Fans Angered as Men’s Gymnastics Future Does Not Look Good With FIG’s Latest Update

The winds of change have swept through Men’s Artistic Gymnastics. But instead of a refreshing breeze, it feels more like a storm cloud rolling in. The Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique (FIG) recently unveiled updates to the Men’s Artistic Gymnastics Code of Points for the 2025-2028 Olympic cycle. The adjustments discussed at last month’s Coaches’ Symposium in Paris are set to shake up the sport in ways that might not sit well with everyone.

While the FIG Technical Committee claims the changes prioritize athlete health and safety, many believe they’re watering down the difficulty and excitement of the sport.

One of the biggest headlines? The number of elements contributing to the difficulty score is being slashed from 10 to 8 on all apparatus except Vault. Since introducing the open-ended scoring system in 2006, gymnasts have been training to max out their difficulty with 10 high-level elements. Cutting it down to 8 is a massive shift, fundamentally changing how routines are constructed and executed.

FIG Men’s Technical Committee President Andrew Tombs defended the decision, “The key drivers to reducing the number of elements from 10 to 8 included three main factors,” explained Andrew Tombs (GBR), the new President of the FIG Men’s Technical Committee. “First is safety and longevity for the gymnasts. As difficulty grew within 10-element routines, there was evidence of long-term injuries, particularly with shoulders.”

Floor Exercise routines are also getting trimmed down, with gymnasts now required to complete their performances in 70 seconds instead of 75. On the surface, it might not seem like much. Considering the reduction in challenging elements, this could significantly change the composition of routines. Fewer skills mean fewer tumbling passes, which could change the rhythm and pacing of performances. There’s also a new rule requiring the final pass to contain a multiple salto—a shift that will force gymnasts to rethink their strategy.

Coincidentally, the double pike has been upgraded to a D element, making it worth 0.4, on par with the triple twist from the previous cycle. It’s clear that FIG is pushing for a different kind of balance between difficulty and execution. Yet, whether it’s the right balance remains up for debate.

Vault specialists are also feeling the pinch, as all vault values have been downgraded by 0.4, across the board. This devaluation will inevitably affect scoring and strategy, potentially discouraging gymnasts from attempting riskier vaults. It’s a decision that might make the event more predictable, and that’s the last thing a sport built on breathtaking acrobatics needs. Conversely, Parallel Bars and Horizontal Bar have seen some upgrades to their highest-difficulty elements.

The Belles and other double salto elements between the bars have been bumped up in value, as have Kovacs-style releases on the High Bar. Miyachi Hidetaka’s legendary double-twisting layout variation remains the highest-rated skill on the High Bar, and as of now, no one else has attempted it. However, these individual upgrades may not be enough to offset the overall impact of difficulty reductions across the board.

For a sport already struggling for mainstream attention compared to its women’s counterpart, these changes might not be doing Men’s Artistic Gymnastics any favors. Difficulty and innovation drives viewership and excitement. And if routines become less complex, the spectacle might take a hit. FIG insists the changes are designed with longevity and safety in mind, but at what cost?

FIG received a change of wind too by the Gymnastics commune

If FIG was expecting applause for these changes, they got a different kind of reaction instead. The latest update came on X. Fans wasted no time expressing their frustration. Notably, the most biting comment? “The winds of change have blown through Men’s Artistic Gymnastics and the breeze smells distinctly of landfill.” The consensus is that these changes don’t feel like an evolution of the sport, but rather a step back, dulling its edge instead of sharpening it.

Another comment directly aimed at FIG’s messaging, saying, “‘There is a push for variety’ so now we’re just lying.” By reducing the number of counting elements, gymnasts are left with fewer opportunities to showcase diverse skills. If anything, the new structure could lead to more uniform routines rather than fostering creative, unique performances. Any sport needs creativity to keep the fans on the edge of their seats.

The absence of any mention of scales in the updated code also raised eyebrows. One fan simply stated, “No mention of scales is odd.” This might not seem like a huge issue at first glance, but every omission sends a message in a sport where fine details matter. Does FIG see scales as irrelevant?

Perhaps the most relatable reaction came from someone well-versed in the intricacies of the Code changes: “Even as someone who knows and understands the code changes, reading this was confusing lol. Also booooooo new code sucks 👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎” If those who eat, sleep, and breathe gymnastics find these updates convoluted, what does that mean for casual fans?

Complexity in scoring and regulations has long been a barrier to broader audience engagement. Moreover, this latest update doesn’t seem to be making things any easier to follow. The thumbs-down parade speaks volumes about how fans feel right now.