Editor's note: Simone Biles was selected for her third Olympic Games and was a key member of the U.S. women's Olympic gymnastics team in Paris.
MINNEAPOLIS — Mathematics is supposed to be black and white, without any room for debate or question.
But sometimes, even the simplest things can rip your heart out, leaving you wondering if the numbers actually lie.
The five gymnasts named to the U.S. Olympic gymnastics team in Paris on Saturday night were chosen because a computer program determined that their three best scores over four nights of competition made up the highest-scoring team, even when all scores from all four nights of competition were considered.
This is a system that players and coaches pushed for because they wanted decisions to be based on data rather than subjectivity.
But it still doesn't seem like enough: Even though I know that the team finals scoring system requires teams that are more jigsaw than cookie cutter, I can't help but look at the final standings and wonder, math aside, if this is the right team.
Get the latest Olympic news via text! Join the USA TODAY Sports WhatsApp channel
“This is a great team,” men's high performance director Brett McClure said.
But is it the best team?
“Based on the results of the two competitions, these guys were the best, hands down, in this process,” McClure said.
It's not necessarily conclusive, it's something that this system was supposed to deny.
Because all three points from each event count in the team finals at the Paris Olympics (there's no losing lowest score as in the preliminaries), medal-chasing teams can't simply pick the top five athletes overall, in order of ranking. Instead, medal-chasing teams will have to field a team that can produce high scores in all events, and do so consistently, sometimes ignoring rankings.
The U.S. will field Steven Nedorosic, a specialist on the pommel horse, traditionally one of the weaker events for the U.S. men. But Nedorosic has never been a phenomenal performer on the pommel horse — in fact, he was runner-up to Patrick Hoopes at the trials — and acknowledged that nerves caused him to tone down his routine Thursday night. And if anyone else gets injured, he won't be able to compete in another event.
Shane Wiskas was an alternate despite placing third at the Olympic Trials after the best meet of his life. So was Koi Young, the team's best vaulter, who placed third at last month's U.S. Championships but struggled at the Trials. Some of our athletes can and do run times of 15 seconds or faster, but overall we just didn't do very well.
“I had the best two days of competing in my life and that's all I can do,” Wiskas said.
Asked how he felt about it not being enough, Wiskas said he felt “numb.”
“I feel like I deserved it,” he said.
There's no good way to crush an Olympic dream. Whether it's a competition decided by the first person across the finish line, a computer program, or a combination of head and heart, the idea of competing in the Olympics is what keeps these athletes in the gym, pool, and track since they were kids, and nothing can ease the pain of falling short. Someone is always going to be devastated.
But making it meaningful is the bare minimum they need, and sometimes that requires more than just pure mathematics.
“I like the data, I think there could be a little more discretion,” said Sam Mikulak, a three-time Olympian and coach at Evo, where Wiskas, Nedorosic and Brody Malone train.
“There's been a lot of discussion and feedback between coaches and staff, and I think following the data closely and the panel of judges to determine who selects the team is something we're still going to work on,” Mikulak said. “Hopefully in the next few years we'll have a little more flexibility.”
Of course, the ultimate proof will be on the medal podium in Paris. If the U.S. men win their first team medal since 2008, there will be no doubt about the composition of the team.
If we don't, everything will be called into question.
Math too.
Follow USA TODAY Sports columnist Nancy Armour on social media:
