what do you think? do you have any questions about gymnastics judging?

[@charitybosua]

Yas Vladislava deserves bonus points for being the only one with a pretty wolf turn

[@jojox9791]

Definitely not the only one, but she does have one of the best

[@jojox9791]

What I can never get over is her crossed feet landing on her vaults. I don't think they deduct, but it seems dangerous

[@PeRiDoTs13]

@@jojox9791Crossed feet is a form deduction in the code, so they should be deducting if they’re not already.

[@cocoroni1031]

I feel it's fair to reward excellent execution, like Komova's sheep jump and Urazova's wolf turn. I get that some people love to see NCAA-like 10s but it's nice to see more separation among those routines.

[@asharadayne6159]

So well said!

[@leelab8307]

I never thought about it like this. I want to hear more.

[@emmathedilemmma]

yes yes give us more!!!!

[@__Tiziana__]

Amazing channel. (Im)patiently waiting for more videos! Thank you!

[@mrdsn189]

Thank you, Emily!

[@sameepbhaladhare5553]

Part 2 !!

[@erinm9445]

Sure, of course we all want to see perfection rewarded. But anything taken to extremes will have costs in elsewhere. Perfection is diametrically opposed to artistry. The former is prescriptive and leaves no room for variation, the latter is expressive and needs to leave room for individuality and risk-taking. The FIG claims that it wants artistry, but an overly prescriptive code will *always* hurt artistry and innovation, even when it claims to grade and reward on artistry. Beam is the best example of this. Even with new "artistry" requirements, beam has never been more boring to watch. It used to be one of my favorite events, and now I can barely yawn through it most of the time. This code rewards an extreme level of perfection, and it rewards difficulty. The code is not interested in creativity, beauty, art, or innovation. That's fine if all you care about is achieving a military kind of precision that simulates beauty without often achieving it, focused on the same few moves over and over that have an optimized risk/reward ratio. But that's not my idea of well rounded gymnastics, and I don't think it's most other peoples' either. I'm genuinely curious what you as a judge think about the state of beam right now. Do you think beam is going in the right direction? That a stricter code has made for better gymnastics? Do you think lockstep precision of a few moves is preferable to innovation and beauty? Or do you disagree with my premise?

[@blackswan7990]

First is jonhson salto?

[@jhere289]

Is muscling up your casts on bars a deduction?

[@FlipFlyTumble]

it depends but usually it would cause a body alignment deduction

[@jhere289]

How about here, when she does the casts, does it cause deductions if so how many? kzbin.info/www/bejne/eZvNZ2CCfbKJhsU

[@gaodrob7938]

@@jhere289 No deductions here for Rebecca

[@jhere289]

@@gaodrob7938 Ok, thanks for the response.

[@WantryandDeluxe]

Can you judge Nadia’s perfect 10 routine to todays standards