# 2017 versus 2016: A Beam Comparison Part Deux

Welcome to the second edition of 2017 beam treatments. Following up on the first post, here are a few more comparisons of beam D scores to see how the intended 2016 D measures up to what the routine would be given under the 2017-2020 code, featuring a few gymnasts that you asked for and a few others that I think are interesting.

Let’s start with Ragan Smith. I’ll use the Patterson version of her routine since I assume that perfecting it will be the aim for 2017.

 Ragan Smith 2016 2017 Double wolf turn – D Double wolf turn – D Switch + straddle – C+A Switch + straddle – C+A Bhs + layout – B+E = 0.1 CV Bhs + layout – B+E = 0.1 CV Full twisting back tuck – F Full twisting back tuck – F Punch front + sissone – D+A = 0.1 CV Punch front + sissone – D+A Aerial + pike jump – D+A = 0.1 CV Aerial + pike jump – D+A Sheep – D Sheep – C Bhs + bhs + Patterson – B+B+G = 0.1 CV Bhs + bhs + Patterson – B+B+G = 0.3 CV CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – GFEDD – 2.6 Acro – GFEDD – 2.6 Dance – DDC – 1.1 Dance – DCC – 1.0 CV – 0.4 CV – 0.4 Total D – 6.6 Total D – 6.0

The value of the Patterson combination is quite critical in making up for the lost CV from those D+A connections. With the Patterson, the only real hit Smith’s routine takes is from the downgrade of the sheep jump. Without the Patterson, however, her 2017 D score would be just 5.6, which won’t be all that competitive.

Based on what I’m seeing in these D scores, a difficulty in the lowish 6s is about what the top beam gymnasts should be aiming for in 2017. (Later in the quad, expect scores to go higher as coaches learn how to work the new CV/copy the more inventive countries.) A lot of top beamers are looking at 5.8s for their current routines, but most of those 5.8s can be reorganized with minimal pain to get another couple tenths.

In the last edition of this post, Simone’s routine composition was the best suited to adapt to the new code, but that title has been taken away by Larisa Iordache, whose routine is the model for what is most valued in the 2017-2020 beam code.

 Larisa Iordache 2016 2017 Bhs + Tuck full – B+F = 0.2 CV Bhs + Tuck full – B+F = 0.2 CV Round-off + “layout” – B+E = 0.1 CV Round-off + “layout” – B+E = 0.1 CV Double spin – D Double spin – D Switch + switch 1/2 – C+D = 0.1 CV Switch + switch 1/2 – C+D = 0.1 CV Aerial + split + wolf – D+A+A = 0.1 CV Aerial + split + wolf – D+B+A = 0.1 CV Side somi – D Side somi – D Round-off + bhs + triple full – B+B+F = 0.1 CV Round-off + bhs + triple full – B+B+F = 0.3 CV CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – FFEDD – 2.5 Acro – FFEDD – 2.5 Dance – DDC – 1.1 Dance – DDC – 1.1 CV – 0.6 CV – 0.8 Total D – 6.7 Total D – 6.4

All of her connections are still valuable in the new CoP, even her previous D+A combo since the split jump rises to a B. Overall, Iordache’s routine gains two tenths in CV over last quad because of the dismount combination, and with everything else remaining the same, her routine is worth almost the same as it was before. The only real problem is that layout.

Just in case Bailie Key still goes here…

 Bailie Key 2015 2017 Wolf turn – B Wolf turn – B Switch ring – E Switch ring – E Bhs + bhs + “layout” – B+B+E = 0.2 CV Bhs + bhs + “layout” – B+B+E = 0.2 CV Side aerial – D Side aerial – D Switch 1/2 – D Switch 1/2 – D Punch front + sissone – D+A = 0.1 CV Punch front + sissone – D+A Aerial + wolf + split – D+A+A = 0.1 CV Aerial + wolf + split – D+A+B Switch + back pike – C+C = 0.1 CV Switch + back pike – C+C Bhs + bhs + double pike = 0.1 CV Bhs + bhs + double pike = 0.1 CV CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – EEDDD – 2.2 Acro – EEDDD – 2.2 Dance – EDC – 1.2 Dance – EDC – 1.2 CV – 0.6 CV – 0.3 Total D – 6.5 Total D – 5.7

The greater concern is that, with the amount of downgrading she got on the layout in recent years, her new D score could be down closer to 5.5. When has this beam routine not felt like it was in dire need of a composition redo?

 Jordan Chiles 2016 2017 Bhs + layout stepout + layout stepout – B+C+C = 0.2 CV Bhs + layout stepout + layout stepout – B+C+C = 0.2 CV Switch + switch 1/2 – C+D = 0.1 CV Switch + switch 1/2 – C+D = 0.1 CV Side somi – D Side somi – D Split full – D Split full – E Aerial – D Aerial – D Side aerial – D Side aerial – D Punch front + wolf – D+A = 0.1 CV Punch front + wolf – D+A Round-off + double tuck – B+D Round-off + double tuck – B+D CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – DDDDD – 2.0 Acro – DDDDD – 2.0 Dance – DDC – 1.1 Dance – EDC – 1.2 CV – 0.4 CV – 0.3 Total D – 6.0 Total D – 5.5

The Chiles routine is an interesting one because of that split full, which is getting upgraded to an E in 2017. It may not be that influential for Chiles simply because I doubt she was getting credit for that thing in the first place, but it does help stoke my fears that we will see a lot more people trying to pull those around in 2017 in the hope of an E.

In other news, the 2017 CoP HATES Pauline Schaefer.

 Pauline Schaefer 2016 2017 Switch ring = E Switch ring = E Bhs + layout stepout – B+C Bhs + layout stepout – B+C Aerial + side somi – D+D = 0.1 CV Aerial + side somi – D+D Double spin – D Double spin – D Side somi 1/2 = E Side somi 1/2 = E Full turn + side aerial – A+D = 0.1 CV Full turn + side aerial – A+D Sheep – D Sheep – C Gainer layout – D Gainer layout – C CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – EDDDD – 2.1 Acro – EDDDC – 2.0 Dance – EDD – 1.3 Dance – EDC – 1.2 CV – 0.2 CV – 0.0 Total D – 6.1 Total D – 5.2

The new rules destroy all of her CV, the sheep jump, and the gainer layout dismount. There’s nothing left. Her routine is like a dystopian urban war zone.

 Angelina Melnikova 2016 2017 Wolf turn 2.5 – E Wolf turn 2.5 – D Switch ring – E Switch ring – E Bhs + bhs + layout + split + wolf – B+B+E+A+A = 0.3 CV Bhs + bhs + layout + split + wolf – B+B+E+B+A = 0.3 CV Punch front + sissone – D+A = 0.1 CV Punch front + sissone – D+A Sheep – D Sheep – C Aerial – D Aerial – D Side somi – D Side somi – D Round-off + double pike – B+E Round-off + double pike – B+E CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – EEDDD – 2.2 Acro – EEDDD – 2.2 Dance – EED – 1.4 Dance – EDC – 1.2 CV – 0.4 CV – 0.3 Total D – 6.5 Total D – 5.7

Question: Is it possible to get two overlapping series bonuses?

For 2017, I have Melnikova retaining 0.3 CV for that (theoretical and almost never happens) connection of bhs + bhs + layout + split + wolf: 0.1 series bonus for the bhs+bhs+layout (B+B+E), 0.1 acro CV for the bhs+layout (B+E), and 0.1 mixed CV for the layout + split (E+B).

Now, because of the addition of a series bonus for mixed elements, the middle of that five-element combination (the bhs+layout+split part) would also be eligible for a series bonus since it’s B+E+B. Are gymnasts able to get a second series bonus for a three-element series even if it overlaps skills with another three-element series that’s already receiving a series bonus?

This is getting complicated. I haven’t given the second series bonus here because that seems ridiculous. But also FIG.

Melnikova kind of needs it because her routine is downgrade-city.

Shang Chunsong goes for the same series as Melnikova, though her routine is more valuable than Melnikova’s in the new CoP either way.

 Shang Chunsong 2016 2017 Bhs + bhs + layout + split + straddle – B+B+E+A+A = 0.3 CV Bhs + bhs + layout + split + straddle – B+B+E+B+A = 0.3 CV Switch 1/2 – D Switch 1/2 – D Bhs + layout stepout – B+C Bhs + layout stepout – B+C Punch front – D Punch front – D Double spin – D Double Spin – D Aerial + sheep – D+D = 0.2 CV Aerial + sheep – D+C = 0.1 CV Side aerial + sissone – D+A = 0.1 CV Side aerial + sissone – D+A Round-off + triple full – B+F Round-off + triple full – B+F = 0.2 CV CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – FEDDD – 2.3 Acro – FEDDD – 2.3 Dance – DDD – 1.2 Dance – DDC – 1.1 CV – 0.6 CV – 0.6 Total D – 6.6 Total D – 6.0

Let’s talk Seda now. I should have picked a hit routine, but this fall is too hilarious to be ignored. WHEEEEEE.

 Seda Tutkhalyan 2016 2017 Round-off + layout – B+E = 0.1 CV Round-off + layout – B+E = 0.1 CV Switch + switch 1/2 – D+C = 0.1 CV Switch + switch 1/2 – D+C = 0.1 CV Round-off + layout full – B+G = 0.2 CV Round-off + layout full – B+G = 0.2 CV Aerial + sissone + wolf – D+A+A = 0.1 CV Aerial + sissone + wolf – D+A+A Switch ring – E Switch ring – E Round-off + double pike – B+E Round-off + double pike – B+E CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – GEEDB – 2.3 Acro – GEEDB – 2.3 Dance – EDC – 1.2 Dance – EDC – 1.2 CV – 0.5 CV – 0.4 Total D – 6.5 Total D – 5.9

For reference, with a piked full-in as her dismount (which she should be doing anyway because that double pike is a DEMON and completely undermines the idea of downgrading for execution/consistency) her 2016 routine is up to 6.7 and her 2017 routine would be 6.3. A 6.3 versus a 5.9. Officially, full-time upgrading to the piked full-in is absolutely worth it and needs to happen yesterday.

Also, Seda…why are you counting a B acro? Pull it together, sister.

 Claudia Fragapane 2016 2017 Arabian – F Arabian – F Switch + sheep – C+D = 0.1 CV Switch + sheep – C+C = 0.1 CV Bhs + layout full – B+G = 0.2 CV Bhs + layout full – B+G = 0.2 CV Side aerial – D Side aerial – D Back tuck full – F Back tuck full – F Switch 1/2 – D Switch 1/2 – D Bhs + bhs + double pike – B+B+E = 0.1 CV Bhs + bhs + double pike – B+B+E = 0.1 CV CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – GFFED – 2.8 Acro – GFFED – 2.8 Dance – DDC – 1.1 Dance – DCC – 1.0 CV – 0.4 CV – 0.4 Total D – 6.8 Total D – 6.2

Rebounding acro series are your friend.

Most of Frags’ D score comes from high-tariff elements (BRITISH TERMINOLOGY) and actual acro combinations, so she gets to keep most of it for 2017. Even the switch + sheep “combination” retains value (theoretically) because dance + dance series can still be C+C.

Of course, the problem for Frags has never been whether she has a high enough D score.

 Fan Yilin 2016 2017 Round-off + layout – B+E = 0.1 CV Round-off + layout – B+E = 0.1 CV Switch ring + sheep – E+D = 0.2 CV Switch ring + sheep – E+C = 0.1 CV Wolf + sissone + aerial – A+A+D = 0.1 CV Wolf + sissone + aerial – A+A+D Split + side somi – A+D = 0.1 CV Split + side somi – B+D = 0.1 CV Switch + side aerial – C+D = 0.1 CV Switch + side aerial – C+D = 0.1 CV Round-off + triple full – B+F Round-off + triple full – B+F = 0.2 CV CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – FEDDD – 2.3 Acro – FEDDD – 2.3 Dance – EDC – 1.2 Dance – ECC – 1.1 CV – 0.6 CV – 0.6 Total D – 6.6 Total D – 6.0

Fan’s routine holds up pretty well under the new code. I included video of this particular performance, though, because of the solid fake-out save in the middle. She’s about to wobble on her aerial walkover but instead she goes to scale and then hand-grab choreographies the beam because she totally meant to, you guys. The D+A acro/dance combination goes away in 2017, but the D+A acro/scale combination remains. She could save an extra tenth in this routine if she did that scale, but for real.

 Liu Tingting 2016 2017 Front handspring + front tuck – B+D = 0.2 CV Front handspring + front tuck – B+D = 0.2 CV Switch ring + sheep – E+D = 0.2 CV Switch ring + sheep – E+C = 0.1 CV Ring leap – D Ring leap – D Split + side aerial + sissone – A+D+A = 0.2 CV Split + side aerial + sissone – B+D+A = 0.1 CV Aerial + switch + back tuck – D+C+C = 0.2 CV Aerial + switch + back tuck – D+C+C = 0.2 CV Round-off + double tuck – B+D Round-off + double tuck – B+D CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – DDDDC – 1.9 Acro – DDDDC – 1.9 Dance – EDD – 1.3 Dance – EDC – 1.2 CV – 0.8 CV – 0.6 Total D – 6.5 Total D – 5.7

Liu’s routine does not fare as well in the new code since she is rather reliant on non-acrobatic CV and that sheep jump. Still, she actually performs true forward rebounding acro, so she gets to keep her 0.2 CV for that. Liu also occasionally attempts to connect a split out of that front tuck, and usually doesn’t succeed, which would bring her new score up to 5.8.

She loses 0.1 CV for the switch + back tuck combo, but since it comes after an aerial, she gains that 0.1 CV right back because it’s now part of a mixed three-element series.

Some other requests:

 Tutya Yilmaz 2016 2017 Bhs + “layout” full – B+G = 0.2 CV Bhs + “layout” full – B+G = 0.2 CV Switch + layout stepout – C+C = 0.1 CV Switch + layout stepout – C+C Aerial – D Aerial – D Switch 1/2 – D Switch 1/2 – D Switch side – C Switch side – C Split + side aerial – A+D = 0.1 CV Split + side aerial – B+D = 0.1 CV Round-off + double pike = B+E Round-off + double pike = B+E CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – GEDDC – 2.3 Acro – GEDDC – 2.3 Dance – DCC – 1.0 Dance – DCC – 1.0 CV – 0.4 CV – 0.3 Total D – 6.2 Total D – 5.6

 Wang Yan 2016 2017 Front tuck 1/2 – F Front tuck 1/2 – F Switch ring + sheep – E+D = 0.2 CV Switch ring + sheep – E+C = 0.1 CV Round-off + layout – B+E = 0.1 CV Round-off + layout – B+E = 0.1 CV Front tuck – D Front tuck – D Aerial + switch 1/2 – D+D = 0.2 CV Aerial + switch 1/2 – D+D = 0.2 CV Split + side aerial – A+D = 0.1 CV Split + side aerial – B+D = 0.1 CV Switch + wolf – C+A Switch + wolf – C+A Round-off + triple full – B+F Round-off + triple full – B+F = 0.2 CV CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – FFEDD – 2.5 Acro – FFEDD – 2.5 Dance – EDD – 1.3 Dance – EDC – 1.2 CV – 0.5 CV – 0.6 Total D – 6.8 Total D – 6.3

 Norah Flatley 2014 2017 Bhs + bhs + layout + sissone + split – B+B+E+A+A = 0.3 CV Bhs + bhs + layout + sissone + split – B+B+E+A+B = 0.2 CV Switch ring – E Switch ring – E Aerial + sheep – D+D = 0.2 CV Aerial + sheep – D+C = 0.1 CV Switch + back pike – C+C = 0.1 CV Switch + back pike – C+C Side aerial – D Side aerial – D L turn – C L turn – C Punch front + wolf – D+A = 0.1 CV Punch front + wolf – D+A Bhs + bhs + 2.5 – B+B+D = 0.1 CV Bhs + bhs + 2.5 – B+B+D = 0.1 CV CR – 2.5 CR – 2.0 Acro – EDDDD – 2.1 Acro – EDDDD – 2.1 Dance – EDC – 1.2 Dance – ECC – 1.1 CV – 0.8 CV – 0.4 Total D – 6.6 Total D – 5.6

## 6 thoughts on “2017 versus 2016: A Beam Comparison Part Deux”

1. dutchposer says:

I’d be ok with the layout gainer dismount staying a D if the judges were as strict with the layout shape as they are on the layout on the beam. No more ugly gainer pikes.

2. Joel says:

The 2016 code specifically mentions “connections of 3 or more” when refering the number of acro elements getting a series bonus. The 2020 code does not….hmmm.

Wow, Norah get’s hammered on D score. I also love the “layout” on some of the descriptions. #Raganfor2017beamchamp #shangchunsongforanymedalever2017-2020

4. Anon says:

Thanks for the recap Spencer, it must take a lot of time and patience to make these comparison posts.

I feel like there is a Romanian gymnast with a high-cut dominatrix leotard and space train choreography missing. Who was she again? Probably some obscure chump who’s never won a beam title.

5. John Rapp says:

Pretty sure the code says no overlapping connections. There is always something at the end with an example. It shows how three different connections could be awarded and says that the judges must pick the one that is in the favor of the gymnast.

6. Anonymous says:

this code making simone and ragan’s dismount J-value lmao