Although She landed without taking a step, her posture was leaning forward, and hence the step she took to present to the judges was necessary to keep her from falling forward, in which case the vault wouldn't be considered a stick because a stick requires a stable vertical body posture. This was probably the controversy the judges took so long to decide over the phone. Other vaults in the same competition featured similar leaning body postures and were not scored as stuck landings.
To the ignorant people bitching about this, think that if the judges DID give her a 9.6, Carly could have easily adjusted her routines to beat her. That's like saying "Well, that 3 pointer I shot in the 2nd quarter was counted as a 2 and should be reviewed in a game I lost by 1". She lost, Carly won and was the better gymnast. After the 1972 Munich games, I can't believe the RUssians would bitch about ANYTHING being "unfair".
This was not perfect of course, but it was better than the score it was given. She had two chances to became the AA champion... here, and Sydney. Sydney just makes me angry! Now this vault is a 5.9 in difficulty! =D Crazy Khorki!
shes performed that vault poorer than here and gotten a higher score, proving the score was too low and the judges robbed her. but in the end, everyone knows she was the best gymnast at these games, she doesnt need a medal to prove that.
@comanecisalto1 Khorkina was way past her prime here and was NOT the best gymnast at these games. There was no best gymnast. Everyone showed different strengths and reasons that they were great at the olympics, while everyone also had their weaknesses. There was no gymnast who was completely better than the others, and all of the gymnasts should be noted as being great. I do agree with one thing you said: medals don't necessarily prove everything.
-1.0 unstable landing posture which necessitated a step toward the judges (cleverly disguised to look like a "presentation," but clearly to maintain her balance.
Equals: 9.450 in my book. Obviously one of the judges threw out a 9.500 which got the resulting score. Totally fair, IMHO.
it is not a low landing at all, chest is above the vertical, her feet are squared with the vault so it's not under-rotated. it's a questionable stick if you're being very strict.
but despite what anyone says, it IS a fair score for that vault i agree. BUT when compared to scores given to OTHER gymnasts for their vaults. they were NOT as strict. cough cough* carly.
besides, this vault wasn't performed nearly as good in qualifying yet in qualifying she got a bigger score.
she scored higher on that exact same vault with a step on landing, the judges wanted Patterson to win. ROBBED. The whole 2004 Gymnastics was one major rigged competition anyway.
@strongbad635 Her chest was above the 90 degree position when she hit the ground, thus there is no deduction for a low landing. I would have given it a 9.6.
Her chest was upright all right, I'll give you -0.1 for the leg separation, -0.1 for the bad form and 0.05 for the unpointed toes. I'll even deduct 0.1 because she didn't stick the landing and saluted too early. That's -0.350 out of a 9.90, which means she should have scored in the 9.550 range. She was definitely underscored.
A "stuck landing" has to show stable body position. Khorkina was clearly under-rotated at the end of the vault, leaning forward, and emphatically DID NOT show stable body position. The step taken forward was necessary to maintain her balance, therefore the step is a deductable error. The judges conversed at length about whether or not to count the step, and in the end, they correctly counted it as a step: she didn't stick the vault because she didn't show stable body posture.
plus maybe another .05 for not really a stuck landing...yes, her feet did not move intially, but she really couldn't have held the landing position and had to immediately step forward and turn to salute the judges. Still, this was underscored. It seems that after 2001, the judges stopped judging this vault like it really had a 9.9 SV. They seemed to judge it like it had a 9.8 SV. No matter how well she did it, the scores didn't measure up anymore. Best one she did: 2001 Worlds Qualifying
Svetlana was underscord here but she was clearly overscored on bars and beam. In Athens I don't think she should have won the silver, qhe was the best in Sydney, she should have won in 2000.
she was robbed, if u look at her qualifying vauklt score it was 9.512. This vault was performed so much better than qualifying round but got lower score. Svetlana you are the real olympic aa champion on these games.
You have to admit, it does look very suspicious when a 9.9 SV vault with a stuck landing scores 9.462 while Patterson's messy looking vault of 9.8 SV with both feet outside the lines scores 9.375. So from a higher start value, Khorkina gets more deductions than Patterson. Did they ever give an explanation to why her vault score was so low?
Believe me, I asked myself these questions very very often, when a romanian gymnast was beated by Khorkhina or Zamo or another...
Let me give you an example - OANA BAN ATHENS, 2004. Her floor was more than cool, but judges gave her only 9,200. Of course, because she was not Khorkhina from RUSSIA, she was just a romanian gymnast.
Policy makes the score! U really believe these girls are scored about their performance???
It's been more than 20 years ago when a Romanian gymnast was underscored! Unfortunately, we can't say the same thing about the Russians. Especially, since the introduction of the new CoP, Russian gymnasts are being consistently underscored. Take Anna Pavlova, for example: she's getting low scores every single time she competes!
Oana Ban scored a 9.600 in the qualification round and 9.437 in the TF. Do you really want to get me started on the judging? Besides, with the exception of Khorkina, Russia is usually the country that gets repeatedly screwed over by the judges, not Romania.
I think Khorkina is one of THE greatest gymnasts of all time and I also think she was underscored on this vault but the truth is that she had small mistakes on all her other routines that night. Had it not been for those mistakes, she probably would have gone on to win the gold...so to say that Carly was "given" the gold is preposterous. However, Zhang Nan getting the bronze over Pavlova with a large error on beam, whole other story in my opinion!...
Carly Patterson stepped TWO feet out of line, ropped on landing and she did an easier vault (SV : 9.8). And the difference between their vault was only 0.1! How come?
Plus : Khorkina created her vault.
The cards were thrown at very begining : WE WOULD NOT GIVE A MEDAL FOR A NON NORTH AMERICAN!
If money can't buy me love, sure can buy TWO gold olympic all around medals! Shame on USAGymnastics!
excuse me? deductions are deductions, no matter who the gymnast is, and no matter what they do on any routine. i'm sick of the reputation/kharma argument for khorkina because it's bullshit, and in this case her own skill was where one of three very obvious deductions should have been incurred. she wasn't even close to vertical on her 1 1/2, and that's in addition to a pretty flagrant form break on the low bar, and a bullshitted, unstable landing.
1. You have to understand that Khorkina was the best uneven bars worker at Athens. With that in mind, a 9.725 is actually a low score. The best workers in each aparatus were getting 9.8 plus in that Olympic Games.
2. It's an all around competition when the scores are a little bit higher for everyone.
3. What about Patterson's tkatchev as her only release skill (shame!)? And what about her lower start value vault?
that's true, and i think i would be more understanding if this were EF. i just got frustrated in '04 because i love svetlana but can't really accept the mantra that she automatically deserved athens since she was screwed by sydney. also, i think carly slightly redeemed herself (lack of more than just a tkachev is definitely an ouch!) and was much stronger than khorkina on beam and floor---original, tough dismount on beam after a clean performance, then some hard tumbling.
On beam, Patterson was way better than Khorkina. Although, I believe Khorkina was underestimated on this aparatus in her entire career.
On floor, otherwise, I don't give any credit to Patterson and I don't understand why people do. Her opening is only a half-in half-out and she doesn't stuck her landings. Khorkina has only three passes tumbling (which is not a problem for me), but the first one is absolutely first class. Not mentioning her artistry and grace.
Start values only went up to 10.0 but Patterson STILL had more difficulty, yes.
Look at the routines side by side.
Patterson got her difficulty through pirouettes on bars.
Khorkina had more but she executed poorly. Commentators from all around the globe commented on how they were surprised she got a 9.975 for a routine that was WORSE than her qualifying she she scored the same.
And vault she couldn't have scored more than a 9.5 since Rosu was getting 9.6's for a harder vault.
Patterson got her breaks on bars and vault. Khorkina got hers on bars, beam, and floor. Most of them were due to her name only. Funny how you say Patterson just didn't have enough difficulty for you, yet she had far more on floor and beam. So at the end of they day she and Khorkina are even with Khorkina having more on bars and vault. At the end of the day, I think the best won. I hate Pattersons floor but her tumbling was great, and I think her beam was a little underscored.
3. The scores on all around event are higher than preliminaries and finals. If Khorkina got less than 9.7, she would almost tie Patterson on "execution" and Patterson has no execution EITHER.
4. The same on vault. They got the same deduction but Patterson didn't stuck, didn't get a good distance and, most important, she stepped TWO feets outside. Was this even taken on consideration?
Distance and power rarely plays into a vault score. It's an option deduction vs. stationary. I agree, bars was a bit high but her Tckathev was directly linked into a pac-salto which is a difficult combination.
I honestly don't get why you rag on her floor mount. She had more difficulty than Khorkina, period.
And I would have been VERY surprised if Khorkina won. To me she just didn't have that look of the best gymnast in the world. And the fact her thighs didn't touch creeped me out. :P lol
5. A half in half out opening on floor? A Tckathev on bars? A 9.8 SV vault? Just not enough for me...
On conclusion, I don't think Patterson is that bad. I just don't think she is good enough to be an olympic all around champion (maybe on beam...). I actually believe the problem of Khorkina was herself : she was still very good on 2004, but worse than 2000. But she wasn't competing against herself, but against Patterson/Nang/Pavlova.
I totally agree the whole vault thing is weird and unexplainable, but if you correct the score on one event you have to do it to all; it's only fair.
Khorkina's 9.7 on bars was by her name only, and it really needed a lower score. Late pirouettes lots of over-cooked handstands and a step on the landing. The penalty for the handstands/pirouettes is VERY harsh. But Khorkina got by unscathed.
@xayresx you made your point about the tkachev. Bars was her weakest event. Name another Olympics where the AA winner did a double arabian dismount off beam.
MUCH more on UB. .1 worth on vault. Patterson had MUCH more on balance beam and much(lower case) on floor. So yeah, it evens out... Vault was the only event Khorkina had without a significant error. Patterson only went OOB on vault, that's the only major mistake she made so she deserved her title. Khorkina rode her name like a horse to get silver.
BTW, I don't think the CoP really showcases the difficulty of the Khorkina II as opposed to the DTY. A difference of 0.1 in SV seems to me utterly ridiculous, Khorkina's vault is far more complex and requires different mechanics.
2004 was the most utterly confusing and downright brainless COP I can recall. BB was ok, but FX, UB and even VT were just real head-scratchers when it came to scoring and SV. On floor way, way too much emphasis was put on the leaps and spins. Tumbling was so generic and lacked ANY diversity. Full in pike, triple twist, 2 1/2 twist to layout punch front and a double pike was basically what everyone was doing, save a few. UB was also really stupid because releases counted for so little. :/
As much as I still think and will always think Khorkina was flabbergastingly over-rated, I too wanted to see her win an Olympic title, because she really did earn her reputation. It's just once she had acquired it, it was completely inflated and people idolize her more than her actual abilities warrant. Not to belittle her abilities, though. She had the possibility of making every EF in 00, and medaling in all of them as well as taking the AA Gold. Which is nothing to short of amazing.
She DID make every EF in Sydney (she didn't compete on BB due to the "2 per country" rule), but I doubt she would have medalled on BB (or on VT, come to that). Lobaznyuk, Zamo and Produnova were much stronger than her.
She might have taken a medal on vault, but no way she could have stood a chance on BB. I was so upset when Lobazniok got injured. She was one of my favorite gymnasts (of all time) and with a little help on her bar routine she could have gone on to be a major AA contender and definitely taken some World titles on Floor and Beam. Such a shame, really.
Oh, don't get me started on the previous CoP! Dance was more important than tumbling and yet we saw no artistic routines? The double cat leap, one of the ugliest skills ever, was a D, just like the double pike and the 2½ twist?? Come on! Besides, it was impossible even for knowledgeable fans to work out the SV! I feel that the current code is moving towards the right direction; top-8 skills, 5 acro, 3 dance, plenty of time for choreography. Let's see how it evolves...
Not to mention people who did take risks on floor got no reward for them. It was all about the compulsory elements in them, that was it. There were a few routines I liked but it was mostly watching the same thing with different music.
I don't disagree; although I hate admitting it, I believe Carly deserved to win the AA over Khorkina, even though she was overscored herself on 3 out of 4 events (her BB score is the only one that looked remotely fair, low even). Pavlova did better than Khorkina (I think she did better than Patterson too, but I'm biased) and didn't even medal. Go figure... But, I do believe there's a reason Khorkina was such a big household name. She was so bloody awesome! Gymnastics is so boring without her...
I hate it too. Patterson was an incredibly talented gymnast marred by bad taste and a lack of any artistic flair, but I've said it before and I'll say it again- Artistic is just something that describes the sport, which is the most important thing. Sadly, Khorkina's flair and dynamics weren't enough to over-rider the fact she was past prime and just inconsistent at this point in her career. I'd actually say Nan was more consistent that her by this stage.
Although not in her prime, she could have actually won had she performed her BB and FX routines the way she did in the TF, had she performed her UB the way she usually did and had she been scored fairly on VT. Or at least, it would have been closer. Too many ifs, though... Carly won and we can't rewrite history.
Possibly, yes. But you have to take into account that if Carly hadn't have gone OOB on vault she would have had a score right up there with Khorkina in every event except UB, but Carly would make the space up on BB. So it's impossible to say..
@xayresx Shame on USA gymnastics? What do they have to do with anything? Why is everything some big conspiracy? There were deductions there. The USA didn't "buy" anything. If anything, Khorkina's name and reputation "bought" her some tenths on bars so it evened out. I'm not Carly's biggest fan, but except for that step out of line, Carly didn't make a single other mistake. She was better that day.
wtf are you talking about? her feet aren't close enough where toe-pointing would have caused her to hit the horse...watch the vid, she's got plenty of room...i stopped feeling bad for her when her UB set was very overscored and then when the judges were kind to her on beam.
I agree with you, her vault was not perfect at all. What I don't understand is why the juges took such a long time to give her score, why did they have to discuss by phone ? It looks like they were dicussing about the best way to maintain the first place open for Patterson...
@khorkiFan from theories that I read online, they may have been discussing the landing. She did a great job faking a stick and maybe some were fooled by it, but she was leaning forward and had to take a step. Like I said though, that's just coming from theories that I read.
@khorkiFan They were discussing whether or not to judge her vault as being stuck or not. The fact that she landed with her chest forward and did not hold the stuck position for even a second before stepping forward and saluting the judges suggests that it was necessary for her to step forward and that she did not stick the vault at all.
That was SOOO unfair! She had a nice lift, good position on the air, didn't take the slightest hop after landing and it was an original vault, named after her with a SV of 9.90. I mean, can we blame her attitude towards the judges? She should have got more than 9.550!
*wikipedia*
Although She landed without taking a step, her posture was leaning forward, and hence the step she took to present to the judges was necessary to keep her from falling forward, in which case the vault wouldn't be considered a stick because a stick requires a stable vertical body posture. This was probably the controversy the judges took so long to decide over the phone. Other vaults in the same competition featured similar leaning body postures and were not scored as stuck landings.
zachz4 2 months ago
To the ignorant people bitching about this, think that if the judges DID give her a 9.6, Carly could have easily adjusted her routines to beat her. That's like saying "Well, that 3 pointer I shot in the 2nd quarter was counted as a 2 and should be reviewed in a game I lost by 1". She lost, Carly won and was the better gymnast. After the 1972 Munich games, I can't believe the RUssians would bitch about ANYTHING being "unfair".
goten1214 3 months ago
It was an ugly vault.
jyosefr 4 months ago
This was not perfect of course, but it was better than the score it was given. She had two chances to became the AA champion... here, and Sydney. Sydney just makes me angry! Now this vault is a 5.9 in difficulty! =D Crazy Khorki!
ShawnVikaKomova2012 11 months ago
@xayresx wtf are you talking about
msms68 1 year ago
Oye aun somos jovenes, todavia podemos hacer una vida
MultiRATON1 1 year ago
i agree that her score was too low i wished they tied her with carly for first
SAX713 2 years ago
shes performed that vault poorer than here and gotten a higher score, proving the score was too low and the judges robbed her. but in the end, everyone knows she was the best gymnast at these games, she doesnt need a medal to prove that.
comanecisalto1 2 years ago 5
@comanecisalto1 Khorkina was way past her prime here and was NOT the best gymnast at these games. There was no best gymnast. Everyone showed different strengths and reasons that they were great at the olympics, while everyone also had their weaknesses. There was no gymnast who was completely better than the others, and all of the gymnasts should be noted as being great. I do agree with one thing you said: medals don't necessarily prove everything.
481095ymg2 1 year ago
@481095ymg2 ugh. you are being so nice about it!!!
Ricoblack2012 1 month ago
@Ricoblack2012 Well thank you:)
481095ymg2 1 month ago
@comanecisalto1 and that's the great thing about it: she doesn't need a medal to prove how good she is, the world just knows she is the best.
yellowbanana104 1 year ago
@comanecisalto1 I AGREE
Ricoblack2012 1 month ago
Comment removed
markedexclusive 2 years ago
Sometimes I wish that she would have won the all-around instead of Carly..
chrislindsey14 2 years ago 2
UNDERSCORED. she was robbed
BrittanyxKilla 2 years ago 2
Corrupt judges. Aweful.
cindyirene2001 2 years ago 5
Here goes:
-0.5 legs separate in 1/2 turn onto the horse
-1.0 legs separate in the air/knees bent
-1.0 toes not pointed/flat feet in air
-1.0 under rotated vault/low landing position
-1.0 unstable landing posture which necessitated a step toward the judges (cleverly disguised to look like a "presentation," but clearly to maintain her balance.
Equals: 9.450 in my book. Obviously one of the judges threw out a 9.500 which got the resulting score. Totally fair, IMHO.
strongbad635 2 years ago
it is not a low landing at all, chest is above the vertical, her feet are squared with the vault so it's not under-rotated. it's a questionable stick if you're being very strict.
but despite what anyone says, it IS a fair score for that vault i agree. BUT when compared to scores given to OTHER gymnasts for their vaults. they were NOT as strict. cough cough* carly.
besides, this vault wasn't performed nearly as good in qualifying yet in qualifying she got a bigger score.
Selecious 2 years ago
I read some where that the judges gave her a higher score on the uneven bar because of the unfair low score she received on the vault Balance
Natalie9911 2 years ago
Didn't Carly score lower than Svetlana on vault?
markedexclusive 2 years ago
she scored higher on that exact same vault with a step on landing, the judges wanted Patterson to win. ROBBED. The whole 2004 Gymnastics was one major rigged competition anyway.
annakfan 2 years ago
@strongbad635 Her chest was above the 90 degree position when she hit the ground, thus there is no deduction for a low landing. I would have given it a 9.6.
indiatree 8 months ago
So sad, they did everything they could so she couldn't win. Amazing gymnast.
annakfan 2 years ago 2
why would they do that?
Natalie9911 2 years ago
Her chest was upright all right, I'll give you -0.1 for the leg separation, -0.1 for the bad form and 0.05 for the unpointed toes. I'll even deduct 0.1 because she didn't stick the landing and saluted too early. That's -0.350 out of a 9.90, which means she should have scored in the 9.550 range. She was definitely underscored.
AnnaPavlovaFan 2 years ago
A "stuck landing" has to show stable body position. Khorkina was clearly under-rotated at the end of the vault, leaning forward, and emphatically DID NOT show stable body position. The step taken forward was necessary to maintain her balance, therefore the step is a deductable error. The judges conversed at length about whether or not to count the step, and in the end, they correctly counted it as a step: she didn't stick the vault because she didn't show stable body posture.
strongbad635 2 years ago
why is her score so low
sochisochi 3 years ago
It was believed that she had been underscored.
It can be calculated using a simple ratio table that her vault should have properly been given a 9.612.
But still, she will lose the all-around gold medal and her score on uneven bars was artificially high.
gy9402 3 years ago
Korkina was robbed on this vault and everybody knows it.
boytoyville 3 years ago 4
@boytoyville Yeah, but she was given a much higher score than she deserved than she deserved on the bars.
JohnPhilipSousa519 1 year ago
9.9 start value.....
-.05 ( separation of legs on the half turn on)
-.15 ("" "" in the air)
-.05 ( a little low on the landing)
and maybe -.05 on the lack of power.
=9.65
mendozarun 3 years ago
plus maybe another .05 for not really a stuck landing...yes, her feet did not move intially, but she really couldn't have held the landing position and had to immediately step forward and turn to salute the judges. Still, this was underscored. It seems that after 2001, the judges stopped judging this vault like it really had a 9.9 SV. They seemed to judge it like it had a 9.8 SV. No matter how well she did it, the scores didn't measure up anymore. Best one she did: 2001 Worlds Qualifying
indiatree 3 years ago
Khorkina was gifted a high score on bars because of her reputation. Her beam score was also bogus, and her floor was a tab high.
Khorkina should have gotten a 9.6 for this vault.
All in all, if you claim mis-judging one one apparatus you have to correct it on all. Patterson still comes out the winner.
WSggs 3 years ago
may i know who are the judges? i will kill them!
gyuasg 3 years ago
she was robbed, the judging panel wanted an American winner, at least at these games the teams are being judged fairly
annakfan 3 years ago 3
Maybe she recieved a gift (or in some way an apology score on UB for Sydney's f' up) but she should have won the AA gold.
nascarkraz 3 years ago
Absolutly ridiculous judging in these games.
cindyirene2001 3 years ago 2
Svetlana was underscord here but she was clearly overscored on bars and beam. In Athens I don't think she should have won the silver, qhe was the best in Sydney, she should have won in 2000.
monyac 3 years ago 2
she was robbed, if u look at her qualifying vauklt score it was 9.512. This vault was performed so much better than qualifying round but got lower score. Svetlana you are the real olympic aa champion on these games.
tombarnes123 3 years ago
You have to admit, it does look very suspicious when a 9.9 SV vault with a stuck landing scores 9.462 while Patterson's messy looking vault of 9.8 SV with both feet outside the lines scores 9.375. So from a higher start value, Khorkina gets more deductions than Patterson. Did they ever give an explanation to why her vault score was so low?
itstrieu 4 years ago
Believe me, I asked myself these questions very very often, when a romanian gymnast was beated by Khorkhina or Zamo or another...
Let me give you an example - OANA BAN ATHENS, 2004. Her floor was more than cool, but judges gave her only 9,200. Of course, because she was not Khorkhina from RUSSIA, she was just a romanian gymnast.
Policy makes the score! U really believe these girls are scored about their performance???
cryssbest 3 years ago
I agree that gymnasts are not only scored by their performances, but it's the first time I hear someone complaining romanian are underscored.
Watch their bars routines. There's nothing more ugly on gymnastics.
On Oana Ban, her score was actually 9.437.
xayresx 3 years ago 2
oh, i totally agree with you there...remember their bars routines in 2000? raducan's and especially maria olaru's were frightful.
scatterplot4 3 years ago
It's been more than 20 years ago when a Romanian gymnast was underscored! Unfortunately, we can't say the same thing about the Russians. Especially, since the introduction of the new CoP, Russian gymnasts are being consistently underscored. Take Anna Pavlova, for example: she's getting low scores every single time she competes!
Darkangel127 3 years ago 2
Oana Ban scored a 9.600 in the qualification round and 9.437 in the TF. Do you really want to get me started on the judging? Besides, with the exception of Khorkina, Russia is usually the country that gets repeatedly screwed over by the judges, not Romania.
AnnaPavlovaFan 2 years ago
Caly would have got a 9.6 if she stuck the same vault.
loaugust 4 years ago
Poor Khorkina.
loaugust 4 years ago
sveta is my all time fave (with boginskaya), but i think carly deserved the gold
rexus82 4 years ago
I think Khorkina is one of THE greatest gymnasts of all time and I also think she was underscored on this vault but the truth is that she had small mistakes on all her other routines that night. Had it not been for those mistakes, she probably would have gone on to win the gold...so to say that Carly was "given" the gold is preposterous. However, Zhang Nan getting the bronze over Pavlova with a large error on beam, whole other story in my opinion!...
ameracad 4 years ago 9
Carly Patterson stepped TWO feet out of line, ropped on landing and she did an easier vault (SV : 9.8). And the difference between their vault was only 0.1! How come?
Plus : Khorkina created her vault.
The cards were thrown at very begining : WE WOULD NOT GIVE A MEDAL FOR A NON NORTH AMERICAN!
If money can't buy me love, sure can buy TWO gold olympic all around medals! Shame on USAGymnastics!
xayresx 4 years ago 7
money can also buy you one of the most overscored bars routine in olympic all-around history, aka khorkina, right after this vault
scatterplot4 3 years ago
If only russian had money .....
And it's not overscored at all when you have a NON-STOP routine and TWO skills named after you in a single aparatus.
What do you prefer : an all-around champion doing only a tkachev in 2004? The last one was Mary Lou Retton in 1984! 20 years!
xayresx 3 years ago
excuse me? deductions are deductions, no matter who the gymnast is, and no matter what they do on any routine. i'm sick of the reputation/kharma argument for khorkina because it's bullshit, and in this case her own skill was where one of three very obvious deductions should have been incurred. she wasn't even close to vertical on her 1 1/2, and that's in addition to a pretty flagrant form break on the low bar, and a bullshitted, unstable landing.
scatterplot4 3 years ago
1. You have to understand that Khorkina was the best uneven bars worker at Athens. With that in mind, a 9.725 is actually a low score. The best workers in each aparatus were getting 9.8 plus in that Olympic Games.
2. It's an all around competition when the scores are a little bit higher for everyone.
3. What about Patterson's tkatchev as her only release skill (shame!)? And what about her lower start value vault?
xayresx 3 years ago 2
that's true, and i think i would be more understanding if this were EF. i just got frustrated in '04 because i love svetlana but can't really accept the mantra that she automatically deserved athens since she was screwed by sydney. also, i think carly slightly redeemed herself (lack of more than just a tkachev is definitely an ouch!) and was much stronger than khorkina on beam and floor---original, tough dismount on beam after a clean performance, then some hard tumbling.
scatterplot4 3 years ago
On beam, Patterson was way better than Khorkina. Although, I believe Khorkina was underestimated on this aparatus in her entire career.
On floor, otherwise, I don't give any credit to Patterson and I don't understand why people do. Her opening is only a half-in half-out and she doesn't stuck her landings. Khorkina has only three passes tumbling (which is not a problem for me), but the first one is absolutely first class. Not mentioning her artistry and grace.
xayresx 3 years ago
Gymnastics is still a sport and difficulty should win over artistry.
And Patterson had MUCH more difficulty on beam and floor than Khorkina.
WSggs 3 years ago
MUCH more difficulty? I don't agree. They have equally 10.0 start value.
On the other hand, Khorkina had a more difficult vault (9.9 x 9.8) and bars (10.0 x 9.9).
Such a shame having an all around olympic champion doing only a tkachev in 2004! Not since 1984...... TWENTY years ago.
xayresx 3 years ago 3
Start values only went up to 10.0 but Patterson STILL had more difficulty, yes.
Look at the routines side by side.
Patterson got her difficulty through pirouettes on bars.
Khorkina had more but she executed poorly. Commentators from all around the globe commented on how they were surprised she got a 9.975 for a routine that was WORSE than her qualifying she she scored the same.
And vault she couldn't have scored more than a 9.5 since Rosu was getting 9.6's for a harder vault.
WSggs 3 years ago
Despite I love arguing about scores, I honestly think it's kind dumb since none of us were there. Not to mention we didn't study for this....
However (and, again, despite I'm huge fan of Khorkina) :
1. Khorkina actually scored more than 9.5 on qualyfing, and she didn't stuck the landing there. THAT'S what no one can explain.
2. I'm not sure but Rosu was actually getting 9.7 on her Amanar.
xayresx 3 years ago
Patterson got her breaks on bars and vault. Khorkina got hers on bars, beam, and floor. Most of them were due to her name only. Funny how you say Patterson just didn't have enough difficulty for you, yet she had far more on floor and beam. So at the end of they day she and Khorkina are even with Khorkina having more on bars and vault. At the end of the day, I think the best won. I hate Pattersons floor but her tumbling was great, and I think her beam was a little underscored.
WSggs 3 years ago
3. The scores on all around event are higher than preliminaries and finals. If Khorkina got less than 9.7, she would almost tie Patterson on "execution" and Patterson has no execution EITHER.
4. The same on vault. They got the same deduction but Patterson didn't stuck, didn't get a good distance and, most important, she stepped TWO feets outside. Was this even taken on consideration?
xayresx 3 years ago
Distance and power rarely plays into a vault score. It's an option deduction vs. stationary. I agree, bars was a bit high but her Tckathev was directly linked into a pac-salto which is a difficult combination.
I honestly don't get why you rag on her floor mount. She had more difficulty than Khorkina, period.
And I would have been VERY surprised if Khorkina won. To me she just didn't have that look of the best gymnast in the world. And the fact her thighs didn't touch creeped me out. :P lol
WSggs 3 years ago
5. A half in half out opening on floor? A Tckathev on bars? A 9.8 SV vault? Just not enough for me...
On conclusion, I don't think Patterson is that bad. I just don't think she is good enough to be an olympic all around champion (maybe on beam...). I actually believe the problem of Khorkina was herself : she was still very good on 2004, but worse than 2000. But she wasn't competing against herself, but against Patterson/Nang/Pavlova.
xayresx 3 years ago
Wow, I wasn't notified of this, heh.
Ok here goes.
I totally agree the whole vault thing is weird and unexplainable, but if you correct the score on one event you have to do it to all; it's only fair.
Khorkina's 9.7 on bars was by her name only, and it really needed a lower score. Late pirouettes lots of over-cooked handstands and a step on the landing. The penalty for the handstands/pirouettes is VERY harsh. But Khorkina got by unscathed.
WSggs 3 years ago
@xayresx you made your point about the tkachev. Bars was her weakest event. Name another Olympics where the AA winner did a double arabian dismount off beam.
can1052 1 year ago
Khorkina had MUCH more difficulty on VT and UB. Your point?
AnnaPavlovaFan 2 years ago
MUCH more on UB. .1 worth on vault. Patterson had MUCH more on balance beam and much(lower case) on floor. So yeah, it evens out... Vault was the only event Khorkina had without a significant error. Patterson only went OOB on vault, that's the only major mistake she made so she deserved her title. Khorkina rode her name like a horse to get silver.
WSggs 2 years ago
BTW, I don't think the CoP really showcases the difficulty of the Khorkina II as opposed to the DTY. A difference of 0.1 in SV seems to me utterly ridiculous, Khorkina's vault is far more complex and requires different mechanics.
AnnaPavlovaFan 2 years ago
2004 was the most utterly confusing and downright brainless COP I can recall. BB was ok, but FX, UB and even VT were just real head-scratchers when it came to scoring and SV. On floor way, way too much emphasis was put on the leaps and spins. Tumbling was so generic and lacked ANY diversity. Full in pike, triple twist, 2 1/2 twist to layout punch front and a double pike was basically what everyone was doing, save a few. UB was also really stupid because releases counted for so little. :/
WSggs 2 years ago
As much as I still think and will always think Khorkina was flabbergastingly over-rated, I too wanted to see her win an Olympic title, because she really did earn her reputation. It's just once she had acquired it, it was completely inflated and people idolize her more than her actual abilities warrant. Not to belittle her abilities, though. She had the possibility of making every EF in 00, and medaling in all of them as well as taking the AA Gold. Which is nothing to short of amazing.
WSggs 2 years ago
She DID make every EF in Sydney (she didn't compete on BB due to the "2 per country" rule), but I doubt she would have medalled on BB (or on VT, come to that). Lobaznyuk, Zamo and Produnova were much stronger than her.
AnnaPavlovaFan 2 years ago
She might have taken a medal on vault, but no way she could have stood a chance on BB. I was so upset when Lobazniok got injured. She was one of my favorite gymnasts (of all time) and with a little help on her bar routine she could have gone on to be a major AA contender and definitely taken some World titles on Floor and Beam. Such a shame, really.
WSggs 2 years ago
Oh, don't get me started on the previous CoP! Dance was more important than tumbling and yet we saw no artistic routines? The double cat leap, one of the ugliest skills ever, was a D, just like the double pike and the 2½ twist?? Come on! Besides, it was impossible even for knowledgeable fans to work out the SV! I feel that the current code is moving towards the right direction; top-8 skills, 5 acro, 3 dance, plenty of time for choreography. Let's see how it evolves...
AnnaPavlovaFan 2 years ago
Not to mention people who did take risks on floor got no reward for them. It was all about the compulsory elements in them, that was it. There were a few routines I liked but it was mostly watching the same thing with different music.
WSggs 2 years ago
I mean, seriously, if Khorkina was just another no name Russian she would've barely made top ten....
WSggs 2 years ago
I don't disagree; although I hate admitting it, I believe Carly deserved to win the AA over Khorkina, even though she was overscored herself on 3 out of 4 events (her BB score is the only one that looked remotely fair, low even). Pavlova did better than Khorkina (I think she did better than Patterson too, but I'm biased) and didn't even medal. Go figure... But, I do believe there's a reason Khorkina was such a big household name. She was so bloody awesome! Gymnastics is so boring without her...
AnnaPavlovaFan 2 years ago
I hate it too. Patterson was an incredibly talented gymnast marred by bad taste and a lack of any artistic flair, but I've said it before and I'll say it again- Artistic is just something that describes the sport, which is the most important thing. Sadly, Khorkina's flair and dynamics weren't enough to over-rider the fact she was past prime and just inconsistent at this point in her career. I'd actually say Nan was more consistent that her by this stage.
WSggs 2 years ago
Although not in her prime, she could have actually won had she performed her BB and FX routines the way she did in the TF, had she performed her UB the way she usually did and had she been scored fairly on VT. Or at least, it would have been closer. Too many ifs, though... Carly won and we can't rewrite history.
AnnaPavlovaFan 2 years ago
Possibly, yes. But you have to take into account that if Carly hadn't have gone OOB on vault she would have had a score right up there with Khorkina in every event except UB, but Carly would make the space up on BB. So it's impossible to say..
WSggs 2 years ago
@xayresx Shame on USA gymnastics? What do they have to do with anything? Why is everything some big conspiracy? There were deductions there. The USA didn't "buy" anything. If anything, Khorkina's name and reputation "bought" her some tenths on bars so it evened out. I'm not Carly's biggest fan, but except for that step out of line, Carly didn't make a single other mistake. She was better that day.
can1052 1 year ago 2
ummm if her toes were pointed she would have clipped the horse, you fool. She won the All-Around and everyone knows it.
HoneyGotMeHooked 4 years ago 2
wtf are you talking about? her feet aren't close enough where toe-pointing would have caused her to hit the horse...watch the vid, she's got plenty of room...i stopped feeling bad for her when her UB set was very overscored and then when the judges were kind to her on beam.
scatterplot4 4 years ago
I agree with you, her vault was not perfect at all. What I don't understand is why the juges took such a long time to give her score, why did they have to discuss by phone ? It looks like they were dicussing about the best way to maintain the first place open for Patterson...
khorkiFan 4 years ago
@khorkiFan from theories that I read online, they may have been discussing the landing. She did a great job faking a stick and maybe some were fooled by it, but she was leaning forward and had to take a step. Like I said though, that's just coming from theories that I read.
can1052 1 year ago
@khorkiFan They were discussing whether or not to judge her vault as being stuck or not. The fact that she landed with her chest forward and did not hold the stuck position for even a second before stepping forward and saluting the judges suggests that it was necessary for her to step forward and that she did not stick the vault at all.
481095ymg2 1 year ago
I agree. I want to ask the judges how they got over .4 decutions off that vault.
rfillangi 4 years ago 2
That was SOOO unfair! She had a nice lift, good position on the air, didn't take the slightest hop after landing and it was an original vault, named after her with a SV of 9.90. I mean, can we blame her attitude towards the judges? She should have got more than 9.550!
Darkangel127 5 years ago 3
she definitely deserved a tenth more. the judges were not kind to her on vault, but they were more than kind to her on both bars and beam.
scatterplot4 4 years ago
What was the problem? Why was there a deduction? She got higher than that in quals with a step!
Doug1233 5 years ago
She was scored too low for that! I think that's why she got so bitchy about the AA judging!
Darkangel127 5 years ago 2