
The Olympic Trials held over the weekend in Minneapolis determined both the women’s and men’s teams that will represent the United States this summer, with legends, veterans, and newcomers set to compete in Paris.
After a series of devastating injuries to three athletes who seemed to be among the strongest contenders for the team – including Shilese Jones, practically a lock after winning six world medals including two in the all-around in 2022 and 2023, Skye Blakely, whose stock soared after adding a Cheng on vault this summer, and Kayla DiCello, an alternate in Tokyo who has looked steady over the past couple of seasons – the picture for the women’s team ended up looking very clear following the first night of competition.
With 2020 Olympians Simone Biles, Jordan Chiles, Sunisa Lee, and Jade Carey topping the all-around standings on day one, it seemed like with the injuries to the others, these four would now be locks unless something went drastically wrong on day two. But all four continued to perform at a high enough level that despite missteps here and there – falls on beam from Biles, Chiles, and Lee and a mistake on bars from Carey – they still managed to come out in the top four once again, and their combined scores made for one of the most balanced team scenarios.
From there, it was simply about who would be the best choice to fill in any holes, which included fifth-place Hezly Rivera, who had a career-best 56.325 on day two, put up two 14+ bars scores, and tied for the best combined beam score of the competition; sixth-place Joscelyn Roberson, who came back from injury to share the beam title here while also consistently putting up strong numbers on vault and floor; seventh-place Leanne Wong, a veteran known for her composure who brought a Cheng to the competition to up her game on vault, winning the bronze medal; and eighth-place Tiana Sumanasekera, who, like Roberson, has one of the strongest vault, beam, and floor combinations in the country.
I thought with bars kind of a glaring weak spot for among the top four, given that Carey brings in mid-13s at best, it would make the most sense to go with Rivera or Wong, with Rivera showing stronger routines but also struggling a bit earlier in the season with hitting, while Wong hasn’t missed a set out of the 11 she’s done over the past year.
But the team could’ve also used a helping hand on beam, where even the best proved that they weren’t immune to falls. With Rivera and Roberson standing out the most here, it again became a question of consistency for me. Rivera has actually been quite solid here all season, save for a miss at the U.S. Classic, and I believed her scoring potential was a bit higher than what we’d see from Roberson. Though while Roberson got off to a bit of a weak start this season, her build over the course of the summer was incredible, and I felt both with beam and her other apparatuses, she seemed to be peaking at exactly right time, also earning two career-best all-around scores over the weekend.
Ultimately, while Sumanasekera is also a beautiful beam-worker with strong Yurchenko double fulls on vault and is simply lovely to watch on floor, I felt that she was just a step behind the rest of the three I had on my list, and from there, I also cut Wong from my predictions, since she wasn’t really anywhere in the top three for the apparatuses they needed to solidify. The final decision for me ended up being Rivera vs. Roberson, and I was actually leaning Roberson for a minute, given that Rivera’s newfound confidence may have been a bit too late-coming.
Though while Roberson seemed to be slowly and steadily pacing for this moment after her injury last year, I think Rivera proved at both nationals and trials that she had what it took and could solidly represent the team on any event, while also providing a key uneven bars set that could take the place of Carey’s in qualifications, essentially making her the bars and beam specialist, while Carey could focus on vault and floor. It’s really the ideal team scenario, and though a part of me still expected to hear Roberson’s name called onto the podium when the team was announced, it wasn’t at all surprising to instead hear Rivera’s, despite a week ago not even having her as my top choice for alternate.
The men’s team puzzle ended up being an even more challenging one for me, though ultimately an algorithm essentially choosing who would go left all of the “buts” and “what ifs” out of the picture. I do think that part of selecting a team shouldn’t just be about the absolute top numbers, and that there should be more critical thought that takes other factors into account. The numbers that they’re using to supply the algorithm exist only in the context of nationals and trials and are not remotely a guarantee for the Olympic Games, but I also understand that the men’s program has been untrustworthy in how it has previously selected teams, so if athletes and coaches prefer letting the numbers alone determine the team, I suppose that’s a fair compromise, even if athletes who should potentially be on the team are now stuck at home.
In the end, the algorithm went with the top two all-arounders at trials, Fred Richard and Brody Malone, who came within two tenths of one another with Richard leading on day one and Malone outscoring him on day two. Also making it were Paul Juda, whose clutch routines on pommel horse and high bar helped make him impossible to leave behind, Asher Hong, who had some of the strongest rings, vault, and parallel bars routines in the field, and Stephen Nedoroscik, a pommel horse specialist who could bring massive scores to both give the team a push while also making a run for an individual medal.
Last year, I was pretty actively against taking a one-event specialist to worlds after Nedoroscik uncharacteristically flopped in the 2022 team final despite superb scores in the lead-up to worlds. Mistakes happen, but I feel like an athlete who makes a mistake on one event yet contributes well elsewhere is more valuable than someone who is one-and-done, and the strategy of taking no specialists in 2023 clearly paid off with the team winning its first medal since 2014.
Based on these results, I’d assumed that the program would recognized the need for more balance across the team, but with the numbers alone essentially choosing the team and with Nedoroscik’s routines asserting him as a member of the top-scoring team scenario, I don’t think we’re getting the most ideal team even though we are getting the “top-scoring” team (again, based on four days of competition and with no guarantee that these scores will be replicated in Paris).
I understand the reasoning behind these selection procedures, and I also think that with so many mistakes from other top contenders, there was never going to be a “perfect” team in the sense that every apparatus could have fully solid coverage. Others who seemed capable of making this team – like 2023 worlds team and two-time individual medalist Khoi Young, 2020 Olympians Yul Moldauer and Shane Wiskus, and two-time world medalist Donnell Whittenburg – were hit-or-miss this summer, showing that while they may have greater team contribution potential than Nedoroscik in theory, they weren’t able to consistently show the numbers that would have essentially self-selected them.
Had there been more of a human aspect in determining the team, I do think we may have seen some different choices, but due to issues with how teams have been selected in the past, I completely understand why athletes and coaches preferred a more quantitative approach. I remain a very staunch “no single event specialists” believer, and think the 2022 vs. 2023 team final scenarios both support my stance as pretty solid evidence, but I also personally love Nedoroscik and think he proved this summer that he has the potential to be a hero for the team while also challenging as an individual medalist on his apparatus.
For the women’s team, Roberson and Wong are the traveling reserves while Sumanasekera and Kaliya Lincoln, who petitioned to Olympic Trials after an injury at nationals and got to show off brilliant tumbling and dance elements on both beam and floor in Minneapolis, will serve as non-traveling replacement athletes. For the men’s team, Wiskus and Young will travel with the team to Paris as reserves, while Moldauer, Whittenburg, and pommel horse specialist Patrick Hoopes are the non-traveling replacements.
Article by Lauren Hopkins
As you say, the unfortunate injuries among the women made the choice a lot easier for the women’s selection committee. If you were looking to eke out the most tenths in possible team score, you might go for Lincoln or Sumanasekera as a traveling alternate, but perhaps less experience and perhaps not being full strength figured into the decision. As it is, pretty much any foreseeable combination of Biles plus 3 of the other team members plus either of the traveling alternates is likely to score no more than a point below the named team. The disaster, of course, would be having to replace Biles, in which case I think the best fallback would be to “promote” Roberson and expect a hit of 3-4 points in the team score, making for a nail-biter against Brazil.
With the guys, I guess the one thing we learned is that the partial-specialist strategy of Curran Phillips didn’t work out, since his scores at Nationals and Trials ended up with him essentially being only noteworthy as a parallel bars specialist, which the team doesn’t need, and unless you left a pommel horse specialist at home, you’d end up putting only 3 up on qualifying for rings. Otherwise, there are a lot of team configurations that would arguably produce a similar team final score (i.e., within a few tenths of a point to the chosen one), but they all have a pommel horse specialist on them. Given that tenths of a point could very well matter in fending off Britain, and with pommel horse powerhouse Whitlock on the British team, the selection committee lucked out in that both their algorithms pointed to the same team. The algorithm rankings after that were not always in agreement: the #2 team by best-3-of-4 (swapping in Moldauer for Hong) ranks lower by the mean-of-4 method, and the #2 team by mean-of-4 (swapping in Wiskus for Juda) ranks lower by best-3-of-4. Since either algorithm would point to having a pommel horse specialist, it was certainly easiest and arguably fairest (in the sense that no personal favoritism would be demonstrated) to simply go with the computer’s answer.
I wonder which would be better for the guys, finishing 2nd in qualifying as they did at last year’s Worlds, so that they start on floor in the finals before going to the pommel horse, or finishing 3rd or 4th so that they go to pommel horse first and get it out of the way?
BTW, instead of publishing anything about the men’s team selection, the NY Times instead gave its readers a feel-good article about the therapy dogs who were working Trials.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/28/us/olympics-gymnastics-therapy-dogs-mental-health.html
In case that’s behind a paywall:
https://www.espn.com/olympics/gymnastics/story/_/id/40459211/2024-gymnastics-olympic-trials-beacon-therapy-dog-usa
LikeLike