FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

2019 Junior World Championships – Györ, HUN

Women’s Artistic Technical Committee Report

By Mrs. Donatella Sacchi, President Women’s Technical Committee

1. PARTICIPATION RIGHTS

The age of the WAG gymnasts was 14 or 15 years old (born 2004 or 2005)

PARTICIPATION WITH A TEAM  Federations who qualified for the 2018 Youth Olympic Games through their respective Continental Championships (regardless their participation to YOG);  any Federation with a gymnast who appeared in the 2018 Youth Olympic Games “Entry List By NOC”, except for the Universality Places.  in addition each Continental Union could request one “Wild card”.

PARTICIPATION IN INDIVIDUAL ALL-AROUND QUALIFICATION  all other federations could send one WAG gymnast.

Following competition phases were held: Qualification (which also include the All-Around Final and the Team Final) and Apparatus Finals.

The participation can be summarised as follows:

# of countries per continent

Oceania; 1 Africa; 1 Asia; 7 Continent Countries % Europe 31 60,7 America 11 21,6 Asia 7 13,7 Oceania 1 2,0 America; 11 Europe; 31 Africa 1 2,0 Total 51 100

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

From the 51 federations:

 •30 Federations were registered with Team: ARG, AUS, BEL, BLR, BRA, CAN, CHN, EGY, ESP, FIN, FRA, GBR, GER,GRE, HUN, ITA, JPN, KAZ, KOR, MEX, PAN, POR, ROU, RUS, SGP, SWE* TUR, UKR, USA, UZB Remarks: The required format for a team was as follows: 3 gymnasts can compete and 2 scores count SWE* was registered with a Team but only 1 gymnast competed

 21 Federations were registered with 1 gymnast: AZE, BUL, COL, CYP, CZE, DEN, ECU, GUA, ISL, ISR, JAM, LAT, LTU, MGL, MLT, NOR, PER, POL, SLO, SVK, TPE

Total: 108 Gymnasts 106 gymnasts competed in the All-Around 2 gymnasts competed in 3 events

2. ALL-AROUND RANKING: ( maximum 2 per country, ranked according to Qualification Competition)

3. TEAM RANKING – ACCORDING TO THE QUALIFICATION COMPETITION

4. PARTICIPATION IN APPARATUS FINAL (the best 8 gymnasts per event - maximum 2 per country)  3 federation competed in 4 Finals: CHN, RUS, USA  1 federation competed in 3 Finals: GBR  1 federation competed in 2 Finals: ROU  4 federations competed in 1 Final: BEL, BRA, ITA, UKR Total federations: 9

5. MEDAL DISTRIBUTION for Team Final, All-Around Final and Apparatus Final by participating continents

Medal Distribution by Continents 10

5 5

3 3 3 2 2 2 1

Gold Silver Bronze Total Asia 3 2 5 America 1 2 3 Europe 5 3 2 10

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

6. AGE OF THE GYMNASTS registered gymnasts: Total 119 Gymnasts in %

61,34 Year of # of % Birth Gymnasts 38,66 2004 73 61,34 2005 46 38,66

2004 2005

7. LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE

Individual All-Around Qualification:  highest score: 14.408 on VT (first VT)  lowest score: 6.175 on UB

Apparatus Final:  highest score: 14.600 on VT (first VT)  lowest score: 12.000 on BB

Comparison of highest/lowest Final score in Qualification – on all 4 apparatus

VT (1)* VT (2) UB BB FX

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

The Extreme D- and E- Scores in Qualification were as follows:

VT (1) VT (2) UB BB FX D High 5,6 5,4 5,7 5,9 5,5 D Low 3,3 3,3 0,9 4,8 4,5 E High 9,133 9,241 8,666 8,4 8,666 E Low 6,866 7,3 2,775 4,1 5,233

Comparison of average Final score/D-score/E-score – all 4 apparatus

12,792 12,770 11,978 11,572 11,111

8,48 8,54 7,50 7,00 6,85

4,700 4,400 4,200 4,500 3,700

VT (1) VT (2) UB BB FX

D-score 4,4 4,2 3,7 4,7 4,5 E-score 8,48 8,54 6,995 6,85 7,496 Final Score 12,792 12,77 11,111 11,572 11,978

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

VAULT 107 gymnasts competed and 43* performed 2 vaults from the following groups: 1 gymnast* with a “0” in the 2nd vault (2 times same vault) (*is not included in the 43 gymnasts)

1st. Vault 2nd Vault Group 1 1 2% Group 2 19 18% 7 16% Group 3 14 13% 9 21% Group 4 74 69% 26 61% Group 5 Total 107 100% 43* 100%

Group of 1st VT Group of 2nd VT Group 2 Group 1 18% 2%

Group 2 16%

Group 3 13% Group 3 Group 4 21% 61% Group 4 69%

Highest Final 14.408 Barros Sydney USA Score: Highest D-Score: 5.60 CHN Highest E-Score: 9.133 Gadirova Jennifer GBR

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Comparison of Vault groups 74

26 19 14 7 9 0 1

Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 Group 5 1st Vault 2nd Vault

Detail D-Score 1st & 2nd Vault

# of gymnasts performed following D-score 50 45 43 40 35 30 25 20 13 15 11 11 12 10 9 10 8 5 4 3 3 5 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 0 5,6 5,4 5,0 4,8 4,6 4,4 4,2 4,1 4,0 3,7 3,6 3,5 3,3 0,0

1st Vault 2nd Vault

% of E-score 1st Vault % of E-score 2nd Vault 56,0% 54,5%

37,0%

27,3%

11,4% 2,0% 1,0% 3,0% 1,0% 4,5% 2,3%

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Line deduction: 0.10 0.30 (Both vaults) 15 3 Time deduction 0.30 Exceeding touch warm up 1 time (started after 32 sec)

Total # of falls: 1st Vault: 4 / 2nd Vault: 2

Inquiry: None Intervention of 6 times (in Qualification, none in Final) reference score: Block of the score 3 times

Remarks: . 44 gymnasts performed 2 vaults in Qualification competition . 17 Vaults were recognised as different to the announced vault (total both vaults) . Zero Vaults: 1 time 2nd Vault (2x same vault)

UNEVEN BARS In Qualification, 107 gymnasts competed

Highest Final 14.366 Listunova Viktoriia RUS Score: Highest D-Score: 5.80 Urazova Vladislava RUS Highest E-Score: 8.666 Listunova Viktoriia RUS

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Detail D-Score

# of gymnasts per DV 9 8 8

7 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

0 5,8 5,6 5,4 5,2 5 4,8 4,6 4,4 4,2 4 3,8 3,6 3,4 3,1 2,9 2,7 2,3 2,1 1,9 0,9

Detail E-Score

30

24 25 23

20 17 15 15 13

10 5 5 4 4 2

0 8.500-8.999 8.000-8.499 7.500-7.999 7.000-7.499 6.500-6.999 6.000-6.499 5.500-5.999 5.000-5.499 below 5.00

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Missing Composition requirements

1 Flight from HB to LB 14 2 Flight on the same bar 32 3 Different grips 10 4 Non flight element with 360° LA 10

Dismount

No DMT 0 A or B-DMT 52 C DMT 31 D DMT (or higher) 31

Connection Value:

# of connections performed and rewarded

+0.10 46 times +0.20 8 times D+C (LB-HB) or more - 3 times; D+E both flights – 5 times

Total # of falls: 43 with 11 gymnasts with more than 1 fall.

Inquiry: None Intervention of Qualification: 8 times; Final: 1 time reference score: Block of the score: 5 times for D-score; 3 times for E-score

Neutral deduction: 2x spotting assistance ea -1.0 with loss of DV and 1 or 2 CR’s

BALANCE BEAM

In Qualification, 108 gymnasts competed

Highest Final 14.066 CHN Score: Highest D-Score: 5.90 Ou Yushan CHN Highest E-Score: 8.40 CHN

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Detail D-Score

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0 5,9 5,7 5,6 5,5 5,4 5,2 5 4,8 4,6 4,4 4,2 4 3,8 3,6

Detail E-Score

30 26 25 23 20 16 15 13 10 11 10 7 5 2 0 8.50-8.99 8.00-8.49 7.50-7.99 7.00-7.49 6.50-6.99 6.00-6.49 5.50-5.99 5.00-5.49 below 5.00

Missing Composition requirements

1. Dance series 6

2. Turn 0 3. Acro series 4 4. Acro elem. Direction 0

Dismount

No DMT 0

A or B-DMT 26

C DMT 54

D DMT (or higher) 28

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Connection Value

# of connections performed and rewarded

+0.10 73 times Series Bonus 42 times (Acro 30; Gym 1; Mixed 11) A+C Turn 0 Dance & D+B mixed: 20 times

+0.20 17 times Acro C+D – 15 times; Dance/Mixed 2 times

Total # of falls: 57 with 9 gymnasts with more than 1 fall.

Time deductions: 12 times

Inquiry: None Intervention of 1 time (in Qualification) reference score: Block of the 7 times score:

FLOOR

In Qualification - 108 gymnasts competed

Highest Final 14.166 Listunova RUS Score: Victoriia Highest D-Score: 5.50 Listunova RUS; Sfiringu Silviana ROU; Victoriia Urasova Vladislava RUS Highest E-Score: 8.666 Listunova RUS Victoriia

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Detail D-Score

# of gymnasts per DV 16 14 14 12 12 10 10 10 8 8 8 8

6 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1

0 5,5 5,3 5,2 5,1 5 4,9 4,8 4,7 4,6 4,5 4,4 4,3 4,2 4,1 4 3,9 3,8 3,7 3,4 3,3 3,1

Detail E-Score

50 45 43 40 35 30 25 23 20 20 15 9 10 5 3 4 5 1 0 8.50-8.95 8.00-8.45 7.50-7.95 7.00-7.45 6.50-6.95 6.00-6.45 5.50-5.95 5.00-5.45 below 5.00

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Missing Composition requirements

1. Dance passage 0 2. Saltos direction 0 3. Salto with 360° LA turn 2 4. Double salto 2 Dismount

No DMT 0 A or B-DMT 16 C DMT 66 D DMT (or higher) 26

Connection Value

# of connections performed and rewarded

+0.10 20 times (E+A/ salto+jump – 1 time; D+B turn – 3 times)

+0.20 14 times (indirect A+A+E – 2 times) (direct A+E - 3 times; C+D – 5 times)

Line 0.10 0.30 deductions: 9 times 4 times

Total # of falls: 7 with 1 gymnast with more than 1 fall.

Inquiry: None Intervention of 1 time (Qualification) reference score: Block of the a. times Qualification; 1 time Final score:

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

8. JUDGING ACTIVITIES Each Delegation could send one judge of Category I, II or III. Delegations entering a team (2 to 3 gymnasts) had the right to present two qualified judges, with the purpose of fulfilling L/T positions in Qualification The D-, R-, and E- judges’ selection and draw was conducted in Györ from the pool of judges nominated by the participating Delegations. Due to personal problem the TC member Tatiana Perskaia could not take part in the competition. The WTC decided to substitute her with one of the top Cat.1 judges, who lived close to Györ, namely Maria Josè San Martin – ESP.

 Numbers and Federations - 39 Federations were represented by 46 judges. D-position: AUS, CHN, COL, FIN, GER, ITA, RUS, UZB R-position: BEL, CAN, EGY, FRA, HUN, ROU, UKR, USA Category I 4%  Categories of the 46 judges Category o 2 Category I III o 30 Category II 31% o 14 Category III

Each participating judge received at least 1 position Category II 65%

 Judges’ Review Session (Instruction) and Judges' Draw. For the judge’s instruction the WTC used very well prepared PPTs. Both Judges’ Review Session and the Judges’ Draw were carried out professionally and efficiently. E and D-judges were instructed separately.

 Assessment of the Judging After the Qualification the WTC carried-out PCVR of selected exercises according to the rules as well as for apparatus Finals.

D- Panel The D- Panels for this competition were taken from the pool of judges named by the participating delegations. A number of young, not yet experienced judges took this chance and they did their job consistently and correctly.

E- and R- Panels As this was a Junior level competition, many Federations took the opportunity to send new, young or less experienced judges to the event, so that they could gain experience in a large, high level arena. Although all tried to do their best, it was inevitable that their inexperience led, in some cases, to an inconsistent application of penalties. Anyway, the ranking was correct in all phases of competition.

Judges placement: The judges were placed around each apparatus FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

9. VENUE AND APPARATUS

 Competition format: Team Qualification: 2 or 3 gymnasts could compete – the 2 highest scores taken into account for the team ranking. Specific junior rule for Apparatus Final: In order to qualify for the Apparatus Finals, a gymnast had to compete and earn a score on every apparatus in the Qualification (she had to obtain an All-Around score)

 Team working order/touch warm up: 2 teams in one group Warm up: the team competing first did their warm-up first, immediately followed by the team competing second. Competition: first team compete then second team. Teams then alternated in each rotation.

 Apparatus Finals Each gymnast was entitled to a “touch” warm up period prior to the competition in two groups as per starting order.

 Apparatus Commissioner The presence of both Mr. Daniel Fesser and Mr Jakob Raab was very important and the WTC would like to thank them for their cooperation.

 Apparatus supplier The apparatus was supplied by “Spieth” The WTC would also like to express their gratitude to Thierry Deleuze and to “Spieth” technical team for their expertise and professional work in the arena and training halls

 IRCOS Video System/Longines On behalf of the WTC, I extend my heartfelt thanks to the IRCOS and the Longines teams for their friendly attitude and professional collaboration. As usual it was a pleasure to work with them.

 Medical Staff We are very grateful to Dr Jay Binder and the entire medical team for carrying out their tasks in a very professional, well organised and friendly manner. The WTC were particularly appreciative of the presentation given by Dr Jay Binder during the orientation meeting. This clarified current medical/physio procedures and was very informative to everyone present.

10. CONCLUSION AND THANKS

Although this competition was held as a test event, everyone hopes it will become an established official event on the FIG calendar. It was so beneficial in many ways. It gave young gymnasts the chance to work in big arena amongst girls of their own age, without the pressure of trying to emulate senior team gymnasts. They had a chance to present their exercises on a big stage, gaining confidence in their own ability and they were able to see and appreciate the work of their contemporaries from other countries. There was a very positive atmosphere around the arena, where coaches and gymnasts from different nations were seen helping and supporting each other. The success of this event can be traced back to the city of Gyor itself and the Hungarian Gymnastic Federation. Firstly, we are indebted to the mayor, Zsolt Borkai and his council. We could not have staged the event without their support. They made us very welcome at every stage. FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE

Secondly, the Organising Committee of Dr. Zoltan Magyar, President of Hungarian Gymnastics Federation and President of LOC, Mr. Attila Racz and Mr. Sandor Altorjai, competition director and executive director and their team, were amazing. The WTC were helped and supported by this team in many ways and would like to thank them all for everything they did towards the production of a successful event.

It was a pleasure to work with Ms. Tünde Zsilinszki. She managed the arrangements, transport for the WTC and the Judge's hospitality very well. She was efficient in her assistance to the WTC and the judges throughout the competition days.

The staff and volunteers fulfilled their responsibilities in a competent manner with a friendly approach which avoided stress to competitors and coaches.

Our gratitude is also conveyed to the FIG Office, especially Mr. Nicolas Buompane, Mr. Steve Butcher, Ms. Celine Cachemaille and Ms. Terhi Toivanen for their assistance, confidence and professional support.

We would also like to thank the members of the FIG Authorities, in particular Ms Naomi Valenzo and Mr. Youssef Al Tabbaa (WAG Jury of Appeal), for their support and help during all competition’s phases.

Oksana Chusovitina (UZB) WAG FIG Athletes Representative, was present during all phases of the competition.

I warmly thank all WTC members for their commitment and professional work in our teamwork and during the World Championship

Respectfully submitted,

Donatella Sacchi, President FIG/WTC Johanna Gratt, Secretary