Tuesday, October 29, 2013

The Evolution of Artistry in Women's Gymnastics: 1969-1972


OMG! That routine was so artistic!

FML! Artistry has died, and the sport is so ugly now!

Artistry is all about having lovely balletic lines!

There are many opinions about artistry on the gymternet, but no one has looked at how the Code of Points has defined the term "artistry" over the years. So, in a nutshell, that's what I'm doing. This week, it's the 1968 Code's turn to be scrutinized. As always, we will look at the Code, and then, we will look at how the Code manifested itself in the routines.






As with all Code of Points, the 1968 iteration opened with a brief explanation of the components of a floor exercise. In their explanation, the Women's Technical Committee noted that "The sequences must be varied, original and make the grace, suppleness, and dynamism of the gymnast stand out."

Pretty standard language for the Code of Points. The real kicker, though, was that the sequences were meant to be in accordance with:
  • the level of difficulty throughout the exercise
  • the "morphology of the gymnast"
  • the "temperament of the gymnast"
Last week, I discussed the temperament/personality issue extensively, so I'm going to put that on the back burner. Instead, I want to highlight the phrase "the morphology of the gymnast," a phrase that will make many of my readers' blood boil. Yes, you're reading that correctly. That's an erudite way of saying "body type."

In other words, back in 1968, the issue of body type was not simply reserved for ignorant comments; it was inscribed into the Code. That is to say, on floor, gymnasts were supposed to do movements that fit their body types. I can only imagine what the judges would have said about this video:


More on the issue of "morphology" below…


Monday, October 28, 2013

The Evolution of Artistry in Men's Gymnastics: 1969-1972


OMG! That routine was so artistic!

FML! Artistry has died, and the sport is so boring!

Artistry is all about having lovely balletic lines!

There are many opinions about artistry, but no one on the gymternet has looked at how the Code of Points has defined the term "artistry" over the years. So, that's what I'm doing.  This week, it's the 1968 Code's turn to be scrutinized.





Last week, we saw that the 1964 Code of Points was concise without much explanation. Not so with the next iteration of the Code.

In 1968, the Men's Technical Committee wrote a novel, and that's because--at least in part--the MTC no longer could rely on terms like "harmony" and "rhythm" and expect people to understand what they were talking about. They had to define their terms, and it wasn't easy for them. As we'll see, they were driving the struggle bus, so prepare yourself for many "WTF" moments.

Let's start our journey with the deductions section…



Floor Deductions:


You should recognize these deductions from the 1964 Code.

  • Lack of harmony, rhythm and flexibility [i.e. suppleness in 1964], deduct every time… Up to 0.20
  • Lack of harmony, rhythm, and flexibility during the entire exercise… Up to 1.00

What's different? The 1968 Code of Points actually tried to define terms like "harmony" and "rhythm." But Ooooo EEE! It's hard to follow the FIG's explanations. Let's take a looksy…



What is rhythm?


According to the Code, routines were made up of "accents" and "non-accents." The Code defined accents of movements as "the pushing off of the legs or hands. Accent is also understood as a suspension, or as an acceleration, change in duration or direction of movement, change in radius of the turn."

So, umm, pretty much every skill in gymnastics was an accent? Huh?

It seems that way, doesn't it? But if I may ventriloquize on behalf of Dr. Karl Appelt, the man who wrote the definition of rhythm, not all skills are accented. Appelt was trying to say that gymnasts needed to show tempo and dynamic changes in their routines. They needed to mix big skills with less flashy skills. They needed to mix fast skills with slower skills. They needed to show tension and "relaxation."

Which explains a lot, like, why kicking out of a skill was so popular back in the day. Believe it or not, kicking out wasn't a question of aesthetic beauty. It was a way of fulfilling the demands of the Code. You see, kicking out of a skill was a way of fulfilling the rhythm requirement. Think about a double back that ends in a kick out. The skill showed both tension and relaxation within a certain skill. Tight tuck = Tension. Opening up = Relaxation. In addition, it was a way of changing the speed and rhythm within a skill. Tight tuck = fast. Opening up = Slowing down.

Ergo, rhythm requirement = fulfilled.


Wednesday, October 23, 2013

The 2013-14 Men's NCAA Schedule


Sam Mikulak wants you to go to men's college gymnastics meets! If you go to a Michigan meet, he might even dance for you.


Sorry, I can't get enough of that video. By the way, who are the 15 jerks who gave the video a thumbs down on YouTube? May you be banished to the lowest circle of gymnastics hell where you will tape warted feet for the entirety of your afterlife.

Anyway, below, you'll find a list of NCAA meets. The team listed first and printed in bold for each meet is the host team. I apologize for not listing the times, but the schedules on the teams' websites were rather incongruous.


November 24
  • Oklahoma Intrasquad


November 25-26
  • Navy Intrasquad

December 6
  • William & Mary Intrasquad


December 7
  • Air Force Intrasquad
  • Michigan Intrasquad
  • UIC Mixed Pairs Competition


December 8
  • Iowa Intrasquad
  • Illinois Intrasquad


December 11
  • Penn State Gymnastics Showcase


December 13
  • ASU Intrasquad


December 18
  • OSU Intrasquad

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

The Evolution of Artistry in Women's Gymnastics: 1964


Remember the 10.0 system? Wasn't it perfect?

The 2013 World Championships in Antwerp were the sixth World Championships under the open-ended scoring system. Over the system's short lifespan, many have criticized it. The detractors have posited that the new Code has rendered the sport too confusing for the layperson, that it has mangled execution, that it has killed artistry, among other things.

But wait! Is that really true? Did the open-ended Code kill artistry? When did artistry die? And while we're on the topic, what is artistry, anyway?

In a long series of posts on artistry in women's gymnastics, I am going to look at how the FIG has defined the word artistry over the years. As we will see, the word has always been polemical. It has always been difficult to define. It has always been subject to the question of taste. And it has always been in a state of flux.

I must confess that I've been thinking about this topic for over a year now, and I've struggled to find the best way to present my nerdy research. In the end, I decided that it would be best just to dedicate one post to each Code. That way, you can see the rules, and you can watch the routines that happened under that Code without the post becoming elephantine.

I expect to look at one Code every week. It'll be like a nineteenth-century serialized novel--like The Pickwick Papers of Dickens or Fortunata y Jacinta of Galdós. Yup, it doesn't get much nerdier than this!



Definition of floor: "These exercises must make use of the entire body, contain artistic movements and leaps with vitality, with poses, with balances, with change of pace, with expression."

Strange: No definition of what "artistic movements" entailed.

Please note: Back then, artistry was not synonymous with expression. Artistry had to do with a type of movement. The Code never explained what kind of movement, though. DRAT! (Don't worry, the next Code will expand on this more.)

Monday, October 21, 2013

The Evolution of Artistry in Men's Gymnastics: 1964




Remember the 10.0 system? Wasn't it perfect?

The 2013 World Championships in Antwerp were the sixth World Championships under the open-ended scoring system. Over the system's short lifespan, many have criticized it. The detractors have posited that the new Code has rendered the sport too confusing for the layperson, that it has mangled execution, that it has killed artistry, among other things.

But wait! Is that really true? Did the open-ended Code kill artistry? When did artistry die? And while we're on the topic, what is artistry, anyway?

In a long series of posts on artistry in men's gymnastics, I am going to look at how the FIG has defined the word artistry over the years. As we will see, the word has always been polemical. It has always been difficult to define. It has always been subject to the question of taste. And it has always been in a state of flux.

I must confess that I've been thinking about this topic for over a year now, and I've struggled to find the best way to present my nerdy research. In the end, I decided that it would be best just to dedicate one post to each Code. That way, you can see the rules, and you can watch the routines that happened under that Code without the post becoming elephantine.

I expect to look at one Code every week. It'll be like a nineteenth-century serialized novel--like The Pickwick Papers of Dickens or Fortunata y Jacinta of Galdós. Yup, it doesn't get much nerdier than this!



Definition of a floor exercise: "The exercise on the floor must form a harmonious and rhythmical whole alternating with elements of suppleness and strength, of balance and agility, moving in different directions, with kips, jumps and tumbling movements."

Spoiler alert: This definition will be repeated throughout the rest of the Codes. The wording will vary only slightly.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Women's UTRS: The Best Scores of 2013 Updated October 15

Methinks the vault scoring for the ladies was a bit high in Antwerp


Last year, The All Around created some handy dandy rankings, leading up to the Olympics. This year, not so much. So, I've decided to create the UTRS (Uncle Tim Ranking System), which, for those who care, is pronounced "uterus." Think of my ranking system as a surrogate until The All Around steps in and takes over.

As per usual, take these rankings with a grain of salt. (Pro Tip: Never bet your life savings based on my numbers–or my predictions for that matter.) Judging varies from meet to meet, and as you can see, I've culled these scores from several meets. I've included the competition names so that you can decide how much crack the judges smoked before handing out the scores.

More than anything, you should think of these tables like this: New quad, new Code of Points. What the H is a good score nowadays? Well, let me show you…

Key:

  • Bold Face: An update since the last iteration of the UTRS.
  • An asterisk (*): Usually denotes a routine for which I have a final score without a D score.
  • Links, when available, are provided for the top 5 routines.


Women's All-Around Rankings: Best Scores



Name
Country
Score
Meet
1. Simone BilesUSA60.500U.S. Nationals
1. Kyla RossUSA60.500U.S. Nationals
3. Aliya MustafinaRussia59.850Russian Nationals
4. Giulia SteingruberSwitzerland59.400Swiss Championships
5. Katelyn OhashiUSA59.199American Cup
6. Larisa IordacheRomania58.550Romanian Nationals
7. Brenna DowellUSA58.450U.S. Nationals
8. Peyton ErnstUSA58.250Secret Classic
9. Roxana PopaSpain58.083Spanish Nationals
10. Yao JinnanChina57.965Worlds
11. Anastasia GrishinaRussia57.932European Championships
12. Shang ChunsongChina57.801Chinese National Games
13. Maggie NicholsUSA57.750U.S. Nationals
14. Mykayla SkinnerUSA57.700U.S. Nationals
15. Vanessa FerrariItaly57.600German-Italian Friendly



Men's UTRS: The Best Scores of 2013 Updated October 15



Last year, the All Around created some handy dandy rankings, leading up to the Olympics. This year, not so much. So, I've decided to create the UTRS (Uncle Tim Ranking System), which, for those who care, is pronounced "uterus." Think of my ranking system as a surrogate until The All Around steps in and takes over.

As per usual, take these rankings with a grain of salt. (Pro Tip: Never bet your life savings based on my numbers–or my predictions for that matter.) Judging varies from meet to meet, and as you can see, I've culled these scores from several meets. I've included the competition names so that you can decide how much crack the judges smoked before handing out the scores.

More than anything, you should think of these tables like this: New quad, new Code of Points. What the H is a good score nowadays? Well, let me show you…

Key:

  • Bold Face: An update since the last iteration of the UTRS.
  • An asterisk (*): Usually denotes a routine for which I have a final score without a D score.
  • Links, when available, are provided for the top 5 routines.
  • Parentheses ( ): The U.S. Nationals used a peculiar bonus system. (See image at the bottom.) Even though start value bonus was not in effect, the execution bonus was added to the D score. To the best of my ability, I have adjusted the scores for the U.S. men on the individual apparatus. However, I have not had time to adjust their all-around scores. Consequently, the U.S. men's all-around scores have parentheses around them. 
  • Many, many, many thanks to Chinese Gymnastics Tumblr for their help with the transliteration of names!!


Men's All-Around Rankings: Best Scores





NameCountryScoreMeet
1. Kohei Uchimura
(内村航平)
Japan91.990Worlds
2. Sam MikulakUSA(91.650)U.S. Nationals
3. Liu Rongbing
(刘榕冰)
China90.650East Asian Games
3. Max WhitlockGreat Britain90.650British Championships
5. Alexander NaddourUSA(90.600)U.S. Nationals
6. Oleg Verniaiev
(Олег Верняєв)
Ukraine90.500University Games
7. John OrozcoUSA(90.400)U.S. Nationals
8. Deng Shudi
(邓书弟)
China90.350East Asian Games
9. Zhou Shixiong
(周施雄)
China90.269Chinese National Games
10. Ryohei Kato
(加藤凌平)
Japan90.250University Games
11. Oleg Stepko
(Олег Степко)
Ukraine90.050University Games
12. Cheng Ran
(程然)
China89.969Chinese National Games
13. Nikolai Kuksenkov
(Николай Куксенков)
Russia89.950University Games
14. Fabian HambuechenGermany89.850University Games
15. David Belyavskiy
(Давид Белявский)
Russia89.799European Championships

Friday, October 11, 2013

For Better or Worse: The Event Finals at the 2013 World Championships


Gymnastics fans invest a lot of time and energy into qualifications. We get super jazzed about who's ranked first and who's ranked second and who's ranked last heading into event finals, but deep down, our logical side knows that the rankings are rarely indicative of who will medal. We know that the gymnasts start with a clean slate, and some gymnasts will rise to the occasion and some gymnasts will fall--literally.

Personally, I've always wanted statistics about which gymnasts improved during event finals and which gymnasts flopped. So, with no further ado, here are some charts to help you visualize the most improved gymnasts and the not-so-improved gymnasts.

Let's start with the ladies…


An aside: The judges credited Phan with a double-twisting Yurchnko--not an Amanar.

Many gymnastics fans were disappointed that Giulia Steingruber didn't medal, and I think part of the disappointment stems from the fact that Giulia brought it like Nadia in Montreal, like Chellsie Memmel in Melbourne, like Nastia in Beijing, you get my point…

Not only did Steingruber upgrade her vault from a Yurchenko full to a Yurchenko double full, but she also upped her execution on her handspring rudi (from a 9.166 to a 9.300). The end result: An increase of 0.434 on her two vault average. Unfortunately, Steingruber didn't have enough difficulty to catch Hong Un Jong, who also improved on her prelims score by 0.234.

Thursday, October 10, 2013

2013 World Championships by the Numbers: The Ladies



Well, the World Championships are over, and you're probably wondering what to do with your life. By now, you have rewatched the finals at least twice. You have mastered the latest gymnastics iPhone game. You have e-mailed your 200-page doctoral thesis on the state of gymnastics fashion to the appropriate leotard designers and gymnastics federations. You have taken the time to sketch new designs for each individual gymnast, and you have thought about new haircuts for your favorite gymnasts. Basically, you're the gymnastics version of Tyra Banks on America's Next Top Model.

So, what is there left to do? Look at the numbers. Duh. Let's look at the ladies whom the judges thought were the cleanest on the floor…



Execution Averages During All-Around Finals


Name
Execution Average
Execution Rank
All-Around Rank
Kyla Ross
8.883
1
2
Simone Biles
8.829
2
1
Aliya Mustafina
8.694
3
3
Vanessa Ferrari
8.533
4
6
Larisa Iordache
8.417
5
4
Carlotta Ferlito
8.300
6
11
Yao Jinnan
8.192
7
5
Noemi Makra
8.183
8
14
Asuka Teramoto
8.166
9
9
Ellie Black
8.158
10
13
Shang Chunsong
8.100
11
8
Giulia Steingruber
8.075
12
7
Anna Rodionova
8.072
13
16
Roxana Popa Nedelcu
8.067
14
12
Victoria Moors
7.992
15
10
Gaelle Mys
7.939
16
18
Ruby Harrold
7.850
17
17
Elisabeth Seitz
7.766
18
15
Laura Waem
7.758
19
21
Ilaria Kaeslin
7.717
20
22
Noel Van Klaveren
7.541
21
20
Rebecca Tunney
7.516
22
19
Vasiliki Millousi
7.508
23
24
Natsumi Sasada
7.291
24
23
*Neutral deductions for going out-of-bounds on floor and vault are factored into the execution scores.

Commentary:

1. As we saw with the men, execution matters. The top three all-arounders were the best executioners out there.

2. If elegance and execution are synonymous, then, Kyla Ross earned the Longines Prize for Elegance.

3. Those who rag on Simone Biles's execution, please stop. Compared to her competition, Simone's execution was quite good. When you add things up and look at total execution across all four events, Kyla Ross out-executed Simone by only 0.216, and Simone out-executed Aliya Mustafina by 0.540. Heck, during the all-around finals, Simone out-executed Aliya on every single event, including uneven bars. Sure, every single gymnast has room for improvement in the execution department, but most of the criticism seems to be founded on opinions rather than numbers.

4. You have to give Vanessa Ferrari credit. At the American Cup in March, she averaged 8.350 in execution. She went back in the gym and worked to fix her mistakes, especially on beam. The end result: At Worlds, she averaged 8.533 during the all-around finals. Brava, Vanessa! (Unfortunately, for both Victoria Moors and Elizabeth Seitz, their execution scores were significantly lower at Worlds when compared to their execution scores at the American Cup, but Moors got that double-double, didn't she?)

5. Also mad props to Aliya Mustafina, who improved her execution by 1.411 between prelims and finals! (When I talk about the women, I sound like an athletics awards banquet.)


2013 World Championships by the Numbers: The Dudes


Well, the World Championships are over, and you're probably wondering what to do with your life. By now, you have rewatched the finals at least twice. You have memorized Sam Mikulak's choreography. You have e-mailed Steve Butcher your 100-page master's thesis on the judging at Worlds. (You included your personal execution scores for each routine, of course, because you, as a couch judge, clearly know far more than any judge from Antarctica.) You have vowed to get back in the gym so that your body bears some semblance of your former gymnastics self. You have thought about starting a gymnastics blog, but ultimately, you decided you like sleep, the gym, and/or your social life more.

So, what is there left to do? Look at the numbers. Duh. Let's look at the guys whom the judges thought squeezed their butts the tightest (among other things).



Execution Averages During All-Around Finals


Name
Execution Average
Execution Rank
All-Around Rank
Kohei Uchimura
8.982
1
1
Ryohei Kato
8.772
2
2
Fabian Hambuechen
8.705
3
3
Andrey Likhovitskiy
8.671
4
8
Max Whitlock
8.655
5
4
Daniel Purvis
8.584
6
7
Sam Mikulak
8.525
7
6
Oliver Hegi
8.511
8
23
Casimir Schmidt
8.501
9
18
Fabian Gonzalez
8.494
10
11
Sergio Sasaki
8.475
11
5
Pablo Braeger
8.461
12
16
Arnaud Willig
8.415
13
13
Arthur Oyakawa Mariano
8.323
14
17
Gustavo Palma Simões
8.300
15
19
Lin Chaopan
8.239
16
9
Bart Deurloo
8.222
17
14
Nestor Abad
8.182
18
20
David Belyavskiy
8.162
19
12
Zhou Shixiong
8.155
20
10
Angel Ramos
7.994
21
21
Oleg Verniaiev
7.828
22
15
Park Minsoo
7.666
23
22
*Neutral deductions for going out-of-bounds on floor and vault are factored into the execution scores.


Commentary:

1. Contrary to popular belief, men's gymnastics isn't just about chucking horrific and highly valued skills. Execution actually matters. In fact, it mattered a lot in the all-around final. The top three gymnasts were the best executioners.

2. Oh, Oleg. He has the best toe point in the business, but the worst mental game. Maybe he needs a trip to the Ranch to meet the formidable Marta Karolyi. Maybe she can scare him into living up to his potential.

3. I repeat myself: Sergio Sasaki, for the love of Nemov, clean up your form! I beg you! You could be even better than you are right now! (If you can't tell, I want, like, a 10-way tie for first next year.)

4. On GymCastic last October, I talked about Andrey Likhovitskiy. In short, if you like clean, simple gymnastics, he's your man. Unfortunately, I doubt that, at the age of 27, he will ever upgrade to the point that he will place in the top 5 at a World Championships or Olympic Games, but he certainly is beautiful to watch. (I also think he looks a little like Oksana Chusovitina's cousin.)

Which brings me to my next table…


Saturday, October 5, 2013

2013 World Championships: On Brandon Wynn's Inquiry

To refresh our memories, here are the results from today's rings final:


  1. Arthur Zanetti, Brazil, 15.800 (6.8 D)
  2. Aleksandr Balandin, Russia, 15.733 (6.9 D)
  3. Brandon Wynn, USA, 15.666 (6.7 D)


When Brandon Wynn's score flashed, he sat in third position--a rather precarious place to be with three gymnasts left to perform. Team USA, however, thought that Brandon should be in second.

You see, Brandon competed the same routine during prelims and was awarded a 6.8 D score. But in finals, he was awarded a 6.7 D score. Confused, the coaches filed an inquiry, hoping to bump up his D score to a 6.8.

In the end, the inquiry was rejected, and Brandon's D score remained unchanged. This left many gymnastics fans wondering what changed between prelims and finals. How did Brandon's D score drop a whole tenth? Here's what I think happened…


Thursday, October 3, 2013

2013 World Championships All-Around Recapped





Rotation 1

Chinese and Japanese gymnasts: Slowly killing the ozone layer one can of hairspray at a time. 






Zhou Shixiong struggled to stay in bounds. On his double double tuck, he stepped out, and when he tried to cover up a bad landing with a prone fall, he fell out of bounds. Oops. Nothing gets by the gym gods. Nothing. 14.833


Max Whitlock went for his harder pommel horse routine today (7.2 vs. 6.6), hoping to give himself more leverage against the leaders. The plan worked. He scored a 15.633, which was 0.225 better than his score in prelims.

It would have been even higher if he didn't have such a lead bottom when circling. He's probably kicking himself for scraping the pommel with his hamstring!


Lin Chaopan: As I said on Twitter, unless you have a ring tucked in your leo and unless you plan to propose, there's no need to take a knee during your floor routine.

Uncle Tim's score: No.
The judge's score: 14.466


Oleg Verniaiev hit his rings routine for a 14.733.







Sam Mikulak schooled the boys on how to stick on floor. 15.366.







Cheer up, Mr. Judgy Pants!

You're staring at Sam Mikulak's butt!

Do you know how many people in the world envy your view?




Kohei Uchimura proved that you don't need 7.4 in difficulty in order to post a massive score on floor. With his 6.4 routine, he scored a 15.558, the highest floor score of the competition. The routine started off a little shaky with hops on the back 3/2 to Randi and front 1/1 to front 2/1, but by the time he got to his back 2.5 to rudi, he was spot on.

In true Japanese style, he opened up out of his triple twist dismount and stuck it. Aliya Mustafina, I hope that you were in the arena. THAT's how you do a triple full.



To refresh your memory, Aliya Mustafina's triple twist: Brought to you by the number 4.








Fabian Hambuechen got so excited that he made it through a pommel horse routine without falling that he almost Uchimura-ed his dismount. 13.333





It is acceptable to land like an airplane if and only if you are doing a double-double on the straight away. Sergio Sasaki and his teammate Arthur Oyakawa threw the hardest floor routines in the all-around finals. Sergio opened with a front double pike to barani, which he followed up with a back 1.5 to punch double front.

If he keeps this up, by next year, he should be able to challenge Denis Ablyazin in difficulty without all the twisting of Shirai Kenzo. 15.133.

Leaders after 1 rotation: 1. Max Whitlock, 15.633 2. Kohei Uchimura, 15.558 3. Ryohei Kato, 15.500 4. Sam Mikulak, 15.366 5. Andrey Likhovitskiy, 15.000

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

2013 Worlds: Introducing the Peloton of the Men's All-Around


Kohei Uchimura is poised to claim his fourth consecutive all-around title. So much has been said about the Superman of Gymnastics, and unless I dedicate a sonnet in iambic pentameter to him, I really have nothing new to add to the conversation. So, I've decided to focus my time and energy on the other guys.

For me, the men's all-around competition will be about the battle for silver and bronze. You see, there's quite a large peloton chasing Kohei Uchimura, and it's unclear how things will shake out. But I'm going to take a stab at it anyway.

Here are my personal rankings of the Kohei chasers:



2T. Sam Mikulak, USA
Qualifying Rank: 2
AA Score: 89.532
Event finals: High Bar

If there were a Mr. Congeniality award, Sam would win it. No doubt. When he isn't being Dance Cam Sam, he's off being Sam the Executioner. Of the peloton, Sam Mikulak had the best execution score during qualifications, averaging 8.789 across the six events. (Kohei averaged 8.971.) Since Sam has a mediocre difficulty score (36.9), he needs all the tenths he can get in order to keep pace with his competitors. In the past, Sam has struggled on pommel horse, and one slip-up could send him to the end of the pack.

Where to watch Sam: High Bar (Video) and Parallel Bars and most landings



Men's Qualifications Round-Up: Day 2

If you couldn't tell from the watermark, this is from Inside Gym.



Ri Se Gwang


Many (myself included) were hoping for a showdown between South Korea and North Korea, between Yang Hak Seon and Ri Se Gwang. But alas, it is not to be.


On his piked Dragulescu, Ri Se Gwang almost rammed his head into the vault, almost becoming forehead twinsies with Tatiana Nabieva.

Seriously, poor thing! I remember when I got rug burn on my nose. Ugh.

Unfortunately, this means we won't see Ri Se Gwang in the vault final.