The Unfair Sport No One Is Fixing
Women’s college gymnastics is booming, but still needs reform
Welcome! We have a few new readers who have joined us since last week, so before I jump in I want to link to a few of my other pieces here in case you want to bookmark them:
The Truth About Load Management: I dove into the data to understand the impact of load management on injuries
The Worst Major Professional Sports Franchises: I took a look at the race to the bottom and give my opinion on the winner…or loser
The 12 Minutes That Changed the Trail Blazers’ Championship Trajectory: As a Blazers fan, I decided to take a painful trip down memory lane
Alright, let’s get to it!
I’m going to assume most of my readers aren’t too familiar with the sport of gymnastics other than rooting for Simone Biles.
My wife introduced me to gymnastics about four-ish years ago. We started by going to the local university meets, then we bought season tickets, and finally, I found myself up at 3am watching the Olympics with her. About a year ago I realized that it was turning into one of my favorite sports to watch. But more recently, I have started to become a bit disenchanted. Why?
Women’s gymnastics has a problem. Consistently, athletes are scored unfairly, impacting the outcome of competitions. Now, before you go and tell me I only feel this way because my favorite team loses, hear me out.
If you hop on X (Twitter), Reddit, or the ‘Gymternet’ as it’s called among fans, you will routinely see complaints about the judging. It got me thinking, is there really something here? I decided to do my homework—Here’s what I discovered.
Judge-Based Sports
Sports that determine a winner by a judge are not new to controversy. From the X Games to figure skating and gymnastics, winners are determined by how well a judge feels a performance is. Now, there are some objective requirements athletes need to meet, but oftentimes determining if a skill is done cleanly is subjective. Plus, it can be difficult to evaluate a skill that is completed in less than half a second.
Don’t get me wrong, head-to-head sports still have their challenges with referees, but usually a team or individual can overcome an official’s mistake throughout the course of a game.
In judge-based sports, one miss by the judge can cost an athlete a tenth of a point, which could be the difference between winning and losing.
Gymnastics Scoring
In women’s college gymnastics, coaches privately evaluate judges every meet. This creates a conflict of interest with judges pressured to inflate scores. Think about it—If you had a coach yelling in your ear the whole meet, it would be impossible to think about the potential ramifications if said coach was to give you a poor grade for your judging. As one former gymnastics judge put it, the system needs an overhaul.
Women’s college gymnastics scoring has been NBA-itized. Over the last 10 years, scores have gone through the roof. In 2014, there were 27 perfect scores handed out the entire season. Last season there were 84.
Team scores have also been inflated. In college gymnastics, teams can score up to 200 points in a meet. In 2014, the number 1 ranked team averaged 197.645 for the season and only five other teams were in the 197 range. Last year, the best team averaged a score of 198.150 with 12 other teams averaging 197 or better.
The issue isn’t that scores are increasing, but that judging is inconsistent from week to week and rotation-to-rotation in each meet.
Judging Biases
As long as a human is involved, there is always going to be some bias in sports officiating. There has been bias in judge-based sports for decades, but it’s now getting more attention in women’s college gymnastics because of the scoring increases and uptick in the sport’s popularity.
Studies have shown that gymnasts who perform later are scored better than gymnasts who perform first. There has also been evidence of sequential bias, meaning the score given to a gymnast will be more generous if the gymnast who went right before them performed well.
There have also been significant findings of difficulty bias. Gymnasts who perform more difficult skills are artificially awarded higher scores. Some gymnasts perform routines that don’t have a 10.0 start value and instead can receive a maximum score of 9.95. These routines are sometimes punished more when errors occur because the skills aren’t as difficult.
There is also the idea of leotard bias, which is when judges give the benefit of the doubt to teams who have historically been the cream of the crop. The idea of this isn’t new. Sports fans complain that teams such as the Lakers, Jordan’s Bulls, or Mahomes’ Chiefs benefit from questionable calls. However, controversial officiating in major sports doesn’t happen every game. With college gymnastics, almost every meet has the Gymternet blowing up with outraged fans.
It has become such a pandemic that even gymnasts who benefit have started to speak out. Chloi Clark, of a dominant Florida Gators squad, took to social media after receiving an inflated score for one of her vaults. She talked about how the gymnasts are just as frustrated as the fans.
Women’s college gymnastics has had an influx of former Olympians for many reasons, including NIL. These athletes with high profiles have anecdotally benefited from judging bias. Jade Carey for example, a former Olympian, recently received a 10.0 for a floor exercise when she clearly took a step forward on a backward tumbling pass, a sign she was not fully rotated.
The biggest problem is that the NCAA doesn’t seem concerned about these biases. Now, I don’t think there is any foul play happening. I believe most judges are doing their best, but subconsciously these biases exist. So how do we fix it? Here are a few simple ideas.
Rooting the Bias Out of Gymnastics
Technology
Using technology is probably one of the most obvious answers. In the Men’s World Championships in late 2023, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) or the Judging Support System (JSS) was used for the first time. It wasn’t used to replace judges but to allow judges to review when a gymnast wanted to challenge a score. It required a handful of high-definition cameras at each apparatus along with the AI technology.
Implementing this into every college gym is probably unrealistic given budgets, but why couldn’t college gymnastics implement replay for scoring? All it takes is one or two cameras, which are already in most arenas anyway because of TV broadcasts. The NCAA could implement rules to allow coaches to initiate a replay challenge a determined number of times a meet. A replay would then be able to either increase or decrease the score depending on the review.
Allow More Judging Conferences
When determining the score of a gymnast’s routine, there are two judges (more in regional and national competitions) who independently give their score. The score awarded to the gymnast is the average of the two scores. Occasionally, these two scores are very different, which indicates one of the judges may have missed something in the routine.
The rule right now is that judges can’t convene to talk it over unless the two scores are greater than 0.2 apart. It seems crazy to allow 0.2 points to separate the two judge’s scores given that 0.2 points could be the difference between the best and worst routine. Rhiannon Franck, a former judge, suggested the rule should be changed to allow judges to talk if their scores are greater than 0.1 apart.
The head judge is also the only one allowed to initiate judge conversations if there is a disagreement between the two judges (e.g. the start value of a routine). This means that if the head judge makes a mistake, it likely won’t be corrected because, by the rules, the other judge isn’t allowed to point it out.
The current conferencing rules are in place to reduce the chances of one judge biasing another judge. However, if the scores given make it clear one of the judges made a mistake, the priority should be to get it right.
Judge Auditing
First and foremost, remove the system in which coaches evaluate judges. Next, the NCAA should set up a system in which judges are assessed and audited throughout the year by an independent party. This idea isn’t new and has been tossed around by many, including Franck.
Judges may not realize when biases are sneaking into the way they score. If discovered, an independent team could tell the judge of their biases to correct the issue. This would require funding to set up a team, but it would be worth it to bring back the integrity of the sport.
Growing the Next Generation of Fans
Women’s college gymnastics has an opportunity to grow exponentially in popularity. Meets are now regularly shown on major networks, including ESPN and ABC. Attendance continues to grow, especially among the top programs in the nation. For example, the University of Utah fills more seats for gymnastics meets than men’s basketball games.
As new fan interest is up and to the right, it’s paramount that new viewers believe the sport is fair. Athletes, fans, and judges all seem to care, now it’s on the NCAA to make the necessary moves.