[ SECRET POST #5334 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5334 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________















05. [SPOILERS for Amphibia]




__________________________________________________



06. [WARNING for discussion of noncon/underage]





















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #763.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[tei]

That article is about the rating of new skills, which is a very different issue, and has nothing to do with being underscored in competition because skills are supposedly easier for her than other gymnasts, which isn't a thing.

The specific issues the Vox article is taking a stab at primarily have to do with two skills: the double-double dismount off beam, and the yurchenko double pike. The beam dismount, yes, was intentionally undervalued in order to try to discourage athletes from doing it. That doesn't just apply to Biles; undervaluing and, in certain cases, outright banning of dangerous skills is a known (and, obviously, controversial, because it's stupid) practice in gymnastics. (To be clear: none of Simone skills have been banned, despite incorrect reports by US media.) The most egregious incident of intentional undervaluing (again, undervaluing, not underscoring; the difference is important because the former happens in the code of points, before the competition, and the latter happens during the competition) in the recent past actually has nothing to do with Biles, but instead was of the Produnova vault (a handspring double front tuck), which was deliberately changed from a 7.1 to a 6.4 and now 6.0 in an attempt to dissuade gymnasts from doing it. However, most of the athletes who do the Produnova are from poor countries with small, underfunded programs and nothing close to the kind of platform that Simone has to complain, so very few people are even aware of it.

The question of whether the YDP was undervalued is quite a bit more ambiguous. Basically, because the difficulties of skills in both the mens' and womens' code are set up poorly in the first place, there is really no obvious "correct" value to give that vault that is progressive with the vaults that it is related to. It's maybe a little low, but it's far from the headline-grabbing "the FIG hates the YDP and Simone Biles in particular" headline that Vox (and other US media outlets which, by and large, have very little knowledge or context on gymnastics to work with compared to other sports they cover) want it to be. A good in-depth explanation of the YDP value situation can be found here: https://balancebeamsituation.com/2021/05/24/simones-vault-value-does-it-make-sense/

Of note, if you care about undervaluing, is that the YDP is now rated 0.6 higher than the new value of the Produnova, when generally front-entry vaults are agreed to be more difficult that back-entry vaults.

Edit: oh, and if this is what you were confused about based on the wording of your previous comment-- even the skills that Simone has named in the Code that are arguably undervalued are still rated extremely highly. She doesn't have a disadvantage doing those skills, she has a significant advantage even if it's not as much as she thinks it could be, which is why with her regular routines, she has several points' worth of room in between her and most other athletes.