JUDGING the possibility of 0.2 and 0.4 deductions are added on every event dismount bonus removed on bars, beam and floor VAULT two vaults
hey guys remember My Code Of Points™? i updated it so much since i posted it here that i just put it on a drive because it would be easier to keep sharing and changing any time someone has a good idea lol
hey peeps from the good place! because of the discourse earlier today om gym twitter about africa's continental spots, i wondered a bit more about how my ideal qualification system would look like in that regard, then since it had 124 berths and we only have 98 in real life, i adapted it for 98 berths and came up with something! i actually did two versions because i couldn't decide which was better:
notes:
1- my format considers world event berths BEFORE AA berths, using QF standings, so the event spots are always used. if someone obtains an event berth, that allows someone else from their country to qualify via AA (as it happens with kovacs and schermann in both formats)
2- i color-coded continents to emphasize how europe dominates the conversation and how important the continental champs spots are. in this system, africa doesn't even show up without africans, because mandy mohamed and caitlin rooskrantz would miss it, since i reduced world AA berths. with that said, obviously it wouldn't happen this way - rooskrantz would have gone to africans in this format, for instance. but still, it would be much harder for an african (or even a non-team asian!) gymnast to qualify by worlds, which, yes, most of us want a harder AA cutoff! but representation always matters
3- north korea's withdrawal causes all sorts of spot shuffling shenanigans with ukraine and australia's inevitable 3 berths in both formats, and it was kinda hilarious to run into them all the time
4- the world cup standings are SO FUNNY without athletes from teams. it wouldn't be this way were this real, but still. bars specialist valeria osipova almost gets a spot if not for 1pc <3
5- yes, chuso misses qualifying in the first format, so IT IS INVALID. i mean, she'd probably do better at the WCs in that case, but still.
Hello! If you follow me, you might have noticed I have been posting a bit about the code of points recently. Having a lot of free time in my hands due to vacation + social distancing, wanting to keep my mind busy because I want to get over a boy (and not having much success rofl) and having some leg pain so I can’t just do some exercise, and having recently been granted access to older Codes of Points, I have been thinking about the rules of our dear sport a lot lately. To be honest, I have had my own ideas about how the Code should go for years now, but since I don’t have much else to do right now, I might as well share them right now!
Like a NCAA team that is third in the conference, I have picked floor to start and then we move forward from there. Even though I actually feel like I have more interesting (scandalous?) ideas in other events, floor is the most problematic event, so I will post my ideas on it first, and then if you think it’s all garbage or have noticed I have created a glaring hole every Nina Derwael’s coach would exploit, please post about it!
CV:
Direct Acro: 0.1 for A+D and B+C, 0.2 for A+E and C+D, 0.3 for C+E and D+D
non-flight elements valued B or higher are eligible for direct acro CV; example: back handspring 1/1 + back 2/1 = direct acro B+C = 0.1 CV
all elements must go in the same direction, counter-saltos are now banned; example: back 3/1 + front tuck = banned = 0.5 deduction
Indirect Acro: 0.1 for A+E, B+D and C+C, 0.2 for B+E, D+D and C+D if one element is a double salto, and 0.3 to D+E
examples: back 1.5 through to back 2.5 = indirect acro C+D, no double salto = 0.1 CV; back 1.5 through to double pike = indirect acro C+D, with double salto = 0.2 CV
Series Bonus: 0.1 for any acrobatic line with three or more saltos, connected directly or indirectly or both, minimum A+A+C
example: whip + whip through to double pike = indirect A+D = no CV; three saltos in acro line, A+A+D = 0.1 SB
Mixed: 0.1 to D acro + B dance and E acro + A dance
Dance: 0.1 for C+C and B+D, valid for both leaps/jumps and turns
As we know, routines count the 8 most difficult elements for the D-score and must fulfill composition requirements, which are worth 0.5 D each
CR 1: one backward acrobatic salto element and one forward acrobatic salto element, both in acrobatic lines
CR 2: one acrobatic salto element with a full twist
CR 3: one full turn element, minimum of B value
CR 4: leaps or jumps showing a cross split and one other different shape (straddle pike, ring, etc)
not showing a acrobatic element with two saltos is a 0.3 D penalty
the dismount is always one of the eight counting elements in routine composition, regardless of its value
at least three of the counting elements must be acro, and at least three of the counting elements must be dance
Rules and Observations
Shapes in Leaps/Jumps: any element that fulfills more than one shape (such as a split ring leap, which shows a cross split and a ring) only counts as one shape for CR 4, but either shape presented can be counted, for the benefit of the gymnast
Leaps and jumps with cross or side split and/or ring are now only allowed to have twists before the split and/or the ring shape is achieved [Commentary: of all my ideas across 4 events, this is the one I am least sure about and I would love some commentary lol]
Leaps and jumps with the same shape are no longer distinct elements and cannot both be performed in the same routine for DV, CR and CV; jumps with a cross split and a side split/straddle pike are now distinct elements again
example: split leap 1/1 and split jump 1/1 are now the same element; split jump 1/1 and straddle jump 1/1 are now distinct elements
OOB: The neutral deductions for going out of bounds would increase; 0.1 and 0.3 becomes 0.2 and 0.5
Lunges: controlled lunges with one leg in acro landings would be allowed without deduction
Difficulty Cap: removal of the E cap on the DV of dance elements; the cap on the amount of twists allowed in leaps, jumps and turns remains the same
Element Upgrades, Downgrades, Removals and (Re)introductions
Leaps and Jumps
stag jump removed from code
switch leap from B to A
double stag jump added as A
switch wolf hop/jump from A to B
hop 1/1 to straddle to front support from A to B
shushunova (straddle jump to front support) from A to B (must show side split parallel to floor before going to front support)
split ring jump from B to C (same element as split ring leap)
wolf jump 1/1 from B to C
khorkina (hop 1.5 to front support) from B to C
split ring jump 1/2 from B to D (same element as split ring leap 1/2)
cat leap 2/1 from C to D
split leap/jump 1/1 to split sit from C to D
straddle jump 1/1 to front support from B to D (must show side split parallel to floor before going to front support) [Commentary: I have been imagining this one as a Popa to front support rather than the way it's been performed so far to be worth a D]
wolf jump 1/1 to front support from B to D
tuck jump 2/1 to front support from C to D
wolf jump 2/1 from D to E
split ring leap/jump 1/1 from D to E
no other dance shapes can have new elements ending in front support or split sit submitted
Turns
turns in passé position can be performed to scale to increase the difficulty of the element by one letter; this is not a different element, the scale must be to at least 135° with no hand support and must be held for 2 seconds [Commentary: turns to scale existed in the elite code up to the Athens CoP and still exist in JO and honestly they sound like a nice idea? But also the last thing elite needs is another turn to exploit, so it doesn’t get to be a different element lol]
double wolf turn from D to C
triple turn from C to D
triple Y turn from E to F
wolf and tuck turns now considered the same element
Acrobatic
front tuck 1.5 added as C
double tuck from D to C (eligible as D for direct and indirect acro CV)
front 1.5 (rudi) from C to D
1/1 twist into double tuck from E to D (differentiated from double tuck 1/1 with the twist happening during the saltos)
front 2/1 from D to E (eligible as D for direct acro CV)
Hello everyone! I go back to work in two days so I figured I might get this done a bit faster now. Next up is bars, which is the event I think I have the most different ideas - at least, I have never seen some of the things I am proposing being mentioned elsewhere before. Specially since bars is the event where the current Code of Points is the least problematic, please let me know if I am too out there. My main goal with my ideas across all events would be to give more opportunities for mid-level gymnasts to increase their difficulty.
If you missed it: FLOOR and VAULT
CV:
If 1st element is flight OR 2nd element is the dismount: 0.1 for C+D, 0.2 for D+E
If both elements are same-bar releases, or a same-bar release and the dismount: 0.2 for C+D
If 1st element is a circle: 0.1 for C+E and D+D, 0.2 for E+E and D+F
Mounts are eligible for connections; some of them are classified as flight and some as circles [Commentary: currently, mounts do not count as flight elements, even though most of the hard ones... obviously should? Distinguishing those from mounts without flight action becomes relevant]
To be eligible for CV, an element must present flight, at least 1/2 turn, or reverse/L-grip in a non-giant circle shape (includes all german giant circle elements)
Example: endo circle + jaeger piked = endo presents reverse grip in straddle (stalder) shape, jaeger presents flight = eligible for CV; 1st element is a circle, C+E = 0.1 CV
Circle/Transition Restriction: connections between two circles or two transitions cannot be awarded consecutively, and the second connection in a row would not be awarded CV; the mount and same-bar releases are exempt from the restriction
example: maloney + pak + van leeuwen = pak + van leeuwen is not awarded CV; tkatchev + pak + van leeuwen = all connections are awarded CV
CR and Routine Composition:
Routines count the 8 most difficult elements for the D-score and must fulfill composition requirements, which are worth 0.5 D each
CR 1: one high-to-low transition element and one low-to-high transition element
CR 2: one circle element with 1/1 turn
CR 3: one same-bar release element
CR 4: elements showing the giant root shape and two different non-giant root shapes
not showing one element in reverse or L-grip is a 0.3 D penalty
the dismount is always one of the eight counting elements in routine composition regardless of its value
Rules and Observations
Root Shape Groups: the root shapes have been slightly regrouped: they are now 1) casts and giant circles, 2) hip circles (clear-hips), 3) straddle circles (stalders), 4) seat circles (inbars and german giant-type elements) and 5) sole circles (toe-ons)
Explaining the changes: casts are now grouped with giants rather than with clear-hips; inbars are now their own category rather than being scattered across the stalder and toe-on categories; german giants are grouped with inbars rather than with toe-ons
Root Shape Restriction: different direction no longer counts as a different root shape for elements for purposes of CR 4 and the limit of three counting elements of one non-giant root shape per routine
example: endo and stalder are now the same root shape
Handstand deductions: it would be harsher on casts and more lenient on circle elements, specially forward ones; this table shows how the deductions would work
[Commentary: in my view, this is the biggest composition changer I came up with across 4 events, rather than any change to how D-score is counted. Currently, you need to miss a cast to handstand by more than 30° to even get a -0.1 deduction. In here, missing a cast to handstand the same way gets you -0.5. Very harsh, but routine composition would become all about avoiding casts to handstand, which would make for more dynamic routines. Lower level gymnasts would have the same incentive to avoid casts, as will be seen in the element section.]
LB Composition: Not performing at least two elements (except for casts and cast 1/2s) on the low bar is a -0.3 composition deduction [Commentary: It’s been said that every CoP has an anti-China rule. I love Chinese gymnastics, but this is my anti-China rule. The low bar exists, China!!]
It is again allowed to perform a kip after a Shaposhnikova-type element
Removal of the E cap on the DV of transition and circle elements
Pirouette Cap: Circle elements have a turning maximum of 2/1 turns and any extra turning will not be recognized as a different skill
Layout cast upgrades: all casts performed with hips extended and legs together are worth one tenth more than its straddled version, but this is not a distinct element from the straddled cast, except for the basic cast with no turn, which are already two distinct elements in the code depending on shape
Element Upgrades, Downgrades, Removals and (Re)introductions
Circles
giant backward from B to A
one-arm giant backward from B to C
one-arm giant forward from B to C
li li I from C to D
toe-on forward circle (and 1/2) from C to D
toe-on forward circle 1/1 from D to E
giant 2/1 from D to E
L-grip toe-on forward circle (and 1/2) from C to E
inbar forward circle (and 1/2) from D to E
L-grip toe-on forward circle 1/1 from D to F
inbar forward circle 1/1 from E to F
huang (L-grip endo 1/1 in one arm to reverse grip, or: ono in endo shape) from E to F
jam (L-grip inbar forward circle, and 1/2) from E to F
healy 1/2 from E to F
ono or ling 1/2 from E to F
Transitions
glide or straddle kip to bounce to HB added as A
bail to hang added as B
straddle back to hang added as B
inbar shoot to HB from B to C
alt schleudern from C to D
straddle back to handstand from C to D
clear-hip hecht 1/2 to HB from C to D
inbar hecht to HB from C to D
yezhova from D to E
radochla roll from D to E
teza pak from D to E
teza bail handstand from D to E
bhardwaj from E to F
strong (bail 1.5 to hang) from E to F
komova I (inbar shaposh 1/2) from E to F
seitz (toe-on shaposh 1/1) from E to F
Same-Bar Releases
tkatchev tucked back as same element as tkatchev straddled in all root shapes
jaeger tucked from C to D
li li II from D to E
tweddle (toe-on tkatchev straddled 1/2) from F to E
li ya (jaeger straddled 1/2) from E to F
counter-kim from F to G
toe-on counter-kim from F to G
mo salto from G to H
def from G to H
caslavska and comaneci same-bar releases would have the preceding kip included in their element description; however, they would be ineligible as the second same-bar release for the 0.2 CV for connecting two same-bar releases
Mounts
assume an upgrade for all mounts that aren't a kip or a jump to HB; the only harder mounts that didn't go at least one letter higher are the round-off to back handspring to LB and jump to clear-hip on HB, both staying at D
[Commentary: I have an Excel with all of the elements in the code with my changes, so I know what each bars mount would be worth in my code, but since nobody does bars mounts right now, I figured it would be irrelevant to you guys to list all of them here. If you are curious about an specific mount I can say what value I have for it lol]
Dismounts
clear-hip tuck/pike from C to B
plichta (stalder tuck/pike) from C to B
double pike from C to B
fan (1/2 twist to double tuck) from D to C
double layout from D to C
double tuck 1/1 from D to C
double pike 1/1 removed from code
1/2 twist to double pike added as D
back layout 1/1 to pike added as D
front 2/1 from C to D
toe-on tuck 1/1 from C to D
toe-on tuck 1.5 from D to E
inbar layout 1/2 from D to E
tucked double arabian from D to E
piked double arabian from E to F
back layout 1/2 to front layout from E to F
triple tuck from G to H
underswing dismounts that have the same amount of saltos and twists in the same root and direction (example: toe-on front tuck 1/2 and toe-on 1/2 back tuck) are now merged into the same element
Thanks everyone who liked and commented on my ideas for the Code of Points on floor! I didn’t expect people to like my ideas all that much and expected more disagreements, I am glad my head seems to be screwed on right sort of. Since the next event in the rotation is vault and this one is quick to post, I will post it now while people might still be checking out the floor post (which you can read HERE if you missed it).
Competition Format: a return to two vaults per gymnast in all stages of competition (QF, TF, AA, EF), and this time, they must be of different families in all stages of competition
Execution Deductions: doubling all extant vaulting deductions: 0.1, 0.3 and 0.5 deductions become 0.2, 0.5 and 1.0 deductions, and 1.0 for falls becomes 2.0
Stricter judgement of acrobatic shape; downgrades of layout vaults to piked or tucked versions would happen in every necessary instance, on top of bigger form deductions [Commentary: This would mean every tucked and piked vault would return to the code, but I didn’t add all of them to the table below for the sake of clarity]
OOB: As on floor, neutral deductions for going out of bounds would increase, 0.1 and 0.3 becomes 0.2 and 0.5 [Commentary: Should they have increased further since I am doubling deductions? Sounded excessive but it’s what logic says I guess]
Difficulty Scores: Entire overhaul of vault D-scores, with slightly higher separation to reflect the increase in deductions and to make D-scores equivalent with the other three events, and adjustment of the relative difficulty of the Yurchenko family
D-Score Table: Linked here is the table with all D-scores for vaults with saltos, and if there is any need, linked here is a table with the D-scores for vaults without saltos; vaults in blue are not in the current Code of Points and have been included for the sake of curiosity or because they’d be too relevant for downgrading purposes
To explain the logic behind the table above, difficulty increments from one vault to another are always fixed: tuck to pike is +0.3; pike to layout is +0.4; an extra 1/2 twist is +0.5, which becomes +0.7 after the 1.5 twist mark for front salto (and no salto) vaults, and the 2 twist mark for back salto vaults
And here is the final piece of my changes to the code of points, my current namesake - the balance beam. Reminder that I am always open to questions, both about this changes I made and about the code in general - I never considered myself that knowledgeable but I am always willing to share what I do know if you feel like I could help! I am saying this now because beam is the longest section in my file, which I just noticed lol, so if it seems hard to follow (because I ramble and also assume people are smarter than me), let me know!
FLOOR / VAULT / BARS
CV:
all CV can include mount (except holds) and dismount
Flight Acro: 0.1 for C+C, forward B+C, and D+B in this order, 0.2 for forward B+D (dismount ineligible) and C+D, 0.3 for C+F and D+D (both elements must be salto or aerial for 0.3)
all connections must be rebounding in one direction
examples: side aerial + back handspring = D+B in order = 0.1 CV / front handspring + front 2/1 dismount = forward B+D, dismount = 0.1 CV (ineligible for 0.2) / layout stepout + tucked arabian = C+F, both saltos = 0.3
Dance: 0.1 for C+C and 0.2 for D+D
Turns: 0.1 for A+C
Mixed Connections: non-flight acro elements are eligible for mixed connections with both dance and flight acro elements
0.1 for B+D and C+C, 0.2 for C+E and D+D
example = valdez + sheep jump = non-flight acro B + dance D = 0.1 CV
Series Bonus: SB can include mount and dismount; 0.1 for B+B+C and 0.2 for B+B+F, C+C+D and B+B+C+C
only two series per routine can be awarded SB; series are awarded SB in order of performance even if not in the gymnast's best interest
CR and Routine Composition:
Routines count the 8 most difficult elements for the D-score and must fulfill composition requirements, which are worth 0.5 D each
CR 1: one full turn element
CR 2: one backward flight acro element and one forward/sideward flight acro element, at least one of which without hand support (salto or aerial)
CR 3: one connection of two flight acro elements, with rebounding action in one direction, one of which of at least C value (hand support allowed) [Commentary: yes, this means the acro series does not require a salto anymore. I don’t mind conceding that as long as acro series are always rebounding instead of, like, the two side aerials crap we still get even from beloved angels like Sanne.]
CR 4: one connection of two leap or jump elements
not showing a cross split and one other different leap or jump shape is a 0.3 D penalty
the dismount is always one of the eight counting elements in routine composition regardless of its value
at least three counting elements must be acro, and at least three counting elements must be dance
Rules and Observations:
no element can be repeated in different connections for CV, including round-offs and handsprings; however, any element can be repeated up to three times in the same connection for CV
examples: a back handspring can only be used in one connection for CV; three layout stepouts can be connected to each other and each connection will receive CV
Mount restriction: an element cannot be performed twice, once as the mount and once on the beam, for DV, CR and CV/SB, except the back handspring mount; does not apply to mounts with no clear on-beam counterpart
example: front tuck mount is performed; a front tuck cannot be performed on beam for value / side aerial over beam to front support mount is performed; a side aerial can still be performed on beam for value, as the mount is not a true counterpart
Shapes in Leaps/Jumps: any element that fulfills more than one shape only counts as one shape for the requirement, but either shape presented can be counted for the benefit of the gymnast
example: switch ring + split jump 1/2 = ring + cross split = requirement fulfilled; switch ring + straddle jump = cross split + side split = requirement fulfilled
Leaps and jumps with cross or side split and/or ring are now only allowed to have twists before the split and/or the ring shape is achieved
Leaps and jumps with the same shape are no longer distinct elements and cannot both be performed in the same routine for DV, CR and CV
example: split leap and split jump are now the same element
Removal of the E cap on the DV of dance elements
Element Upgrades, Downgrades, Removals and (Re)introductions:
Leaps and Jumps
arch jump added as A [Commentary: I added this one back solely so there is something to downgrade the sheep jump to. Currently, judges are supposed to not recognize it as an element when it's bad, but that never happens, so they just made it a C. Why be like that when you can reasonably threaten bad sheeps with an A?]
split leap/jump from B to A [Commentary: I was convinced by @cut-catches to put the split leap/jump below the switch leap on beam basically one hour before posting this. I actually don’t know how routines would be composed without the split jump as a B, since that was so convenient and I didn’t try to actually compose a routine without it . But I am sure it’s manageable. There are 9 other B dance elements, not even counting the switch leap itself lol]
switch wolf hop/jump from A to B
switch leap from C to B
double stag jump added as B
stag ring jump from B to C
L hop 1/2 from B to C
straddle jump in side position to front support added as C [Commentary: You know this one! It’s the one Ekaterina Lobaznyuk fell on in the Sydney TF!! We need it back]
sheep jump from C to D
switch ring from E to D
straddle jump 1/2 in side position to front support added as D
yang bo from D to E
split jump 1/1 from D to E (same element as split leap 1/1)
straddle jump 1/1 from D to E
straddle jump 1/1 in side position to front support added as E
Turns
wolf turn from B to A
1.5 wolf turn from C to B
prone turn from B to C
double wolf turn from D to C
1.5 prone turn from B to D
triple turn from E to F
wolf and tuck turns now considered the same element
Non-Flight Acrobatic
scales can be performed in balance stand for a one letter increase; this is not a different element (but all different scales - needle scale, scale forward and scale with leg upward - are now each a different element rather than the same element)
rise up body wave to toe balance stand from A to B
standing body waves added, to both legs as A and to one leg as B
one-arm cartwheel from A to B
scale backward with leg extended added as C
side split sit to side split roll from C to D
front walkover in side position from C to D
back walkover in side position from C to D
Flight Acro
front handspring stepout, one arm front handspring and one arm front handspring stepout added as B (differentiated from front handspring)
one arm round-off added as B (differentiated from round-off)
one arm back handspring added as B (differentiated from back handspring)
one arm back handspring stepout added as B (differentiated from back handspring stepout)
one arm gainer back handspring added as B (differentiated from gainer back handspring)
[Commentary: All of this handspring differentation has to do with the whole “you can’t use an element in more than one connection rule” I made up. If people need back handsprings so much, they can do them with one arm now. But really, I could have not done this and just let them manage just having three bhs options. I am open to suggestions here. I just want to do something about people tacking back handsprings after like every element lol.]
back pike (and gainer) from C to D
back handspring with 1/2 twist after flight from C to D
yurchenko loop from C to D
tucked aerial round-off removed from code
one-arm onodi from D to E
rulfova (and gainer) from D to E
back handspring 1/1 (and gainer) from D to E (twisting must be fully completed before hand support)
back handspring in side position from D to E
kolesnikova (back handspring 1/2 to handstand in side position) from D to E
back layout from E to F
teza loop from E to F
front tuck 1/2 added as F
front pike 1/2 added as G
side aerial in side position from E to G
back layout 1/1 from G to H
all acro elements that have the same amount of twists in the same shape (example: front tuck 1/2 and 1/2 twist to back tuck) are now merged in the same element
Mounts
All mount versions of of elements on the beam are valued one letter above the on-beam counterpart; some of the changes below follow the changes to the elements above
front handspring over beam to rear support from B to C
switch leap from D to C
rear jump to candle from D to C
back handspring from D to C
baitova mount (two flanks one flare) from C to D
neck stand 1.5 to chest stand from C to D
press handstand 1.5 from C to D
pike handstand to front handspring from C to D
reverse planche from C to D
front/side aerial over beam to rear/front support from C to D
layout stepout from E to D
back tuck from E to D
onodi from F to E
phillips (side handstand to front walkover) from D to E
front tuck from D to E
front pike from E to F
zamolodchikova (round-off, back handspring 1/1 to hip circle backward) from E to F
back handspring 1/1 from E to F (twisting must be fully completed before hand support)
rulfova from D to F
back tuck 1/1 from F to G
back layout from F to G
front tuck 1/2 from F to G
front pike 1/2 from F to H
back layout 1/1 from G to I
Dismounts
cartwheel to stand (and 1/2) added as A
cartwheel to 1/1 and 1.5 twist added as B
front aerial (and 1/2) from A to B
back tuck 1.5 from C to B
front aerial 1/1 from B to C
cartwheel to back tuck added as C
cartwheel to back pike added as D
front aerial 1.5 from C to D
gainer back 2/1 to side of beam from C to D
gainer pike 1/1 to end of beam added as D [Commentary: Currently, the code explicitly tells judges to recognize piked attempts at the layout 1/1 as a layout and deduct for shape, which... no. That was a pike 1/1, the end]
front 1.5 from C to D
front 2/1 from D to E
back 2.5 from D to E
gainer layout 1/1 to end of beam from D to E
side aerial to back tuck from E to F
double tuck 1/1 from G to F
gainer back 3/1 to side of beam from F to G
tucked double front from F to G [Commentary: Maybe an H?]
What would the staples of floor such as back 1.5 to front full and back 2.5 to front full be worth in your code? (Sorry i don't know element values and don't understand if connections have to be that exact letters or if higher letters are also eligible for that cv?) since i can't understand these enough, could you explain what was your goal with it, like what do you want to see more of? (Sorry if it sounds rude) also what is a cross split? And do you consider switch leaps same as regular leaps?
don't worry, you are not being rude at all! thank you for your interest!
when CV is discussed, not just in my code but in real life, connections don't need to be the exact letters - higher letters are eligible until they end up becoming a better connection. for example, direct acro on floor has B+C for 0.1 - C+C is also eligible, but then C+D is listed as 0.2. they also don't need to be the exact order if not explicitly said so.
so, the value of those two passes actually didn't change - back 1.5 to front 1/1 is still 0.1 CV (C+C) and back 2.5 to front 1/1 is still 0.2 CV (D+C). however, i have expanded CV opportunities to passes both easier and harder than those two. for example, to get that 0.1 CV, back 1.5 + front layout (or front 1/1 + front layout) would already be enough, since B+C is my requirement!
my main goal with those new CV options would be first and foremost to give new opportunities for gymnasts to increase their D-score, which allows for bigger separation between routines with clearly distinct levels of difficulty, and maybe even see less injuries happen as coaches wouldn't try to make their gymnasts perform difficult tumbling beyond the gymnast's ability to perform or their own ability to coach. i don't want to specifically see more of any one element or combination, i just want routines that aren't four variations on a double back to be able to get a good score.
as for a cross split: it's a split in 180 degrees in cross position, which is the common position to be in both beam and floor. i guess it's called so because the legs are vertical and the arms are horizontal and it forms a cross? anyway, it's the common split, seen in the split jump, the switch leap, etc.
speaking of which, the switch leap with no twisting is definitely just as easy as the regular split leap, both on floor and on beam (spoilers for the beam code?). switching gives momentum for the gymnast to hit the split position. to me it only really seems to become harder than the regular split when twisting is involved. i'm open to change my mind on this though!
beamscoring's wish table of acro elements on WAG FX
in response to an earlier anon confession about capping the number of double backs in a routine! only C elements and above
C ELEMENTS
whip 1/1, back 1.5, back 2/1, front 1/1, double tuck (down from D, counts as D for CV)
D ELEMENTS
front 1.5 (up from C), back 2.5, double pike
E ELEMENTS
front 2/1 (up from D, counts as D for direct CV), tucked double arabian, back 3/1, double tuck 1/1, double pike 1/1, double layout (down from F)
F ELEMENTS
front 2.5 (up from E), tucked double front (up from E), tucked double arabian 1/2 (up from E), piked double arabian, double layout 1/2 (down from G)
G ELEMENTS
tucked double front 1/2 (up from F), piked double front (up from F), back 3.5 (up from F), double tuck 2/1 (down from H), double layout 1/1 (down from H)
H ELEMENTS
layout double arabian
I ELEMENTS
double tuck 3/1, double layout 2/1
please let me know if you have an opinion! i have been thinking a lot about this since i have become more knowledgeable of the code, and i think it's a very reasonable proposal, i am only hesitant on downgrading the biles I and maybe upgrading the tucked double front, but i included both changes to welcome arguments against it.
