FIG President Bruno Grandi recently gave a speech at the AIPS Congress that highlighted several two key components of our ever-changing sport: fair judging & the open scoring system.

Grandi noted that the judging aspect of gymnastics is often difficult, because “we do not have stopwatches that tell us who wins, nor do we have finish lines that show us who arrives first.” 

There is so much subjectivity involved, but he has worked hard to achieve what he calls “sportive justice.” It takes these two things to achieve that:

- A clear and coherent code of points
- Judges who are honest and competent

A system has been built that allows scores to be contested and a superior jury can re-watch a routine to verify the score. The education system for judges has been improved to “assure that all judges have the level of excellence required for international competitions” Grandi said.

FIG also has a complex new system in place to evaluate judges after each World Championships where they can identify the outliers among the scores and the judges who gave them.  

With the end of the perfect 10, there came great doubt in the gymnastics community. But Grandi stands behind the new system because “the 10 was, in fact, restrictive” and didn’t allow the judges to separate difficulty level from the quality of execution. While Grandi noted that some people thought he was crazy and many still don’t agree with it, the open scoring system has been in place for over 10 years and has been very successful.

So, is it finally clear that the 10.0—the symbol of perfection that made Nadia Comaneci famous 40 years ago—is simply too restrictive to distinguish between athletes' performances?

Should this open scoring system be implemented in lower levels of the sport (JO) as well as NCAA gymnastics?

Would a change like this cause immediate uproar and eventual growth like it did on the international stage?

Share your thoughts!


Related:
FIG President Bruno Grandi- King Of Justice Gives His 2016 Vision