GYMN-L Digest - 25 Apr 1995 to 26 Apr 1995
There
are 16 messages totalling 507 lines in this
issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Summer season in Gymnastics
2. 1992 Olympics
3. Negativity - a different slant
4. Ploiesti? (2)
5. SI vs. rhythmics
(a late entry)
6. Title IX,
Part II
7. Comments about
Barcelona. (3)
8. Test
post
9. Mukhina
10. Coaches treatment (2)
11. Barcelona
12. negativity -
a different slant
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 23:39:11
-0500
From: ***@VAXA.CIS.UWOSH.EDU
Subject:
Summer season in Gymnastics
Date sent: 25-APR-1995 23:34:56
I was just
leafing through an old issue of International Gymnast,
Novemeber
of 1993, when they covered the 1993 national Championships
and talked about the new summer season...I'm curious. How
does everyone
think the new format has worked out,
now that we have had some time
to think about
it.
In my personal opinion, I really think it worked better in May,
despite
the fact that TV money wouldn't have been
as high, and selection procedures
would be
different (or different people selected). I think the quality
of gymnastics has suffered because athletes have not had
time to rest and
train new skills. Who knows?
Shannon Miller is now training a full out
on bars
to replace the double layout (which, in my mind, is a smart move
on her part, since she is having problems with the other
skill). With the
old symstem,
the gymnasts would be able to refine skills and add new ones
over the summer.
With the new code of points, it is
crucial that gymnasts learn and upgrade
skills and
routines. With the new system, I think that limits things.
Please...I'd
love some debate on this issue.
Jennifer
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 23:47:40
-0500
From: ***@VAXA.CIS.UWOSH.EDU
Subject:
1992 Olympics
Date sent:
25-APR-1995 23:41:03
I realize this is old news, but seeing the
commentary on Bontas's
compulsory
beam score made me want to bring it up.
While watching the 1992
Olympics, and reflecting even now, I still
think
the Americans were the subject of some very tough scoring in
Barcelona. A
good example (indirectly) is Bontas's beam and
bars
marks. She scored 9.9 on both routines.
Betty
Okino scored 9.85 on bars and 9.862 on beam, both
scores below
what Bontas
received, yet, both routines were of higher quality. Similiar
instances can be applied to Kerri Strug's
floor routine, and Shannon
Miller's bar set in compulsories.
In optionals, the situation was even worse. While I cannot
deny that
the Romanians deserved the silver (the
Americans did not stick but two
dismounts on bars
and beam combined) the American scores, in comparison
to
the Romanians, again seemed a bit harsh. Maria Neculita,
as the first
athlete up on bars for the Romanians,
had major form breaks on her
cast to giants and
sloppy form on both her Yaeger and her dismount.
She
received a 9.837. It deserved far less than that.
My point, I guess,
is that, after all the disputes over the scoring
in
Indianapolis, alot of European coaches said the
tables would be
turned on the Americans in
Barcelona. I'm wondering if that is
percisely
what happened.
Again, PLEASE...I'm looking for discussion.
Jennifer
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 05:18:53
UT
From: ***@MSN.COM
Subject:
Re: Negativity - a different slant
| Just a bit confused -- are you
saying that we should, or shouldn't,
|
treat
young girls differently?
I won't presume to speak for anyone
else,
but although I understand that some people
may see them on TV in a detached
way, and feel
that if they're in front of the camera
they're fair game, Not
me. As far as I'm concerned (here comes the
hate mail) they should be
treated like the jewels
that they are - excelling at something shouldn't
require
them to forfeit that.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:51:33
+0200
From: ***@DD.CHALMERS.SE
Subject:
Ploiesti?
If someone knows something about the europeen
cup in Ploiesti in
Romania I am very interested in info about it!!!
Please
write to me or to the list.
peter
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 08:20:37
-0400
From: ***@SIDWELL.EDU
Subject:
SI vs. rhythmics (a late entry)
Simon (***@postoffice4.mail.cornell.edu)
has been having some
troubles getting through to
the listserv, so he asked me to post this for
him.
Lisa
----------
Forwarded message ----------
Subj: SI vs. rhythmics (a late entry)
I would've commented on this
sooner, but my bookstore is a little slow in
getting
SI. . .At least I've had a chance to see some of your opinions
first. (I will
now proceed to beat a dead horse.)
E.M. Swift's commentary, as has
been previously mentioned, was in "Point
After," which is the
editorial page. Thus, it's his
opinion. (Of course,
the other examples of his "opinion" out there,
like Shannon Miller's
apparent downfall back in a
Feb. issue, aren't particularly encouraging.) I
think
he's written virtually all the gymnastics articles I've seen in SI for
the past few years.
Occasionally, he has a positive opinion (usually if
we've got a winner). Unfortunately, he seems to editorialize
wherever he can.
But I digress. . .The "Point After"'s
primary focus was on ballroom
dancing. He seemed supportive of that, and urged
a little redefinition of
the term
"sport," choosing things like curling, yachting, and shooting to
point out sports that may seem somewhat "out
there." Then, boom,
there's
this line about making room [for ballroom
d.] by discarding synchro.
swimming
and rythmics, "two ridiculous
activities." After reading
some of
the opinions put forth on the list, I'd
been expecting perhaps a more
extensive attack on
those sports from him. That sentence, though was it.
Above all, his editorial backed
some redefinition of what Americans
consider
"sport"--it doesn't have to involve colliding bodies or throwing
around a leather object. He *might* have been attempting to be
sarcastic
with that one sentence, but given his
general track record on gymnastics
coverage, I
think it shows what his real opinion is.
(The fact that that
one line was stuck
rather bodly in the title doesn't make me feel
any
better.)
SI, which is often an editorialized mess to begin with, needs to
bring in some more writers.
My .02. Thanks for putting the effort into
reading it.
--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:36:50
BST
From: ***@IC.AC.UK
Subject:
Re: Ploiesti?
Peter wrote:
> If someone knows something
about the europeen cup in Ploiesti in
>
Romania I am very interested in info about it!!!
> Please write to me or
to the list.
Which European Cup is that? The info I got was that the
women
artistic gymnastics European Cup is going to
be in Rome, Italy,
and the rhythmic gymnastics one
is in Telford, England. Both
are going to be in
June. Maybe the one you mentioned is the
mens artistic one? I'll see if I can find more info
on that one.
Sherwin
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 09:11:57
-0500
From: ***@SUVAX1.STETSON.EDU
Subject:
Title IX, Part II
I'll get this brief this time. As a university professor, I know that
the
typical administrator and faculty member don't
care for athletics and resent
the type of
treatment athletes and coaches make (particularly when coaches
make much more the most professors!). Unfortunately, college athletics
exists for only two reasons:
1) For recruiting
purposes. It's much easier to recuirt students to you
school if they have something to cheer for. Many students will attend
a school partially because of their athletic reputation
(it's sad to
say). I don't
really believe adminstators want athletes for
student
diversity reasons, as many of them claim.
2) To appease
alumni. Alumni usually give to
winners. Winning athletics
draw alumni who spend money at games, joine
booster clubs, and seem to
take more pride in their schools.
College athletics is a
tool. How can things get better for
gymnastics??? Do
your best to sign quality athletes. When you do that, the crowds will
come
(like UCLA, Utah, Florida, Alabama, Georgia)
and they willl pay money. Attempt
to
court boosters who have a lot of money and ask them to designate
gymnastics
as the recipient of their gift. I keep my fingers crossed for both men's
and
women's gymnastics programs. Title IX, however, will not be the
remedy for
our problems.
Mike
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 11:38:57
-0400
From: ***@PRISM.GATECH.EDU
Subject:
Comments about Barcelona.
> While watching the 1992 Olympics, and
reflecting even now, I still
> think the
Americans were the subject of some very tough scoring in
> Barcelona. A
good example (indirectly) is Bontas's beam and
bars
> marks. She scored 9.9 on both
routines.
I have to agree with this to a point. Bontas may have been overscored
in terms of elegance and what you view as higher quality
routines by
Okino, but her routine was more
difficult. However, she routinely missed the
RO-FF-Double tuck (underotated) and she was not heavily penalized by the
judges. I think that the judges in Barcelona were using
their own
code. Examples:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gutsu's huge step forward on floor after that
ugliest-thing-ever-saw "Double
Layout with the legs split on the first
Somi" Scored a 9.912. Shannon
steped on her Double pike and got
a 9.90.
Kim Zemeskal's AA Beam. Talk about
gift. she almost feel off the beam on her
tumbling runs (both) and hopped on the dismount (9.8, with
what
deductions?)
Yang Bo's Floor: Same
tumbling and great dance as Bogi, but scored almost
0.1
less.
Lyssenko's
AA Floor: No IDEA how they came up with a 9.8 for this routine.
The only
thing she didn't under rotate was the second pass.
Milosovics
AA Floor: A Big Hop on the mount with no deduction (9.962)
Lyssenko (Again) Vault Finals: She tucked on the horse on
the handspring
front 1/2 and she still made a 9.9.
(Not to meantion the 9.925 she got for
the Double twisting Layout Yurchenko
with a big step on the landing.)
Gutsu's AA beam. She had Errors right from the start. 9.912
HOW?
And, Bogi's AA FX & BB scores
(9.912) and her second vault in the finals.
"Nothing extra, she's just
pulling her legs around as fast as possible to
get
to the floor- Elfi Shlegel"
that somehow outscored Gogean?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The
point being, alot of gymnasts got shafted at
Barcelona. Christina wasn't the
only one getting
favors. Like I said, apparently the Judges were using their
own personal code of Points.
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 14:54:40
-0400
From: ***@POSTOFFICE4.MAIL.CORNELL.EDU
Subject:
Test post
I'm
terribly sorry to be wasting bandwidth, but I need to see if the
Gymn-l server still likes me or not. I'm working on the problem.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 21:16:00
+0200
From: ***@MAIL.LSS.CO.ZA
Subject:
Re: Mukhina
I also heard that she was doing
floor and wasn't ready to one of the
moves but the
coach made her do it anyway.
Helen.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 21:23:46
+0200
From: ***@MAIL.LSS.CO.ZA
Subject:
Coaches treatment
I have got very tough coaches, or at least they are
IMHO.
1 - We get weighed twice a week and if we haven't lost weight we run
and
do strength in tracksuits until we've lost, in all weather.
But soon
we are getting a dietician to come to the gym who knows what
she is
talking about.
2 - We get hit if we don't do something
properly but only rarely does it
leave
a bruise.
3 - If we are injured they never believe us. They say if we were
really
in pain we would do what they told us to and then do
something else.
but if we are injured and don't tell them we get shouted
at.
Helen.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 15:55:28
-0400
From: ***@MAGNUS.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU
Subject:
Barcelona
I have to agree with Jeff on the Barcelona scores - for almost all the
big
names. It kind of seems to me that the judges
were scoring the gymnasts on the
basis of their
names rather on what they actually did, or did not, do. Not that
this doesn't seem to happen at EVERY meet, but Barcelona
seemed more blatant
than most. Probably all of you
know that I'm a HUGE fan of the ex-Soviets, but
I in NO WAY agree with Gutsu's getting the AA gold in Barcelona. Yes, she had
tricks, but she also had not-so-great form and errors that
were just plain
overlooked. My theory has always
been that the powers-that-be in the gym world
wanted
an ex-Sov to win, mainly out of sentimentality. This
was their last
competition together as "the
unified team" and it made a nice story for one of
them
to win. The Sov coaches sent a clear signal about who
they wanted it to be
by putting Gutsu back in AA, and it seems like the judges just went
along with
it. It's all just so ridiculously
political. But as I said, it seems like most
meets
are. At a lot of the major competitions I've been to, it was blatantly
obvious after compulsories who was going to win, barring
errors. The ones that
stand out the most to me are
'87 Worlds, where the judges
CLEARLY want to give
Silivas the gold, but
she just made too many errors, and '89 Worlds, where I
knew
after comps that Bogy would win. I'm not saying she didn't deserve to, or
that Silivas didn't had she hit in
'87, but it just seems to me that the judges
are
not going into these meets open-minded. And it only seems to get worse at
the Olympic Games, where so much is at stake. I still
haven't decided who I
think should have won in
Barcelona, but IMHO it shouldn't have been Gutsu.
I'd
rank both Miller and Milosovici
above her, but with all the political scores,
it's
hard to say who should have been first. I haven't watched my tapes in a
while, and I don't even remember if all of Milo's routines
were shown, so it's
hard to make a judgment. What
do others think? (A P.S. to all Gutsu fans. I am
NOT
blaming her for the outcome - scores are always the judges' decision or
"fault," not the gymnasts. I have nothing against
Tatiana, I just don't think
her performance on
that particular day was worth the Olympic gold.)
Beth
P.S. A
different topic, but the men's artistic European Cup is also in Rome,
with the women's. Could this meet in Romania be some sort of
junior
competition?
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 12:59:00
PDT
From: ***@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU
Subject:
Re: Comments about Barcelona.
>
> Gutsu's
huge step forward on floor after that ugliest-thing-ever-saw "Double
>
Layout with the legs split on the first Somi"
Scored a 9.912. Shannon
> steped
on her Double pike and got a 9.90.
>
It is pointless to compare a split-leg
double layout with a double pike.
Case in point: Kristie Phillips could do
a double pike. Do you want to
see her try a split-leg double layout? I think what the judges were
trying to do was compensate the gymnasts who threw maximum
difficulty. The
scoring system was such that just about every gymnast started
from a
10.0 start value, so that gymnasts were not being rewarded for
extra
difficulty. The most famous and blatant case of this
was the Yurchenko-full
being
worth the same as a double-full.
The double full is about 0.3
harder. Give Lyssenko
credit for it and she's the Olympic champion. Gutsu
really went above and beyond just about everyone else and
the judges wanted
to reward her for going for
it. The same goes with Lyssenko and Milosovici.
I
think the judges had finally figured it out and wanted to actually try
to separate and rank the gymnasts according to difficultyAND execution, as
opposed
to just stuck landings. They didn't do a perfect job. Sylvia Mitova
will tell you that, if you can hear her all the way from
11th place. They
may have forgotten a little about
artistry, but they were on the right track.
-Brett
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 16:17:40
-0400
From: ***@PRISM.GATECH.EDU
Subject:
Re: Comments about Barcelona.
>
> >
> > Gutsu's huge step forward on floor after that
ugliest-thing-ever-saw "Double
> > Layout with the legs split on
the first Somi" Scored a 9.912. Shannon
>
> steped on her Double
pike and got a 9.90.
> >
>
> It is pointless to compare a split-leg
double layout with a double pike.
>
Case in point: Kristie Phillips could do a double pike. Do you want to
> see her try a split-leg double layout? I think what the judges were
> trying to do was compensate the gymnasts who threw maximum
difficulty. The
> scoring system was such that just about every gymnast
started from a
> 10.0 start value, so that gymnasts were not being
rewarded for extra
> difficulty. The most famous and blatant case of this
was the Yurchenko-full
> being
worth the same as a double-full.
The double full is about 0.3
> harder. Give Lyssenko
credit for it and she's the Olympic champion. Gutsu
>
really went above and beyond just about everyone else
and the judges wanted
> to reward her for going
for it. The same goes with Lyssenko and Milosovici.
>
I think the judges had finally figured it out and wanted to actually try
>
to separate and rank the gymnasts according to difficultyAND execution, as
> opposed
to just stuck landings. They didn't do a perfect job. Sylvia Mitova
>
will tell you that, if you can hear her all the way
from 11th place. They
> may have forgotten a
little about artistry, but they were on the right track.
>
>
-Brett
>
I stand by what I say. It was the ugliest
thing I have seen performed.
Plus, I was only suggesting that many gymnast got higher scores on moves
with
greater difficulty than gymnasts who performed less difficult scores.
And,
like you also echo: They were using their own Code of Points, it seemed.
BTW:
I now support, as I did before, the STRONG taxation of routines with
emphasis on FORM and EXECUTION. Point blank: It is one thing
to perform
the most difficult tricks, but good
form on a less difficult trick is
better.
Besides:
Enforcing rules which deduct for form errors make the
coaches of
the world actually make their gymnasts
learn moves technically correct.
How many full-ins have you seen that look
like "desparate attempts"? I can
say alot.
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 18:04:57
-0500
From: ***@ASTRO.OCIS.TEMPLE.EDU
Subject:
Re: Coaches treatment
Helen says:
>I have got very tough
coaches, or at least they are IMHO.
>1 - We get weighed twice a week and
if we haven't lost weight we run and
> do
strength in tracksuits until we've lost, in all weather. But soon
> we
are getting a dietician to come to the gym who knows what she is
> talking
about.
>2 - We get hit if we don't do something properly but only rarely
does it
> leave
a bruise.
>3 - If we are injured they never believe us. They say if we
were really
> in pain we would do what they told us to and then do
something else.
>
but if we are injured and don't tell them we
get shouted at.
Helen, that's not tough, that's abusive. Hitting a gymnast is both
inappropriate and illegal. Ignoring a gymnast who says she's in
pain is
downright dangerous. (I assume you're talking about
injury-type pain, not
stiffness, the unavoidable
pains of a heavy workout, or stuff like bruises
and
rips.)
When I was a gymnast, I believed that you had to make a
trade-off: abuse
for improvement in the sport. I've worked at enough gyms since to
know
that the best coaches aren't abusive. They're tough, they require a lot
out of an athlete, but they're also willing to listen and
they _never_ hit.
I really hope you will find a new gym with a better
coach. I wouldn't be
surprised if your gymnastics improved as much as your
morale.
--
Ilene
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 1995 00:10:18
UT
From: ***@MSN.COM
Subject:
negativity - a different slant
>I have seen the effects of a little
criticism on girls that are sheltered
>from
it, and I have seen the effects of a great deal of criticism and worse
>on girls that have had to deal with it from the beginning. I
have found that
>on the former, any such
invective is taken far out of proportion, and can
>quite often be very damaging, perhaps even ending the gymnasts
career. On
the
>latter,
a healthy attitude develops that goes along the lines of "the
closer
>the source of
criticism is to me personally, the more important it
is
that I
>listen. Conversely, if I don't know my
detractor, who cares?"
My background does not include
coaching gymnastics, but it does include being
in
a similar environment in the equestrian world - the training, age, and
typical personality of the girls has many similarities. I don't recall
saying
that they should not be criticized, and I certainly wouldn't presume
to stop their coach from doing so.
Having said
that, I think that if
desensitizing them so that
they can emotionally handle the rudeness and
non-sequitor attacks of the press is a necessary evil, then I'm
just happy
that I can be the one to give the hug
and you can be the one to hurl the
insults - I
don't have it in me.
------------------------------
End of
GYMN-L Digest - 25 Apr 1995 to 26 Apr 1995
*************************************************