GYMN-L Digest - 30 May 1995 to 31 May 1995

There are 5 messages totalling 188 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

1. Sports Acro Junior World Championships (Riesa/Germ any)
2. lack of coverage in Oz
3. Enlightenment
4. Canadians
5. GYMN-L Digest - 29 May 19...

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

Date: Tue, 30 May 1995 23:11:07 -0400
From: ***@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Sports Acro Junior World Championships (Riesa/Germ any)

>Tumbling - finals:
>Salto:
> 1. Elena Blushina (Rus) 19.68
> 2. Tatjana Jevdokimova (Kaz) 19.34

Anyone know if Tatiana is related to the gymnast Irina Yevdokimova?

:-)
Adriana

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

Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 19:31:20 EST-11
From: ***@DISINFORMATION.BF.RMIT.EDU.AU
Subject: lack of coverage in Oz

Michelle Harten is totally right - the Australian media doesn't know
anything about gym. They rarely report anything - and even when they
do they get it wrong. The media still thinks the Aussie girls are
ranked 6th in the world!!

I had to wait ages before I knew the results of the Pacific Alliance
Championships, which were held in New Zealand!!! The only thing I
saw in the paper was a picture of Lisa Moro, who won a couple of
medals. The Melbourne press didn't even print any results of the
Dortmund Worlds. Although the Australians didn't compete, it was
still a major event!!!!

How I struggle to stay sane in this country of virtually gymless
media!!!!!

Thankyou to all who take the trouble to print results of competitions
on GYMN.

Simone.

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

Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 12:27:35 BST
From: ***@CS.BHAM.AC.UK
Subject: Enlightenment

Hi everyone,

This email is in response to that sent to me personally from a member of the
GYMN email list. While I would not normally send out global replies to such
email I feel that it is in everybodies interests if certain prejudices were
addressed as they impinge not only on trampolining as a sport, but also
gymnastics. The message reads...

>As far as I know, trampolining in the US is pretty much dead except for
>some use as a training aid for gymnastics. Something about the US
>liability laws and legal system and the injury rate on tramp...

>Trampoliners are crazy - when I was at gymnastics camp one year, when
>there was a little bit of trampolining left in the US (mid 70s), they
>took the normal bed off the tramp and put on the 6mm bed for "serious"
>trampoliners... Trampoliners are crazy.

There are two issues here, (a) the state of play concerning trampolining
within the US and the legal issues involved, and (b) the mental aspect of
those participating.

In response to (a) I can say that trampolining is far from dead in the
US (although it did go through a bad patch and is only now starting to
recover, which I will dicuss below as it has important lessons for all
coaches). Trampolining has it's own recognized body within the US (the
American Trampolining and Tumblining Assoc.), and indeed just recently
held it's National Championships and it's first FIT (International
Trampoline Federation) Pan American Games in Denver, Colorado. In the 94-95
World Cup Series American performers are placed in 10th and 19th (female
and male respectively). The question is then one of why did trampolining go
through a bad patch in the 70s and 80s within the US?

Trampolining while carrying a certain element of risk is no more dangerous
than many other sports, eg. boxing, horse riding, American football, rugby,
skiing, hang-gliding, ice hockey, motor racing, or indeed gymnastics. As with
these other sports account must be made of the inherent dangers involved,
with coaching practices geared not just towards maximising performer
excellence, but also towards minimizing the dangers. I suspect that one of
main causes of litigation within the US in the 70's and 80's was not due to
the risks involved (otherwise how could gymnastics or any other of the above
mentioned sports gotten off the ground?), but poor coaching applied to reduce
those risks. It should be remembered that a coach can only be sued on the
grounds of negligence, where the onus of proof lies firmly with the
prosecution. Disregarding whether people are more or less likely to initiate
proceedings against a trampoline coach rather than, say, a gymnastics coach,
or football coach, in all cases negligence must be proven. If this cannot be
done the coach cannot be held liable for any accident, however damaging.
Hence, a gym coach is as likely to loose a court case concerning a pupil that
breaks an arm as a trampoline coach, but only if that coach is shown not to
have taken all humanly possible precautions (both in teaching practice and
theory). It is not the sport and it's dangers which are in question, but the
coaching practices applied. A very sensible saying to remember in all
coaching situations is this - if a pupil hurts themselves it's always the
coaches fault. Of course this isn't true as I've tried to point out, good
coaching practice shifts the burden of 'fault' from the coach into the realms
of 'accidents will happen', but remembering that saying means that you (the
coach) always question the methods you employ. Coaching within all sports is
a continuously evolving task and this is as true for trampolining as it is
for gymnastics, and any other sport you care to think about. What this means
is that coaching is always improving to maximise excellence and minimise
risks, in whatever sport you examine. So you cannot compare the coaching
style (and resultant pupil injuries) from the 70s and 80s to that of now.
Equally, you cannot compare the litigation rate.

(b) Trampolining is a sport for crazies. This is the sort of attitude which
affects all risk involving sports. Understandably, most people are fearfull
of that which they have no experience, and therefore tend to characterise
those doing the 'fearfull' thing as crazy (to a greater or lesser degree).
This is as true for a person watching a trampolinist, as it is for the
trampolinist. The difference is not in the cognitive evaluations leading to
the causation of fear, but the in the initiating factors and knowledge that
those evaluations are based upon. The trampolinist, or gymnast, will feel as
much fear as the onlooker when confronted with something novel, it is simple
that what is novel is not the same, both from performer to performer, and
onlooker to onlooker. Just as gymnastics was viewed rather sceptically in
the early 70s, but has since dispelled the 'crazy' labelling and the 'it's
not really a sport' attitude, as trampolining becomes more widely recognized
within the US then the novelty factor will decrease with a comensurate
decrease in the associated negative attitudes. Within Europe, the East, and
the Indo-pacific region, this has already happened with trampolining gaining
in popularity and recognition (it is now an IOC recognized sport for
instance). Finally, as mentioned in the email, trampolining has long been
used as a teaching aid for gymnastics, spring-board diving, and ariel
skiing - it would require a stretch of the imagination to say everyone
involved in these sports are all crazy (er... but then again you'd never get
me to somersault on a piece of wood 6 inches wide, or double somersault from
a high bar onto the floor - gymnasts, they're all mad :-) )!

I hope that this has been of use to people on this email list. It is not
meant to insight flame (discussion maybe), but to try and dispell some of
the ignorance and prejudices that face our sports (both gymnastics, to a
lesser extent these days, as well as trampolining).

Christian

PS. If anyone from the ATTA is reading this can you please contact me.
Thanks.

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

Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 08:18:56 EDT
From: ***@BIOMED.QUEENSU.CA
Subject: Canadians

Hi, my name is Anne-Caroline and I am a PhD student in physiology at
Queen's University (Kingston, Ontario).
I started training in gym about 3 years ago (at the old age of 24!!).

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

Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 17:28:39 -0400
From: ***@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: GYMN-L Digest - 29 May 19...

Ilene wrote asking about wrist guards. I wore the lion's paw for 8 years
because of recurrent tendonitis. They helped a great deal, and were the only
reason that I could tumble or vault for a while in high school because
otherwise my wrists hurt too much. As far as whether or not they weaken
joints, I don't believe that is true.
Different coaches have different feelings on taping things and wearing
braces. One coach at my old club hated tape or any kind of brace, and felt
that if the gymnast needed to wear one then they shouldn't be working out,
they should be doing rehab for the injury. At the same time, a second coach
at the same club had all of the girls order the lion's paw brace.

IMHO the lion's paw is a great brace that help's to decrease wrist pain
tremendously. If the pain is really a problem, then a doctor and or physical
therapist should be consulted as well.

I have the information to order Lion's Paws, but I have to look for it. If
anyone wants it please email me directly.

erica

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

End of GYMN-L Digest - 30 May 1995 to 31 May 1995
*************************************************