Sovetsky Sport. December 11, 1970
Sovetsky Sport Roundtable
The Sovetsky Sport roundtable session is dedicated to the results of the world gymnastics championships and opened with speeches from the senior coaches of the country's men's and women's national teams. L. S. Latynina spoke briefly: the competition was successful for us, although we cannot rest on our laurels, since the development of women's gymnastics in the world is proceeding at a rapid pace. Our competitors are strong. This is especially true for the GDR athletes. The average age of our team is 19 years old, the girls are young, and everything is ahead of them.
It was more difficult for V. M. Smolevsky:
"Before the championship, we carefully assessed the situation, we knew the strength of the Japanese, and we were full of desire to fight for first place, but we understood that we could remain in second. But second place can be taken with a gap of 0.2 points from the first, or even 6.75 points, as this time. True, the GDR team, which came third, was 11.2 points behind us. It would seem that our second place is solid. But does it suit us? Of course not."
"It cannot be said that we prepared poorly at the pre-competition stage: both the gymnasts and the coaches put in a lot of effort. But if we keep in mind the entire period of preparation, that is, counting from the Olympics, then there was no tension in everyday work. All the time I felt the mood: 'I didn't do it today, I'll do it tomorrow - it's not urgent.'"
"Can the national team be called lazy? Apparently, no. It's just that our strongest, not feeling competition within the country, sometimes rested on their laurels, and this was reflected in Ljubljana."
"So, one of the reasons for our failures is that we can choose the six strongest from even one and a half dozen equivalent gymnasts, but we don't have those one and half dozen. There are a lot of talented juniors, but we don't have reserves that are at the level of the national team."
"Despite his failures in Ljubljana, Mikhail Voroin is worthy of praise. He competed with an injury that he received shortly before the championship. Feeling that he was not prepared enough, he experienced great moral stress, and this affected him and led to mistakes. Of the rest, only Viktor Klimenko peformed well, although he could have done better. In general, the team's strengths turned out to be unequal. Moreover, if you take the entire history of our losses, you can see that they beat us precisely because the composition of the national team is uneven; we always have both clear leaders and clear outsiders. Our fourth and fifth men are always worse than the same on the Japanese team. They all made it into the top eight, and the gap between the first and sixth team member is small - maybe two points. In our country, this range is unacceptably large."
"But can our loss be called a tragedy? In my opinion, there is no need to exaggerate. Of course, we cannot count on more in the near future. But there is hope that the conveyer we are trying to establish now, I mean the entire system of training gymnastics, starting from physical education lessons in secondary school, will eventually begin to produce 'high-quality products.'"
"The Japanese system is almost no different from ours. Moreover, it was they who adopted our system. But they developed our ideas, and we need to learn from them a creative approach to business, hard work, and perseverance."
The senior coach was asked several questions. To the question of what is now the main advantage of the Japanese - the difficulty of their routines or the purity of their execution, Smolevsky replied that if, in terms of percentage, the Japanese routines are somewhat superior in difficulty to ours, nevertheless after the Olympics the Japanese did not increase their difficulty as a whole. V. Smolevsky sees their overwhelming superiority only on the horizontal bar.
The question was also asked about how the individual training of the national team gymnasts was planned and how these plans were carried out?
"Plans were made taking into account the individuality of each gymnast. These plans had to be revised in the direction of increasing training loads. But we were not willing to take such a step. In addition, I am now not sure that the local plans were fully implemented and that the coaches strictly controlled them."
During the debate, Professor M. L. Ukran, head of the gymnastics department at the State Center for Physical Education, took the floor:
"I would like to read you one small statement: 'The loss of the Soviet team championship is also explained by that fact that the correct conclusions were not drawn in a timely manner from the team's performance at the Olympic Games. The coaches of the men's team did not ensure the implementation of individual plans. The volume of the gymnasts' training was significantly reduced. During the year, the men's team's training plan was repeatedly violated. Training loads were lower than recommended. Completely insufficient attention was paid to the execution of the routine as a whole. They did little physical training. Some of the national team's gymnasts lacked the necessary performance capacity, as a result of which they could not train with the proper work loads.' Do you think this is fresh material? No, this is from 1961, and the results of the Olympics in Rome. When I write a report for 1970, I will write the same lines, only adding other names if necessary."
"Sorry, but I'm tired of saying the same thing, no science will help us here, we need strong nerves from coaches and conscientious work from the athletes. The question is, why can our girls train three times more than our men? And somehow, they have to write down what they did that day, and then these notes can be analyzed."
"What did Smolevsky do when he receieved a completely unprepared team? Nothing. He could only apply the methodology to which he was accustomed, and in his place I would have done the same, because there was no time for radical changes. And such changes are needed. And which ones are also known. We appreciate the methodology by which Latynina, Chukarin, Shakhlin, and others from the older generation were trained. Not all of them were able to become world champions, but they trained conscientiously. Some of the gymnasts of the current generation cannot manage to do their routines even on the eve of the world championship. Where does this fit if the training loads for a whole week of a member of the 1970 USSR national team are equal to the training loads of the all-around champion of the 1952 and 1956 Olympic Games, V. Chukarin? Of course, Smolevsky should simply release half the team members - those who are not able to train as they should - and take others. But, alas, there are no others."
"One of our research assistants administered a questionnaire to boys and girls, asking them to list ten sports that were of interest to them. Girls' gymnastics came in third place, but boys' gymnastics didn't even make it into the top ten - that's what we've done to it; we removed everything alive and interesting that was in it."
"Maybe my point of view will be refuted, but look what happens. In his time, Chukarin didn't leave Lvov. Latynina, Shakhlin, and Titov never left Kiev. Now not a single female gymnast leaves Voronezh, and Rastorotsky and the current all-around world champion Lyudmila Turischeva are in Grozny. The fact that they are in their native land apparently helps them win. Why did we snatch Diomidov from Tashkent and bring him to Moscow? Did our gymnasts benefit from it? They lost. As well as from the fact that they ruined the gymnastics center in Leninsk-Kuznetsk, as well as the fact that Ilinykh left Novosibirsk."
"Why are the Japanese strong? Only conscientiousness and attitude. Their routines are a little more difficult than ours. They also fall off the apparatus. But they train a lot and, when necessary, they are in great shape. And when our gymnast enters competitions with a routine that he has performed in its entirety maybe only six times, then how will he do it?"
"Can we assume that science has done everything? Of course not. But Latynina correctly asks the question:'Comrade scientists, the girls will be able to perform as many routines as needed, but tell me, how many?' That's the question we need to answer. We need to help the team leaders clarify optional programs."
"For example, look at the optional program of the Swiss. The team is not very strong, but each one of them has his own 'zest' in the routine. And we've known this for 40 years, but we just don't use it."
"Leonid Arkaev is competing - in fact, he can be considered almost the same age as the guys from our team, he himself used to be on the team, and hasn't left the platform, although he is now both an international-category judge and is the deputy chairman of our Gymnastics Federation:"
"If you do a simple experiment - sew the emblem of the national team of any other European country onto the shirts of the guys from our national team, then only Voronin and Klimenko will stand out from the rest, you wouldn't even recognize our friends [the rest of them]. It seems to be that our problem is that the coaches follow a template, but a familiar pattern."
"The Japanese are strikingly different from our gymnasts, especially on the high bar. Our guys, I think, are simply not able to perform the exercises - physically they are not able to. But even on the rings, where the original Russian strength should be manifested, no one is able to hold up a cross. But it's all about one thing: a conscientious attitude towards training."
Merited Coach of the USSR V. M. Kurlyand takes the floor:
"We regularly lose in the compulsory program. Even the women lost at this championship. Moreover, we ourselves are to blame for this - this is our attitude towards the compulsories. The rules at the USSR championship provide that the all-around sum consists of half the sum of the compulsory and optional programs, plus the optional. But it would be necessary, I think: half the sum or two optional rounds, plus the sum of the compulsory round. Then the ratio will change."
"About the new scoring program, which will come into force on January 1, I think it will slow down the development of gymnastics. It's too complicated. For example, in order for a boy to perform the First Youth Level on the horizontal bar, he needs to train for five years. We have 20-25 structural classification elements on each apparatus; they need to be divided into several groups according to the number of categories, so that each group is mastered in the appropriate age category."
"Specialized schools are, of course, a lever for the development of gymnastics. But there is essentially no normal standard regulations on these schools. We are talking about a modern technique, but according to our estimate, we don't even have videotape cameras, not to mention much else. That is, if the director of a school is a person of change, everything is there. If not, then it's not. It seems that all these schools should be subordinate to the gymnastics department of the All-Union Committee."
A veteran of our gymnastics, Merited Master of Sports A. S. Abramyan said:
"We have significantly lost in the difficulty of exercises. Why did Lisitsky previously do a double twist dismount from the high bar, but now he does a simple hecht? And at the same time we want to beat the Japanese?! I do not agree with either Ukran or Smolevsky. They say that the Japanese have no more difficult routines that we do. They do! They say that the Japanese also fall off the apparatus. If they do fall - Nakayama fell from the pommel horse - how did he continue to work? He won three events. And here Karasev falls, falls again, and the others follow. It is necessary to raise the question of strong-willed preparation and responsibility more seriously."
"Guys, I don't mean to reproach you, but you still take advantage of the fact that you don't have worthy competition at home. However, you should feel responsible for Soviet sports and the country!"
Merited Coach of the USSR, Yu. Shtukman - women's coach, but the thoughts he expressed concerned gymnastics in general and mainly men's gymnastics, the situation of which worries us all today:
"I really don't like abstract discussions: difficulty or purity, early specialization or late. Life events dictate our line of development, not discussions. Lisitsky created an element that caused a storm of admiration - the double twist dismount. Now Lisitsky is doing hechts. However, why didn't any of our other gymnasts show a double twist?"
"The fundamental question is - who will win? I'm tired of losing so shamelessly and recklessly in men's gymnastics!"
"We must demand courage, determination, and will from our youth. But coaches also need to look at themselves. We must look for talented students. And we really, really need smart coaches."
"The issue of bringing our men's gymnastics closer to Japan is now an issue for all gymnastics. It will also help us, women's coaches. It will help us to be more courageous and not to let our competitors get close to us."
"Yes, we were behind the GDR women's team in the compulsory program. But there is no particular point in focusing on the compulsory. It is impossible to ensure victory by winning the compulsory; you have to think about the optional program. What did the men do? Suddenly it was decided that the Japanese no longer do difficult vaults, they say it's necessary to raise the height of the vault and so on. And Japanese gymnasts simplify or complicate their routines, based on the requirements of today, on the interests of tactics. Today, Kenmotsu alone did a triple twist on the floor. Tomorrow, if necessary, the rest will do it, too."
"The Japanese can only be defeated by difficulty. And acquiring it is an incredibly difficult task. It takes hellish discipline."
Merited Master of Sports Valery Kerdemelidi, having just recently left the gymnastics platform, his valuable opinion is more valuable:
"We say: there is no influx of young talented male gymnasts, but there is an influx of talented female gymnasts. Why? One of the reasons is the financial background of the trainers' work. In men's gymnastics, to bring up a first-rate gymnast, you have to work for seven years, and when a boy turns 18, he is drafted into the army. And all these seven years, by the way, the men's coach receives less money than the women's coach. Because after two years the girl becomes a First-Category student, after another year she becomes a candidate for master, and after another year she becomes a master. And now the coach is entitled to 150 hours of work for three trained girls. And for men, try to work out these 150 hours! So it turns out that in Moscow, for example, 70% of coaches work with girls, and 30% of coaches work with boys, and not the best."
"We know about the Japanese fanaticism for training, but are we fanatics? With us, you can skip classes on Thursday and calmly take a steam bath. And now once-a-day training isn't enough - we need two or three times a day, and then we will achieve something. And you have to understand that if you missed even one lesson, it means you've lost a tenth of a point, and the path to a gold medal is closed."
The most experienced gymnast of our team, repeated participant in the Olympic Games Viktor Lisitsky said:
"They say we started training less. Since 1960, since joining the national team, I have been training twice a day - before I thought I wouldn't be able to withstand such work loads. I increased the difficulty of my routines. But the years passed, and they began to make strict demands on me in terms of cleanliness. And then the double twist was thrown out, which was talked about a lot here. But I see that I'm wrong. Only through difficulty can you win. Women cope with the work load, and even to music. Now I'm making my routines difficult again. In general, it's correct - national team members must grow up in harsh conditions. No need to pat us on the head."
V. B. Korenberg, lecturer at the Moscow Forestry Institute:
"Chekov said, 'If they serve you tea, don't look for coffee in it.' If Lisitsky is made up like Voronin, nothing good will come of it; there is no need to paint all the gymnasts with the same brush. Voronin needs smooth routines. Lisitsky needs rugged ones; then he can shine and win against 'smooth' ones. The Japanese are allowing themselves relatively 'smooth' routines now only because they feel they are a cut above. They beat us in the optional program, and it is a criterion of strength - whoever is stronger in the optional program is potentially stronger in the compulsory program."
"It seems to me that we are making very poor use of the opportunities offered by sports science. In particular, we forget about the biomechanical analysis of routines, which should be based on a good understanding of mechanics. It is unlikely that a coach, who is already quite busy in our conditions, will be able to master this analysis. And today, it turns out that we spend more time correcting mistakes than teaching the elements themselves."
Yu. Menkhin, teacher at the Moscow Technological Institute of Food Industry:
"I think that it's a big problem that we still do not have a unified system for anlayzing technique and teaching methods. Each coach has his own opinion on how to teach a double twist or any other difficult element. But there are fundamentals of rational technique, and they are unified."
In conclusion, the Chairman of the USSR Gymnastics Federation, Hero of the Soviet Union, G. V. Baklanov spoke:
"The pace of development of world gymnastics is higher than the growth rate of our gymnastics. This is the fundamental conclusion that we must draw from the results of the world championship. For the men, everything happened completely naturally: the Japanese are stronger than us, and all our attempts to patch holes once again confirmed the futility of this activity. Today our men's gymnastics is experiencing a crisis, the elimination of which requires radical measures. What are these measures? The whole world has armed itself with our gymnastics school. The Japanese, who at one time were unable to master our school, approached it in their own scientific way, which our trainers regarded as the Japanese school. This was our fatal error, which affected us during the past decade. We suddenly became disillusioned with our own school, and began to grab in fits and starts something seemingly new from anywhere, and the 'new' revealed to us by the Japanese - it's just hard work, efficiency, and a tremendous commitment to gymnastics."
"Analyzing the lessons of defeat and the causes of the crisis, we must take as a basis our organizational system, our training system, plus discipline and hard work, threefold compared to the current one"
From the Editor: As you can see, the roundtable discussion turned out to be quite heated. Although much of the speeches of the speakers sounded polemical, truths are borne in disputes. One of them has now become obvious to everyone: without a significant increase in the performance of the gymnasts, without increasing their responsibility, one cannot count on success.
Four years ago, after the last world championship, we also held a final meeting at the roundtable. Now the debate from four years ago seems somewhat abstract and untroubled. Difficulty or purity? How should you arrange the routines? One can argue a lot about these issues, but, as Yu. Shtukman correctly said today, "life events dictate our line of development, not discussions."
Four years ago, we lost to the Japanese national team by not so little, either - 4.25 points. The features of the crisis, which G. Baklanov speaks about so directly and frankly today, have already been outlined. The only trouble is that it didn't worry us enough at the time. V. Muratov, the former head coach of the national team said four years ago: "I consider one of the mistakes in preparing for the world championship to be that I left too much to chance in the preparation of individual gymnasts, allowing them to work only according to an individual plan."
Unfortunately, the self-discipline in work and insufficient control over its quality served as a hindrance for the whole subsequent period. The composition of the men's national team was renewed several times, and now the new head coach V. Smolevsky states that the plans made with due regard to the individuality of athletes should have been revised in the direction of increasing work loads, and in general there is no confidence that these plans were fulfilled.
Listen to what M. Ukran says: the work load of the current national team gymnast for a week is equal to the daily workload of Chukarin, who left the platform many years ago! What was only an alarming symptom four years ago has today become one of the main causes of the crisis, as was mentioned in most speeches.
Efficiency, enthusiasm, discipline - these are the absolute requirements of today. The responsibility of our strongest to the sports community, to the country. Increasing the authority of the coach. The creative work of a coach and the creation of conditions for this work.
Other problems were also raised, and if some of what was said was not included in the report, it was only because our goal was to focus attention on the most fundamental issues of domestic gymnastics.
But there is one more issue that was almost not touched upon at the roundtable. The issue is about personal responsibility on the part of sports societies and departments, as well as cities, regions, and republics for matters in gymnastics. Sovetsky Sport already wrote about the trouble of the once-famous Ukrainian gymnastics before the world championship. But isn't what happened in Ljubljana largely a consequence of the deterioration of work with leading gymnasts in CSKA, Dinamo, and the DSO trade unions? The newspaper intends to return specifically to this issue.
Let's consider this material only as the beginning of a serious conversation about our gymnastics. We are waiting for responses from coaches, athletes, specialists, and all of our readers.