UCI

[@callumcurran6682]

Real nice stuff guys.😁

[@nickyboy74]

Why does Tom not do the big comps? He would kill it

[@henrybrustin]

Jude Jones lap: back Double whip on Spine,front Flip on Spine,1080,triple whip,front flair... 3rd ?

[@juju-nl9te]

terrible terrible judging with real UCI judges Tom should have placed last ... since when you score style in UCI ?! are they dumb if it would be the case corey walsh would won every Fise and olympic

[@nekitsherbabmx]

I completely agree bro, the judges need to be changed

[@freedombmx_mag]

@@nekitsherbabmx The UCI rules clearly state that: "When considering overall impression of the quality of a run, the judges consider the following criteria. • Difficulty of tricks • Progression • Amplitude • Flow • Use of course • Risk factor • Variety of tricks • Style • Execution • Originality • Landings No particular criterion is more important than any other; they all contribute to overall impression." archive.uci.org/docs/default-source/official-documents/bmx-official-documents/uci-bmx-freestyle-park-judging-method-v.03052019.pdf?sfvrsn=8fff2d10_2 At the contest in Eindhoven Tom ticked more of these box than any of the other riders, wouldn't you agree?

[@juju-nl9te]

@@freedombmx_mag you know it's not true

[@freedombmx_mag]

@@juju-nl9te The judging of BMX Park contests is a very subjective matter of course, but in accordance with the UCI rules it does make sense that Tom deserved to win, as he objectively went higher, used more of the course, had better flow, better execution, and did a bigger variety of tricks than anybody else. He also scored very high in regards of style, originality and landings, arguably higher than anybody else. The only three criteria Tom didn't not excel in were trick difficulty, risk factor and progression. He still scored really well in these areas too, though. You may be of a different opinion regarding some of the criteria (style being is a highly subjective one for example), but I don't see where the judges made a major mistake that would undermine their decision. They had good reasons to argue that Tom excelled in 8 out of the 11 criteria and placed well above average in the remaining 3, which means he should get the most points. Seems like a valid argument to me. Maybe you don't fully agree with the result, but it's still a valid one in a sport that is mostly judged on subjective criteria.