight...

before you rant. It wasn't a Candian "girl" in 02...it was pairs skating.

[Zuni]

56. I'm sorry

thats right. It was pairs. It was a on the spot error. I watched it manby times in 2002.
The Russians f-ed up in the finals, while the Canucks delivered a nearly flawless performance---I remeber it. And a French judge switched his score to give the gold to the Russians

[VelmaD]

Try again

I have that competition on tape and have watched it a thousand times. The Russians did not "f up" and the Canadians were not "flawless". I've already posted about this today but I'll put up the link again. Go here for a good decontruction of the two long programs:
http://www.frogsonice.com/skateweb/articles/slc-pairs.shtml

[theboss]

62. Except the judges actually did cheat in that case

There wasn't an error; there was corruption. Big difference.

[VelmaD]

64. Was that ever proven?

There was talk of cheating and one judge who seemed to collapse under the pressure and told conflicting stories.

I also don't buy the judging conspiracy theory because the Russians didn't play be the "rules" that were proported for the deal. The way it was supposed to work the Russians would get the pairs gold in exchange for letting the French have the ice dance gold. Well, the Russian ice dance judge's (and the rest of their "bloc") marks sure as hell shot that theory apart.

[Cheswick2.0]

95. I don't agree Velma

I thought the Russians were sloppy and as the russians often do, they covered bad foot work with lots of arm flailing.
The Canadian pair were much more techincally near perfect.

[VelmaD]

98. Well, I thought the Canadian pair covered...

a lack of pair choreography with a lot of mugging. But that's just my opinion. :)

I will however admit that I think that the movie and music from "Love Story" is complete dreck and I wish to god that pair had never chosen it.

[Hoping4Change]

112. So crappy behaviour by Koreans makes this acceptable.

I was taught to bring people up to my standards not lower myself to theirs.

This is not to say that Hamm's performance was not stellar however if he keeps the gold it will be tarnished and so will the US. However if he were to give the gold to the Korean he would be remembered forever for doing a noble gesture that exemplifies Olympic ideals

[Mike Daniels]

129. Thank you - Bad calls and sportsmenship have existed since the beginning

Seems like some people on this board want to make this some sort of statement about how Bush is responsible for this display.

Christ, the Soviet Union clearly lost to the buzzer in a basketball game in some Olympics some time back and didn't have any qualms about keeping the gold medal.

It's utter BS to act like this is a unique situation where the US is the only one to behave in such a situation.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

141. And so the real issue makes itself known.

Tell me, were you booing the U.S. athletes that first night? Did it bother you to see our athletes win gold medals? Give me a break.

[K-W]

7. Yah, Hamm should show more class.

He knows he didnt win.

[MUSTANG_2004]

8. Hamm also has a point

That there is a process for handling judging problems and that a post-award review of the video tape is not part of the rules.

Here's the ESPN article:
http://tinyurl.com/4atxd

I don't know anything about gymnastics so can't say if Hamm's take is just hot air, but I can understand an athlete being upset that a ruling "on the field" is overridden well after the game is over.

[K-W]

10. But Hamm doesnt have a point. He didnt score the highest.

He can hide behind a technicality, but the right thing to do would be to give the medal to the man who beat him fair and square.

[MUSTANG_2004]

13. Not exactly

As he points out, the judges also missed a deduction of the Korean's that would still make Hamm the winner.

[K-W]

20. fair enough

I thought the facts supported the Koreans.

[tedzbear]

24. Where is this second mistake???

I haven't read anything about a second error that handicapped Hamm. That wasn't mentioned in the front page story in the LA Times today. Could you link me to it? Thanks.

[MUSTANG_2004]

27. Here it is

From the ESPN article:
http://tinyurl.com/4atxd
"By reviewing Yang's routine, Hamm said, FIG has opened a can of worms. If Yang's performance was reviewed to award points for the start value -- the level of difficulty of the routine -- then he should also be deducted two tenths of a point for four holds he committed, Hamm said."

[tedzbear]

30. No. Hamm is saying if HE were the judge he would have voted differently..

...Which doesn't mean a damn thing. He is not the judge(s). How does he know they would have deducted two tenths of a point if the starting value had been correct?

[Piltdown13]

34. Actually...

In the article it states that someone else brought the missed deduction to the attention of the coach and Hamm. Apparently there IS a rule that you can only have three "stoppages" in your routine, and the Korean seems to have had a fourth, which is a two-tenths deduction.

[tedzbear]

51. Notice it says "seems to have had a fourth."

It's up to the judges to determine a stoppage, not Hamm or his coach. Again, I say Hamm should have immediately offered to share the gold (or even give it up) to be a true champion. Vice a versa too---the South Korean could have offered the same.

Then, these two gentlemen athletes could wait for the verdict of the FIG.

[theboss]

54. That's the can of worms

Either you follow the rules or you don't. If the start value can be changed, then why can't the entire routine be re-judged?

[Pithlet]

103. The start value is objective

Judgment of the routine is subjective. The start value isn't a judgment during the performance, it is something that has already been determined. The start value is objective because they get points merely for making the attempt. Either they tried to do the move or they didn't.

[Piltdown13]

61. No...*I* used the word "seems"

Because I haven't seen the routine since the night of the all-around, and I don't remember if that was the case, and I'm trying not to just take Daggett's and Hamm's word for it that the Korean had a fourth hold. I'd think it would be pretty obvious if a gymnast stopped or not...and these judges have already been proven to make mistakes, unfortunately.

[VelmaD]

63. I have it all on tape...

I'll try to watch it tonight and post what I see.

[Piltdown13]

65. Cool....n/t

:-)

[Cheswick2.0]

96. because they would have to

If you are going to use video then you have to review all of it. Seeint the mistakes (which the judges should have seen during the routine)they are required to take the deductions.

[Zuni]

44. Yeah, that is what I heard

I think Hamm deserved the medal anyway.

[theboss]

15. But he still doesn't necesarilly beat him

Things might have gone differently if he had a bigger lead. He might have lost concentration and blown it.

The Cardinals might have still lost in '85 if the ump gets the call correct in Game 6.

Though - in reality - this is closer to the Fifth Down touchdown for Colorado in 1990, which helped them win the national title.

It is simply amazing how many times this happens in sports.

[theboss]

9. I disagree completely

The South Korean would not have necessarily won if his score was calculated correctly. He still would have had to complete the competition with the factors being slightly different. I think it would have changed the entire competition.

(As a quick aside, I care not a fig about men's gymnastics. I simply feel that the rules in sport should be followed, even if someone gets screwed).

If you want to re-calculate, the South Korean's score, then I think you need to go back to that moment and re-do the entire competition from that point forward.

For the record, this kind of thing happens all the time in sports. Joe Paterno in his autobiography essentially admits that Penn State's 1982 National Title probably wouldn't have happened but for a bad call in his favor early in the season against Nebraska. But he's not giving up the win, because - like everyone - he knows that these things tend to even out over a career.

It may not come back for this gymnast, but you can view it is karmic adjustment for South Korea. They would have a better leg to stand on if they gave back the gold medal they stole from Roy Jones in '88.

[K-W]

14. You cant really compare it to team sports.

Your argument doesnt really hold in gymnastics, it wasnt a call, and it didnt effect what they were doing.

[theboss]

16. I can compare it to the Colorado Fifth Down game

Everyone in the state knew what happened. No one said give back the win.

[K-W]

17. No, its nothing like a call in a team sport.

The call changes the course of a game. Scoring errors in gymnastics dont.

[jtb33]

26. I agree with you...

It happens. I am into the swimming events and swam competitively in college. I also watched a race in this Olympic games (the 100m breaststroke) where the Japanese guy who won the Gold (by less than two tenth's of a second) distincly did an illegal flutter kick which, (had the judge seen it) would have immediately disqualified him. Those who are or were swimmers know that such a kick would EASILY give at minimum a two tenth's of a second speed increase. Hansen should have gotten the Gold in that race.

IMO, judges aren't perfect, and they do make mistakes that go both ways. Athletes shouldn't be penalized for the mistakes that judges miss, especially after-the-fact calls.

[K-W]

28. No one is penalizing athletes. We are talking about sportsmanship.

The classy thing to do when you win and you shouldnt have is to make things right.

[jtb33]

31. Okay... then...

The Japanese guy should have looked at the tape of him doing it (it was very obvious), and given up his Gold medal for his disqualification.

[stopbush]

11. The big problem is that South Korea DID try to protest IMMEDIATELY,

but were told erroneously by the same judges that they needed to file their complaint *the next day*:

"There is a question, too, in this case of whether South Korean gymnastics officials should share some of the blame. Did they catch the scoring error immediately and demand it be corrected during the competition? The federation, known as FIG, said it didn't. The South Koreans said they did and were told to file a protest letter after the meet. "

In effect, the judges screwed the Koreans twice: first, with the wrong rating for the apparatus, and second, by telling them to wait until the next day to file a protest, which in effect blew their chances of protesting.

http://sports.yahoo.com/oly/gymnastics/news?slug=ap-stevewilsteingym&prov=ap&type=lgns

[Hoping4Change]

114. There is something fishy about these judges because the Bronze

medal for Vault was awarded to the Romanian who fell upon landing and Shewfelt who was almost faultless placed fourth. The judge is denying the Canadian request for an appeal. BTW the judge is a Romanian.

[democrat_patriot]

19. Share the medal or return it.

I haven't really noticed the utter arrogance of the american athlete until this olympics.

I am happy they are winning, and cheer for them. But I notice the "I never doubted for a second we would win" crap almost every time US wins a medal.

Don't brag, and thank your opponents. It's just simple manners.

[K-W]

22. You are being over critical.

First off, you are exagerating most american athletes and most world athletes are very respectful and say the right things. There are some people who dont from every country. The US is no worse than any country with a big team at the olympics.

[Zuni]

53. American athletes are not different than anyone else in the Olympics

They play fair.
When have you seen bad behavior from Americanm athletes? As far as I am concerned, nothing is more repellant than the Iranian refusing to compete with an Israeli.

[theboss]

55. Our track team bothers me sometimes

I didn't like the sprinters in the 100 talking to each other in one of the trials last night. Aside from the track team (where the behavior is always iffy), I think the Americans have behaved extremely well.

And, I agree. Nothing compares to refusing to compete against an Israeli.

[NoQuarter]

25. Was anyone actually watching

the first night of competition? When the US team learned that the start value for Blaine Wilson's high bar routine would be less than anticipated (also LESS than it had been scored in all other events) He chose to change his routine in order to achieve the point value. These routines determined all other entrants in all other gynastics events.

If folks want to decry the outcome of this competition, then call for throwing out ABSOLUTELY ALL results. The scoring shenanigans did not start or end with South Korean Gymnasts on all-around night.

[ElementaryPenguin]

29. Hamm has proven himself to be a real BUSH leaguer!

I may be wrong, but I don't believe that Michael Phelps, for example, would have behaved like such a poor sport in that circumstance - caring nothing for the truth - ala Chimp/Cheney - no recount - I want my stolen (or wrongfully tallied)top prize! I'M THE WINNER (even though I know I'm not!)

If Hamm was a big enough person - truly a "champion" - he would not only have supported the idea of a second gold awarded to the victimized Korean athlete - he would have suggested/insisted upon it himself - and then left the ultimate ruling up to the FIG! But NO!! Now he nows comes across like a spoiled, selfish, bullying little thief (just like our shameless, unscrupulous Commander and Thief) - which is a shame, because Hamm is an excellent athlete, who works very hard, is usually very clutch, and did make a remarkable and dramatic comeback from a totally disastrous fall!

[K-W]

32. Phelps showed good class giving the relay spot to Crocker.

Thats sportsmanship.

[Lavender Brown]

33. The attitude of the US Olympic Committee isn't necessarily Paul's

He hasn't said much about this himself. It's the US gymnastics organization or whatever that is trying to prevent the Korean kid from getting a second gold medal.

[tedzbear]

38. I imagine the FIG will give the gold to both of them.

But Hamm had his moment to do the right thing and he let it pass (listening to his advisors just like *).
I agree that a "real champion" would have immediately offered to share the gold (or even give it up). This kind of bad sportsmanship is why I don't watch televised sports anymore. It's all about winning and not how you play the game. Boring.

[theboss]

39. Again, why is this up to the athlete?

He followed the rules. If there is a scoring error and he won. Well, there is a scoring error and he won. Like I said, it happens all the time.

As long as there is no cheating taking place, why does he have to give back the medal? This isn't like the figure skating scandal where the judges where intentionally altering scores. The judges made a mistake that benefitted Hamm. In the next competition, he might be the one to get screwed. These things happen in sports (especially in judged sports).

[Zuni]

48. Exactly

Why is the athlete punished because the judges don't have their shit straight?

[ElementaryPenguin]

Exactly - exactly! Why indeed?

The Korean athlete is most definitely being "punished because the judge don't have their shit straight!"

[alarimer]

100. I agree

I don't understand why Paul should be punished for what was someone else's mistake. It is very different than the Japanese swimmer's situation. That was his mistake that the judges' missed. To call Paul Hamm names for not giving back his medal (which he earned) is ludicrous.

[Hoping4Change]

115. Its wrong to characterize this as punishment. Paul is not being

punished because he did nothing wrong. However his position about this is not sportsmanlike and speaks volumes about his character.

[ElementaryPenguin]

67. A second gold should be awarded. This wasn't a SUBJECTIVE mistake.

This was a clear violation of the rules - and therefor an appealable decision. That's different than a plain "bad call."

[theboss]

69. But they didn't even follow the rules of the appeal

Either you follow the rules, or you don't.

[ElementaryPenguin]

73. They tried to follow the rules - and weren't allowed to.

A link to this is found earlier in this thread.

[AspenRose]

35. They may give a second gold medal to S. Korea anyway

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5784651/

ATHENS, Greece - The U.S. Olympic Committee would consider supporting South Korea’s bid to pursue a duplicate gold medal for one of its gymnasts to make up for the scoring error that gave American Paul Hamm the all-around title.

[Renew Deal]

43. I was there and I disagree.

I was at that event. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=1556813

I disagree that the medal should be taken away from Hamm. He won that fair and square. It does beg the question about how many other scoring mistakes there were. They can look over the Koreans (bronze medal winner) routine from the beginning. I think they will find out that he was scored too generously. He should have lost more points on the parallel bar. The best way to handle this is give them both Gold medals. That or do nothing.

[Zuni]

46. I agree

Hamm did better than the Korean. I have seen their stuff several times now.

[theboss]

47. I hate the two medals scenario

It seems like something you would do in a youth sport. You compete under the same conditions. There are no do-overs (unless it's a woman's sport and someone cries).

[Susang]

116. Well, wasn't that sexist.

I certainly hope you meant that facetiously. Women in sports have a hard enough time being taken seriously without cracks like that, don't you think?

[Pithlet]

105. It wasn't a subjective scoring mistake

Start values don't change. The fact that you were there doesn't change that. The Korean should have received the gold that night, and Hamm the silver.

[Commendatori]

49. Hamm's an asshole. He and Svetlana Khorkina deserve each other.

They both act like children and could produce some real whiners together.

[theboss]

52. What is he doing that is wrong?

He won. On the last event, he was told what score he needed, and he got it. Why is he responsible for a mistake the judges made and the mistake that the Koreans made in failing to challenge it correctly.

You are making him pay for two mistakes that he had no control over.

[tedzbear]

58. You're missing the whole point.

Who cares about the intricacies of the scoring and FIG protocol! Since the scores were only a fraction of a point apart, a true champion would have immediately offered to share the gold (or give it up). That goes for both Hamm and the South Korean. I am talking about good sportsmanship here, something that many keep ignoring.

This cultural priority for winning at the expense of morality will be the end of American civilization as we know it. This BS going on at the Olympics is only a symptom.

[theboss]

59. Sportsmanship is not cheating and being gracious

Nowhere in sportsmanship does anyone say that you give up a victory due to an official's error.

And where is Roy Jones' shared medal in all of this?

[Commendatori]

68. Speaking out against sharing it.

"I feel like I'm the Olympic champion."

Yes, Roy Jones Jr got screwed, but that was in the eighties. He wouldn't have diminished his medal at all by welcoming the idea of sharing it with a guy who scored more points, but instead he looks like a baby in front of a world that isn't full of U.S. fans in a competition that's supposed to be more about goodwill than it is about who gets how many medals.

You're entitled to your opinion, I just have a different one. He's an asshole. He's representing the U.S.A, and we already have a president embarrassing the shit out of us. Hamm's stamping and holding his breath until his face turns blue just to keep himself as the only holder of gold just makes me sick.

If your stomach can take the guy, more power to you. To me, he looks like a baby - one who I hope never gets an endorsement deal.

[theboss]

70. What stomping and whining is he doing?

The South Koreans look the whiners to me. "We didn't really lose!!!" Don King pulls this kind of shit.

[Commendatori]

74. He's upset that it's even being reviewed.

Support him if you want. To me, he threw away a chance to go down as the classiest sportsman to ever represent a country, and he wouldn't have even had to give up the gold to do it. All he had to do was offer to share, OR not propest when the idea was brought up to him. Instead, it's "mine, mine, mine," which is exactly how the world views us.

[theboss]

75. He won!

Do you think that the New England Patriots should have shared their first Super Bowl with the Raiders because of the "tuck rule?"

He won under under the rules. Hell, maybe he goes out and scores a ten on his last event if the correction had been made.

If they want him to "share" the gold, he should insist that they go back from the point of the mistake and re-do the entire competition. That's "fair."

[Commendatori]

79. Technicalities are on his side, but they're also

on Bush's. He won recounts and the Supreme Court ruled in his favor. Although I freely admit that this is not a perfect analogy, the fact is that bnoth have technicalities on their side - so can I now assume you accept the election decision, too?

I'm talking about the way he's acting. I don't give a rat's ass who gets the medal. Hamm could have at least been silent about it.

I cringe when I think of how other countries are writing up his behavior - you know, the countries in front of which we can do no right because of the chimp in the White House. He had a chance to display some real sportsmanship, and instead he's clinging onto the medal like Bush did to his 537 votes.

Like I said, support him if you want. I don't, even if the technicalities are on his side.

(edited to correct laughable typing errors)

[theboss]

80. It's not a technicality

It became a technicality after the fact.

He was told to go score a 9.8 and win. He did.

[Commendatori]

85. Fine, then support him.

I don't.

To me, he's acting like a child to cling to his medal. What are the chances that, considering your point about having to do it all over, they'd take the medal from him? None, and he knows it. He's upset that he might have to share, even though he'd still have gold and could have made us look better. He'd have looked a lot classier by just shutting the hell up.

Go ahead and read some world press about this incident, and if that's fine with you, more power to you. I already acknowledged your right to your opinion. I simply don't share it, your correctness about what I still view as technicalities notwithstanding.

[theboss]

86. Why does the world press matter?

As a Steeler fan, in my old age, I've come to accept the fact that a large segment of the sporting press viewed the "Immaculate Reception" as an illegal touching by Frenchy Fuqua. My response to them: Go fuck yourselves. The ref called it a touchdown.

The press doesn't matter. The rules matter. And the supreme rule in sport is that the official's ruling is final...unless Don King or Al Davis is somehow involved.

[Commendatori]

90. It does matter to me because

a lot of goodwill could have been attained for no risk. Instead, he's acting how so many have come to expect Americans to act.

I'm not comparing you to Repugs, so don't get me wrong, but when they talk about world opinion and Iraq having violated the cease fire, and "screw what they think, we had the right to attack them any time," I think of stuff like this.

I'm not disputing the finality of the ruling, I'm disputing his behavior. You seem to approve. I don't. You can quote the rulings to me, their finality or whatever else all you like, his behavior still made him look like an ass to me.

[theboss]

93. So this guy has to play Jesus for Bush's sins?

I have no idea what a dispute between an American and a South Korean in Greece has to do with a war in Iraq? Judging by the reception of the crowds in Greece (all fifteen of the people there at least), no one is blaming individual Americans for the sins of the government.

The Bush Administration should be irrelevant to this discussion. Unless you are willing to argue that had this dispute occurred in happier times like 1996 or 2000, then Hamm should be allowed to keep his medal.

And for the record, my argument would be the same if Hamm was the one whose score was miscalculated. I don't think there should be do-overs unless there is corruption involved. (That's why I keep bringing up Roy Jones, because I am convinced someone was cheating like mad in that fight. He pummelled the guy, was never hit, and somehow lost).

[Commendatori]

94. Simply shutting up would have made him look classy.

He looks like someone who is clinging onto his medal, that's all. If you see nothing wrong, then nothing is wrong for you.

To me, he looked like a baby, and although he is obviously not responsible for Bush's actions, they were so bad that we could have used a little lift. Instead, we got a kneejerk "mine, mine, mine," and to me it looked childish. You obviously don't share the same opinion.

My opinion was the same of the Russian skaters in SLC in 2002 and of Svetlana Khorkina this year - when you represent your country, you should do it with class. I don't see any in his actions.

I stick with my original post: he's an asshole, and he and Khorkina deserve each other. He could have shut up and looked classy, but he opened his mouth and struck roughly half the country (if my local sports station's polls are a decent barometer) as an immature ass. I see that we're simply on different sides of that 50% line.

[Pithlet]

104. Yes. He sounds petulant.

It's unfortunate to think you've won the gold, and find out later that you received it on a technicality. But, the facts are that if the judges hadn't made the mistake, he would have received silver. The Korean beat him, and the only reason he wasn't awarded the gold was because the judges screwed up.

[Cheswick2.0]

97. Of course he's upset it's being reviewed

If Yang's start value was increased to 10.0 and then the two tenths were deducted, Avery said Yang would have received a 9.612. "That would be the honest score for the routine," he said.


Hamm pointed out that changing a score after the event -- by videotape or otherwise -- isn't a fair course of action.


"There is a reason why a protest like that has to be done in a certain amount of time," he said. "Everyone in the U.S. can understand it because it's similar to a football game. We don't know what the outcome would have been if the one tenth would have been added. Maybe the gymnast would have been relaxed more going into high bar, maybe he would have had a mistake. We don't know. That's why the score has to be contested by the end of the event."

[nyhuskyfan]

66. That's not fair to him

During the team competition, Hamm was visibly cheering for the Japanese after they won the gold. He said in the interview afterwards that he was incredibly impressed with how well the Japanese performed and wanted to congratulate them. He was incredibly gracious and accepted his silver with class.

In the individual competition, Hamm went into his last routine knowing that he needed a 9.8 for the gold and he went out and did it. That's why scoring decisions have to be changed immediately -- so that competitors know where they stand. Once you start tinkering with scoring in the middle of a competition, you alter everything that happened afterwards. Maybe the Korean performs differently on his last routine if he thinks he has the outright lead -- or if he isn't angered by the scoring decision on the previous routine. Maybe Hamm adds a little extra difficulty to his high bar and nails it if he knows he needed a 9.875.

[theboss]

71. Exactly

If you change the scoring of that event, you have to re-do the entire competition.

[Lavender Brown]

72. Agreed

He won in controversial circumstances, but he doesn't necessarily deserve to have all the arrogance and meanness of the Bush administration attributed to him. :eyes:

[Commendatori]

77. Spare me the insults

He's whining that it's being reviewed.

You know, kind of like Bush did in 2000. Thew Supreme Court ruled in his favor, so he has a technicality on his side. Do you accept it?

I don't, and I don't need your insults, either. He's acting like a baby, and my pointing that out doesn't warrant a comparison with such scum.

[Lavender Brown]

81. I don't see where I compared you to anything...

but, OKaaay.

[Commendatori]

84. I took your "all the arrogance and meanness of the Bush administration"

to mean my attitude towards him. I now see you meant differently. Mea culpa.

[Lavender Brown]

89. Nah, that wasn't a reference to you.

I just don't want to think of him as the poster athlete of American corruption (aka the Bush administration). :) He might be a brat, but he's not Dick Cheney Jr. or anything.

[Commendatori]

91. You're right, big difference

Sorry to have jumped the gun. I just figured that the guy was never going to actually lose his medal (they'd have to redo the entire thing), so he could have looked classy by simply S-ingTFU instead of complaining about the review. No risk to him, and it would have gone a long way in front of so many who hate us...just a thought.

[nyhuskyfan]

87. Elections aren't anything like athletic competitions

In athletics, the competitors have some active means of controlling the outcome. Hamm stood at the high bar knowing he needed a 9.8 on his final routine and he got it. The competitors in an election just sit back and hope for the best, unless their brother is a governor in a key state, but that's another issue altogether.

The protocol of the sport says that you don't change the scoring after the competition is over, any scoring changes must be appealed on the spot. If the Koreans were indeed told by the judges that they needed to protest after the competition was over, they have a legitimate gripe and a shared gold medal would be deserved. But you can't have an athletic competition where you can go back after the fact and change stuff in the middle of it.

[mrboba1]

57. I have no sympathy for athletes

who go into sports where the determining factor whether you win or lose is not totally in their hands. When one enters a sport where judging is involved, they know full well that human errors are bound to occur.

Was it fair that they started his scoring .1 points too low? No.
Was it fair that the Japanese head judge told the Americans that their sets were going to be scored lower than in the World Championships? No.

Should Hamm give back his gold? Hell no. Because he won in a flawed system, but it is a known flawed entity that each competitor knows about when they go into it.

Should they just go back and review the tapes for all the competitors and reassign scoring? That is ridiculous. If they missed it when it was live, that's just too bad. It cuts both ways and if you don't have the stomach for such a sport, then don't compete in it, and don't watch it.

[theboss]

60. That's basically my view

I don't even really considering gymnastics, diving, figure skating, etc. to be sports, because the athletes don't control their fates. They are more like "athletic pageants." (At least in boxing, you have the opportunity to knock your opponent unconscious before the judges get involved).

Having said that, these are the rules you compete under. There are no do-overs.

[VelmaD]

76. What I want to know is where was this fucking outrage...

at the beginning of the team competition when the Japanese judge informed the Americans that their start values had been changed. I don't seem to recall that becoming an international incident.

[Piltdown13]

78. Exactly...

In my view, if there is an outrage, that's it -- it occurred right before the beginning of the prelims, which determined not just who went on to the team competition, but also who made the all-around and the high-bar event final as well. And, IIRC, it wasn't just Americans who were affected, it was everyone who had the suddenly-devalued element in their routine. So they were left with a choice of either do the routine as planned and be assured of taking a one-tenth hit right off the bat, or switch the devalued element for a higher-valued one with no chance of practicing it.

[Malikshah]

88. Bingo

Anyone commenting on Hamm and attacking him, better get the ENTIRE story first.

Comparing him to Bush is beyond the pale and quite shitty.

Shame on ill-informed folk.

[alarimer]

102. yes

Those gymnasts went back and changed their routines to get a higher start value. Obviously that is a dofficult thing to do and neither of them did all that well. I am not sure either of them made the finals in that event. But I haven't heard much about that. And who knows what other scoring mistakes were made. I thought Mcclure's rings score should have been higher but I am only a spectator.

[Pithlet]

107. It was outragious

but it has nothing do with the mistake the judges made regarding the Korean's routine start value.

[LDS Jock]

110. oooh you tell 'em Velma

I agree completely. The same routine which had been judged a 10.0 start for two US gymnast was changed and lowered to a 9.8 start value. It forced both gymnasts to change the routine they had worked on for a year for this competition. Blaine Wilson fell on his due to the change.

[SOteric]

118. That's a good question

though only peripherally relevant to whether or not Paul Hamm is a good sportsman.

If you're bored enough to read my post near the bottom of this thread, (117, I think, but I could be wrong) you'll see that I feel matters like the Japanese judge changing the start values on some routines for the American competitors is yet further reinforcement to my belief that Hamm does reflect good sportsmanship. Hamm's not the bad guy here.

[Princess Turandot]

123. Triple bingo..(I did mention this on another forum in here.)

especially since the judge changed the rules just two freaking days before the compition. That probably cost the US the team gold, but it was totally allowable under international rules. The gus who got screwed referred to that, but that was it. They simply cannot redo their whole exercise under 2 days notice. The US guys got fucked, pure and simple. Hamm blw his vault, but was great in the next 2 rounds.Then there was that little swimming brief disqualification when 2 supervising judges signed a disqualification card which was freaking blank, and did not explain the issue, which no one could identify, but which initionally took a gold medal away from the American winner..

And there was the issue of the japanese swimmer who won the 100 breatstroke, using a kick clearly illegal at his start and turn. No one went to the videotape on that one, since the swimming judges do not use underwater cameras to review events. But no one who saw the videotape, and understands these things, disagreed that he was using an illegal move.



There is no one here who can say that the final exercises would have come off the same way if the SK did not have his points value mistakenly lowered. He sucked wind tonight. Hamm tied in points on that competition today because but while he tied with the guy who got the gold medal, he got the silver because the Italian guy got more higher placed votes throughout the competition. Hamm did not say he was screwed.

If you are going to judge them after the fact, than do so with videotape which neutral observers re-score, and do it for everyone.


In the Utah games, there was virtually no one who didn't think that Canadians had won,in the stands and at home. There was a confession altho subsequently retracted from a French judge who said she was vote swapping with the Russians.

Don't blame Hamm. If they are so confused abt what to do here, redo the competition amont the final six.

[amazona]

82. this puts him in a totally unfair position

Hamm is not the judge and it is not for him to decide who won the gold. In most competitions, the decisions of the judge are supposed to be final. If players can go around exchanging medals, well...this is too much pressure down the road on other players when other judges make other bad calls. You will get endless bickering and back seat driving on down to eternity.

That said, I thought it stunk to high heaven from the very beginning that the dude who won the gold was the dude who fell down...no wonder people are going to think the fix is in.

Some stories don't have a happy ending. This is one of them. But it is not for Hamm to make this decision. The appropriate judges must decide or decide not to decide and not put this decision on a competitor!

While Hamm's comment was tactlessly phrased, I think he is doing the right thing. It is not up to him.

[theboss]

83. Frankly, as a gambler, I am horrifed by that possibility

What if the Eagles are laying six, win by seven and then decide that a first half field goal was kicked after time expired?

[Pithlet]

106. He can choose how he reacts

It is true that these were events outside of his control, and there is nothing he can do about that.

But to insist that he is the true winner, and not the Korean, when the Korean would have won had it not been for a objective mistake, is poor sportsmanship.

[cmkramer]

109. You're assuming something that isn't true

You're assuming that the only apparatus he was being judged on was the one he fell on. If that were true, then, yes, the fact that he won would be suspect. However, he was judged on several other events and until the controversy erupted, he managed to score high enough on those other events to take the gold.

I agree with those who say that the time for the South Koreans to protest would have been that night. Somebody on TWOP theorized that maybe the reason they didn't was because they expected their gymnasts to score higher than they ended up doing on their remaining events.

[mrboxers]

92. If you ask me, Hamm did earn the gold medal.

If you ask me, Hamm did earn the gold medal. Whether or not a mistake, its no different than trying to change the results of an NFL game on Monday for a Sunday game. If you have a dispute, you make sure its heard or followed up on.

[UdoKier]

99. Hamm's a lousy sport.

If the Korean realy won, then he should get the gold.



End of story.

[buycitgo]

101. hahahahahahahahaahaaaaaaaaaaa!

I LOVE Betty Bowers!

sounds like Hamm is from the Florida school of keeping count

[democracyindanger]

108. And Roy Jones Jr.

should get his gold from the Koreans.

[theboss]

113. Amen

That was a burglary.

[SOteric]

117. I don't see it that way.

Sportsmanship is ultimately about three things: the athletic event, playing within the rules (however challenging that may be at times), and good and ethical behaviour.

The winning 3 competitors in the Men's Gymnastic All-Around are each unquestioningly superlative athletes, the scores separating them being in thousandths of a point.

The only questions of sportsmanship are in the matter of the rules and ethical behaviour.

The protocol and rules for lodging a dispute weren’t appropriately followed by the Korean team and their coaching staff.

To many, this is a mere technicality and Yang Tae Young should have won. I see that as a non-entity; a what-if scenario. It’s in no way a guarantee that this particular competitor would have won had his score in one event been different. For all we may speculate, perhaps the higher score would have made him overconfident on his floor exercise and he would have allowed his focus to lapse when the lower score helped to keep him more diligent.

Regardless of the esoteric nature of the question, Paul Hamm’s athletics were excellent, noteworthy and he followed the rules. Yang Tae Young’s athletics were excellent but his and the FIG’s adherence to and respect for the rules is in serious question. The FIG is not permitted to use videotapes in determining their rulings and they’ve done so, and the Korean’s did not file their protest within in the required timeframe and in the appropriate manner.

To me, this is not unlike a World Series game which went in favour of one team after a spectator caught a ball which would otherwise have remained in play, sending the momentum to favour the opposing team. One can always ponder the ‘what-ifs’ but the rules are clear and done is done. Fans of the team which lost will no doubt wear the “we wuz robbed” banner for some lengthy period of time, but it hardly speaks of bad sportsmanship if the winners still harbour some pride in their accomplishment.

In my perspective, the kerfluffle over this event is not unlike what would have happened had the losing baseball team taken their grievance to the Grand High Muckity Mucks on the Baseball Commission a week after the series was over and tried to get them to reverse the outcome. The winning team has every right to be outraged that the Baseball Commissioner would even entertain such an idea.

I don’t think Paul Hamm is the poor sport here. I think the coaching staff of the Korean team and Yang Tae Young are the poor sports, and the FIG is rendering their own authority ludicrous to even entertain such a complaint in such a way.

[Pithlet]

120. Yang Tae Young should have won the gold

Why are they the poor sports? They were cheated out of their medal by a mistake the judges made, and had every right to see that corrected.

Hamm is being the poor sport because he's saying that he's the rightful winner when he actually wasn't and they are outraged at an attempt for a mistake to be corrected because it wouldn't be in their favor. He wouldn't have been given a gold medal if the judges had done their job correctly.

[shawn703]

119. Why should he give it back?

There was a two-tenth deduction that should have been taken from the Korean on his parallel bars event but it wasn't. If everyone was scored perfectly, why do you think Hamm still wouldn't have won the gold?

[Pithlet]

121. The 2 tenth deduction has nothing to do with it

The mistake wasn't in the judging and deductions, which is subjective. The mistake was that they used the wrong start value number, which is based on the difficulty of the routine, to make deductions from. That number is an objective one. They put the wrong one down, which was lower, which made his overall score lower.

By going back and changing it, they aren't changing what the judges thought of the performance. They are correcting a number that you start off to begin with, and then the judges deduct from that. If they had used the right one, his score would have been higher, and the Korean would have won the gold.

[NoQuarter]

122. The extra held position

which called for the deduction that WAS NOT assessed, would have brought about the same outcome that we are now debating. You only get three 'held' positions (aside from the armstands) The Korean guy did four. That is an AUTOMATIC deduction. Doesn't matter how pretty it is. If the "corrrect" start value had been used, Hamm still would have won.

Not capitulating to whining is not poor sportsmanship.

[Pithlet]

130. But the deduction is part of the judging

Judges give deductions where none was warranted, or fail to give deductions where one is. That is part of what is so frustrating about judging, and is what makes it so subjective. But, it is a separate issue.

The start value does not change. It has no deductions, unless the person does not perform same routine, or adds or changes it. Young did not. He did the routine that calls for a 10 start value, so deductions should have been made from a 10. The Koreans are rightly calling this to attention, and responding with how the judges could have scored differently is irrelevant. You could look at almost any routine and find areas where the judges could have deducted, or deducted too many points. THe issue is with the objective start value, and looking at the subjective judging after the fact is irrelevant.

[Skittles]

124. keeping stuff you don't earn

it's the Bush way

[theboss]

125. For the millionth time, he earned it

He was told, score a 9.8 and you win the gold. He scored a 9.8.

Tell me again, what he did wrong?

As everyone has pointed out, if the South Korean's score was calculated correctly, there is no guarantee he would have won. Maybe Hamm scores higher. Maybe he chokes.

It's not as simple as, "If the judges do this, he wins."

[Skittles]

126. I watched the entire thing and I disagree

it's tainted

[Pithlet]

132. He earned a silver

The Koreans score should have been higher than his. Not because the judges judged wrong. The only reason it was wrong is the judges deducted from the wrong start value. The same deductions from the higher and correct start value would have been higher than Ham's

[LynneSin]

127. Games judged by others will always be flawed: Let him keep the gold

I see valid points to why the Koreans complained but they also waited until after the filing period to file their complaints.

I also see valid reasons that the Korean did an extra hold that was never deducted and should have been.

Finally, I see people here not only demonizing Paul Hamm but associating him as a 'republican' because repukes don't return metals, etc. etc. etc.


Gymastics, along with any other sport where the winners are determined by a set of judges will always be flawed because the outcome is subjective to someone's point of view.

Clearly Alexsi Nemov should have won a medal for that incredible performance on the high bar (although not gold - I agree that the italian was the winner) and yet crowds went off the deep end because of how low his score came out.

Paul Hamm should not have to return his gold - he earned it, he won it fair & square on his own merit. He is not to be blamed because the judging system is screwed up beyond belief. If the judges and IOC feel guilty about the Korean then give him a gold medal too.

BTW, why isn't the scoring system setup so that the 'handicap' start value of a routine isn't already in the system. THen those judges who are ticking off deductions don't have to worry about the math. IT does seem that half of the judges got it right

[VelmaD]

128. I have to disagree about Nemov...

and that is hard for me to do because I adore Alexei. His routine last night had pretty glaring errors. He took a big step on the landing of his dismount and a couple of his release moves were caught too close to the bar (the last release in particular). And as much as it pains me to say it one of the first things I said last night while watching was "his form isn't what it used to be". He used to have impeccable toe point and body line and it just didn't seem quite the same last night. I agree that his original score was too low...but I didn't think he deserved a medal. Sorry.

[LynneSin]

131. I was thinking it should have been bronze

Morgan Hamm's routine was so plan compared to Alexsi and I could believe that Alexsi was rated lower.

BTW, Alexsi just gets hotter every year. He looks better with the blonde hair and those gorgeous russian eyes. Between him and Alexander Popov - damn Russians know how to grow some hot looking men in that country!

[VelmaD]

133. Yes plainer, but...

still out of a 10.0 start value and better executed. I think Morgan was the only one who really stuck his landing and he didn't get a medal either. :shrug:

Finally, a think we can really agree on. :) Nemov and Popov are H-O-T. Know who else is pretty hot...Alexei Yagudin (won the men's skating in 2002). Yummmmmmmmm.

Even Ivan Ivankov was looking pretty good last night. :)

[tedzbear]

135. There are some glaring mistakes that have not been questioned here!!!!!!!

I have read in more than one story that the South Korean officials did complain about the wrong start value immediately after the exercise. They say the judge they complained to told them to wait and request an inquiry after the meet was over.

In that case the judge they questioned was not following the rules and should have let them request an inquiry right then. He fucked them over by telling them to wait.

You don't hear anything about this from the pro Hamm side.

Also, the deduction not taken for the extra stoppage by the South Korean is a subjective decision taken by the judges, not a required one. The judges may have felt he didn't stop long enough to be given a deduction. If we want to get picky about judging, many have said Hamm should have been penalized more for his fall, and he wasn't. To win a gold medal after you make the ultimate fuck up, FALLING, is bizarre. But then again, that is a subjective decision by the judges.

I wish we could find out who the judge was who told the South Korean officials to wait. He is the center of this controversy, IMHO.

[Piltdown13]

136. OK, I'll bite

The Koreans have said that they were told to file their protest after the competition. By saying this, they are essentially claiming that they were told something differet to what others in the exact same situation were told. Two examples of this: Brett McClure's rings routine (same both nights) was given a lower start value in the all-around than in the preliminaries, as was Jason Gatson's (I think it was his) in the team finals. In both cases, American coaches complained right after the exercise and had their complaints reviewed on the spot (unsuccessfully in both cases, IIRC). I suppose it's possible that only the Koreans were given the wrong information -- the judging has been bizarre the entire competition -- but at this point it's their word against the judges' word.

And the missed deduction for the fourth hold *is* a mandatory/automatic deduction, just like the .5 deduction for sitting a landing or falling off an apparatus. Granted, it's a deduction that's going to be harder to spot for judges -- it requires keeping count throughout the routine, rather than just noticing that a guy falls on his ass -- but it is still required. I tend to think they simply lost count, because each of the Korean's holds were for at least a second or two; it would have been easy to do, as two of his holds were at the very beginning, and the other two at the very end of the routine.

Now, as to Hamm's deductions for his landing on the vault: First, it may seem like his score was too high, but he did have a high start value (10.0) for the vault, and there's no question that the mandatory deductions (.5 for sitting the landing plus .1 for landing outside the white lines, leaving him with 9.4 at best) were taken, along with some other deductions (he got 9.137, I believe). Also, the vault scoring in general was weird -- most of the scores seemed to cluster between 9.0 and 9.4 or so, with many excellent vaults being scored lower than one would think, and several badly botched attempts (including falls by other gymnasts) still receiving above 9.0. So, Hamm's vault score, although higher than one might think, wasn't really out of line with how vault was being scored during the competition.

[Pithlet]

137. deductions are subjective.

The rules may say that such-and-such a thing is an automatic deduction, but it is up to a human pair of eyes to determine if an action meets the requirements for a deduction. One judge may see a hold where another one does not.

Hamm's score was fair becase the start value was high. If they'd given him the wrong start value, then his score would have been artificially low. That is the whole point behind what happened to the Koreans.

You may disagree or find it highly unlikely that the oreans actually did file a protest in time, but it doesn't change the course of the actual events. The wrong start value WAS used, and it lowered a score that should have been enough for gold.

[Piltdown13]

138. Unsurprisingly, I don't agree :-)

Some deductions are subjective -- deductions made for things like jumps or releases not being "high enough", or a gymnast being "too close" to the high bar at the end of a release, or even things like two technically similar pommel horse routines receiving very different scores because one athlete had "better body lines" than the other. And of course, some deductions that are supposed to occur for form breaks don't occur because someone misses a split tuck or a missing toe point.

I still maintain that the above is different from mandatory deductions. With any of the things just mentioned, you can argue that perhaps those minor mistakes didn't detract from the overall quality or effect of the routine. But, things like steps or sits on landings, falling off of apparatus, and, yes, even things like the number of holds on parallel bars or too-short strength holds on rings are different IMHO because they are violations of the stated technical requirements of the exercise. Looking back at the video, I think that it's more likely that the judges saw four holds, but lost count of the number. Unfortunately, we'll probably never know exactly what deductions each judge took.

Yes, the wrong start value was used, but I still prefer being unfair to one athlete by allowing the ruling to stand to being unfair to everyone else by changing a score after the competition and setting a dangerous precedent. Maybe the best solution is to award a duplicate gold. (I don't agree with Hamm giving back the gold, because I haven't heard if the second-place Korean would be willing to swap his silver for bronze, which is what he *should* have gotten if only the start-value change is made.)

[Pithlet]

139. Making sure the right person gets the medal

is not unfair to everyone else. Eliminating avenues to take when mistakes have been made isn't fair to anyone.

And you are just plain wrong about the deductions. Some may be more subjective than others, but when a human being is looking at something and making a mental determination, it is subjective by definition. At any rate, there is a difference between deductions, which take place during the routine, and a start value, which is static, unless the gymnast changes their routine mid-performance.

You may be happy with letting the decision stand, and I can understand that position even if I don't agree with it. But, when all is said and done, it still doesn't change the fact that the wrong person got the medal.

[Piltdown13]

142. Like I said before, agree to disagree

We're probably getting to the point of splitting hairs here, but saying that anything a human observes is by definition subjective...well, in one sense of course that's true, but it's a road I don't want to go too far down, because before too long the majority of results would be questioned on that basis. I can agree that human judgment is subjective without also agreeing that any deduction a judge takes or doesn't take is just fine on the basis of subjectivity.

And, as far as the start values go, they should always be the same for a given routine, but they are, IIRC, determined as the routine occurs, along with the deductions. The judges do know in advance what elements a gymnast plans to include (or what vault he or she is going to do), but that start value comes from two judges who specifically watch the routine to see what the start value should be -- they make sure it matches what the gymnast intended to do, while the other judges are solely responsible for deductions. So, a mistake in the start value -- which I do not dispute was made here, with the start value judges apparently assigning an incorrect value to one of his routine's elements or maybe even missing an element -- is more similar to a mistake in the deductions than it first appears.

[Pithlet]

143. No, the start values are determine beforehand

The only reason they would change is if the gymnasts leaves something out entirely. Merely attempting it, no matter how poorly, gets them the same result, when it comes to start value. They aren't determining how well it is done, but merely that it is done. This isn't a case of questioning how something was judged. It just isn't. The start value had already been determined. That is what the deductions should have been subtracted from, and they weren't.

It simply isn't the slippery slope you're making it out to be.

[Piltdown13]

144. Right, they're determining that the elements are done

said determination being what the start value judges are there for. And the start value judges can make a mistake just like the deduction judges. They may miss an element, or subjectively decide that a similar but lower-difficulty element was actually performed rather than a higher-scoring one. (Not saying that's what happened here, only that it's a possibility...it's why we hear the commentators talking about lost bonus points when an athlete changes something during a routine.) I simply disagree that a mistake by those judges should be treated differently than a mistake by the deduction judges.