GYMN-L Digest - 27 May 1996 to 28 May 1996

There are 14 messages totalling 281 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. compulsories
  2. 97 CODE
  3. 97 code and what it means
  4. 97 CODE WOMEN
  6. Which is worth more in COP (2)
  7. Boston Gyms
  8. Judging for execution
  9. % muscle fibers in gymnasts
 10. GYMN-L Digest - 26 May 1996 to 27 May 1996
 11. New Code
 12. Corbeil RSG International


Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 11:26:21 -0500
Subject: compulsories

I just wanted to second Jeff's comments about compulsories.  There's
something magical about the way different gymnasts can take the same
routines and make them unique.  Also, when a gymnast isn't overly concerned
about whether she'll survive a skill without a fall she's more likely to
show you _just_ how beautifully she can perform.



Date:    Sun, 26 May 1996 14:54:22 PDT
From:    ***@AMDAHL.CO.ZA
Subject: Re: 97 CODE

Oh yeah! Another thing! I heard that they might not count the second move if
you repeat it twice. ie. if you do two flic-1/4 turns to handstand on beam,
only one will count. Yippeee for spectators. Oh-oh for gymnasts!


Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 10:48:01 -0500
Subject: 97 code and what it means

Could someone please post what they know about the 97 code changes
and what it will entail in one post? Like the start value, where
and how bonus can be earned and then what major skills will be valued
at (such as full-ins, triple twists, double layout off bars, etc, etc)


Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 19:29:54 GMT
From:    ***@PIPELINE.COM
Subject: 97 CODE WOMEN

Could someone please list the web address for the 97 Women's Code? Many
people on the list have obviously seen it, but I have missed it and would
like to get in on the discussion. If there is no listing, please list where
the code specifications can be obtained (mail, telephone, etc.).




Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 19:36:05 GMT
From:    ***@PIPELINE.COM

>Does anyone know if the man who bought the Karolyi gym is planning on
bringing rhythmic to the gym? (Karen Lookofsky-List May 26)

I had no idea that the Karolyi gym had been sold! Could someone in the know
please mail in all the details (where is Bela moving, is he retiring again,




Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 18:52:52 -0400
From:    ***@WAM.UMD.EDU
Subject: Which is worth more in COP

Is there a distinction in score of the following moves:

(1) RO + FF + whip + whip + FF + double full

(2) RO + FF + whip + whip + double full

Note (2) contains no flip flop before the double full.  Some
of the chinesse women are using this pass.


Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 20:46:19 -0400
From:    ***@YORKU.CA
Subject: Re: Which is worth more in COP

> Is there a distinction in score of the following moves:
> (1) RO + FF + whip + whip + FF + double full
   This pass would get an indirect special connection bonus of 0.1 for
"two or more saltos in a series", A+A+C
 > (2) RO + FF + whip + whip + double full >
   This pass would get a direct special connection bonus (ie for
consecutive saltos) and would get 0.2 for A+A+C
        So basically, the direct connection of the saltos, with no
interrupting ffs gets more bonus.


Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 21:03:55 -0500
Subject: Boston Gyms


I am a 20 year old college student who is interested in finding out about
gyms in and around Boston with summer gymnastics programs.  I'm a relative
beginner.  I'm working my way up to a back somersault on the floor at the
moment.  I'd like to find a flexible program that would allow me to come in
evenings and/or weekends - preferably for adult open recreational workouts.
 I also need to work on strength, so some access to weights etc. would be
preferable.  If you could email me back to my address, that would be great.
 Thanks in advance.



Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 23:04:49 -0400

I hope that he will continue training Strug and Moceanu to the Olympics!!
Anyone know anything


Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 23:08:53 -0400
From:    ***@AOL.COM
Subject: Judging for execution

>I wish that judges would reward more for proper execution than for th e
>'big moves'. When gymnasts have to cowboy double tucks off beam, it just
>makes me think they don't have enough strength to do it correctly.
>a triple off HB is often cowboyed. You see the judges take deductions for
>spread leg double layouts, why not on other skills.

At the Jr. level you do see this type of judging. However, at the
international level, there is a lot more going on at the podium then looking
for bent legs. There is quite a bit of politics involved. Philosophically I
believe the FIG agrees with you.This is substantiated by reading the
beginning of the code. It says straight perfection of execution is more
important than difficulty. And execution is worth the biggest chunk of the
gymnast's score. But again, when you actually get up there with a panel of
foreign judges and your are put in the position of not only having to judge,
but to bolster your home country, things change radically.



Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 23:46:32 -0400
From:    ***@WCHAT.ON.CA
Subject: % muscle fibers in gymnasts

I was wondering if anyone knew the average percent of muscle twith fibers
that a typical gymnast might have.  All the books I have explain the
different fiber types with reguards to runners and sprinters etc but not
gymnasts.  Does anyone know?
If you can email me privately, ASAP, it would be greatly appreciated.


Date:    Tue, 28 May 1996 01:04:43 -0400
From:    ***@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: GYMN-L Digest - 26 May 1996 to 27 May 1996

In a message dated 96-05-27 15:50:15 EDT, you write:

> Four years ago the JoPC decided to adopt a graduated base score
>system.(class 7 starts at a 5.0....class 6 starts at a 6.0...and so on). The
>theory was that it would prevent the gymnasts from dropping out of the sport
>because their self-esteem was damaged by their scores dropping as they
>advanced through the levels. Ignoring of course that that is NOT why they
>drop out around the beginner optional levels.

This is not completely accurate.  The graduated score system was begun in
Region 9 as an experiment in 1988.  The rationale was exactly as you state,
and we introduced this in response to coaches who stated that they were
losing too many boys due to the drop in scores from level to level.  The REAL
TRUTH is that the scores were, and are, pretty much irrelevant to the boys.
BUT, parents were pulling their sons out of the program because, in the
parents' opinion, there sons were getting worse as they moved to a more
difficult level because their scores went down, initially; in addition,
new,young coaches were being heavily pressured to hold boys back so that they
could keep the high scores.  IN FACT, the system worked very well and
resolved many of these problems; some other regions adopted this system late
in the quadrennium because of the results they saw us achieve in Region 9.
 For these reasons, the 1992-1996 Competition Committee (of which I was a
member) and the JOPC elected to expand the system to all levels in the new
program; this also made it simpler to set up base scores for the modified
optionals.  I still believe that the concept has merit, but, perhaps, is not
needed as much as it was. (Keep in mind that the drop out rate for boys in
the years preceding 1992 was over 70% by the time they reached the Class 2
     I believe that our committee put together a pretty fine program for the
past quadrennium.  When we found mistakes or problems, we changed them right
away, rather than waiting for the next quadrennium.  The result was a totally
new, redirected boys program.  At the same time, all of the changes and many
of the ideas we tried certainly made a very complicated system; I judge a lot
myself, and I will attest to the difficulties I found in applying the system,
a system that I helped design.  I think we will see the benfits of this
system in the coming quadrennium.  The new Competition Committee has kept the
basic concepts and structure that our committe designed, but, in answer to
the coaches and judges, have radically simplified things.  I believe Dean's
point will be proven through better, more consistent judging in the future.
 I hope that we don't return to the problems of 6-8 years ago with parental
expectations for scores.


Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 23:03:20 -0700
From:    ***@SONIC.NET
Subject: New Code

Jeff wrote;
>I don't agree with changing scoring system to a two system method. What I
>would rather see is actual, REAL deductions for execution errors <snip>

And this finally gets to the crux of the matter. What rules govern a sport are
unimportant if they are not applied in a consistent and objective manner. I have
never fretted over Code changes, they will apply to everyone. If scores
it is a non-issue to me, (as a coach), ranking is what matters. What bothers me
is the apparent haphazard method in which the Code is applied, the lack of
vault" deductions for the many so called Yurchenko 1/2 turn front vaults comes
readily to mind. I was informed by a fellow coach that many of the judges simply
did not know the difference. I personally have found most judges at the Elite
to be extremely intelligent and well versed in the sport, I can't subscribe to
Point being that Code changes only beg the real problemn...


Date:    Mon, 27 May 1996 21:04:39 +0000
From:    ***@ALOHA.NET
Subject: Corbeil RSG International

Does anyone with access to Eurosport know if they provided coverage
of the Corbeil International?  Sherwin?  I would be interested to
know the results.  Also, isn't the RSG Europeans happening this week
in Oslo?


End of GYMN-L Digest - 27 May 1996 to 28 May 1996