In 1979, there was finally a vague sense of harmony between the men’s and women’s Codes of Points. Both the Women’s and Men’s Technical Committees emphasized risk, originality, and virtuosity, and both used four difficulty categories: A, B, C, and CR (for extra-risky skills).
While this was a major change for the Women’s Code of Points, the 1979 Men’s Code of Points was quite similar to the 1975 Men’s Code of Points. Let’s take a quick look at it.
In 1968, the Men’s Technical Committee published its Code of Points, which introduced the concepts of risk, originality, and virtuosity (ROV) for apparatus finals. In the decade that followed, the MTC continued to tinker with the formula for ROV.
Meanwhile, the Women’s Technical Committee continued to discourage excess difficulty. In fact, in 1973, the Women’s Technical Committee unsuccessfully tried to prohibit a few skills that Olga Korbut popularized at the Munich Olympics.
But all that changed in 1979 — the year when ROV were finally added to women’s artistic gymnastics.
In 1975, the Women’s Technical Committee published a new version of the Code of Points. Below, you’ll find some of the updates, as well as the complete English text.
Happy gym nerding!
In Some Ways, Execution Started to Matter More in 1975.
Compared to the 1970 Code of Points, the 1975 Code of Points put slightly more emphasis on execution, making it worth 5.0 points (rather than the previous 4.0 points).
| 1970 | 1975 | |
| Composition of Exercise | 6.00 Total | 5.00 Total |
| -Value of Difficulty* | 4.00 | 3.00 |
| – Originality and Value of Connections | 1.50 | 1.50 |
| – Value of General Composition | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Execution | 4.00 Total | 5.00 Total |
| – Execution and Amplitude | 1.50 for execution 1.50 for amplitude | 4.00 |
| – General Impression | 1.00 | 1.00 |
But More Elements of Superior Difficulty Were Required in 1975.
| 1970 | 1975 |
| 4 elements of medium difficulty (0.50 each element) | 4 elements of medium difficulty (0.30 each element) |
| 2 elements of superior difficulty (1.0 each element) | 3 elements of superior difficulty (0.60 each element) |
Related: According to the 1975 Code of Points, the “final phase should contain an element or acrobatic series of superior difficulty” on floor exercise.
Changes to Vault
Notable Changes to Beam
As You’ll See…
One More Thing
With No Further Ado…
Here’s the 1975 Code of Points for Women’s Artistic Gymnastics.
More on the Code of Points
In 1975, the Men’s Technical Committee published a new version of the Code of Points. Below, you’ll find some of the updates, as well as the complete English text.
Happy gym nerding!
In a 1971 bulletin, Arthur Gander, who was president of the FIG at the time, published a long series of remarks about the state of optional exercises in men’s gymnastics. Gander’s article touches upon some of the challenges in both men’s and women’s gymnastics that persist to this day.
For example, monotony. Even in the era of risk, originality, and virtuosity, there were certain skills and combinations that had almost become compulsory. (Granted, risk, originality, and virtuosity were still in their infancy at that point.)
Side saltos. Gymnastics fans love to hate on side saltos on beam, and guess what! Arthur Gander didn’t like them, either, on men’s floor!
Value assignments. What constitutes an A, B, or C part? Should such-and-such skill really be a C? Yup, the FIG was wrestling with those questions back in the day, as well.
There’s also the question of nostalgia. As you read Gander’s remarks, you might find yourself wondering, Does Mr. Gander want to see these skills because they would add variety or because they are representative of a different era of gymnastics? And how often does nostalgia for a past era color our view of gymnastics today?
Finally, the fear of the “feminization” of men’s gymnastics. Though Gander believed that men could learn a thing or two from women’s uneven bars, he feared that men’s floor exercise could become too feminine, especially if floor music were included. It’s a question that has been raised as gymnasts like Heath Thorpe (AUS) incorporate more leaps into their floor routines.
Another interesting tidbit: Gander mentions that the IOC was not pleased with men’s vault in 1968, questioning whether the event was worthy of an Olympic medal.
Below, you’ll find my translation of Gander’s remarks. (The FIG provided its own English translation in its bulletin, but the translation was quite rough and difficult to follow.)
In 1958, before the World Championships in Moscow, the Code of Points for men’s gymnastics was updated again. By and large, this version of the Code combined the 1949 Code of Points and the 1954 supplement in one single document.
That said, there were a few changes in the 1958 Code of Points. Below, you’ll find a summary of the major changes, as well as the original French text, as printed in the magazine Le Gymnaste, May 1958. Thanks to the Bibliothèque nationale de France for the documents.
In 1949, the first Code of Points for men’s gymnastics was published. Five years later, in 1954, the document was updated.
The 1954 Code of Points was a supplement to the 1949 Code, adding more detail about the evaluation of men’s optional exercises. It specified:
Assigning difficulty levels to elements was a request from the Soviet Union:
As the Russians proposed, a table of difficulties has been worked out, which can be used in Rome [at the World Championships].
Gazette de Lausanne, January 7, 1954
On a mis au point, sur proposition russe, une table des difficultés qui pourra être utilisée à Rome.
So, here’s a summary of the 1954 Code of Points, as well as the original French text, as printed in the magazine Le Gymnaste, May 1955. Thanks to the Bibliothèque nationale de France for providing the documents.
In 1971, the Men’s Technical Committee issued an update to the 1968 Code of Points. But instead of printing a new document, they printed pages that were meant to be pasted over certain sections of the 1968 Code of Points. As you’ll see, the document has a funky layout as a result.
This supplement is important for two reasons. First, it established the individual all-around final. Second, it placed even more emphasis on risk, originality, and virtuosity.
Reminder: At the time, the women’s Code of Points did not have any requirements for risk, originality, and virtuosity.
Let’s take a look at the major changes…
In 1970, the Women’s Technical Committee published a new version of the Code of Points. Many of the rules had already been in place in the 1968 Code of Points (e.g. only four judges per apparatus instead of the previous norm of five judges per apparatus).
The major change in the English version was the inclusion of stick figure drawings. Let’s take a look at the Code.
The first Code of Points was published in 1949. Though, the seed for the project was planted much earlier, in the 1930s.
Here’s how Pierre Hentgès, Sr., recounts the history of the first CoP.
