Do judges really hold back higher scores in the beginning of the meet?

[jsfofec]

Just by sitting and observing, I think what happens sometimes is the judges don't want to get "trapped in a corner". Let's say the very first gymnast of the meet goes out and does an absolutely outstanding routine. The judges are in a tough spot, if they go too high, and better routines show up, they will find themselves giving really high scoring. Then if they go to low and nobody else comes out and performs as well as the first gymnast, suddenly the scoring goes too low.

To me it seems like early on they are just looking for their base. Sometimes you see them going back and looking at notes/deductions of an earlier gymnast to see what they did for that one in comparison to the one they are currently scoring.

In the end, scoring is relevant for the current meet only. Whether high or low, it fits that particular meet and usually the right person wins. You really can't compare scoring meet to meet, because each meets atmosphere is different, just like the scoring.

 

[Krystan]

I find all this very interesting since I'm fairly new to the sport. For some reason I thought judges weren't supposed to rank gymnasts. I thought they were just supposed to score each routine individually? Clearly that is not what's happening, but is that what is "supposed" to happen? Just curious really.