Importance (or lack thereof) of teaching a tsuk to kazamatsu-style twisters

[Geoffrey Taucer]

Up until now, I've always considered a Tsuk to be a very important step in the development of upper-level vaults. When a kid is ready to move on to something harder than a handspring, a tsuk is generally the first choice (or perhaps I should say the progression towards an eventual tsuk is generally the first choice)

But a recent discussion with another coach got me thinking: for Kazamatsu-style twisters (ie kids who roundoff with their left foot and twist left, or who roundoff right and twist right), is the tsuk necessary at all? Since a Kazamatsu is what these kids will eventually be training, and it twists the opposite direction comming off the table, would there be any disadvantage to skipping the tsuk entirely and just going straight to a 1/2 on to an arabian? (ie a Kazamatsu minus half a twist)

It seems to me that this vault may be less scary for them (since they can spot the ground at the beginning of the flip). It doesn't seem significantly more difficult. And it seems like it would accellerate the progression towards a Kazamatsu.

[JBS]

I would always teach the tsuk first. Tsuk's are must easier without the half twist...in my opinion.

I'm just not a into skipping steps. To me, this is like teaching a layout half before a layout...missing a very important step.

[lannamavity]

Yeah, I have no doubt you could do it...the question is should you?

First, a basic tsuk, even with a half, is still a tsuk, because of the entry. The vault should show backward rotation when leaving the table, regardless of a twist.

Second, I never skip progressions, because, inevitibly, a kid will learn a 1/2 1/2 and one day won't be able to stand it up. And, what...1/2 1/2 to her butt is her only vault? What vault do you step back to if she doesn't flip tsuks, a handspring?

I see kids like this at meets all the time, and I just feel like telling their coaches to quit screaming at the kid and learn how to coach progressions, and the kid wouldn't be in this situation.

I did see Joy Umenhoffer teach a 1/2 in 1/2 out on trampoline when the kid never did a double back...so it's very possible to skip progressions, but the question remains...at what price?

[Geoffrey Taucer]

Ok, thank you.

[Geoffrey Taucer]

Here's what I was thinking:

With the table (as opposed to a horse), a tsuk vault for most kids is not so much a 1/2 on to back tuck as it is a 1/4 on, 1/4 off to back tuck. So a 1/4 off to a front salto does not twist any more than a normal tsuk, it just twists in the opposite direction comming off the table.

[gymdog]

I wouldn't do it. When I learned a 1/2 1/2 fronts (I RO right and twist left though, and mine was more like somewhere between a 1/4 and a 1/2 on and a 3/4 and a 1/2 off) we learned a tuck tsuk without grabbing first and worked a lot on the rotation. I know if you did a true 1/2 1/2 that wouldn't mean as much but I feel like I never really see true 1/2 1/2s. There's still backward momentum to some extent. Although that may be because tsuks are generally taught first, but who knows. In my experience all these vaults were confusing for people with the 1/4 on RO trying to twist off the same way...people end up trying to fight themselves to only twist a 1/4 and getting all crooked in their flip. And when they start to flip back first it gets even worse and generally looked awkward/not "smooth". I think backward rotation is pretty natural though with the momentum from the entry, maybe because I learned tsuks first. A true 1/2 1/2 front takes a strong front flip and why not work a front front after doing the tsuk in L8 at that point? With the design of the table the RO-type 1/4 on with one hand first just seems like a better twist entry for most than a 1/2 and in that case I feel like the same RO/twist (i.e. left left) can be confusing. At least in my head. What I'm saying isn't even making sense to me anymore

[lannamavity]

On top of everything else, for the JO program (WAG), from a judging standpoint, there is no distinction between a 1/2 on 1/2 front and a tsuk 1/2 any longer...so the value just doesn't warrant messing up a kid's tsuk to zip to a 1/2 1/2 front any longer. Both have a start value of 9.7.

[Geoffrey Taucer]

If I were to have any of my kids take this route, it would be my guys; in the men's code, a tsuk is specifically written as a 1/4 on, 1/4 off to back tuck.

I think you guys are right, though.

[blantonnick]

Bottom line is there are two ways a gymnast learns anything in relation to gymnastics, Horizontally and Vertically. Here is what I mean by these two descriptions: One learns Horizontally through broadening one's basics by using progressions, drills, etc., One then learns Vertically through adding twists, flips, connecting sequences, etc.
You do not have to be a builder to understand the concept that if a building is built with a wide and firm enough base then it can grow to a high stance. Gymnastics is a paradigm of this concept, if a gymnast has a larger repertiore of basics to cognitively choose from, then he or she can essentially learn a higher level of skills.
That being said, it is very important that coaches progress through the proper widening of basics before thrusting forth into the vertical gain of difficulty. It should be stressed that learning a proper 1/4 on 1/4 off 'Roundoff' to back somersault is the prerequisite to the Kazamatsu, regardless of the fact that the twisting directions are opposite. The reason for this is cognitively it gives the gymnast a greater sense for how blocking off of a dominate arm is going to feel and flipping through the air. Only after this sensation is mastered can twists be initiated.
It is how the progression naturally fell for the orignator of the skill, so why should gymnasts and coaches treat cutting corners as an effective solution? Kazamatsu first mastered the Tsukahara, and then and only then did he try and figure out that he had given himself enough time in the air to begin twisting. It so happens that he also encountered the fact that he twisted the opposite direction as his roundoff and eventually the well known vault of the Kaz was born.
Coaches that cut corners will eventually find that they will have to stop vertical progress and horizontally maximise their base or their preverbial building will collapse.

[lannamavity]

Quote:
Originally Posted by blantonnick Bottom line is there are two ways a gymnast learns anything in relation to gymnastics, Horizontally and Vertically. Here is what I mean by these two descriptions: One learns Horizontally through broadening one's basics by using progressions, drills, etc., One then learns Vertically through adding twists, flips, connecting sequences, etc. You do not have to be a builder to understand the concept that if a building is built with a wide and firm enough base then it can grow to a high stance. Gymnastics is a paradigm of this concept, if a gymnast has a larger repertiore of basics to cognitively choose from, then he or she can essentially learn a higher level of skills. That being said, it is very important that coaches progress through the proper widening of basics before thrusting forth into the vertical gain of difficulty. It should be stressed that learning a proper 1/4 on 1/4 off 'Roundoff' to back somersault is the prerequisite to the Kazamatsu, regardless of the fact that the twisting directions are opposite. The reason for this is cognitively it gives the gymnast a greater sense for how blocking off of a dominate arm is going to feel and flipping through the air. Only after this sensation is mastered can twists be initiated. It is how the progression naturally fell for the orignator of the skill, so why should gymnasts and coaches treat cutting corners as an effective solution? Kazamatsu first mastered the Tsukahara, and then and only then did he try and figure out that he had given himself enough time in the air to begin twisting. It so happens that he also encountered the fact that he twisted the opposite direction as his roundoff and eventually the well known vault of the Kaz was born. Coaches that cut corners will eventually find that they will have to stop vertical progress and horizontally maximise their base or their preverbial building will collapse.

Holy Crap.

Not only does that sum up the entire technical side of of a sound coaching philosophy, but it sounds like you speak from experience.

Kudos