2004 Summer Olympics

[starbug]

I was especially disappointed to see Svetlana Khorkina fall off the uneven bars. I was rooting for her to medal ... she did well to hide her disappointment, but what a way to go out.

[Natasha (candygirl)]

I was rooting for her too. She seemed much less drama queenish during the team finals than the Sydney Olympics (when she yanked off her silver medal in disgust), so I was really hoping she would go out on top (even though she was catty when she lost the all around to Carly Patterson the other night). I thought bar finals would be her moment to shine. I'm a sucker for all those human interest stories they do, so although I was happy for Courtney Kupets and Terin Humphrey when they won medals (partly because they have been overshadowed by Carly, partly because Courtney has had an incredible comeback from her injury), I had really hoped that Svetlana Khorkina would go out with one last gold.

[Nothingman]

Paul Hamm's all around gold was the greatest momment of the games so far for me. I was disapointed about how much more the media road Carly Patterson's gold medal performance. She did a great job and I'm not trying to take anything away from her, but Paul's come back is a prime example of the reason we all watch sports. It didn't matter what sport he was doing at that momment, the fact he was able to perform in such a clutch situation and seize the opportunity is universal. As far as the contraversy, it has nothing to do with Paul, he did his job and that's all he has to say. The koreans didn't file a protest in time, so it voids them having any recourse. It's unfortunant, but so is a small step on the landing. The judges should be repromanded, but the koreans had the opportunity to correct it and missed it, Paul had an opportunity and he seized it. It's his gold.

[Nothingman]

Here's a well written article on why Paul should give the medal to the Korean based on sportsmanship.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5790612/

Though I agree with the political implications and reasoning why it would be great sportsmanship, there are other things at work here. Paul signed on to represent his country to the best of his ability, which he has done. Does that commitment obligate him to become a political pawn in helping to restore the damaged image of America which he has nothing to do with other than being an American citizen? How many times do you think Paul has suffered at the hands of the judges with questionable scores throughout his career. It's the nature of the sport. The only difference this time is the judges made a consitant error that can be recalculated rather than simply being "harsh" in their scoring. We also do not know the history between these two men, there may or may not be more between their competions over they years. The point is there is a lot more to this than America's image. I don't think Paul has trained most of his life and sacrificed so much to become a political pawn or to be known as the man who gave up his medal and appeared on the tonight show. He came to do his best and let the chips fall where they may. It's such a shame that his finish has to have an asterick after it forever. I suppose you could also argue that if he competed just to compete and it's not about the glory of winning then it shouldn't matter if he gave up the medal. Either way, it's a tough question to answer.

[MyLifeIsBrians]

Noooo Paul should not give up his gold. He was amazing the way he made the biggest mistake and turned it around into two amazing performances. The Koreans were fine and they were good but Hamm deserved the gold.

[Natasha (candygirl)]

As soon as I mentioned that the Korean guy had filed a protest, my boyfriend said, "Well, the Koreans aren't really in a position to complain about unfair judging."



Seriously, I totally hear you NM. This reminds me of the ice skating brouhaha from a few years ago with the Russians and the Canadians. It really sucks to win a gold medal and then have people ask amid the controversy, "Do you think they should take your medal away and give it to someone else?" Gymnastics, like ice skating, leaves room for the judges to express their opinions through the scores. As much as it sucks to say this, part of the score is political and influenced by reputation as much as the competitor's skill. As for Paul Hamm being affected by this, I think it showed last night. Was his floor routine really that bad in comparison to the others? No, but he still finished fifth, after getting the highest floor score during the all around competition.

I don't want to sound like Svetlana Khorkina bitching about unfair judging, but you are right in that the judges are NOT consistent. They CAN take deductions, but they don't always choose to do so. This, however, is more a case of the judges screwing up. I might sound like a big softy, but this is the reason why I wish everyone could win. There is no argument that all of these athletes have worked their tails off for the better part of their lives and everyone has a story, but I am not in a position to decide who deserves a medal more. That's what the scores are supposed to do.

In other gymnastics controversies, have you heard about the Romanians? In Sydney, the women won the team and swept the all around 1-2-3, but then Andreea Raducan, the gold medal winner, was stripped of her medal because she tested positive for a banned substance (a cold medicine). Now that particular drug is no longer on the banned list. She is filing a petition to get her gold medal back.

I also agree that they made such a big deal about Carly Patterson and hyped her up, and although she did win the all around gold, I don't think she is the best gymnast. They put her in every event for the team competition and she did not deliver on two out of four of those events. If they had allowed someone else to do bars, could they have won the team gold? Maybe, maybe not, but I was thinking more along the lines of Courtney McCool who did so poorly in the qualifying events that the coaches pulled her from the rest of the competition. Sure, she still got a silver medal in team, but during the team competition I didn't even see her on the floor. I don't remember all the scores off the top of my head, but I am willing to bet that she scored better on bars in the qualifying event than Carly Patterson did during the team final.

[MyLifeIsBrians]

It seemed to me that Carly Patterson messed up and other people had to pick up her slack. They one silver but I think that is due to the team and not Carly. The media needs to back off of her because I don`t think she really is all that great.

[Natasha (candygirl)]

Gawd, it's just getting worse and worse! This article quotes Jae Soon Yoo, the spokesman for the Korean team as saying, "We want our medal, not Hamm's medal. Our appeal is not against America, not against Paul Hamm....We're talking about judging and judges, not America." Unfortunately, that is not how the Korean people are viewing the situation. The same article states that there is now anti-American sentiment being whipped up my the South Korean media.

The official word about the situation:

Gymnastics Official Nixes Second-Gold Idea

Bruno Grandi, president of the International Gymnastics Federation, told The Associated Press on Monday night that rules prevent him from asking for another gold medal to make up for the scoring error that cost Yang Tae-young the all around title.

"If the athlete [Hamm] does not agree to give up his medal, I don't know what we can do," IOC (news - web sites) member Alex Gilady said.
And Grandi seemed to indicate that's just what he would like.
"For me, the best situation would be for Paul Hamm to take this medal and give ..." Grandi told the AP, pretending to remove a medal from around his neck and leaving the sentence unfinished.

So the IGF refuses to take any responsibility for the situation outside of suspending some judges and are putting all of the responsibility on Paul Hamm to give up his medal? Does that mean the other South Korean will give his silver medal to Paul Hamm? This is getting ridiculous.

According to this article, people were so angry about Alexei Nemov's high bar score, that the crowd booed for ten minutes, prompting a judges conference.

One top of all that, apparently the Korean athlete in question should have received an additional .2 deduction on his parallel bars routine, which means that if they rescored everything correctly, he still wouldn't have won. In fact, he would fall out of medal contention and the Romanian would win the bronze. This is the reason why protests must be filed before the event is over - too many what ifs.

Now the Canadians are filing a protest about one of their atheletes being robbed out of a medal too. One of the Canadian coaches is being quoted as saying, ""We may be whining but we're right."

[Natasha (candygirl)]

Now that I have had a chance to watch Monday night's event finals, I just want to know what kind of crack the judges are smoking. I'm too tired to rant about it because it's such a mess.

This is a great Sports Illustrated article that expresses my feelings about the situation. Betcha didn't know my pseudonym was E.M. Swift, did you?

This is another good article from the New York Times.

Just wanted to mention I also hate the new "no more ties" rule. It's stupid.

[starbug]

According to this article, people were so angry about Alexei Nemov's high bar score, that the crowd booed for ten minutes, prompting a judges conference.

Yeah, I saw this. The BBC had to cut to some boxing as it was so bad... they described it as 'a little technical difficulty'. hah! I missed Nemov's routine and they didn't replay it, but the commentators were saying it was performed brilliantly, with a flair of originality.

I have to say, I feel for Hamm on this one. The pressure on him to give up the medal is pretty unfair; you work for it your whole life, according to the rules, you win it, and then people jump all over you to give it back. On the other hand, I can see the Koreans' argument too; it sounds like they really didn't .

Personally I think the judging in this olympics has been totally substandard. Not a day goes by without some kind of controversy; medals being given, taken away, and then reinstated, and screwy scoring. And not only in gymnastics; the controversy over Bettina Hoy & Leslie Law in the equestrian was disgusting. I'm not really sure what can be done about it but my inclination is that giving someone a 10 minute window to appeal something, when they're in a team situation and other competitors on the team would no doubt be affected by such arguments, is a little harsh. Perhaps they could wait a little longer before announcing the medal positions or something, instead of steaming in there and announcing it straight away. That could allow people who have problems with a mark to appeal it calmly later. It isn't going to stop anyone performing at their best at any given time, I think...

[fnordboy]

According to this article, people were so angry about Alexei Nemov's high bar score, that the crowd booed for ten minutes, prompting a judges conference.

It was actually longer than 10 mins I think. I watched this last night and thankfully they didn't change to a different sport, they kept the cameras on right there. This guy should have had a gold or a silver. Hamm's routine was weak (both twins) and he got the same score as the Italian who totally blew him away.

Nemov's routine was amazing and it was not surprising that the audience reacted the way they did. IIRC Malaysia and Canada gave his routine a 9.60 which is what ruined his average. How they even got to that number is unknown, there is no logical reason for them to score him that low. So the judges conferenced and eventually changed his score, but not enough to even bring him out of then third place. It was bulls***. I really feel for the Russians in the games, they seem to always be getting screwed over. After the score change the crowd kept booing because it wasn't enough of a score to reflect his routine. Eventually Hamm had Nemov come out and quiet the crowd down. He was extremely gracious, and even though he didn't win crap it must make you feel real good having that many people on your side when you know you are getting screwed over.

Korea. This pisses me off. The Gold should most definitely go to the Korean. Hamm clearly didn't win it. He keeps saying in interviews how he knows that he is the champion, etc. Come on, the math is right in front of you. You did not do enough. Plain and simple. Last night during the men's gymnastics the commentators were so kissing Hamm's ass. The one even said when the Korean guy screwed up on the high bar that, "for what it's worth Paul Hamm never screwed up a routine like that on the high bar". WTF? The guy makes a mistake and that should invalidate his valid claim that he should have the gold? I hate the nationalistic crap that comes along with the olympics.

[Natasha (candygirl)]

I disagree that the Korean guy won. Yes, the judges erroneously gave him the wrong start value, which would add .10 to his score, but they also neglected to give him a mandatory .20 deduction for going over the maximum number of holds allowed in a parallel bars routine. If his routine was rescored with the correct start value and the standard deduction, he would be back where he started - with the bronze medal.

[MyLifeIsBrians]

The booing went on for a long time. I remember one of the commentators saying how he wishes it would keep going so the judges can learn to stop making stupid mistakes. I agree with candygirl. Paul Hamm deserves the gold. One of the commentators said he spoke to Paul Hamm on the phone and that Paul feels as if the whole world is against him. It`s sad. It really is sad that this is happening to Paul Hamm. It`s unfair and if he has to give back his gold I for one would be really upset and angry. The koreans should not get the gold. In my opinion they should just shutup and be happy they even got a medal in the first place. Ya, I understand why they are protesting, I read the article but I just wish this whole thing would shutup.

[Natasha (candygirl)]

The FIG is refusing to allow a second gold medal for Yang, so they are trying to put all the responsibility on Paul Hamm for their judges screwing up.

FIG's letter:

Le President
Bruno Grandi
Athens, 26th August 2004
FAIRPLAY
Dear Paul,

Firstly may I extend to you and to the USA team my heartfelt congratulations for your magnificent results at the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens.

I have addressed this letter to you after having read the following statements attributed to you in the American press: "It was very hard to focus after what has happened the previous days. At this moment, I don't feel that I have to give back my medal. If the FIG will decide that I have to give it back, I'll do it. There are many different options about what I have to do. I can understand my Korean opponent. I believe that something is going to happen soon."

This declaration, which gave me great pleasure, was made by a great gymnast and true champion who has the highest ethical values. This act, which demonstrates the highest level of honesty, places you amongst the true Olympic champions. I wish to confirm that your words grant you the highest esteem from the worldwide gymnastics family.

I wish to remind you that the FIG Executive Committee has admitted the error of judgement made on the Parallel Bars and suspended the three responsible judges, two from the A panel and the FIG Technical Committee member. Indeed, the start value of the Korean gymnast Yang Tae Young was given as 9.9 instead of 10. As a result, the true winner of the All-Around competition is Yang Tae Young.

If, (according to your declarations to the press), you would return your medal to the Korean if the FIG requested it, then such an action would be recognised as the ultimate demonstration of Fairplay by the whole world. The FIG and the IOC would highly appreciate the magnitude of this gesture.

At this moment in time, you are the only one who can make this decision.

With my best regards and deepest respect,
Bruno Grandi, FIG President

The USOC letter in response:

Mr. Bruno Grandi
President
Federation Internationale De Gymnastique
Mr. Grandi,

I write in response to your letter of August 26, 2004, which you asked the United States Olympic Committee to forward to Olympic gold medalist Paul Hamm of the United States of America.

The United States Olympic Committee (USOC) views this request as a blatant and inappropriate attempt on the part of the Federation Internationale De Gymnastique (FIG) to once again shift responsibility for its own mistakes and instead pressure Mr. Hamm into resolving what has become an embarrassing situation for your Federation. The USOC finds this request to be improper, outrageous and so far beyond the bounds of what is acceptable that we refuse to transmit it to Mr. Hamm.

The fact is, Mr. Hamm did exactly what an Olympic champion should do: he performed to the best of his ability, he competed within the rules of his sport and he accepted his gold medal with pride, honor and dignity.

Further, we strongly urge you to not release your letter to the media or make your request of Mr. Hamm known publicly in any manner at any time. We also urge you to immediately transmit the same directive to any individual or group to whom you may have provided a copy of your letter.

Your letter states "the IOC would highly appreciate the magnitude of this gesture." You should know that upon receipt of your letter, we immediately contacted the International Olympic Committee and its President, Dr. Jacques Rogge, which expressed its displeasure over the fact the FIG would even consider placing an athlete in such an untenable position and strongly stated they do not support the letter or its contents.

Mr. Grandi, it is important to remind you that your own Federation rules, and your own public statements, clearly indicate that Mr. Hamm is the Olympic gold medalist in the 2004 Individual Men's All-Around. We share and support that viewpoint. The statement in your letter that "the true winner of the All-Around competition is Yang Tae Young" is not only inconsistent with your rules and public statements, it is incorrect and undermines the very spirit of the Olympic Games.

As stewards of the Olympic movement, we all share a responsibility to protect, and not sacrifice, the interests of athletes. We encourage you and other individuals within FIG, who saw this as an appropriate remedy, to begin taking that responsibility more seriously.

Once again, we urge you to immediately retract this unacceptable request.

Jim Scherr
Secretary General
United States Olympic Committee

cc: Dr. Jacques Rogge, President, International Olympic Committee
Peter Ueberroth, President, United States Olympic Committee
Bob Colorassi, Chief Executive Officer, USA Gymnastics

Comments from the USOC press conference:

Peter UEBERROTH, Chairman, U.S. Olympic Committee Board of Directors:

“We (the U.S. Olympic Committee Board of Directors) have reviewed the action of the international gymnastics federation and we find them deplorable. They’re deflecting their own incompetence and their problem to a young athlete who simply came here to compete in the Olympic Games. He competed very, very well. He was awarded the gold medal. They continue to cause him grief. We are here to back him. Also, more importantly we are backing the management of the U.S. Olympic Committee, led by Jim SCHERR, on this matter, and we support the documents to the international gymnastics federation.”

“I think we’re here to represent the athletes. The letter from FIG was inaccurate, purporting that the IOC supported this matter. We have three IOC members on our board. We went to them and to the IOC, and they said not at all, in fact the opposite, so it’s a misleading attempt to avoid responsibility.”

Herman FRAZIER, Chef de Mission, 2004 U.S. Olympic Team:

“Paul competed in the Olympic Games, which we all believe to be the ultimate competition. It is obviously no fault or control of his that issues arose in the field of play. We certainly support our athletes and our teams behind the scenes, and this is no different. Paul Hamm is the Olympic champion.”

“As I read the letter, it seems as though they are asking him to voluntarily give up the medal. There’s nothing in that letter as I read it to say that they are concretely referring to any matters whatsoever to any matter in their rules or anyone else’s rules.”

Jim SCHERR, Chief Executive, U.S. Olympic Committee:

“The United States Olympic Committee’s first priority is to protect the well-being and welfare of our athletes. Last evening we received a letter which was a thinly-veiled request – it wasn’t even a request, it was a thinly-veiled suggestion – to our athlete that he should solve the problems of the FIG with his own actions. We find that request to be callous disregard for the welfare of one of their own athletes in the FIG, as well as our athlete, Paul HAMM.

Therefore, we have informed the FIG that we will not honor their request to deliver this suggestion to Paul. We believe that it is improper for the FIG – for any organization that purports to support and care about the welfare of their athletes – to place an athlete in an untenable position such as this. The responsibility for the administration of the technical rules and results of the sport are those of the international federation, in this case the FIG. The responsibility for this issue and controversy lies with the FIG and their administration of their rules.

The suggestion that Paul HAMM can solve their problems in technical issues in how a judge rules and how they administered this competition is absolutely improper and should never have been suggested by the FIG. Therefore, we have rejected their proposal and will not deliver this letter or suggestion to Paul. We also feel that the statements, given the statements both written and declaratory, by Bruno GRANDI, president of the FIG, stating that their rules will stand, they will not review matters than happened on the field of play within their sport and their rules are fine, and the fact that the IOC president, Jacques ROGGE, has stated that this matter is not under consideration, that it will not consider stepping in and solving it through some other mechanism, this issue for the FIG, that this matter to be closed.

We believe very strongly that Paul HAMM competed well, competed within the rules, did nothing wrong, took no improper action and should have no role in solving this issue. He is the Olympic champion by the results of the FIG, and, in their own statements, will always be Olympic champion.

The U.S. Olympic Committee is very proud of Paul and his performance in this competition. He has done what no American athlete has ever accomplished, to win the individual men’s all-around gold medal in these Games. We believe he has competed with honor and dignity and represented our country well, and that this matter should be closed.”

“Obviously we respect the authority of the FIG to administer their sport and their rules. That’s where it should stop, at the FIG, and not be transmitted. No statements made prior to this, or this letter, make any suggestion that the responsibility for the result nor the administration of their rules in the correction of this controversy be placed outside the FIG on the athlete himself. That’s where we have a difference of opinion. How they will address this and how they will address their rules in the future is up to them.”

“The Korean Olympic Committee requested the United States Olympic Committee to consider that proposal as they were pursuing that option and they wished to approach the appropriate bodies with that request. We said that, were they to do so, and were those bodies make a ruling, at that time we would, once that was done, consider what the Koreans had proposed at that time.

Because of the circumstances now, with the clear statement from Jacques ROGGE, president of the IOC, that this matter is not under consideration, it is not under consideration by the U.S. Olympic Committee and will not be considered. I also wish to state that the IOC was tagged on and included in the letter from Bruno GRANDI to the U.S. Olympic Committee. It expressed that the position that the IOC might appreciate that Mr. Hamm take action on his own regarding the situation. We have brought this letter to the attention of the IOC and Mr. ROGGE. They do not support the contents of this letter, they were not involved in the drafting of this letter, and they do not in way feel an athlete should have been placed in this position.”

“If you read their letter and other statements, there’s a very clear ruling they made, they’ve stated very clearly, that their results are final. The results of the competition and the technical matters on the field of play are not subject to review by them or any other body and that the results of these Games will stand. They now have a public controversy over how they administered the rules within their contest.

They are attempting to remove the public controversy and the eye of the media from themselves and place on the shoulders of the competitor, on Paul HAMM, who had no part in creating this issue. Therefore, it doesn’t resolve the results of the competition, it doesn’t change the results of the competition which they indicated very clearly are final.”

“There were other circumstances within a specific apparatus as well as in all six events that could have been reviewed, could have been changed and could have been scrutinized. However, and I think rightly so, the rules of the FIG do not allow for that, so when the competition is final, and the athletes have done their best and reacted to what they see on the field of play at the time, those results stand. You could reshuffle that deck forever if you wanted to, and that’s why they shouldn’t be changed.”
On what the USOC’s course of action would be if FIG demanded that the medal be returned:

“We do not believe, based on their own statements, that they would ever make that demand. We received a letter from Bruno today that states very clearly: ‘following its rules, FIG cannot and will not change any score or ranking list.’”

Just when I thought I couldn't dislike the FIG any more, I read their official statement:

In the case of the judging error, which occurred last Wednesday August 18, during the Men’s All Around competition, the FIG releases the following statement:

- The FIG has written to Paul Hamm because of his statement published in the newspaper USA Today: “At this point in time I am not planning to give over the medal. If the governing body decides I should, then I will”.

- The FIG, through the President and CEO of USA Gymnastics, has previously verbally contacted Paul Hamm to personally consider a gesture of Fair Play towards the Korean gymnast.

- FIG has received a negative answer from USA Gymnastics.

- After this first verbal exchange, FIG has read the above mentioned declarations of Paul Hamm to the press.

- It is only after these declarations that the FIG has officially written to Paul Hamm via the USOC, asking him whether or not he has the intention to consider a possible gesture of Fair Play.

- The USOC refused to forward the letter to Paul Hamm.

- FIG wishes to confirm that it has suspended three judges after first video analyses. The three judges have accepted this decision in writing and admit to have made an error.

- Respecting its rules, the FIG has not modified the final score and the ranking.

- By suspending the 3 judges, the FIG recognised its error.

- The FIG would not have re-opened the discussion, if Paul Hamm would not have made the above mentioned statement to the press.

- Paul Hamm cannot be responsible for a judging error.

Chicago Sports has a hilarious parody of the FIG letter:

My Dear Paul:

Hi, there! Bruno here. Where are you today in the USA? Are you back now in Milwaukesha or Waukwaukee or whatever is the name of that very nice Wisconsin village of yours?

You remember me, don't you? My fancy title is 'President, Federation Internationale de Gymnastique,' but you can just call me Bruno, OK?

I am told in Wisconsin you are a very large hero now. Good for you!

They say the governor of your state, a Mr. Jim Doyle, declared the date of Aug. 17 as 'Paul and Morgan Hamm Day' in tribute to you and your very able twin. And is it true that a 10-acre city park is now called 'Paul and Morgan Hamm Park?' I envy you, my young friend.

Well, down to business.

The reason I write to you is ... well, Paul, it is but a minor matter, nothing of consequence. We here at the FIG have a quite small favor to ask of you:

Would you mind terribly sending us your gold medal back?

I understand there are fine DHL, FedEx and United Parcel Service offices in a number of towns in your lovely Wisconsin region. Do you know of a town called Pewaukee? Or else a Menomonee Falls? If it is more convenient to drop off your gold medal in a self-stamped 8-x-11 envelope, I believe they do have a night-deposit slot.

My friend, I regret you did not receive my original letter to you, the one your U.S. Olympic Committee so rudely stamped 'Return to Sender.'

In my missive of Aug. 26, I extended to you 'my heartfelt congratulations for your magnificent results' at the 2004 Olympics.

(And you really are a magnificent little gymnast, my good fellow. Do not let anyone tell you otherwise.)

I noted a statement of yours—a quite intelligent one, I should add—in some American publication, to wit: 'If the FIG will decide that I have to give it back, I'll do it.'

This gave me great pleasure. In fact, just between us, all of us here at the FIG were so happy, we put on pointy little party hats, blew up some Athens 2004 balloons and danced a little FIG jig up and down the halls here at the Villa de FIG.

I then wrote that your words 'grant you the highest esteem from the worldwide gymnastics family' and ... Let's see, what else did I write you? ... Oh, yes, that 'the true winner of the all-around competition is Yang Tae Young.'

(Korea also thanks you and grants you esteem, by the way.)

And in conclusion: 'If you would return your medal ... such an action would be recognized as the ultimate demonstration of fair play by the whole world.'

Well, what a tempest!

You would think I asked you for CIA spy secrets or something! Or for tickets to one of those good Green Sea Packers football games of yours in Wisconsin!

First I received a note from a Mr. Jim Scherr, the secretary-general of your U.S. Olympic Committee, in which he told me, more or less, to go up on a gymnastics apparatus and flip off.

Next I heard that Mr. Peter Ueberroth, your USOC chairman, called my letter 'deplorable.' And that he said there was no sport where you crown a champion and then say to him, 'There was a mistake. Could you please fix this for us?'

Next I found out that at a breakfast Friday with a few reporters—including one from Chicago, which I believe is quite near your Wisconsin, is it not?—Dr. Jacques Rogge, who is what you would call the big cheese of our International Olympic Committee, said, 'We are not going to give medals for so-called humanitarian or emotional reasons.'

I was flabbergasted, if I may use one of my favorite American words.

Emotional reasons? We have no emotional reasons. We simply are seekers of international gymnastics justice for all, Paul!

So I hope you see fit to ignore all of these shrill USOC and IOC voices and mail us that gold medal that you won but that you didn't really win because Yang Tae Young really won.

Pay no mind to troublemakers like the one from that Tribune newspaper just south of Wisconsin who says that you, Paul Hamm, should, and I quote, 'Stick that gold medal in a Bank of Waukesha safe-deposit box and swallow the key.'

Just put it in some tissue or bubble wrap and address it to me, Bruno, care of our FIG main office in Rome.

Please mark 'Urgent - Gold Medal Enclosed' on the outside.

We'll send you a receipt.

Thank you for being a part of our worldwide gymnastics family. If I should get up there to that Wisconsin area soon, I personally will bring you a realistic-looking copy of your 2004 Athens medal made of wood and gold paint. It looks just like the one we need back.

Best regards,

Bruno

[MyLifeIsBrians]

arrrgggg!!! This is unfair. It`s so wrong of them to put the responsibility on Hamm. He did`nt do anything! I don`t know what to say anymore. It`s just stupid.