GYMN-L Digest - 24 May 1996 to 25 May 1996
There are 13 messages totalling 438 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. '97 FIG code changes (2)
4. Hate mail (2)
5. Why we are all really here!
6. WAG/MAG: The Asian World and Grand Prix of Rome
7. Adding Women's Gymnastics (fwd)
8. Moceanu Article
9. NCAA Requirements
10. World of Gymnastics subscription info
11. How To Order-Gymnastics Book by Eileen Langsley
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 07:35:26 -0400
Subject: '97 FIG code changes
>I understand the point behind devaluing some skills, but cmon, all of
>them? I'm not saying that skills like a front full or a rudi or a giant
>full on bars shouldn't be devalued. My point is, we've come nowhere
>near hitting the 10.0 mark consistently. I think there have been two
>awarded tens. THe highest women's scores at Sabae were Mo's 9.937
>dt yurchenko, and I think Khorkina's bars at 9.912. Both routines most
>like would have received tens four years earlier. The judges ARE managing
>to keep the skill levels differentiated (IE, Milo's beam at World AA).
>To lower the start score and devalue skills is just BEGGING for kids to
>push the envelope. If you think we have injuries now, I hate to see what
>we will have down the line. I'm sorry, but there is no way stress
>fractures should be the norm.
I responded to this in e-mail, but I have a little to add. I have been
judging and coaching for a while now and I remember back to the time when a
back layout full was a C-skill. When it was devalued, I heard comments
like....."My god! Kid's are gonna have to do a double to get a C anymore.
They are just asking for more injuries." Which is the same argument I am
hearing now. Gymnasts and gymnastics survived, evolved, and improved. IMHO
were are not THAT much the worse for wear.
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 15:03:11 +0200
Subject: Re: Fabrichnova
>I was wondering if anyone knew what has happened to Oksana Fabrishnova. She
>is one of my favorite gymnasts and has missed most of the recent meets. She
>wasn't at Puerto Rico, at European's and I did'nt see her name in the
>Russian Nationals results. Is she injured?
She's going to partecipate to the Grand Prix of Rome next week.
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 10:13:24 EST
Does anyone out there know how Onodi is doing with her comeback? She is
also one of the great dancers who always seemed to have excellent
choreography in her routines. Also, is Kim Guang Suk going to be in
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 13:27:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Hate mail
Not long ago, a number of parents discussed (ON the list) the possibility of
creating a new list where Junior Olympic issues and the sport in general
be discussed without "stepping on the toes" of those out there who have
tolerance for people who don't know as much about the sport. Basically, we
talked out of starting something new with the reasoning that this list was
and understanding of those of us not quite "up to speed" with the nitty
details of the sport.....I, for one, do not want my daughter (and her
teammates who tune into this list from time to time) to spend time on a forum
if it is going to be so
risky to ask questions. Those who ask the questions never know if they are
going to get slammed for it or not. This list is a terrific source of
information for gymnasts, coaches, and parents. I would hate to see it chase
away the young gymnasts and parents who could learn so much from the more
experienced gymnastics professionals...
The above post was excellent (as most of LC's are). I have referred many
parents, several coaches and a couple of judges to this list. The flaming
that has occurred recently is terrible. I imagine the folks (Rachele, et al)
that have worked so hard to get this list where it is are literally aghast at
the recent weeks' flaming and threats. This is yet another occurance of those
"playing by the rules" getting their work and benefits trashed by a few
single agenda freaks who want tollerance of any idea at any expense except
when it disagrees with their sacred cow "agenda". //Don
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 13:39:42 -0400
Subject: Re: '97 FIG code changes
I'd like to add my 2 cents worth on this one...
It seems to me that gymnastics scores ought to reflect a
gymnast's difficulty level, form, choreography (where
appropriate), originality, execution, etc. I like the idea of
making it harder for routines to start at a 10.0. I'd rather
see a larger range of scores distinguishing the very
good routines from the great ones, and one way to do that is
to reward more difficult routines more highly. BUT, that's
only one way. I'd also like to see real deductions for form
breaks, deductions for lack of amplitude, deductions for
lack of stylistic interpretation on women's fx, etc.
So, I'd like to see a beautifully executed, moderately difficult
routine score as well as a highly difficult, adequately
executed one. Gymnasts like Pods, who combine difficulty
and great execution, should be rewarded (although she shouldn't
do quite as well on bars with that perpetual leg separation).
Similarly, someone like Kerri Strug (who has good
difficulty but, IMO, has way too many form breaks) shouldn't
do as well.
So I guess what I'm saying is that the new code sounds like a
good idea to me, but only in the context of more stringent
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 14:01:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Hate mail
> I have referred many
> parents, several coaches and a couple of judges to this list. The flaming
> that has occurred recently is terrible. I imagine the folks (Rachele, et al)
> that have worked so hard to get this list where it is are literally aghast at
> the recent weeks' flaming and threats. This is yet another occurance of those
> "playing by the rules" getting their work and benefits trashed by a few
> single agenda freaks who want tollerance of any idea at any expense except
> when it disagrees with their sacred cow "agenda". //Don
Okay, I've been sitting on my hands trying to let this thread die
gracefully, but now I have to comment. Most of us who were
interested in discussing the Spartanburg issue have taken our
discussion off the list because others seemed to think it was
irrelevant to gymnastics. (I, for one, do think it's relevant, but
that seemed less important than the fact that the majority did not.)
We have been discussing it via private email.
Over the last week or so the vast majority of the related posts
have been of the "won't you folks just shut up already" variety.
That seemed silly to me since, for the most part, we had shut
up before those posts started, but okay, I can ignore that.
Now, however, they're taking a new turn. You can't bemoan the
horrors of flame wars in one line and call those of us engaged
in the issue freaks in the next. That's not an attempt to calm
the list down, that's a way to claim that your own position is
the only valid one. Just what does "playing by the rules" mean,
and just whose work has been trashed? And what's this about sacred
only sacred cow here is the idea that any discussion of issues that
some people find irrelevant or offensive is off-limits.
Oh, by the way, unless you know that we have no other "agendas"
of interest, you might refrain from using phrases like "single
agenda freaks." All the participants in this
discussion have posted on enough other topics to be accorded the
status of multidimensional human.
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 16:34:38 -0400
Subject: Why we are all really here!
I've been a subscriber for nearly a year now, even thought I don't post very
often. For the most part I have found many of the posts very helpful and
Through these posts I have enjoyed programs on television that I would
otherwise have never even known were on. I have corresponded with a few
people who have probably either competed against or judge me when I compted
nearly 20 years ago! I have also made a friend or two and found the
exchange of information very valuable as a gymnastics mom, former gymnast
and gymnastics fan/spectator.
It saddens me to think that this list could be losing some of the "Good" and
"Responsible" folks who have been part of the reason for all the benefits I
have received as a subscriber to this list. To those people I say, "Hats
off to you guys, you are doing all of us a tremendous service."
To those who do not contribute in a positive, informative, and helpful way,
no one has the right to ask them to leave. All we can do it hope that they
see the light and utilize this list in the manner for which I'm sure it was
created and intended.
Me, I try to read most to all of the messages. However, when the subject
matter is obviously a contribution and continuation of a thread that has
little, no impact or negative impact towards the purpose of this list, I
simply delete the message without even reading it. Therefore I don't get
mad, angry or defensive and post a "counter-flame" message. I never read it
so I don't know what it was about, hence I don't continue feeding the fire
with my response. My suggestion to all those responsible people--DELETE
threaded message dealing with subjects that really have no purpose on this
list to begin with.
I am sure to get some negative responses, but I am prepared for them. It is
just that I enjoy the good parts of the list and as a responsible subscriber
I feel it is my duty to help preserve it's "Goodness."
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 17:14:19 -0600
Subject: WAG/MAG: The Asian World and Grand Prix of Rome
1) Anyone know what is going on in the Asian world of gymnastics now? Are
there anymore meets prior to Atlanta? Anyone know who is the Chinese mens
and womens champs? These teams are favorites for the Gold in both mens
and womens AG and since we have no 'europeans' meet to rank there
current status of their athletes, I was wondering if anyone knows anything.
2) Will information be available about the Grand Prix of Rome on the internet
at the Italian Federation's site? Anyone got that WWW address, I accidently
deleted it. Or it linked to the GYMN page?
Dina, Dina, Dina.
(I still think it was Fab who did the stoop at Goodwill....haven't check
my video yet, since I loaned my VCR out to a friend.)
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 17:26:47 -0500
Subject: Adding Women's Gymnastics (fwd)
Hi, I'm forwarding this for Scott from Alabama.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 14:47:02 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Adding Women's Gymnastics
Could you please post this note the the Gymnet listserve. I am not a member
of the listserve anymore, but I think this would be good information for
people to know and help out if they can. Thanks
The Athletic Director at the University of Alabam - Birmingham, Gene Bartow,
is giving serious consideration to adding women's gymnastics at UAB. This
would be an important step for gymnastics as a whole and especially for
collegiate women's gymnastics. I am asking evryone who has any interest in
the sport to PLEASE write him a letter and encourage him to add gymnastics
at UAB. His address is:
Athletic Director, UAB
617 13th Street South
Birmingham, AL 35294
I cannot stress enough how important this would be for gymnastics. To set a
precedent for schools to begin adding gymnastics instead of dropping
current programs would be a huge step in securing our sport for the future
Thanks in advance for your help,
Assistant Women's Gymnastics Coach
The University of Alabama
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 18:30:20 -0400
Subject: Moceanu Article
I found an article from a few weeks ago called, "The Little Savior?
Gymnast's Sweet Face Belies her Unbridled Competitiveness."
It's just a fluff article on Moceanu, but it has some interesting quotes. It
basically talks about how Moceanu doesn't fit the mold of the gymnasts
portrayed in "Little Boxes."
If you'd like the article, just e-mail me and I'll send it along. It's from
the May 12th Chicago Tribune.
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 16:12:00 -0700
Subject: Re: NCAA Requirements
Regarding Dane Utz's question about the limitations place on male gymnast's
training in 1992 and if it made a difference in Barcelona.
Well, I competed for the UCLA Women's team (1989-1993) and we were
restricted by this 20 hours per week rule as well. I am pretty sure that
this rule is still in effect for both men and women NCAA gymnasts. The
rule basically puts a limitation on the hours of "manditory" training.
Programs can get around this by providing "voluntary" workouts.
In regards to the question about how this affected the training of the men
in 1992, I don't feel that it had an impact on their performance. Scott
Keswick, my husband, trained as much as he needed that year. The
restrictions generally applied during the season, but I know that Scott
worked out much more than 20 hours per week throughout the year, even
though he was still a collegiate gymnast. Maybe his training time was
considered "voluntary", I am not sure.
Dane also asked about some of the men, including Scott, and whether they
are *career* gymnasts. If I understand that correctly, yes. Scott trains
several hours, 6 days per week and has little time for anything but
gymnastics. He does enjoy photography and reading, but there is little time
for any other work because gymnastics is his "job". His workout schedule
changes every week depending on what meets are coming up. On average he
trains: M-F: 8am-9:30am and 2pm-6pm, and on Saturday: 11am-2:30pm
(Sometimes more, sometimes less).
I hope that was helpful.
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 16:12:59 +0000
Subject: World of Gymnastics subscription info
For those of you that asked here's the subscription info for "World of
The magazine is the official publication of the FIG(Federation
Internationale de Gymnastique). There are 3 issues per year with
each 40 pages in length(front to back cover included).
The current issue features the 10th World Gymnaestrada, Berlin 1995.
Major articles include a feature on the first World Champs of Sport
Aerobics held in Paris, France; a portrait of Yukio Endo; and news of
the new FIG competition programme planned for the post Olympic years.
The issue also has a poster of Gina Gogean(pictured in mid leap
Subscription is for 6 issues: 30 Swiss Francs(European countries);
45 Swiss Francs(all other countries) and acceptable payments are:
Bank/Post Transfer-Swiss Bank Corporation in 2501 Bienne,
Switzerland, FIG Account #56-301.649.0
Credit Card: Mastercard/Eurocard, VISA, Diners Club, American
Express(can order by phone 41+32+936666)
Date: Fri, 24 May 1996 16:12:59 +0000
Subject: How To Order-Gymnastics Book by Eileen Langsley
For all those that asked here are the details on how to order
"Gymnastics The Art of Sport" by Eileen Langsley.
The book was advertised in the April 1996 issue of IG(with Amy Chow
as the cover girl). The advert came with an order form one could fill out and
If you do not have access to this issue of IG I suppose it is
possible to write to the FIG(Federation Internationale de
Gymnastique) one of the sponsors of the book. (For Lisa) the FIG is
the governing body of gymnastics worldwide.
The address is :
Federation Internationale de Gymnastique
P.O. Box 359-Rue des Oeuches 10,
2740 Moutier 1-Switzerland
The price per copy is 40 Swiss Francs. Postage charges are as
follows: for European countries: 15 Swiss Francs
for all other countries: 25 Swiss Francs. If you want to know how
much it cost in US Dollars-I have no idea at this point because I
have not received my credit card statement. Hopefully its not
excessive but then again, the book is certainly worth it. Do any
European Gymners know what the exchange rate is?
Payment options are as follows:
-Bank Transfer to Swiss Bank Corp, in 2501 Biene, Switzerland, FIG
Account # 56-301.649.0
-Check: Drawn on a Swiss Bank in Swiss Francs
-Credit Card(Mastercard/Eurocard, VISA, Diners Club, American
Express) be sure to include card #, expiration date, and signature.
I hope the FIG does not mind me doing this. If its illegal can
someone please let me know. If not, do I get a commission(JUST
End of GYMN-L Digest - 24 May 1996 to 25 May 1996