Is it true Paul Hamms is to turn in his medal?

kls

I have read this on another board is this true?

onacruse

No, he says he won't.

At an immediate post-Olympic interview, and a later night-show interview, he said he feels that he was the true champion of that contest.

As an aside: In the original Olympics, there were no "judges" as we see them today. A man either threw the discus, javelin, of shot-put farther than anyone else, or he didn't, period. A man crossed the finish line of a race first, or he didn't, period. A man either vaulted of high-jumped higher than the guys before him, or he didn't, period.

All the rancor attending to the Olympics has (except for drug-testing) been focused around the "judges" decisions, including that unique episode where the crowd's outcries virtually forced the judges to change their score for the Russian multi-champion, who performed a sequence of four and three "disconnects" on the high-bar; which, insofar as I know, has never been performed by any man or woman on this planet.

And then there is also the never-before-attempted-in-international-competition double-somersault side dismount from the parallel bars, by a Chinese (as I recall) gymnast, who nevertheless got an incredibly low score from the judges.

Why is it that I hate "judge," especially of the Rutherford variety?

Craig

PS: Please feel free to correct any factual mistatements in this post. LOL

Mulan

I saw this discussed on CNN today, and the IOC are not giving him the letter that asks him to do it.

I don't think he should either. He followed the rules, and when they replayed the Korean's routine, they saw another area they should have deducted for him, so he wouldn't have won after all.

I hope he doesn't do it.

Princess

He followed the rules, and when they replayed the Korean's routine, they saw another area they should have deducted for him, so he wouldn't have won after all.

But they didn't deduct from the Korean's score. I'm sure they could go back and look at all the routines and find deductions that weren't made. The fact is, they started the Korean's score too low. He is the winner.

Paul Hamm did nothing wrong but he is not the winner. His gold medal will always be tarnished and I bet in his heart, he knows that as well. He should have given it back immediately. He didn't win.

Big Tex

As an aside: In the original Olympics, there were no "judges" as we see them today

Thank you. If I were king, I'd abolish all judge-scoring events. Oh maybe keep them as exhibitions but not Olympic events. A contest needs a clear cut winner. But I digress.

He shouldn't have to give back the gold. The mistake was not about him but about the judges. If the IOC chooses not to take it away from him, I see no reason why he should return it.

I remember a Super Bowl where the Pittsburgh Steelers beat the Dallas Cowboys on a controversial call by a referee. A few days later, the NFL publically admitted the call was incorrect, but they did not strip the championship from Pittsburgh. Nor should they have.

Chris

Gretchen956

His gold medal will always be tarnished and I bet in his heart, he knows that as well. He should have given it back immediately. He didn't win.

This may be true, but if he gives up the gold his points would still make him the silver medal winner. So now do they then force the silver medalist to give his up to Paul Hamm? And then the bronze medal would be next.

No, it may be tarnished, but they knew the rules and didn't follow them in their appeal of this. They were almost 24 hours late in filing it.

He may win on a technicality but he still wins.

Sherry

Leolaia

They forgot to give the Korean the correct start score, which is the basis of his claim that he deserves the gold medal, but as was pointed out many times by NBC Olympic commentators, the Korean made an error on his routine (one extra hold than the four mandatory ones) that was not caught and if it was, it would've deducted more points than he would've gained from the other error. So I think it all evens out and Paul deserves the gold that he won.

Princess

Have they checked the tapes to see if Paul made any errors that weren't caught?

Fine, the Koreans didn't file their complaint as they should have. That doesn't make him the winner.

The Korean won.

Yes, they should do a medal shuffle. Why not? The silver medalist would probably be willing to give up his medal if it means his teammate would get his gold.

Steve Egner

I was thrilled to see Hamm win the gold... It took incredible focus and poise to come back and perform at such a high level after his crash landing from the vault.

That said, after the judges mistakes were revealed, I felt very strongly that he should have willingly relenquished the gold medal in person to the Korean competitor. Here's why:

The judging mistakes were not subjective judgement decisions. The judges made an objective error, before the performance began, essentially a math error. No one is questioning their judgement of the performance, so no review of the performance should be required.

Big Tex,

I remember a Super Bowl where the Pittsburgh Steelers beat the Dallas Cowboys on a controversial call by a referee. A few days later, the NFL publically admitted the call was incorrect, but they did not strip the championship from Pittsburgh. Nor should they have.

I've been in a funk for years over that game. You'd think I'd be over it by now...

But with all due respect for the opinion of a fellow Cowboys fan, the analogy just doesn't hold up. This issue really doesn't parallel a referee's decision. For the parallel to run true, it would have to go something like this:

The Cowboys and Steelers play, final score, Cowboys 28, Steelers 31. Now, after the game, an official realizes that when the game began, the official scoreboard read Cowboys 0, Steelers 7, rather than Cowboys 0, Steelers 0. He sees that the Steelers have actually been credited seven points that they never earned. The net result should have been Cowboys 28, Steelers 24.

An impossible scenario, I admit, but the point is, the football analogies don't work. For the analogy to apply, you have to create a situation where the outcome of the game is decided by a mistake made off the field of play, before the game began. Not likely.

The one salient point, I believe, in favor of Hamm keeping the medal is this: Had the Korean been given the appropriate starting value for his exercise (an additional one-tenth of a point), given the subjective nature of the judging, we cannot project with certainty that the scoring outcome would necessarily have resulted in a score one-tenth of a point higher than what he actually received.

All in all, I feel that the pure essence of sportsmanship still called for him to hand over the medal. Person to person, without compulsion, as soon as the error was revealed. The uplifting effect this act could have had on international sport would have become legend, elevating Hamm's reputation far above that of an ordinary gold medal recipient.

Sadly, that moment has passed, and teammates, coaches, family members, journalists, and various olympic committees have all weighed in on the matter, clouding the issue with political pressure and poor comparisons.

Sport disappoints me again. I miss what might have been.

Steve

Is it true Paul Hamms is to turn in his medal?

Share this