Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

New Olympics Scoring: No More Perfect 10.0

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wed Aug 06, 2008 08:42 AM
from the get-rid-of-judged-events dept.
Dekortage writes "If you watch the Olympics gymnastics this year, you may be confused by the new scoring system which will let athletes score 14, 17, or even higher. The new rules are 'heavy on math' and employ two panels of judges: one for technical difficulty, which adds points up from a score of zero; the other for execution and technique, which starts at 10.0 and subtracts for errors. The two numbers are then combined for the final score. As one judge put it, 'The system rewards difficulty. But the mistakes are also more costly.' The new rules were adopted after South Korea protested a scoring at the 2004 Olympics." Now I'm sure that no Slashdot reader will intentionally watch any "sport" that has judges determine the winner, but their wives/girlfriends might seize control of the remote because they want to know who is the best at that ribbon-twirling thing.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] China Claims Score In Weather Manipulation 147 comments
hackingbear writes "Despite prior skepticism over effectiveness, China claims successful application of weather intervention to ensure a stunning Olympic opening ceremony, according to a report by the official Xinhua News Agency: 'We fired a total of 1,104 rain dispersal rockets from 21 sites in the city between 4 p.m. and 11:39 p.m. on Friday, which successfully intercepted a stretch of rain belt from moving towards the stadium,' said Guo Hu, head of the Beijing Municipal Meteorological Bureau (BMB). While there wasn't a single drop of rain over the National Stadium — also known as the Bird's Nest — during the opening ceremony from 8:00pm-12:00am on August 8, the weather services said that Baoding City of Hebei Province, to the southwest of Beijing, received the biggest rainfall of 100 millimeters Friday night, and Beijing's Fangshan District recorded a rainfall of 25 millimeters."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Huh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Aaron_Pike (528044) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @08:44AM (#24495559) Homepage
    And people wonder why there is a perception of sexism in technical fields.
    • Re:Huh (Score:5, Funny)

      by jfclavette (961511) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @08:58AM (#24495799)
      Seriously. I'd expect more open-mindedness from a bunch of people whose hobbies are such interesting things as soldering and typing in a text editor.
      • Re:Huh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by PlatyPaul (690601) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:14AM (#24496079) Homepage Journal
        To play devil's advocate, it really does seem stupid to include Rhythmic Gymnastics [wikipedia.org] in addition to the tried-and-true Artistic Gymnastics [wikipedia.org], as the demonstration of ability is almost exclusively artistic in nature.

        If they have rhythmic gymnastics, they should have professional dance. Seriously.
        • Re:Huh (Score:5, Interesting)

          by DragonWriter (970822) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @10:19AM (#24497165)

          If they have rhythmic gymnastics, they should have professional dance. Seriously.

          Well, no, there is no requirement that the Olympics have everything that qualifies as a "sport" under whatever definition applies.

          That aside, Ice Dancing. Seriously.

        • Re:Huh (Score:5, Insightful)

          by spazdor (902907) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @10:33AM (#24497441)

          The legitimacy of rhythmic gymnastics as a "sport" is certainly up for debate. The objection raised, though, was to the "ha ha chicks don't like real sports" bit of childish misogyny in the OP.

          • Re:100m? (Score:5, Insightful)

            Personally, I have always felt that the most stupid event at the Olympics is the 100m sprint. Paradoxically this seems to be the viewers favourite, despite the fact that it is the event most determined by luck and, frankly, rule bending.

            Huh? How is luck involved in running against an absolute clock? And how do you bend the rules of "fastest to the finish line wins"? Unless you're talking about drugs, and that's a problem of every performance sport.

            The reason the 100m sprint is popular is because the runners hit the highest speeds, and thus earn the title "the fastest man on Earth."

            • Re:100m? (Score:5, Insightful)

              by CastrTroy (595695) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @11:11AM (#24498225) Homepage
              Except when a Canadian [wikipedia.org] wins, and then some America [wikipedia.org] claims to be the worlds fastest man, because he broke a record for the 200m. After which they decide to have a showdown, at a race of 150m, which the Canadian won. Apparently Johnson, the America, pulled his quadriceps muscle, which caused him to drop out halfway through the race. There's controversy as to whether or not he actually had injured himself, or decided to throw the race after he realized he was going to lose.
          • Re:Huh (Score:5, Funny)

            by KernelMuncher (989766) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @12:06PM (#24499301)
            How about an archery competition where you have to shoot it high and then catch it in some sort of bin. Extra points if you catch it by hand. Points are subtracted if the arrow ends up in your body. Now that's something I'd watch.
      • Re:Huh (Score:5, Funny)

        by 1u3hr (530656) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:18AM (#24496133)
        I'm sure there are plenty of homosexual men that enjoy gymnastics, this is just Slashdot being sexist.

        On the other hand, watching nubile athletic girls contort themselves does it for me.

      • Re:Huh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by lilomar (1072448) <lilomar2525@gmail.com> on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:21AM (#24496205) Homepage

        I think the point is that anything that needs judges is not a sport, due to it being subjectively instead of objectively scored.

        • Re:Huh (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jfclavette (961511) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:27AM (#24496329)
          What about referees ? They can have a lot of influence. As much as judge can since they have well-established guidelines too.
            • Re:Huh (Score:5, Funny)

              by Intron (870560) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:48AM (#24496673)

              Since a moderator decides on objective criteria, slashdot posting is therefore a sport.

              I fully expect this post to be moderated objectively.

                • Re:Huh (Score:5, Informative)

                  by grahamd0 (1129971) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @12:44PM (#24499925)

                  Since a moderator decides on objective criteria, slashdot posting is therefore a sport.

                  Your premise is false.

                  I objectively determine that I disagree with a poster before I mod them down.

                  </sarcasm>

            • Re:Huh (Score:5, Informative)

              by initdeep (1073290) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @10:08AM (#24497001)

              do you even understand scoring in gymnastics?

              in other words, do you have a clue or are you just randomly spewing?

              as in many other "subjectively scored" sports, the previous system had a very defined set of scoring rules. And I'm willing to bet this is merely a refinement of said system. (much like the "refinement" that goes on with the BCS rankings almost yearly)

              a particular vault for example has a maximum starting value based upon the "degree of difficulty".

              that is the maximum you can score regardless of how perfect you do it.

              from there, there are certain WRITTEN deductions for defects in the performance.

              legs open when the should be closed? minus 0.03
              hand not on the vault in the same plane? minus 0.01

              etc.

              its not nearly as subjective as people want to make it out to be.

              And i realize that I'm not the average /.er and actually understand many different sports, but damn, merely watching a gymnastics television broadcast would teach you this. (I learned mine taking a niece to gymnastics competitions and talking with the coach).

            • Re:Huh (Score:5, Informative)

              by scheme (19778) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @10:10AM (#24497029)

              In a sport, you can say, "If I do X I will get Y number of points." In a judged competition, you can't do that.

              I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with judged competitions, I'm just saying that they aren't sports.

              In gymnastics, you know that given a certain routine you will get x points for technical difficulty, likewise if you make mistake y you use z points for execution.

              That matches your definition of a sport fairly well.

      • Re:Huh (Score:5, Insightful)

        by SatanicPuppy (611928) * <Satanicpuppy@gmai3.14159l.com minus pi> on Wednesday August 06 2008, @10:11AM (#24497045) Journal

        Yea, ya think? The way I read it was as more of a "I know all you guys watch this stuff and care, but I'm going to pretend like I believe that the only reason you watch it is because your girl makes you."

        Shit. Geeks are as gooey as anyone else. I went over to a buddies house last weekend, drank a few beers hacked on some linux, talked about xen virtualization and shit like that. Then we went up to let the dogs out, and got sucked in to the last 12 minutes of Castaway and the first fucking two hours of goddamn Titanic.

        The whole "we're just watching it because of the VR-controlled submersibles and the picture of the hot chick" argument wears a little thin after a while since that stuff happens bed for christs sake. But if you'd asked us we'd have blamed it on her anyway; it's not only women who have defined gender roles in this society.

        The hyper political correctness gets old after a while. The worst thing he suggested in the damn title is that women might like to watch the ribbon twirling, which, judging by the fact that my wife likes to watch it, I don't think is that far fetched or degrading.

  • I just wait for someone to tell me there are hot chicks in skin tight clothes doing something. Otherwise, I could care less.

    • by SpeedyDX (1014595) <speedyphoenix.gmail@com> on Wednesday August 06 2008, @08:48AM (#24495621)

      I was gonna say the same thing. Then I remembered all gymnasts look 12 years old.

      Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, amiright? ...

      • by value_added (719364) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:16AM (#24496095)

        Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, amiright? ...

        Dunno. Are you attracted to powerful shoulders, an over-developed torso, flat chest, and short (Russian style) muscular legs?

        If you are, you might be interested in the stocking clerk that works at my local grocery store. His name is Billy.

        • Numeric inflation (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Moryath (553296) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:02AM (#24495877)

          isn't restricted just to the Olympics - though it's sad to see it happening.

          Look at all (american) professional sports. Every time they're in a slump, some "rule change" comes along to bump scores. Basketball got laxer and laxer on obvious rules violations (watch any of the running leaps a "slam dunk" guy takes). Football implemented letting q-backs throw the ball into the stands. Baseball juiced up the ball itself, but thankfully drew the line on allowing metal bats.

          And it's not even restricted to physical sports. Look at a pinball table today - you could easily chop off the last 3 digits of the score, because they never read anything meaningful anyways. Look at the numbers for damage ratings in "rpgs" like the Final Fantasy series - you used to start with characters doing 5-6 points of damage a hit, now you do 500-1000 and go from there.

      • Your second comment is appropriate. I could care less. It doesn't mean that I do care more. If you were to assign a scoring system of 1 to 10 to my level of care, where 1 is absolute lack of care, and 10 is absolute care, the Olympics may rate a 3, at which point there is room in the scale to raise or lower my level of care. I could care less, but it wouldn't even matter, because it's lower than a neutral level of care (5), and has no direct impact on myself.

            If there were to be a direct impact upon myself by the event, then that level of care would be more significant. Take the scenario "There's a truck coming down the road". If I were not in the road, I could care less, at a care level of 3, and it wouldn't matter. If I were standing in the road in front of the truck, at a care level of 3, and I did care less, that would definitely be a sign of deep depression, which would be resolved rather quickly, assuming the truck does it's job appropriately and runs me over. :)

            It becomes a moot point, as the phrase "I could care less" entered colloquial English approximately 40 years, and it is already commonly understood to mean the same, either in the positive or negative syntax. It is found in print as far back as 1966. I'm only 35 years old, and I started speaking at 1 year old, so both versions of the phrase were already in common usage for 8 years.

        http://incompetech.com/gallimaufry/care_less.html [incompetech.com]
        http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/couldcare.html [wsu.edu]
        http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/g09.html [reference.com]
        http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ico1.htm [worldwidewords.org]

  • Yeah right (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 06 2008, @08:47AM (#24495611)

    No single male would ever switch the gymnastics on and watch a bunch of young ladies do physical exercise in leotards.

    In other news, the last porn site finally died, citing a "lack of market" for its product.

  • Boxing anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by night_flyer (453866) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @08:48AM (#24495629) Homepage

    how about martial arts... last time I checked they are scored by judges...

  • by kahei (466208) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @08:53AM (#24495721) Homepage

    Sure, the 2004 Olympics (and the next Winter Olympics perhaps even more so) contained judging that didn't necessarily reward the 'best' contestant. But that's part of the sport; it's not about being the 'best', which is pretty well impossible to define except in straightforward running/throwing events. It's about getting the highest score.

    Nobody really thinks Tour de France cyclists don't store blood and take drugs; part of the game is the tradeoff between higher performance and higher chance of getting disqualified. Look at the way football is played in south america; taking a fall is just seen as part of the game, a judgement call like any other with particular risks and rewards. Argentina beat England in 1986 by pushing the ball in the net by hand; that may mean they won by taking a particular risk, but it doesn't mean they didn't win. They won the game of 'being allowed the most goals, by whatever means', which is the game they were actually playing.

    I don't think the answer is to change the scoring. The answer is to take a more holistic approach, and say: "Ok, he was maybe the second best at *gymnastics*. But he was the best at *getting points for gymnastics*!"

  • Lame. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Just Some Guy (3352) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Wednesday August 06 2008, @08:55AM (#24495759) Homepage Journal

    Now I'm sure that no Slashdot reader will intentionally watch any "sport" that has judges determine the winner, but their wives/girlfriends might seize control of the remote because they want to know who is the best at that ribbon twirling thing.

    First, if you can't appreciate the beauty and artistry in judged events, then you're missing something wonderful. From the guys doing iron crosses on the rings (which makes my shoulders hurt sympathetically) to the girls seeming to ignore gravity, there's something there to move any soul.

    Second, my wife was a college swimmer and completed Army Airborne training. She's about as into ribbon twirling things as I presume girls are into you.

  • Scoring... (Score:5, Funny)

    by PottedMeat (1158195) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:14AM (#24496071)
    Scoring only enters my mind when I watch the women's beach volleyball.

    Obligatory jokes below.

    PM
  • by bziman (223162) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:25AM (#24496287) Homepage Journal

    As a former gymnast, I can say that the new system is definitely more fair -- if you have two perfect routines, the one with the higher difficulty wins. Also, it means that you don't have to keep changing the system -- as routines include more difficult elements, the start value becomes higher. And you can keep a standard set of deductions for things like bending your knees, or not maintaining a toe point, or falling on your ass.

    On the other hand, as a fan of the sport, the new system is more confusing, because when it was out of ten, everyone knows that a 9.9 is really good, but now, is a 16.5 really good? Or a 17.3? As it turns out, a 16.5 might win gold on one event, but not even medal on another. But I think anyone who actually follows the sport will be able to keep up, for the casual once-every-four-years viewer, they can just concentrate on the shiny medal thingie hanging around the necks of the folks on the podium at the end.

  • by thoughtcancer (465644) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @10:40AM (#24497603) Homepage

    I can help clarify some misunderstandings with regards to the impartiality of the gymnastics scoring system (Note: I am a former USAG Judge as well as a former competitive gymnast at the collegiate level).

    1) Gymnastics routines are made up of a series of interconnected skills
    2) Each skill in the routine has a "perfect" execution form; that is, straight legs, pointed toes, straight arms, clean shoulder-to-knee lines, or whatever the skill calls for.
    3) If a gymnast performs a skill, and the execution of the skill does not meet the "perfect" execution form, points are deducted for each imperfection within the skill
    3a) Gymnastics judges are, for the most part, former competitive gymnasts with an intimate understanding of the execution of the skills which they are judging, and undergo extensive training for identifying imperfections in the execution of said skills.
    4) Depending on the severity of the imperfection, points are deducted (minor bends in the limbs account for small deductions, while falls or failure to execute skills correctly or in sequence account for large deductions).
    5) Add up all the deductions for each skill in a routine, and you've got your execution deductions.

    Now, the new scoring system is based on a response to the ridiculous difficulty of modern gymnastics. Each skill in any given event is given a difficulty rating depending on how difficult it is to execute the skill flawlessly. In mens gymnastics, for example, difficulty ratings go from an A-level (skills like a basic back flip) to F-level (skills like a triple twisting double back flip). It makes sense that gymnasts who perform more difficult skills should be rewarded with higher scores, so that's where the new system comes into play.

    In the old days, no matter how difficult your routine was, everyone started off with a "10" and was deducted for execution of skills. So, a gymnast who performed a triple back flip (an F-level skill) in his routine would be on the same level as a gymnast who only did a double front flip (a D-level skill); judges would solely deduct based on execution rather than take into account the difficulty of the skill. So now, instead of you starting with a perfect score, have to BUILD towards the perfect score by creating a routine with high level skills (that is, graded D, E, and F).

    Now, back to judges. Judges can now take into account skill difficulty as well as skill execution when judging a routine. Keep in mind that judges aren't judging a routine based on their personal opinion. They judge based on universally accepted "perfect" forms and the skills are directed in the FIG code of points (created by gymnasts for gymnasts, by congress). As a former judge, I can tell you that our judging performance is also graded by how well we can spot imperfections in execution; judges don't get to the Olympic level unless they are eagle-eyed and impartial.

    I hope this helps everyone as they continue their discussions on the matter.

    • by Gotung (571984) on Wednesday August 06 2008, @09:13AM (#24496055)
      So you don't think its cool to watch somebody that can not only do a back flip, but throw in a full twist in the middle of said back flip?

      Now add in that they did this not on the ground, but on a balance beam only inches wide and they nailed the landing with narry a wobble?

      Regardless of the politics surround this year's Olympics, you seriously can't see why anybody would enjoy watching a human being pull off amazing shit like that?