gymn Digest Wed, 31 Aug 94 Volume 3 : Issue 9

Today's Topics:
Alexandrov and Karolyi
CG Men's AA Competition Full Results
CG Women's AA Competition Full Results
College gymnasts vs USA team
Complaining to NBC
Flamable Opinions (2 msgs)
flame me via E-mail
Foreign Meets on US TV?
Gurova's essay thing
Jenni Beatherd
Jennie Thompson (2 msgs)
Kerri & Pozsar (2 msgs)
let's guess who the dortmund winners will be
men
My USA picks
No men on NBC (3 msgs)
Re[2]: NBC Coverage
The Men's Thing
Whatever happened to..., OTC gymnasts
women's scoring-where's the punch line? (3 msgs)

This is a digest of the gymn@athena.mit.edu mailing list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 21:38:34 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Alexandrov and Karolyi

>Thank you Alexandrov!

Perhaps the new 'savior' of US gymnastics? <g>

Seriously, I never in my life expected to see Alexandrov and Karolyi on the
same team (!), but think it could turn out to be very positive. Certainly,
even his 3 months with Dom M has made a huge difference. I'm curious to see
what his effect on Kim Z will be...as well as Bogie's effect on both of
them...

One thing I do wonder about, though, is how Sasha feels about being Bela's
employee.

Mara

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 23:40:56 UTC-0700
From: ***@cs.ubc.ca
Subject: CG Men's AA Competition Full Results

(CG = Commonwealth Games, AA = All-around)
(AUS = Australia, BAR = Barbados, CAN = Canada, CYP = Cyprus, ENG = England,
HKG =Hong Kong, MAS = Malaysia, NGR = Nigeria, NIR = Northern Ireland,
NMB = Namibia, NZL = New Zealand, RSA = Republic of South Africa,
SCO = Scotland, SWZ = Swaziland, WAL = Wales)

Name Country Floor Pommels Rings Vault PBars HBar
Total

1. Neil Thomas ENG 9.575 9.050 9.250 9.525 9.150 9.400
55.950
2. Brennon Dowrick AUS 8.700 9.450 9.200 9.200 9.450 9.525
55.525
3. Peter Hogan AUS 9.050 9.200 9.300 8.600 9.500 9.300
54.950
4. Lee McDermott ENG 8.900 8.950 9.450 9.200 9.100 9.200
54.800
5. Richard Ikeda CAN 8.450 9.150 9.200 9.000 9.350 9.575
54.725
6. Kristan Burley CAN 9.575 8.350 9.050 9.250 9.200 9.150
54.575
7. Bret Hudson AUS 9.150 9.200 8.850 9.500 9.000 8.800
54.500
8. Alan Nolet CAN 9.250 8.350 9.500 9.250 9.050 8.800
54.200
9. Colin Close NIR 8.850 9.150 8.650 8.800 9.050 8.750
53.250
10. Robert Barber ENG 9.000 9.000 8.750 9.100 7.800 9.300
52.950
T11 Mark Lister NZL 8.500 8.550 8.750 8.900 8.450 8.500
51.650
T11 Steven Frew SCO 8.400 8.500 8.450 9.100 8.250 8.950
51.650
13. Gareth Irwin WAL 8.450 8.400 8.450 8.750 8.650 8.850
51.550
14. Dewald Laubscher RSA 8.200 7.850 8.250 9.000 8.650 9.050
51.000
15. Johan Van Heerden RSA 8.450 8.300 8.450 8.800 8.650 8.200
50.850
16. Adrian Steyn RSA 8.500 7.550 8.000 9.150 8.450 8.700
50.350
17. Tak Ming Lee HKG 7.850 7.950 8.300 8.900 7.900 8.050
48.950
18. Sean Grosvenor BAR 8.650 6.950 7.100 8.750 8.500 8.900
48.850
19. Craig Bruce NZL 7.750 7.350 7.550 9.200 8.350 8.600
48.800
20. Nicholas Dunn NIR 8.050 7.950 8.500 8.600 7.550 7.900
48.550
21. Gareth Davies WAL 8.000 8.450 8.200 8.000 7.850 7.800
48.300
22. Andrew Tombs WAL 8.050 7.650 7.750 8.600 7.600 8.050
47.700
23. Kim Fai Wong HKG 7.950 7.200 7.500 8.850 7.650 7.100
46.250
24. Nobleman Motsa SWZ 8.000 5.450 8.250 8.400 7.250 7.400
44.750

Derek Callahan of Scotland who had finished 22nd in the team competition
and qualified for the all-around competition did not compete in the all-around
competition (I don't know why). His spot was taken by the first reserve
gymnast, Nobleman Motsa of Swaziland.

Karen

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 1994 0:07:51 UTC-0700
From: ***@cs.ubc.ca
Subject: CG Women's AA Competition Full Results

(CG = Commonwealth Games, AA = All-around)
(AUS = Australia, CAN = Canada, CYP = Cyprus, ENG = England, HKG = Hong Kong,
MAS = Malaysia, NIR = Northern Ireland, NZL = New Zealand, RSA = Republic of
South Africa, SCO = Scotland, WAL = Wales)

'T' indicates a tie in placing.

Name Country Vault UBars Beam Floor Total

1. Stella Umeh CAN 9.675 9.725 9.475 9.525 38.400
2. Rebecca Stoyel AUS 9.412 9.700 9.375 9.550 38.037
3. Zita Lusack ENG 9.625 9.300 9.375 9.425 37.725
4. Lisa Simes CAN 9.525 9.475 9.300 9.100 37.400
5* Salli Wills AUS 9.387 9.325 9.200 9.475 37.387
6. Jacqueline Brady ENG 9.450 9.325 9.300 9.150 37.225
7. Karin Szymko ENG 9.550 9.050 9.275 9.275 37.150
8. Ruth Moniz AUS 9.362 8.850 8.925 9.475 36.612
9. Sonia Lawrence WAL 9.462 9.100 8.350 9.600 36.512
10. Jaime Hill CAN 9.237 9.500 8.950 8.250 35.937
T11 Sarah Thompson NZL 9.412 8.700 8.350 8.825 35.287
T11 Bethan Powell WAL 9.262 8.000 8.900 9.125 35.287
13. Heidi Oosthuizen RSA 9.337 8.050 8.900 8.950 35.237
14. Rachel Vickery NZL 9.237 8.100 8.750 9.025 35.112
15. Jo-Anne West RSA 9.412 8.625 8.200 8.650 34.887
16. Wai Chi Lim MAS 9.112 8.650 8.525 8.475 34.762
17. Claire Hamer WAL 8.837 7.500 8.300 9.300 33.937
18. Andri Agathocleous CYP 9.112 7.450 8.350 8.975 33.887
19. Sinead Lyons SCO 9.050 7.100 9.025 8.575 33.750
20. Fiona Pulman NZL 9.337 7.450 8.550 8.250 33.587
21. Nicola Helen Waite HKG 9.350 7.600 7.700 8.450 33.100
22. Tanya Steenkamp RSA 8.950 7.350 8.425 7.825 32.550
23. Sonya Cairns NIR 8.725 6.750 8.725 8.025 32.225
24. Jenny Dwyer NIR 8.950 6.100 7.750 9.150 31.950

* Salli Wills who finished 11th in the team competition but did not qualify to
the all-around as 3 other Australians were ahead of her competed in place of
Joanna Hughes of Australia who finished in 5th place. Joanna did not compete
as she is still not fully recovered from her injury suffered at worlds earlier
this year and they did not want her to risk further injury in individual
competition.

Sherwin emailed me that H. Oosthuizen is Heidi Oosthuizen according to
the television announcers.
For anyone keeping these posts, please note that I spelled one competitor's
name wrong in the team list. The correct spelling is Jo-Anne West of the
Republic of South Africa. (I missed the 'e' on Anne in the team post.)

Karen

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 00:13:52 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: College gymnasts vs USA team

Hello!

I went to USA congress and the USA Nationals and I had a great time. The
level of gymnastics shown by the girls is very good. I think lots of good
thing to happen to the US Women Gymnastics. The Juniors look very good.

I must said that College Gymnastics is not too far behind. I can name 10
college gymnasts that can easily beat Wendy Bruce (18th place) and Martha
Grubs (9th place) on their optionals. BTW, Martha Grubs will attend the
Univ. of Florida this Fall. If they eliminate compulsories, as talks arround
the USA congress suggested, you will see many college gymnasts competing at
USA Nationals and making the USA Team. Like it or not, the top College
Gymnasts have the same or more difficulty than the 6th to the 20th place at
the USA Nationals. In fact Dominique Daws will attend Stanford and Amanda
will be attending college next year. Those two gymnasts and others will add
more stregth to college gymnastics. Remeber Kelly Garrison, well if the
compulsories gets eliminated, you will see more like her to emerge.

Raul

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 18:54:48 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Complaining to NBC

>(NBC)When they realize that there are over a hundred of us >gymn folk on the
internet alone they will have to take us >seriously.

Texx, where have you been?
I can't take THAT comment seriously

David
NBC

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 21:38:12 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Flamable Opinions

>> Bulls**t!!!
>
> 1) I doubt there's anything the US Women could learn from the US Men at
this
>> point (except maybe how to pout)


>I case you all havent noticed, I took EXTREME umbrage at that remark !

Flame away. I can take it. Just don't pout <g>

Mara

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 22:25:51 -0500 (CDT)
From: ***@owlnet.rice.edu
Subject: Flamable Opinions

| Flame away. I can take it. Just don't pout <g>

Please do not flame on Gymn. We do attempt to maintain a productive,
civilized atmosphere. Flaming does aboslutely nothing to contribute
to either of those goals.

If you want, you can flame in private direct email. But Gymn uses
enough bandwith already, and we don't need to waste everyone's time
with flame wars.

Rachele

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 21:25:36 -0700 (MST)
From: ***@imap1.asu.edu
Subject: flame me via E-mail

Sorry, Rachele et al! I just posted something that includes a "Flame me"
response at the bottom, seconds before I got the "please don't flame on
gymn notice"! So the offer still stands, but E-mail it to me if it is
what you may describe as "flaming". But don't be too mean...:)

address is as below...

Gurova

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 23:24:00 UTC
From: ***@genie.geis.com
Subject: Foreign Meets on US TV?

>Maybe we could develop an appreciation for men's gymnastics by showing
>Russian, Ukrainin or Belarusian nationals on American TV.

How about showing the World Stars (a.k.a. Moscow News) meet? That way we'd
be treated to all of the above nations at once, and lots of others, too.

Debbie


------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 10:37 PDT
From: ***@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU
Subject: Gurova's essay thing

Bravo!

Stand up and take a bow. Well said.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 21:38:39 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Jenni Beatherd

I've never been a major Jenni Beatherd fan, but was very impressed by her UB
set that was shown Saturday. Formwise, one of the best Tkatchev's I've seen
(*straight* legs, *pointed* toes).

Mara

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 10:46 PDT
From: ***@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU
Subject: Jennie Thompson

Am I the only one in the country who feels that Jennie Thompson is just an
embarrassment to artistic gymnastics? I can't believe they rank her 4th in
the country. She is the sloppiest, most awkward, most unpolished gymnast
I have seen since Laura Cutina (ROM). A friend remarked that what bugs about
her is not how she refuses to point her toes, but that she almost "unpoints"
them.

People seem to latch onto her because she's short and has some difficult tricks
Guang SUk Kim(PRK) was tiny as well but had beauty, polish and extension in her
work. It IS possible.

THe real tragedy in this is that she is a really talented kid. Chuck her in
the "what could have been" pile along with Maria Neculita and Kerri Strug.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 15:43:45 EST
From: ***@email.cfr.org
Subject: Jennie Thompson

Brett wrote:

>Am I the only one in the country who feels that Jennie Thompson is just an
>embarrassment to artistic gymnastics? I can't believe they rank her 4th in
>the country. She is the sloppiest, most awkward, most unpolished gymnast
>I have seen.....

Jennie Thompson is embarrassingly *young* and her skills show it. By no
stretch of the imagination is she artistic. Jennie's level can be difficult
in the trick dept.(eg. on beam), but she is still an automoton. Time will
tell, time will tell......(here we go again with the age debate).

Connie

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 11:46:45 EST
From: ***@email.cfr.org
Subject: Kerri & Pozsar

Susan wrote:

>Kerri trains at Gymnastics World owned by Jerry Hinkle though Geza Pozsar and
>Artour Akopian are her main coaches.

I thought Geza Pozsar had his own gym (with the former Emilia
Eberle helping out). Sure is hard to keep track of not only gymnasts but
coaches these days....

BTW- Awhile back in a newspaper article I remember that Pozsar praised the
running of Brown's Gymnastics and the business sense of its owner as the best in
the country (ouch to Bela ;-) ).

Connie

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 17:26:13 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Kerri & Pozsar

>I thought Geza Pozsar had his own gym<

He does in Northern California but he still does choreogrpahy and clinic like
stuff for many many people. In fact the way I always understood it was that
Rick Newman (Michelle's coach) was the mind behind the coaching at Pozsar's.
Rick is now at Nunno's and there are no elite gymnasts that I know of
currently training at Geza's.

Susan

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 19:39:38 -0700 (MST)
From: ***@imap1.asu.edu
Subject: let's guess who the dortmund winners will be

These are the teams I feel will have shots at medals, and these are my
predictions re: the make-up* of those teams:

For the Russian team I'm thinking: Kochetkova, Fabrichnova, Khorkina,
Groscheva, Vandisheva (alive and well?), Golub, Nikolaevna, Lebedeva, and
possibly Ignatova if she still exists.
For the Romanians: Milo, Gogean, Hatagan, Cacovean, Bican, Amanar,
Ghimpu, and maybe Loaies if they're desperate.
For the Ukrainians: Pod, Bolokava, Knizhnik, Malaya, Nakorneeva,
Shchakoval, and for some nostalgia Lyssenko and Kalinina may be
making the trip.
Of course, other teams may be seriously contending, like China and the
US...
China is tough to call because most of who they have sent to the
last major meets have been *very* inexperienced but maybe they are hiding
some good four event gymnasts.
The US will also be inexperienced, and as far as I'm concerned, lack
the technical polish and mental toughness for compulsories, and optionals
may be a repeat of Rotterdam. (Although good for Dawes for wanting to go to
Dortmund after the long, painful, exhausting trials system that will be
in place and that could possibly ruin her for future meets like Atlanta ;)).
I also think it will be interesting to see the progress team-wise of
France, Greece, and of course Germany.
I also hope for us "Slavic" fans, that we see decent depth from
teams like: Belarus, Kazakstan, Latvia, and whomever the Uzbeks bring
besides Galieva and Chussy.

*Note: Some of the gymnasts stated above may have barriers preventing
them from going, such as age or serious injury etc. So these were just
predictions!

Also, if someone knows status or anything new regarding those
questioned above (Lyssenko, Kalinina, Vandisheva, Ignatova) I would love
to hear it.

As always...

Gurova
------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 18:25:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: ***@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subject: men

Susan, I see your point about Shcherbo - he can rightly be called the
Michael Jordan of gymnastics. But I think the point Brent was trying to make
was that we need an AMERICAN gymnast who's that good for men's gymnastics to
get more popular in the US. It seems to me there was a lot more interest in it
back in the good ole days of Kurt Thomas and Bart Conner, etc. Even though I
was just in high school then (and you were a toddler!) I remember seeing more
men's coverage in the late 70s, early 80s. Of course, we on gymn appreciate
great gymnastics regardless of what country the guy is from, but unfortunately,
I don't think the rest of the American public thinks that way. They want the
best guy to be from the US. I think it's been kind of similar with the women.
Although Olga and Nadia created a large following, I know of very few people
outside of gymnastics who have even heard of Omelianchik, Shushunova, Silivas,
etc. But they know who Mary Lou, Kim Zmeskal and Shannon Miller are. I get very
frustrated that people think that way, focusing more on nationality than on the
pure beauty of the sport. Maybe we could develop an appreciation for men's
gymnastics by showing Russian, Ukrainian or Belarusian nationals on American
TV. How about it, David? Would NBC go for it? (I'd sure love it!)

Beth

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 21:38:18 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: My USA picks

> Okay folks, time to start predicting women'sDortmund team. My guess -
Dom, Amanda, Amy, Kristin McDermott, Summer and someone TBA. i don't think
Doni, Moceanu or Jenni can go because of age >- am I right?

You're right. 15 this year minimum I think.

My picks:

Dawes, Strug, Miller (the big if), Fontaine, Borden, Chow, Phelps

if no Miller, add Webster or McDermott

Mara

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 1994 08:18:36 +1000
From: ***@pharm.med.upenn.edu
Subject: No men on NBC

>>It's going to take a gymnastic Michael Jordan for men's gymnastics to really
>>take off. <
>
>And what was Scherbo chopped liver?
>
>Susan


NO, but Sherbo is NOT from the United States - believe it or not, the
majority of people in the US actually want someone from the US to be the
great one -- Note the comment was made about a great AMERICAN basketball
player, not a great GERMAN player.

Mayland

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 13:38:26 BST
From: ***@axion.bt.co.uk
Subject: No men on NBC

Susan countered
>And what was Scherbo chopped liver?

Mayland replied
>NO, but Sherbo is NOT from the United States - believe it or not, the
>majority of people in the US actually want someone from the US to be the
>great one -- Note the comment was made about a great AMERICAN basketball
>player, not a great GERMAN player.

Im confused I thought Scherbo came from Belarus

Clive
------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 17:26:06 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: No men on NBC

>"it's going to take a gymnastic Michael Jordan for U.S.
men's gymnastics to really take off."<

I find this all rather funny considering that the current gymnsatics TV age
was set off by *not* '70 silver medalist and card carrying American Cathy
Rigby but '72 non-AA medalist with crooked pigtails and a hammer and sickle
"commie" named Olga Korbut. The next "gym-darlin" was non-other then Romo
Nadia Comaneci and everyone *still* worships her. Are you telling me that 2
commies in the middle of the most frozen moments of the cold war caught the
publics eye but that a *men's* champ will have to be wrapped in the red,
white, and blue to succeed? This *is* the new world order right? Scherbo
lives in State College Penn. and was born in Minsk, Belarus. Mihai Bagiu
lives in Alberquerque (evil sp. I know), NM and was born in Timasura,
Romania. Can somebody explain to me the technical diff ... beyond the teams
they currently compete for I mean. Scherbo's a definite "personality" and
Mihai has had little Int'l success (I mean *I* think he's great but ... ) and
isn't gonna' be half the ham that Vitali is (but then again who is?). Most
of the US men's '92 team was either first generation to this country or not
even born here themselves. They were probably the most un-American US team of
the games. There's nothing wrong with any of this I'm just trying to point
out that I think it ridiculous that the American public is so stupid that
they will only cheer for someone wearing the proper flag.

Susan

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 09:07:08 EST
From: ***@email.cfr.org
Subject: Re[2]: NBC Coverage

Texx wrote-

>The mike business makes me laugh.

Actually it's a bit distracting to hear the "squeaks" and thuds, particularly
of the beam and bars, though you do get used to it; makes you wonder about the
apparatuses durability ;-)

>How did he mean that bit about obituaries ?
Was that a threat ?

Since I provided the quote:
Shannon looked glummer than usual after two events and Nunno was
patting her on the back giving her some inspiration (melodramatic as it
was...).

Connie

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 94 19:13:49 EDT
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: The Men's Thing

Beth writes:
>showing Russian, Ukrainian or Belarusian nationals on >American TV. How
about it, David? Would NBC go for it? (I'd >sure love it!)

There quite simply needs to be an American male who is a true Hoss and a half
in gymnastics before the sport takes off again. Viewers (Gymn folk excepted)
have a hard time with guys named Vitaly, Wang and Ivan. Somebody wrote that
USA men's gymn needs a Michael Jordan ---- That is the essence.

We WANT to put the men on ---- but it's gotta be great stuff with world class
contenders. Faced with the choice of guys falling off stuff or showing Summer
Reid, Amy Chow or Dominique Moceanu, I choose the girls every time.

As far as more program time ---- as I said before, the marketplace dictates
duration. Two hours in primetime is great in a non-non-non Olympic year.

Maybe Texx could sell some ads!!!!

David

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Aug 1994 16:44:53 -0500
From: ***@merle.acns.nwu.edu
Subject: Whatever happened to..., OTC gymnasts

>Whatever happened to Jennie Thompson? A year ago most of us would have
>expected her to be high on this list...
>
>--Robyn

Jennie is competing in the Senior division this year.


ALSO ...
I am wondering if someone at Nationals could give me some info on the OTC
gymnasts. I noticed that Marshall Nelson ended up 3rd in Juniors and J.D.
Reive was 10th after compos, but I haven't heard how his optionals went.
Did Kyle Asano or Lou Datilio compete? Also, has Bill Mulholland been able
to make a comeback after his ACL injury? He always had the BEST toepoint
among US men ...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 21:19:10 -0700 (MST)
From: ***@imap1.asu.edu
Subject: women's scoring-where's the punch line?

Since I'm new to gymn, I don't know what's been said about
women's scoring so far. But here I go with my opinions...
Re: the most recent meet, women's nationals, (although of course
this applies to every meet) the scoring was ridiculous (of course).
Execution is being ignored in favor of the big names/clubs.
Example: Chow's scores-her scores were accurate if not high. She has
definite form breaks that are being deducted for, and even though her
tricks are fantastic, execution should not be ignored! Dagget complained
about her scores, saying "The judges aren't being fair to Chow..." This
is true, but not in the way he meant. What isn't fair is not the scores
she's receiving, but rather the overscoring of her competitors. Shannon,
for example, received ridiculous scores for her bars, beam, vault, and
floor. Oh, that's all the events isn't it? Point made I guess...
Vault is the one I have the most problem with, because
this vault is such a joke it's not even funny. Look at it. Go ahead I
dare you. Yurtchenko 1/2 turn to pike front. Not just Miller- everyone
who has ever peformed this vault in front of my eyes (except Podkopayeva-
but more on that later). Around the world, judges are not opening their
eyes to the fact that the vault these girls are performing is a different
one than the one they called. And another reason this vault is valued so
highly (or as Kathy Johnson tells me) is that "it is a blind
landing...you can't see the floor until your feet hit the ground..."
Well, if that is motivation for higher values, where's the 10.00 value
for a handspring front? How many times have you seen this vault stuck
cold?
For bars and beam, too much stress is placed upon the combination
of things. This works for some moves, such as a giant-full to release,
but aren't some moves more spectacular performed without a giant or back
handspring? Wouldn't you be more amazed to see a standing full on beam
instead of a ff full? How about a kip cast full-in of bars? And of
course the noticable ff layout-ff is equal to ff layout-layout, even
though the latter is much harder. So these popular pirouetting skills,
to me, look simply boring, because they usually are just thrown in and
are not *truly* connected to releases.
Floor is the most ridiculous. I think a problem with this event
especially is the use of moves only labeled A-E. Only? you may be
thinking. Well, think about it...
A back handspring is not condidered of value since it is so basic. A
front sommersault is an A, as is a back one (when a whip). So if you
climb the difficulty ladder, you try to give out decent values. A
layout back full is a B. A layout back double full is a C. Since
adding the third twist is obviously harder than adding the second twist,
a layout back triple full is an E.
A double back somersault is a C. A double back with a full twist
is a D. A double layout is an E. A double layout with a full twist is
an E. So don't you notice some discrepencies with the above examples? I
know you may be thinking, "Well, practically nobody does a double lay-full
anyway." Well, in '91, this move was performed by Bontas, Chusovitina,
and Gutsu. This particular move will be another in the same line as the
"Yurt-full, double full" problem that began to noticably surface in '91.
Again, the Yurtchenko double-full was performed in '86, but the
Yurtchenko full was still considered to be so hard at that time that it was
kept in the 10.00 vault category through '92. The same situation could
arise with the double layout-full on floor (and off bars too), to use as
just an example.
I can understand (at least partly) the motivation for increasing
the value of front tumbling on floor. The way the human body is made, for
some reason it is more difficult to tumble forward than backward, the same
way it is harder to run backward than forward. However, is a layout front
with a full *that much harder* than a layout back with a full? Is it
really equal in difficulty to a full-in double back? Of course not. Is a
front with a one and a half twist really *so much harder* than a back with
a one and a half twist that it is given the same value as a double
twisting double back? I think not.
And as for these "dance" moves, are they really true dance
moves? WHen I think of dance I think of artistry, elegance, Boginskaya
:), etc. A jump with a double turn is an acrobatic move. So if they want
to give out extra bonus for dance, why don't they have like a maximum
start value of 9.8 or something (like men's vault) and then add a tenth
or two for artistic presentation? Of course, I'd rather see a scoring
system that truly rewards artistry, like figure skating, but at the same
time I think a complete overhaul of the gym scoring system might somehow
complicate and mess up things even more.
Another thing that was scrapped was bonus for originality. So
why come up with new moves when you can open up the Code of Points to
design your routine? I remember hearing once (and I don't remember the
source) that one of the problems with originality is that sometimes
really old moves are confused with new ones. Well, as long as they
differ from the "compulsory" routines of everybody else's optionals,
they're worth seeing!
So who are the big losers in the Code of Points? Well,
everybody.
The gymnasts that supply the proper execution (like Podkopayeva
on vault) and originality (Khorkina on any event) and true difficulty
(Dawes, Fabrichnova, etc.) are victims simply because the lame routines
of their competitors are being credited the same as theirs. So even if
they win (Dawes at Nationals, especially floor) their margin of victory
is so small that there is unnecessary controversy over their win by the
losers. Why go for the big tricks?
The gymnasts that do the cheap skills are also victims. Obviously
it is difficult to be an elite gymnast, and if you make it you are quite
talented indeed, not to mention the commitment and sacrifice made. They
are obviously capable of the big tricks etc. So why throw the big skills
when you can sleep easy and throw a cheap one? If a gymnast wins with
inferior although somehow seen as equal routines than her competitors, she
will be criticized. The people that know the sport best (the die hard
fans that are not involved with the politics) are going to say that
Khorkina (just to use as an example of course :)), or whomever was ripped
off, thereby casting a shadow over the win. But if they had used the
difficulty they are capable of but feel unnecessary providing, then they
could have made a more convincing win. So these gymnasts lose too.
And of course, the fans lose as well. I, for, one, feel quite
deflated when watching a cheapo routine. The true winners are not being
recognized- it's frustrating!
We have two more years to go under this code unless an emergency
meeting of the FIG is called.
Well, reading this back to myself makes me realize that I sort of
went off "just a tad", but I won't be editing it just to make it "fluffy"
in order to prevent flames or good conversations, because that never
really solves anything. I am always thinking of different
Code-related injustices so perhaps if I think of anymore you can all see
some more.
And to (roughly?) quote Mara, "Flame away!" if you feel the
need. I look forward to hearing any feedback on my opinions anytime...

As always...
Gurova

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 11:56:43 EST
From: ***@email.cfr.org
Subject: women's scoring-where's the punch line?

"Gurova" wrote-
>Execution is being ignored in favor of the big names/clubs.

'Tis a historical problem. Big names have *always* scored better than
most, unless they're truly horrendous; even then a few points may be added
because the judges know the gymnasts have performed the routine well in the
past. During the FX routine of Miller at the Nationals, out of exasperation
I wondered whether the judges would mark her down for seeing the same
routine for the upteenth time. Eeeeeeeeeesh, give me a break! (yes, I'm
"beating a dead horse", but.....really!) Amanda Borden's FX was a breath
of fresh air.

Connie

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 Aug 94 9:27:42 PDT
From: ***@sol.metaware.com
Subject: women's scoring-where's the punch line?

> During the FX routine of Miller at the Nationals, out of exasperation
> I wondered whether the judges would mark her down for seeing the same
> routine for the upteenth time. Eeeeeeeeeesh, give me a break! (yes, I'm
> "beating a dead horse", but.....really!)

Out of curiousity, how long do gymnasts usually stick with the same
music/routine? When I played the cello a lot in H.S./College, I would get
SICK of the piece I was auditioning with and would beg my teacher to
help me find something else. I figure gymnasts have to get sick of the
same thing

> Amanda Borden's FX was a breath of fresh air.

Even though she's not as 'clean' with her moves, and often makes mistakes,
Amanda is always fun to watch.....and the FX was different from the hum-drum
ones that our out there still....

--Robin


End of gymn Digest
******************************