kinda weird choreo, but I appreciate there is some "personality" to the routine rather than totally random movements with no intention. I got psycho or dualing personality vibes from it - part dark-part lighthearted.
Brillant?? The code of point has some problem... this floor deserve 11 big max.. it's a joke.... look the gym in 90' so much difficulty and now whit a double tuck max to termin in 6 place olympic final....😂🙃 sorry sonething it's wrong.. 2 gym per country it's a joke too...🤮😡
@@joym1463 this would score a 14.2 in last code probably. It's because she gets a DDE with those turns, C+C, D with leaps, and doesn't get deductions with those bc her form is good. and only does 2 tumbles which minimizes deductions
@@zb6070agreed, the problem with the COP is that execution deductions have gotten so harsh that gymnasts really can score just as high with low difficulty tumbling, especially if you can milk the high value spins. In the 2024 COP you can only do one wolf turn but if somebody like Derwael can probably do a double L spin pretty well also, maybe even connect it for 0.1 CV.
@@poshbo If Nina can do a consistent double L, her dance difficulty can compensate for her lack of E+ tumblings. Considering that most gymnasts count at least one B dance element due to devaluation, the EDDCC dance difficulty is very competitive in the 2022-2024 COP.
@@cocoroni1031 agreed. The Chinese are now also milking the spins; Ou Yushan for example does the Mitchell, Double L and Double Y and when she hits her DV is solid.
Yes! i’d rather watch this than Jade Carey’s FX. Impressive tumbling passes but absolutely no expression or personality in the rest of her routine. Completely robotic.
Who cares about the tumbling difficulty? Shouldn't the code allow for choices/styles? If a gymnast can compensate for less difficult tumbling with dance elements and turns, who really cares? It's not like she's cheating....the code is the code.
Why all the hate? Yes, the tumbling is "easy", but she is artistic and her choreo special. I prefer this so much more than difficult tumbling with a boring choreo without dance moves
Looks like a failed attempt at boginskaya's combined floor routines from '88 and '89 but minus the tumbling cause Svetlana had comparably harder tumbles than Nina.
Why is here so much hate? She is a tall gymnast and it is much harder for her to tumble. I enjoy this routine much more than routines like from MyKayla Skinner where she just puts hard skills in it, but executes very poorly
It isn’t even all about the tumbling like yeh I would like to see more difficult tumbling from her but watch athletes like lieke wevers floor (watch her 2019 routine from worlds podium training it’s my all time fav floor routine) and she is praised for it because of not just how artistic and elegant her dance is but also how she has difficulty in the dance elements even though she lacks in the power department. In my opinion she is actually quite under scored a lot of the time. Then compare that to Nina who is out here dancing like… well… that. It’s about the ugly dancing and lack of difficulty in the dance elements and to add to that she is way over scored.
The floor choreography is awesome and you know that if it had been performed by the Soviet gymnast in 1989 gymnternet would have been falling over themselves to praise it
Not surprised or upset by her score. She had two 0.3 deduction (landing on her second pass and switch split ring). Other than that, there were only 0.1 deductions. Fewer skills means lower D-score, but higher E-score as long as the elements are clean. Double Y-turn - 0.1 for imprecision (over-rotated) Double back salto - 0.1 for step Split 1/1 - 0.1 for imprecision (over-rotated) Back 3/2 + front 1/1 (0.3 for bent legs and large step on landing) Wolf 3/1 - 0.1 for over-rotation and 0.1 for excessive arm movements Wolf 2/1 - 0.1 for over-rotation, 0.1 for excessive arm movements, and 0.1 for lack of balance at the end Switch split ring - 0.3 for insufficient ring position and 0.1 for insufficient head release That's 1.5 in deductions which gives you an 8.5 E-score.
Yes, but there are no artistry deductions in your breakdown, and pretty much everyone gets those. What about the fact that her movements don't match the music (that's up to a possible 0.3)? Is she portraying a character or reflecting the musical theme? That's 0.1. Performance of the entire exercise as a series of disconnected elements & movements? That's another 0.1 eugymnastics.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/cop_wag_2017-2020_ici-e1.pdf, see section 13, page 4. I'm not saying that she should get all of these but if some aren't relevant, then whose floor exercise should get deducted for these? I have no objection to her working the code in her favour. It's a perfectly fair competitive strategy - do low difficulty, but with cleaner execution on three events, and higher difficulty with less focus on keeping it as clean on uneven bars. But this routine should have been deducted for artistry, and frankly, the Belgian team needs to hire a better choreographer who understands the brief. I haven't checked your breakdown, but if you're right about how they levied the 1.5 in deductions and there were no artistry deductions, then that 13.5 was a gift.
Fun fact: at the 2016 Olympics Nina was the one who got the least artistic deductions in floor exercise, with only one of the judges in the panel taking 0.1 off in artistry deductions.
@@RobeDuarte Well, as all the financial adverts tell you to make sure you understand that there isn't a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, "past performance is not indicative of future results". So here's my fun prediction, with this routine, she should get artistry deductions because if she does not, no one is getting artistry deductions in Tokyo.
@@RobeDuarte All judging is subjective, so duh. But there are rules. Ask yourself: if this routine doesn't get artistry deductions according to the rules, then should anyone's? What about, for example, Jade Carey's? Or indeed anyone who really struggles with this aspect of execution? Execution deductions are not some sort of valuation for the inherent worth of anyone's character. They're an aspect of the rules that exist to put the best to the worst routines in the correct order, according to the rules. And you can't have a rule that you interpret one way for one person, and another way for another person just because the latter has long lines, or is your favourite. Judging is necessarily subjective, but it should still be fair.
@@leizhang8423 Absolutely ridiculous that this is considered elite in 2021, this level of tumbling is actually weaker than many gymnast did in the 70's.
I REALLY CANT WITH THE HATE IN THESE COMMENTS! Can y’all just cut her some slack?!?! Yes, she’s not a powerful tumbler but she tries her best with what she can do! She got a 13.5 fair and square! As for the choreography… lol it’s quirky but it’s very Nina and if she likes it that’s what matters. IMO I loved her 2019 routine and wouldve liked to see it at the Olympics
Choreography is original, I enjoyed it!! Regarding the hate, I couldn't agree more! What's the need??? She's not as good on floor as on bars, so what?? That gives you right to laugh at her? Come on...
@@notafrog4967 would you deduct more than 1.5 in execution??? Cuz this was a very clean routine with good landings and great leaps, 8.5 is a very accurate execution score. You can’t deduct for lack of difficulty. 5.0 D score + 8.5 E score = 13.5
@@RobeDuarte My breakdown Double y turn; - 0.1 for lack of precision Double back (tucked); - 0.1 small step Switch full; - 0.1 for over rotation + - 0.1 for flexed foot Backward 3/2 twist in layout position; - 0.1 for crossed legs + - 0.1 *x2* for flexed feet + - 0.1 bent leg Front full layout position; - 0.1 legs crossed. (Debatable) + - 0.3 for medium step on the landing (could give another 0.3 deduction for a second step but she kinda covered it up) Triple wolf turn; - 0.1 excessive arm movement + - 0.1 over rotation Double wolf; - 0.1 for excessive arm movement + - 0.1 over rotation + - 0.1 lack of balance at the end Switch ring; - 0.1 insufficient arch of upper back + - 0.1 insufficient head release + - 0.1 flexed front foot (the angle that was filmed of the ring leap was very poor and these are the deductions that I thought I could see) Artistry deductions - 0.1 for a series of disconnected elements or movements. -0.1 movements that did not match the music. Artistry deductions are very subjective. Total deductions: 2.2 E score: 7.8 You could easily get a 7.8 like I did here or even lower in her e score. If I had taken that extra 0.3 for the step which she kinda somewhat covered up her e score would be 7.5!!!
And she termin 6th place at Olympic with this floor!!😧 the code of point at a (big) problème... i hate this floor routine. For this level, it's a joke. Just before i look some of olympic 96. What a big level... and now that...🤨
@@clemencecadorel6478 Honestly! What on earth do these judges see in Nina? I mean just deduct her fairly and accurately like they do with everyone else..
Everyone mad at her just because she tries to use the code in her favor. Chill people, everyone tries to to do the best with what they can! Leave her be! A 13.5 is accurate because she has a 5.0 difficulty and she’s clean! Deal with it.
As a dancer I find it grotesque and classeles. This routine borders on the ridiculous... She should be penalized. Her hilarious movements doesn't match with this classical music.
That's why she participated at Dancing with the Stars in Belgium and won it. Her previous choreographer retired and her dance choreographers will create a new routine for her.
Well, this was interesting to watch...I'm not sure if you would call this dancing as I thought it was just a string of awkward movements linked together. Not even sure what the story is lol.
