New Quad, Same Nonsense


The FIG published a document yesterday titled “Technical Regulations 2020,” which discusses the rules and regulations regarding FIG competitions in the coming years.

Much of the information serves to confirm information we already know, like the format for world championships and world cups for each discipline, age eligibility and other rules pertaining to the athletes competing internationally, what the local organizing committee is responsible for…but in the middle of the document, there’s a section highlighting the special regulations for artistic gymnastics, which includes some updated rules about world championships going forward into the next quad.

We took a deep dive into this document today, and below, we highlight the biggest changes that will affect world championships in the coming years, as well as our thoughts on how these changes will affect the sport and its athletes.

Qualifying to World Championships

World championships are now referred to as “team and individual world championships” in the second and third years of the Olympic cycle (aka 2022 and 2023 in the next quad), and they require nations to qualify through continental championships and apparatus world cups.

Here’s a breakdown of how nations can qualify teams and individual gymnasts:

Criteria 1 – Continental Championships (Teams)

  • 24 men’s teams (120 men) qualify through continental championships
  • 24 women’s teams (120 women) qualify through continental championships
  • For the world championships in year 3 (the pre-Olympic year), the top 8 teams from the previous world championships automatically qualify and do not have to qualify through continental championships in year 3
  • Teams may participate at world championships with 4-5 gymnasts and 1 reserve gymnast

Criteria 2 – Continental Championships (Individuals)

  • 40 men’s all-arounders qualify through continental championships by name (max. 2 per country without a team qualified)
  • 49 women’s all-arounders qualify through continental championships by name (max. 2 per country without a team qualified)

Criteria 3 – Apparatus World Cup Rankings (Individuals)

  • 48 men’s apparatus specialists by name (max., 8 per apparatus, 2 per country)
  • 32 women’s apparatus specialists by name (max., 8 per apparatus, 2 per country)
  • The qualified gymnasts will only be allowed to compete on the apparatus they qualified for
  • Gymnasts from a team qualified through Criteria 1 and individuals qualified through Criteria 2 may compete in the apparatus world cup series but will not be eligible to qualify to world championships through Criteria 3

The FIG also notes that federations that don’t qualify a full team can qualify a maximum of five men and five women individually. There are also a number of rules that get into how countries tie-break their own gymnasts if more than five individuals meet qualification standards, as well as rules that break down how unused spots are reallocated to other federations – like if the host country qualifies a team or an all-arounder, their spot will be reallocated to the continent to which the host country belongs – but this is a little too in-depth for us right now so let’s just stick to the basics.

Basically, putting this in a real-life situation, federations will have to send teams to continental championships in 2022 to qualify a full team to worlds later that year, the top eight teams at worlds in 2022 will automatically qualify a full team to 2023 world championships, and then the remaining 16 teams will again have to qualify at continental championships in 2023 to get back to worlds that year.

The FIG has also decided how many teams from each continent are able to qualify to worlds, with Europe getting the most – 13 for both MAG and WAG – while Oceania and Africa each gets only a single team spot.

Screen Shot 2019-08-17 at 1.07.27 PM

It seems the FIG just took a look at last year’s top 24 to determine how to move forward. In 2019, Europe placed 14 teams in the top 24, the Americas placed five teams, Asia placed four, and Oceania placed one, so the FIG took away one of Europe’s spots to leave one for Africa – Egypt qualified 25th in 2019, finishing just outside the bubble – but otherwise, the numbers match exactly.

For the men, however, it’s a bit different. 16 of the top 24 teams at worlds last year came from Europe, with Asia placing five teams in the top 24, the Americas placing three teams, and Oceania and Africa both finishing outside. To even things out a bit, Europe is being limited to 13 team qualifiers going forward, while Asia and the Americas get five and four, respectively, and Oceania and Africa will each get one guaranteed team spot.

European Championships has historically been the most competitive and exciting of the continental meets, but now with these qualification rules, it’s looking like the competition is going to heat up even more, with federations now more likely to send top athletes to ensure a spot. It seems unlikely that a top European program will place outside the top 13 at a continental meet, but last year, the Ukrainian men finished 13th exactly, with Norway less than a point behind them, and for the women, Romania also finished almost out of contention, so it’s totally possible that teams we might expect to see in a worlds final might not even make it to worlds as a team.

I kind of like the idea of teams qualifying for world championships, but at the same time, I think it’s going to make life much more difficult for smaller programs that lack depth and must prepare to peak twice in the same year. The Czech Republic, for example, would not have qualified a women’s team to world championships in 2018 based on how they competed at European Championships just two months earlier, but then at world championships, the women finished 24th.

It might not seem like a big deal to most people that the Czech Republic could’ve gotten a raw deal last year, but for smaller programs like these, international results matter not only to grow the program, but to keep the current program running and funded. Many programs that are nationally funded are in trouble as it is, and there are often impossible ultimatums like “if you don’t have a gymnast make the all-around final at worlds, we’re not funding worlds next year.” I can totally see programs cutting funding if a team doesn’t qualify to worlds, and so this is potentially going to have incredibly negative affects for the already struggling small programs, even if they do still have the opportunity to qualify individuals.

For the most part, a team that places 14th at Euros or 5th at Pan Ams isn’t at all likely to make the team final or qualify a full team to the Olympic Games, so I get why the FIG wants to cut it down to just those that would have even a slight chance at getting in, and I get why for the pre-Olympic year it makes sense to limit the field to just those with the biggest chance at qualifying to the Olympics.

But for many of the federations that compete at worlds, it’s not about medaling or making the final or even qualifying to the Olympics. Most of the federations that choose to send full teams to the mid-quad world championships do so because this is the only opportunity they’ll ever have to put a full team out on the world stage, and this experience helps them grow as a program. Taking that away from them sucks, and is a major blow to programs trying to grow the sport.

I also don’t like that programs will essentially have to peak twice a year, first to make it to worlds, and then to do well at worlds. Programs with a lot of depth, like the United States for the women or China for the men, could send B-teams to the qualifiers and things will work out just fine for them, but most countries struggle to put a team together even once a year, and so a lot of teams that could realistically make the top 24 at worlds could end up missing out on worlds entirely.

Take Mexico, for example. Last year, the Mexican team performed incredibly well at world championships, finishing 19th to qualify a full team to this year’s worlds. However, next quad, it wouldn’t have mattered that Mexico looked great at last year’s worlds. That result will essentially be meaningless, because the qualifier to this year’s worlds would’ve been Pan Am Games for Mexico. Going into Pan Ams, a series of injuries and other issues caused about six gymnasts to drop out prior to the competition, and the girls that were left only managed to finish seventh, and they would’ve missed qualifying to this year’s worlds based on this result.

Of course, the Mexican federation could’ve opted to put slightly injured athletes on the Pan Am Games team to hope for the best, but this is incredibly risky, and not fair to the gymnasts. By risking them to put up a top-notch performance at Pan Ams, it could put them in jeopardy for world championships and thus the Olympic Games, as worlds acts as a qualifier for the Olympics.

It looks like the FIG is opening up the individual qualification to 88 men and 81 women, so combined with the teams, both the men and women will have just over 200 competitors, which is pretty similar to what we see now without qualifiers (though that’s assuming all of the all-around and apparatus quota spots are filled; we could end up with less).

As a whole, the qualifying rules won’t be super limiting, and I think there will be very few nations that miss out completely. I also like that by setting a quota standard instead of a minimum score standard, a gymnast with a bad day won’t miss her chance to qualify as long as she still ranks well enough. However, the “standard” they set is so low. Without a qualifier in 2018, a total of 229 women competed at worlds, and this new “standard” allows for 201 women. If you’re only going to cut two dozen people from qualifying, what’s the point of having a standard at all?

Though I’m personally against limiting countries from participating at world championships, I do understand the reasoning for some sort of standard at the world level. We sometimes see some gymnasts at these competitions who would barely be optional-level gymnasts in the U.S. Junior Olympic program, so it makes sense to ensure that the athletes in an elite competition are, in fact, “elite”…but I’m also conflicted knowing that opportunities like world championships is how smaller or newer programs grow, and those smaller programs with almost no resources are now going to be pushed even further back.

I actually happen to love many of the smaller programs who might now be in danger of not getting to compete at worlds. I look forward to qualifications more than any other day at a major championships like worlds, and even though the skill level might be a bit behind for some, many are doing super solid work and are lovely to watch.

Had I not gone to qualifications in 2017, I would have missed out on Bulgarian gymnast Yoana Yankova’s floor routine. With a score of 11.033, she finished 94th out of 111 gymnasts on this apparatus, but she was an absolutely gorgeous performer with some of the best artistry in the field. Had I not gone to qualifications at Euros this year, I would’ve missed the tidy and precise routines from Luxembourg’s Celeste Mordenti, who scored just a 45 in the all-around, but had an excellent day and looked so thrilled to finish strong.

There are dozens of gymnasts who will never make a final at a world cup or continental championships, but the work that they put into their routines and performances to become the top gymnasts in their countries doesn’t make them “less” than a gymnast who can score 15 points higher to be the best gymnast in her country. Olympic gold is realistic for only a few. The majority of gymnasts who spend more than a thousand hours in the gym every year to become the best in their country, many with only the bare minimum of resources, will never get the chance for Olympic gold, but they’ve more than earned the opportunity to compete at world championships and I don’t see the point in taking this away from them.

One of my favorite memories at worlds last year was seeing the utter joy on Cayman gymnast Raegan Rutty’s face as she spent a half hour skipping, leaping, and posing for photos with her country’s flag in the Doha arena after qualifications. Raegan’s highest international all-around score is just a 42.133, but she’s the best gymnast to come out of the Cayman Islands thus far, inspired by a few others who got similar high-level experiences before her, first with Bethany Dikau competing at the Commonwealth Games in 2014, and then with Morgan Lloyd reaching world championships a year later.

Representation matters, and for a gymnast like Raegan, seeing other gymnasts from her program get these opportunities before her is what helped her want to grow and become better so she could take her country’s program even further, and it would be a shame for someone like her to not in turn be able to inspire younger gymnasts to break her records and keep that growth moving forward.

The good news is that for the individual world championships in the first year of the Olympic cycle, any federation is allowed to compete regardless of any qualifying rules, so gymnasts like Raegan will get at least one chance to reach the world stage…but I still feel like allowing every federation the opportunity to send gymnasts to every world championships outweighs the need for setting a standard, especially when the number of athletes attending pretty much will not change.

Based on the numbers, pretty much every nation that opted to attend in 2018 is going to qualify in the future, minus just a handful of countries that will be left out. If they are “setting a standard,” it’s not a very high one, so why not just let everyone compete?

Competing at World Championships

Nothing has changed between this quad in the next in terms of the world championships format, including how many gymnasts will be able to compete. Like this quad, for countries that are eligible to send full teams to worlds in the future, it looks like we’re stuck with just five gymnasts per team, and the team format remains 5-4-3 in qualifications as well as 5-3-3 in the team final.

Additionally, in the team final, the FIG is going to keep up with alternating between teams on each event – e.g. China’s first gymnast vaults, the first U.S. gymnast vaults, China’s second gymnast vaults, the second U.S. gymnast vaults, and so on – which was new to the sport this quad.

The biggest change is that it seems like the FIG is trying to squeeze all 200+ competitors into just a single day of qualifying rather than spreading them over two days.

Screen Shot 2019-08-17 at 2.12.27 PM

With just five subdivisions for the women, it means there will be 40 gymnasts in each subdivision, and for the men, we’ll see about 60 in each of the three subdivisions, which is basically double what we have now. Qualifications will now work more like a team final, with two teams (or one team and one mixed group, or two mixed groups) per event rather than just one.

Doubling the subdivision’s size means it’s going to take twice as long to complete each of them, so athletes will have to get used to that adjustment…and it also means the judges will be working almost nonstop from morning until night on these qualification days, which could absolutely affect how they’re scoring between the earlier and later subdivisions.

Another major change is related to the individual world championships in the first year of the cycle, but we won’t see this take place until 2025. In 2021, we’ll still see six men and four women allowed to compete for each country, but the subsequent quad, the FIG is limiting these numbers to just three men and three women.

Something About Brenda made the point that this is going to “totally kill the all-around competition at the post-Olympic world championships.” The biggest reason for this isn’t that only three total can compete, but that only two can compete on each event in qualifications, which allows for either two all-arounders, or one all-arounder and two specialists at most.

For a majority of countries, the all-around final will now be one-per-country for many nations that are depleted in a post-Olympic year and would rather capitalize on apparatus finals. For the men’s competition especially, I wouldn’t be surprised to see most nations send groups of three specialists, with only the very best all-arounders competing all events, and it’s only the deeper programs – like the U.S. women’s program – that would be likely to send two all-arounders who could also be in the mix for apparatus finals.

This would be the most efficient way to capitalize on this format, but most of the “sure bet” apparatus contenders aren’t all-arounders. Thinking about 2017, for example, Russia would’ve been better off putting up Maria Paseka on vault, Anastasia Iliankova on bars, and Elena Eremina on all four than they would’ve been putting Eremina and Angelina Melnikova in the all-around. I’d expect this to be the way of things for most programs.

Article by Lauren Hopkins

30 thoughts on “New Quad, Same Nonsense

  1. I agree with pretty much all of this except two things…:
    One, there isn’t a lot of differentiation between 2022 and 2023, it’s still 24 teams in both. It’s good because just because 2022 wasn’t a good year, you still have a chance in 2023. But it’s still a bit strange as generally as you get closer to the OG, you want to narrow the field down.
    Second, I completely disagree with the sending 3 athletes and two spots in qual, complete AA kill for sure. I wish they would change that. The old system was better with 6 and 4 and 3 up in qual.


    • I totally agree with you re: the three athletes for two spots in qualifications. It’s really only going to work for big/super deep programs, like the U.S. women and Japanese men, who can send two all-arounders to capitalize on AA medals and EF medals. Other countries are all going to have to send either 1 AAer and 2 specialists, or all specialists, which sucks. The AA field will be so depleted.


      • What makes you think Japanese MAG could bring up 2 all-arounder instead of China? Remember in recent World Championships China went 1 and 2, 2 and 4, where Japan was nowhere near. Or did you already assume that Japanese newbies could do better than, say, Xiao, Lin, Sun or Deng? This unconscious bias is quite annoying.


  2. I may be in the minority but ma favorite moments during Europeans or Worlds is to watch all the subdivisions during qualifications: only one or twice a year I have this opportunity to see at the the same time all gymnast showing their level and the countries strategies to go further than this phase. And when you start following gymnasts from many countries, it’s a real pleasure to see them perform along the favorites. This moment is as important for them as it is for the top contenders even if their chances to qualify are slimmer. I hope I’m not the only one to enjoy watching gymnasts from Slovenia (Adela Sajn), Egypt, Hungary, Australia, Venezuela or Norway. I’ve heard that some find these qualifications too long and fastidious but I think we can accept than once a year, the top gymnasts from each delegation can perform during the World Championships even if that means the QX process takes 1 or 2 more days.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Agreed! Qualifications are my favorite part of worlds or Euros, and this year for worlds, I chose to go to qualifications only instead of going to the finals because qualifications is the only time I get to see all of my favorites who compete for smaller programs. Norway is one of my favorite teams, I think their gymnasts are so underrated, but there are lots of programs like Norway that would be at risk for not qualifying to worlds now and it doesn’t seem fair at all that these gymnasts who work so hard might not get to compete at the biggest meet of the year just because the organizers want to cut things down.


      • And I must say that the QX in Doha 2018 were the weirdest I have ever seen as a spectator: no queuing, 5 seats for myself, seeing the same people in the audience every day, sitting next to gymnasts who had finished their qualifications, etc… I talked to people I never imagined I could. I’ve seen local or regional meets that were more crowded than these Championships. It must have been strange for the gymnasts too to perform in a nearly empty arena and to be watched by the “gymnastics world” only. But such a joy to be able to see Carlos Edriel Yulo, Farah Ann Abdul Hadi, Alexa Moreno or Sofus Heggemsnes! I hope the changes won’t turn the gymnastics into an elite club. Let’s not forget that there are champions from “minor” countries who probably wouldn’t be able to show their skills if there were too many restrictions.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Me too! I also only got tickets for qualifications and looking so much forward to it. I am always so sad, if there is no possibility to watch the qualifications. I know it’s probably quite expensive to stream events like this. But I think it would be just the appreciation these atletes (training so many hours a week for so many years) would deserve – being seen once a year.
        I also found it interesting that when I went with my group of girls to meetings like Bundesliga they kind of enjoy also watching the gymnast with lower skills, because it is easier for them to compare them with themselfes. They are always happy when they find skill which they even can do with training 2-3 times a week 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • That’s amazing to hear about Bundesliga! I love watching the Bundesliga meets (what I can find online) and love seeing German gymnasts I might not otherwise get to see internationally. It’s why I also really look forward to qualifications at worlds, because I never get to see gymnasts from the smaller programs, even when I follow their nationals results, it’s rare that they upload the video. Worlds is the once chance we get to see every country’s top gymnasts, and that’s why I go out of my way to attend qualifications for all of these meets! I wish they would stream them as well.


  3. I agree with your personal feeling that participation shouldn’t be limited. I don’t care if some small, poor, unknown country has gymnasts doing Level 8 skills at World Championships. If they’re paying their FIG dues, who cares? It in no way detracts from the excitement and high level of the medal races. Let them come and compete and participate. Let them make contacts with richer countries, maybe get a little advice from high level coaches, and get inspired by higher-level athletes. This decade’s “nothing country” could be next decade’s 15th place team, which could be next decade’s 8th place team. And don’t we want the joy of gymnastics to spread and flourish in all continents?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Fully agreed. If all 195 countries in the world somehow managed to send 5 gymnasts in 2018, then yeah, almost 1000 gymnasts for WAG and another 1000 for MAG would have been nuts. But at most, around 250 end up showing up for each, and I don’t see how that’s “too many” but 200 isn’t?! When they said they wanted qualifications to “limit” the field, I assumed they were gonna cut it down by a lot, but if you’re gonna allow 200, you might as well allow everyone, and if they’re the best in their country, they deserve to go to worlds, period.


      • Exactly. You’re not cutting it by a significant amount to be positive, but just enough to be negative. In a weirdly opposite way, it’s the same argument I have for allowing 3 gymnasts-per-country into the AA final. Limiting to 2 per country was supposed to open up more participation for other countries, but because of the need to take specialist in the 3-up-count format, there are usually no more than 3 strong countries who even have 3 girls competing AA in qualifications where all 3 are good enough to make finals. So they’re cutting out 3 of the best gymnasts in the world from finals, while barely opening up participation from other countries. It’s not enough extended participation to justify cutting out athletes who qualified in the top 6. Just as there’s not enough over-participation to justify cutting participants down 50 athletes. Don’t know if that makes sense, but it’s a similar thing. Overcorrecting for a problem that isn’t there.
        When 400 athletes start showing up for Worlds, then go ahead and set a standard. Or when 8 countries start qualifying 3 athletes to AA finals, go ahead and cut it to 2. But these are problems that don’t exist right now.


    • So right. If this had been the case for the olympics back in the day we wouldn’t have had the inspirational Jamaica bob sled team and Eddie the Eagle. The best their countries had and they have the right to compete. If they keep making it harder we’ll end up with a basic quad meet with the United States Russia. Japan and China. I enjoy the efforts of smaller countries and their athletes work just as hard but in sub par conditions. They have earned the right to participate. Bring on the world

      Liked by 1 person

  4. I see why they had to make certain changes. the sport is expensive to host and broadcast. If they’re not getting hosting countries then we end up with Doha all over again; an unfit place with no spectators which kills the sport faster than small teams not making it to worlds. At least we’ll see them at the continental level and in their best shape too. Regarding the 3 person teams, why do the FIG keep lowering the team count? Like, they’re not up against the Olympic committee trying to take gymnastics slots for other sports, so why punish our own? With so little chance of making a worlds team, it makes the sport not worth it (from an athlete perspective) tbh.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I do not understand why the FIG are lowering the team count post 2024. This willl make for boring competitions and kill the sport as gymnasts know they have very little chance of making the world championship teams and so will quit. What can we do to reverse this stupid decision? Also who are the people on the FIG making these stupid decisions?


    • One thing I think is very notable is that despite women’s or rhythmic gymnastics being the better known and more popular discipline in many countries – a rarity among sports in general – the upper leadership of the FIG remains OVERWHELMINGLY male. I’m pretty sure Nelli Kim is the only woman among FIG’s like 12 VPs and we know she doesn’t really have the sport’s best interest in mind and is more concerned about taking every element out of the COP that isn’t named after her. Of course given who I’ve seen in the upper leadership of a lot of national federations I’m not really sure who should replace the existing members but like… there’s gotta be someone. We can start by tossing Gallimore out on his (corrupt, mandatory-reporter-who-didn’t) ass, an action which should have been taken back when that email was uncovered or really before but heaven FUCKING forbid any federation in this sport do anything proactively


  6. I also think this is kind of poor marketing from the FIG … don’t they want to grow the sport worldwide? There’s not that much incentive to watch the event / put your child in gymnastics if your country isn’t represented, and this could affect huge markets like India. Football right now is doing the exact opposite and expanding the World Cup to like a million teams (which is problematic for other reasons, but since the financial/organisational costs for 20-50 extra gymnasts isn’t that much …. ?).

    Liked by 1 person

    • In addition to football, most other sports like athletics and swimming have huge numbers of athletes participating in different disciplines and distances which makes these sports popular as there are so many medals up for grabs. In gymnastics there are relatively few events so if you narrow the number of participants down to 2 per country per event this is sheer madness. Is there anything that can be done to stop it? In the past when teams comprised 6 gymnasts competions were far more exciting.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Swimming also has qualification requirements. Someone can be the fastest swimmer in their country and not technically qualify for the Olympics. For swimming, 878 swimmers can be in the pool (2 per country per event total), but must meet an Olympic Qualifying Time in the event. There is also an Olympic Selection Time that is a bit slower. Only one swimmer per country can compete qualifying at this time if and only if the total meet capacity of 878 has not been met. I think there is a way for a country to get what was at one time called a universality place, but I can’t recall those criteria (or if it is an open FINA decision).

        Liked by 1 person

        • It’s understandable that swimming, like all Olympic sports, has standards for participating in the Olympics. That quota is handed down to them by the IOC and they have to find a way to meet it; gymnastics has this issue too (in fact, of the three Tier I Olympic sports – an IOC designation of the sports which are the biggest draws at the Games – gymnastics has by far the smallest quota, a little over 300 compared to the 878 mentioned for swimming and even more than that for track and field.) Does **FINA** have a SELF-IMPOSED quota for swimming world championships? Because if they don’t, their actions aren’t a germane comparison for this move.

          Fuck the FIG. They really are trying to kill the sport.


  7. i think they are going along the line of trying to cut down on the amount of time used for qualification because they just want to shorten up worlds. While i do see that they have to deal with limited resource, i do see also the need to have smaller programs being able to show up in qualfication for exposure,

    I supposed we could make it so that worlds are only hosted in countries that are “rich” enough so they dont complain about “too long qualification and too much money”? so then less countries might be willing to host? But honestly, even though it’s expensive to host, has they ever had trouble finding a host yet?

    Liked by 1 person

  8. I dont think the idea of limiting the qualification days is completely wrong.. But I would have mixed the qualification days. For example, day 1: sub1-3 wag sub 1 mag
    Day2: sub 4-5 wag sub 2-3 mag
    You have to change the aparatusses but I think it is better for the gymnasts and judges. And even more equal because of morning sessions for women and evening sessions for men or the other way around.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Are some of those continental championships even going to have that many countries competing? I mean Euros is obviously a big comp, and the Americas are made up of quite a few different nations, but the Asian, African and oceanic areas – how many countries are they going to have competing at each of those comps? That could be a very expensive exercise to host a championships for only a few nations.

    Liked by 1 person

    • you could combine the Asia and Oceania and African together. Just have separate ranking for each continent. So in that way you don’t have to have a whole event organized for just like a few nations, but would still have ranking for 3 different confedrations.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Yeah, I’ve been on board with this…a while back I wrote that Oceania should just join Asia, or Oceania and Africa should combine. I get wanting continental representation but I’ve always thought Oceania having just two regularly-competing programs makes it nuts that one of those two programs is automatically guaranteed to send a team to worlds. For the women, I guess it doesn’t really matter, as they’re generally around the top 15, but no Oceanic MAG program made the top 24 at worlds last year, so it seems unfair that they’ll get to send a team while other stronger teams won’t be able to attend.


  10. There’s another factor that the above comments, taken together, highlight, though not by intention.
    That’s the difference between the opportunities that different levels of fans have: those who can afford to attend events (including transportation and lodging) and those dependent upon whatever shows up on their screens at home.


  11. Pingback: Around the Gymternet: Believe it or not, I invented Post-Its. | The Gymternet

  12. Pingback: Around the Gymternet: Believe it or not, I invented Post-Its. – allgym18

  13. Since 2023 worlds serve as qualifiers for Paris, it seems they kind of screwed over Africa. Only one team and 4 individuals from the entire continent can go to 2023 and attempt to qualify for 2024 (unless of course they change the Olympics quals from the ’24 cycle).

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s