Since its inception in major events in 2006, the "Code" has faced strong opposition from many prominent coaches, athletes and judges. Proponents of the new system believe it is a necessary step in advancing gymnastics, promoting difficult skills and increasing judging objective. Opponents feel that people outside the gymnastics community will not understand the scoring and will lose interest in the sport, and that, without emphasising artistry, the essence of gymnastics will change. Many opponents of the new scoring system feel that this system, in essence, chooses the winners before competition ever begins. Competitors no longer compete on the same level. Each contestant begins with a unique start value; therefore, contestants assigned a lower start value or difficulty rating are knocked out of the winner's circle before the competition begins. They may compete, but they cannot win. A competitor with a higher difficulty rating will begin competition with a higher combined base score. There has been dissent over the fact that the new "Code" effectively abolishes the "perfect 10" score, for many years one of the hallmarks of gymnastics. There has also been concern that the new "Code" strongly favors extreme difficulty over form, execution and consistency. At the 2006 World Championships, for instance, Vanessa Ferrari of Italy was able to controversially win the women's all-around title despite a fall on the balance beam, in part by picking up extra points from performing more high-difficulty skills on floor exercise. The 2006 report of the FIG's Athletes' Commission, drafted after a review and discussion of the year's events noted several areas of concern including numerous inconsistencies in judging and evaluation of skills and routines.