• Almir Atiković University of Tuzla, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Edina Kamenjašević University of Tuzla, Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Bosnia and Herzegovina



women’s artistic gymnastics, judging, competitive performance, prediction


In the present study, we try to establish whether specific disciplines in women’s artistic gymnastics are equal and should the applicable Code of Points (COP) be revised in terms of point standardization on apparatus. Our sample included all-around senior female gymnasts who participated in the qualification (C-I) competitions from 2009 to 2019. The aim of our research was to determine the impact of individual apparatus D and E score in women's artistic gymnastic in relation to the final result of all-around event. The age among seniors rise from 2009 to 2019 for 1.88 years. In our analysis, we have found that the results achieved on each apparatus were significantly different. The average final scores on vault were significantly higher than on all other apparatus. Significant predictors of all-around success seem to be uneven bars D and E scores and balance beam E score. It was interesting to observe that the vault, balance beam and floor D scores were not significant predictors. Coaches can use the results from this research in their planning of preparation tactics for gymnasts in all-around, team and apparatus competitions.


Download data is not yet available.


Aarts, M., & Pluk, A. (2014). 1st report on “Smart Rings” presented during the 2nd European Union of Gymnastics (UEG) MAG Judges’ Colloquium 5-7 December 2014, Frankfurt, Germany. UEG / InnoSportLab ‘s-Hertogenbosch, Internal report.

Atiković, A., Delaš, K. S., & Čuk, I. (2017a). Age trends in artistic gymnastic across World Championships and the Olympic Games from 2003 to 2016. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 9, 251-263.

Atiković, A., Delaš, K. S., & Čuk, I. (2017b). Change the gymnastics minimum age requirements and the changes that have occurred in major competitions in women's artistic gymnastics. Acta Kinesiologica, 11, 80-88.

Atiković, A., Kamenjašević, E., Nožinović, M. A., Užičanin, E., Tabaković, M., & Ćurić, M. (2020). Differences between all-around results in women’s artistic gymnastics and ways of minimizing them. Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity, 12(3), 80-91. DOI:

Atiković, A., & Smajlović, N. (2011). Relation between vault difficulty values and biomechanical parameters in men’s artistic gymnastics. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 3(3), 91-105.

Atikovic, A. (2020). Anthropometric Characteristics of Olympic Female and Male Artistic Gymnasts from 1996 to 2016. International Journal of Morphology, 38(4), 990-996. DOI:

Atiković A. (2012). New Regression Models to Evaluate the Relationship between Biomechanics of Gymnastic Vault and Initial Vault Difficulty Values. Journal of human kinetics, 35, 119-126. DOI:

Boen, F., van Hoye, K., Vanden, A. Y., Feys, J., & Smits T. (2008). Open feedback in gymnastic judging causes conformity bias based on informational influencing. Journal of Sports Sciences 26(6), 621-628. DOI:

Bučar, M., Čuk, I., Pajek, J., Karácsony, I., & Leskošek, B. (2012). Reliability and validity of judging in women's artistic gymnastics at University Games 2009. European Journal of Sport Science 12(3), 207-215. DOI:

Bučar, P. M., Forbes, W., Pajek, J., Leskošek, B., & Čuk, I. (2011). Reliability of real time judging system. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 3(2), 47-54.

Čuk, I., & Atiković, A. (2009). Are Disciplines in All-around Men's Artistic Gymnastics Equal? Sport Scientific & Practical Aspects, 6, 8-13.

Čuk, I., & Forbes, W. (2010). How apparatus difficulty scores affect all-around results in men’s artistic gymnastics. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 2(3), 57-63.

Čuk, I., Fink, H., & Leskošek, B. (2012). Modeling the final score in artistic gymnastics by different weights of difficulty and execution. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 4(1), 73-82.

Čuk, I. (2015). Can audience replace execution judges in male gymnastics? Science of Gymnastics Journal, 7, 61-68

Farana, R., Uchytil, J., Zahradník, D., & Jandačka, D. (2015). The “Akopian” vault performed by elite male gymnasts: Which biomechanical variables are related to a judge’s score? Acta Gymnica, 45(1), 33-40. DOI:

Farana, R., & Vaverka, F. (2012). The effect of biomechanical variables on the assessment of vaulting in top-level artistic female gymnasts in world cup competitions. Acta Gymnica, 42(2), 49-57. DOI:

Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. WAG Code of Points 2017-2020. Lausanne: FIG; 2017. Available at:

Ferkolj, M. A. (2010). Kinematic analysis of the handspring double salto forward tucked on a new style of vaulting table. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 2(1), 35-48.

Fujihara, J. (2016). Revisiting run-up velocity in gymnastics vaulting. 34th Conference of the International Society of Biomechanics in Sports, Tsukuba, Japan, 18-22, pp. 593-596.

Fujihara, T., Yamamoto, E., & Fuchimoto, T. (2017). Run-up velocity in the gymnastics vault and its measurement. Japanese Journal of Physical Fitness and Sports Medicine, 62, 435-453. DOI:

Fujiwara, H., & Ito, K. (2018). ICT-based Judging Support System for Artistic gymnastics and Intended New World Created Through 3D Sensing Technology. Fujitsu scientific & technical journal, 54, 66-72.

Grossfeld, A. (2014). Changes during the 110 years of the world artistic gymnastics championships. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 6(2), 5-27.

Hadjijev, N. (1989). Some problems of training young male gymnasts: FIG Symposium during Artistic Gymnastics World Championship. Stuttgart.

Heiniger, S., & Mercier, H. (2018). National Bias of International Gymnastics Judges during the 2013-2016 Olympic Cycle, Available at:

Leskošek, B., Čuk, I., Karácsony, I., Pajek, J., Bučar, M. (2010). Reliability and validity of judging in men’s artistic gymnastics at the 2009 University Games. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 2(1), 25-34.

Massidda, M., & Calò, C. M. (2012). Performance scores and standings during the 43rd Artistic Gymnastics World Championships, 2011. Journal of Sports Sciences, 30(13), 1415-1420. DOI:

Pajek, M. B., Čuk, I., Pajek, J., Kovač, M., & Leskošek, B. (2013). Is the quality of judging in women artistic gymnastics equivalent at major competitions of different levels? The Journal of Human Kinetics, 37, 173-181. DOI:

Plessner, H., Schallies, E. (2005). Judging the cross on rings: A matter of achieving shape constancy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1145-1156. DOI:

Sands, B. (2010). Judging in “Real Time”. Available at: new/2010/11/bills-sands-judging-in-real-time/

Ste-Marie D. M. (2000). Expertise in women's gymnastic judging: an observational approach. Perceptual and motor skills, 90(2), 543-546. DOI:







How to Cite

Atiković, A., & Kamenjašević, E. (2021). THE PREDICTION OF ALL-AROUND EVENT FINAL SCORE BASED ON D AND E SCORE FACTORS IN WOMEN’S ARTISTIC GYMNASTICS. Science of Gymnastics Journal, 13(1), 47-58.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 187

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.