Hamm medal controvery

[krissy3483]

I feel terrible for the position this guy is being put into. Now they want him to give up his medal.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/olympics/2004/gymnastics/08/27/bc.oly.taintedgold.ap/index.html?cnn=yes

 

[Microcell]

I can't believe he has to pay for thier error!

 

[Geoff_M]

In no way shape or form should Hamm give the medal back. Lost in all of this is the fact that the judges also made an error in not deducting .2 a point for an illegal 4th "hold" done by the Korean during his routine. If we're going to re-open judging errors, then you need to revisit both errors.

 

[leahannpen]

Originally posted by Geoff_M
In no way shape or form should Hamm give the medal back. Lost in all of this is the fact that the judges also made an error in not deducting .2 a point for an illegal 4th "hold" done by the Korean during his routine. If we're going to re-open judging errors, then you need to revisit both errors.

 

[gymnasticsmom68]

There is no way in heck he should have to give up his medal. It's not his fault and he shouldn't have to pay for their mistake.

 

[DukeStreetKing]

I agree he shouldn't have to give his medal back. However, this will be a footnote for the rest of his career. He will be forever known as the guy who won the gold but maybe he shouldn't have. I've thought about this and if I were in his place, I would give it back. Everyone knows he did a wonderful routine and he's going to be successful whether he has the medal or not. I would rather give it back and be done with it. He would be respected even more for being the "bigger man".

 

[Doug123]

Another reason why sports where judges are used should be eliminate from the games.

 

[damo]

Originally posted by DukeStreetKing
I agree he shouldn't have to give his medal back. However, this will be a footnote for the rest of his career. He will be forever known as the guy who won the gold but maybe he shouldn't have. I've thought about this and if I were in his place, I would give it back. Everyone knows he did a wonderful routine and he's going to be successful whether he has the medal or not. I would rather give it back and be done with it. He would be respected even more for being the "bigger man".

Gotta agree with you. He knows in his heart if he won gold or silver. If he thinks that his performance was the gold winning performance, then by all means keep the medal. But if he feels that it wasn't, then he should give it back.

This is very similar to Kristen Babb-Sprague (USA) getting a gold when it should have gone to Sylvie Frechette(CAN) in synchronized swimming back in 1992. They ended up giving two golds.

 

[snoopy]

That poor guy. I hope he knows how very many people admire him for both his incredible athletic performances, but also for being so gutsy and standing up though all this malarky!

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by snoopy
That poor guy. I hope he knows how very many people admire him for both his incredible athletic performances, but also for being so gutsy and standing up though all this malarky!

ITA!!

No way should he give the medal back. The South Koreans should suck it up and quit whining, and the gymnastics governing body that is pressuring him to give up his medal should stuff it.

 

[missypie]

If they rescore both the start value and the deductions, the Korean loses .1. How can the FIG make the sweeping statement that the Korean is the rightful gold medal winner? How can you recore the start value without also rescoring the deductions? If they want to recore, they need to rescore both and apologize to Paul. Paul should be remembered for his amazing mental toughness in pulling off two great routines after the poor vault.

I also wonder what Paul will do in the future. It would be reasonable for him to want to retire after accomplishing the "ultimate" but if he does, they'll say he's afraid to defend his title. But if I were him, I'd be afraid of never getting a fair shake in international competitions.

 

[Paradise]

He should give it back because everytime he sees it at home or sits down with his kids, grandkids, etc in the future, a little voice in the depths of him memory will keep reminding him that the Korean was the real winner. His concience will continue to nag at him.

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by Paradise
He should give it back because everytime he sees it at home or sits down with his kids, grandkids, etc in the future, a little voice in the depths of him memory will keep reminding him that the Korean was the real winner. His concience will continue to nag at him.

The problem with this scenario is that the South Korean WASN'T the real winner. The judges missed a manatory deduction that would have still given Paul Hamm the gold medal, regardless of the original error.

 

[decker96]

The biggest problem in all this besides the fact that Hamm is the true winner if you go back and TOTALLY rescore the South Korean's routine is that the guy they are saying should have won actually got the bronze.
Let's say Hamm would give up his gold. Do they then expect the guy who won the silver to give up his medal to Hamm and take the bronze?
The whole thing is just so dumb. The FIG judges made the mistake, not the only one in the competition either in my opinion, why should Hamm be the one to pay for it? If they really think the South Korean deserves the gold, give him one too, but don't expect Hamm, or any other athlete for that matter to fix it for you.

 

[Az Pirates]

Originally posted by Geoff_M
In no way shape or form should Hamm give the medal back. Lost in all of this is the fact that the judges also made an error in not deducting .2 a point for an illegal 4th "hold" done by the Korean during his routine. If we're going to re-open judging errors, then you need to revisit both errors.

The problem with that is if you start looking at one judging error - then you better open up every routine to a video review and I'll wager that there would be more than one medal swap that needs to take place!

There is a big difference between judges missing deductions in a routine (never open to review in the sport of gymnastics) and an athlete not getting a proper start value and being penilized before they ever step onto the floor.

What I don't understand is why more of the blame is not being placed on the coaches. This is an olympic competition after all. There are very strict rules and guidelines about when and to whom a complaint should be filed. The Korean coaches should have filed a formal complaint about the start value discrepancy before they proceeded on to the next event.

I agree that FIG is trying to weasel out of an uncomfortable situation by trying to pressure Hamm into fixing a mistake that is not his responsibility to fix.

 

[theSurlyMermaid]

Originally posted by Az Pirates
There is a big difference between judges missing deductions in a routine (never open to review in the sport of gymnastics) and an athlete not getting a proper start value and being penilized before they ever step onto the floor.

There is some obvious confusion here about how a start value is determined.

It is NOT NOT NOT set before the gymnast steps onto the mat. The best you can have is a routine that is expected to be out of a 10.0 or a 9.9, or whatever. If said gymnast misses an element, or flubs something up during the routine, the start value is automatically lowered. That means you can't know what the true start value of the routine is UNTIL IT IS FINISHED.

The panel who judged the start value of the Korean's routine all agreed it was a 9.9. They obviously all missed the element that put it at a 10.0 (after all, the routine had been judged to be a 10.0 the other times he did it in the competition). They also missed the MANDATORY 2 tenths deduction on the 4 holds. How is this any different?

The guy was not penalized before he even started his routine. The final start value of a routine is NEVER known until the routine is finished. It's stupid, it's complicated, but that's how it is.

Don't you guys remember watching the routines? (or did you all have your TVs muted to drown out Elfie and Tim? I can sort of understand that). When a gymnast would fumble an element on the balance beam, Elfie would say "She was supposed to connect those....that lowers her start value." Start value is a subjective thing that needs to be decided upon as the routine is being performed.

How you can draw the distinction between this error and the mandatory deduction error is beyond me. There is no difference. All these articles about the S. Korean being the "true winner" are a bunch of hogwash.

As for the cowardly FIG, they are trying to have it both ways....appease the Koreans without actually DOING anything. How repulsive. Luckily the USOC and the IOC told them where to go.

 

[Geoff_M]

There is a big difference between judges missing deductions in a routine (never open to review in the sport of gymnastics) and an athlete not getting a proper start value and being penilized before they ever step onto the floor.

I guess I don't see the difference... both were procedural errors by the judging staff. The deduction wouldn't have been a matter of aesthetic interpretation. The fact is that one set of judges, on an oversight, cost the athelete 0.1 points... and another set of judges awarded him 0.2 points he was not due as perscribed by the rules by a second oversight.

 

[teh fish]

so, we have a group of people that want a rescore on only a part of the performance but when you look at the entire performance, the south korean still didn't win. Where have I seen this before.....

 

[Miss Jasmine]

There is some obvious confusion here about how a start value is determined.

It is NOT NOT NOT set before the gymnast steps onto the mat. The best you can have is a routine that is expected to be out of a 10.0 or a 9.9, or whatever. If said gymnast misses an element, or flubs something up during the routine, the start value is automatically lowered. That means you can't know what the true start value of the routine is UNTIL IT IS FINISHED.

The panel who judged the start value of the Korean's routine all agreed it was a 9.9. They obviously all missed the element that put it at a 10.0 (after all, the routine had been judged to be a 10.0 the other times he did it in the competition). They also missed the MANDATORY 2 tenths deduction on the 4 holds. How is this any different?

The guy was not penalized before he even started his routine. The final start value of a routine is NEVER known until the routine is finished. It's stupid, it's complicated, but that's how it is.

Don't you guys remember watching the routines? (or did you all have your TVs muted to drown out Elfie and Tim? I can sort of understand that). When a gymnast would fumble an element on the balance beam, Elfie would say "She was supposed to connect those....that lowers her start value." Start value is a subjective thing that needs to be decided upon as the routine is being performed.

How you can draw the distinction between this error and the mandatory deduction error is beyond me. There is no difference. All these articles about the S. Korean being the "true winner" are a bunch of hogwash.

As for the cowardly FIG, they are trying to have it both ways....appease the Koreans without actually DOING anything. How repulsive. Luckily the USOC and the IOC told them where to go.

Then explain to me how the American's were told PRIOR to competition that some start values were lowered on high bar routines????

Also when Good ole Tim and Elfie were talking they said they would lose the BONUS points, not that it would lower the start value.

 

[jrydberg]

This is why ping pong -- er... excuse me, table tennis -- is a great Olympic sport! There is no great controversy over the gold medalist (wait! his paddle was corked!)

You know you've lost when your opponent serves up a vicious smash that results in the little plastic ball leaving an imprint on your forehead