Well, I do not think I ever will be able to thank the too generous (courageous) contributor who allowed me to perform this judging analysis of the Trampoline Finals in London. Please note that for simplification purpose, Jason’s marks were not included in the Men, Victoria’s only affected the number of marks in for one judge.


I did the exact similar exercises than I did for the Men in 2008. In this category, it is easy to say that the quality of judging was much higher in London. The Bulgarian Mariela Stoycheva did not beat the Swedish Martin Thorsson’s record four years ago (7 out of his 8 marks went in!) but, she was the best with 5 in. “Dani” and “Kuba” are right behind with 4. Peter Heames was a bit “off” (to say the least) since he only got 2 in.

I have always considered a good judge, someone who is able to make the difference between what is good from what is REALLY good. From what is not that good to what is REALLY bad. At that game, Miguel Vicente made UEG proud and took most risks with a 2.3 variation! As much as he finishes well ahead, unfortunately and yet again, Peter finishes behind with only 1 point variation. I suggest they consider him as Chair for the Men and DD for the Women in Rio.

As far as the girls are concerned, it is not as clear… If “Vivi” finishes first with 5 marks in as well, he had the safest judging of all since his variation was the lowest with 1.2. While “Kuba” got 4 in again, “Dani” is the one who took most risks with a 2.8 variation: “Hop Schweiz!” Almost surprisingly since she did so well with the Men, Mariela ends last in the Women with only 2 scores in and another “safe” 1.4 variation.

Three judges were on both Men and Women’s panels. If you add all the criteria I used for this study (i.e. number of marks in, difference between lowest and highest mark, total variations of marks) my old Polish friend “Kuba” (we did compete together kind of 20 years ago in Swidnica) wins Gold! “Dani” is close behind and earns a very well deserved Silver while Mariela’s substandard performance in the Women’s lands her Bronze.

Now, the newer part for me: Reference judging! Looking at Men’s results, I was surprised by some of the “weird” E Scores (Ushakov, Lu and Ueyama). After quite some time spent self educating, I did understand why and will not waste time commenting these.

What I did though, is simulating what would have happened had the Reference judging been used instead of Execution. And, there, it gets REALLY interesting. As far as the Men are concerned, Masaki would have finished 2nd, Dima 3rd and Lu 4th! As far as the Women are concerned, Karen would have finished 3rd, Savannah 4th, Wenna 5th and Tania 6th.

Since we are talking about Trampoline judging, everyone will have a different opinion. Having said that, since they were the “references”, you would think they would be better judges… Therefore, how come they were not on the Execution Panel where it REALLY counts? I will leave the answers to Japan and Canada…

Related Posts: