After his re-election at the 18^th congress of UEG, the president of UEG Klaus Lotz said some words regarding the decreasing trend of our sport and requested to counter this tendency. 
There are current inadmissibilties that are damaging the attractiveness of Gymnastics, e.g. the complicated Code de Pointage. In fact, it adds to decrease the interest in and the enthusiasm of both the audience and the media for Artistic Gymnastics, although this is naturally not intended. 
Actually, the Code in its present structure did not exist before 1964. Different concepts leading to misjudgments at competitions could be widely eliminated with this structure. In each revised form (ten times so far!) the principle - besides objectifying and harmonising - was, that aim and purpose of the code is supposed to provide objective means for judging at competitions on all levels, regional and international competitions, in order to achieve an harmonised (total) judging in Artistic Gymnastics, that is supposed to and can be used on the whole world. 
It is unfortunate that almost each revision added to separate the code further from this aim and added to question an harmonised usage. This problem is not new. However, there is no such consideration of how a perfect code can be created. Among a high number of gymnastics experts who spoke out on the problem, there is the highly interesting point of view of Hardy Finks (CAN) , member of the TCM and previously, from 1996 to 2000, president of the technical committee men of FIG. In an OTA-article “Quo vadis Code de Pointage", there was already an reflection on a future and permanent code and the "additive difficulty system" was picked out as a central theme. That is an aspect one can talk about. However, first the reason has to be realised why all of the corrections missed the common aim - to create a permanent, more simple and applicable code. This is too much asked of the code and it is wrongly instituted. After all, it consist of rules on the basis of which the routines of the gymnasts are judged in competition.
A code is neither a program of Artistic Gymnastics performance development, nor its training plan. Even though the code can have an influence on it, and even a negative one! The increasing monotonicity of the individual competition routine of the gymnasts documents this clearly. When the overstrained demand of the code as such is accepted, then its permanent revisions are not necessary any longer. It is anyway only an adjustment to the development of difficulty after a lowering of gymnastic elements. All of the other factors of judging are not involved in the over-complication of the code. In fact, the revised codes were even simplified, so that differences of scores could further reduced. The committees responsible for the code have already recognised the problems some time ago, if you will pardon my saying so. But it needs courage to strive for a permanent modernising of gymnastics, without skipping the basic tenets, which are the basis of the performance structure of our sport and should play a role in the matter of performance judgement. What is performed, the material value of a competition routine is important, however, the technical execution, the composition of combinations and its obtained effects are an essential difference to disciplines, in which performances are measured. Even though our scores according to points does not reach the ultimate precision, it has the advantage to include more of the performance of the athletes. For the aesthetic aspects can be relevant and not only the wish to achieve a new record.

Our problems with the Code remain unsolvable as long as the tables of difficulty are unstable. Permanent lowering of difficulties add to evict gymnasts and audience from competition halls. This is a burden for strong gymnastic nations, too. The declining of the Chinese gymnasts to take part in the World Championships 2001 in Ghent does not have to be in connection to this point - but nevertheless!

The partial concentration of the code on difficulty has to be eliminated. In consequence, virtuosity and originality should be re-involved into the assessment to fight monotonicity. Certainly, it must be proved, too, if the number of judges in the present form has to be preserved unconditionally.

Lastly, it should be mentioned that the Code de Pointage has little to do with competition program and competition tender. This is a matter of the organisers on a national, regional and international level and can vary. With judging this has little to do. This should be simplified with stable and long-termly valid regulations in order to apply them faster everywhere. 
Every real progress in this direction can have the effect to reduce the criticism of both the presidents of UEG and the decreasing tendency of our attractive sport, and to reduce the home-made problems with the Code of Points. 

Rolf Bauch Potsdam, 2001
Translation: Florian Schmid-Sorg, Hamburg
(Copyrights: gymmedia)