What Would You Like To Change In Gymnastics?

[I-Heart-Beam]

Hiya! We had one of those three hour long conversation today at practice so I thought I would post and see what you all thought of it!

1. Is there any apparatus you would like to be added to gymnastics?
A lot of us want to try high bar. But we were trying to think of new apparatus as well! It's a lot more difficult than it sounds, lol.

2. What would you like to be changed in gymnastics?
eg. I want to see indivuality rewarded more. I hate that. Most of the routines are the same here because that's what scores points.

PS. Hope I posted this in the right place

[gymgramma]

I'd like to see artistry be rewarded as much as strength

[Geoffrey Taucer]

Interesting that you say you want to try high bar; I've always though unevens looked like a blast. Beam looks like it would be an interesting challenge as well.

Anyway, I think it would be nice if there was more artistry on the men's side. I'd also love to see creativity and individuality rewarded more for both men and women.

In women's JO, I think risk-taking should be rewarded a lot more than it is. On floor, for example, under current JO optional rules, they basically want to see a dance routine with a couple of tumbling passes thrown in for ornamentation; dance is obscenely overvalued (Hello? A tuck jump double full (D) is worth more than a double-back(C)? That's just stupid). Seems to me like it should be the reverse; floor should be about the tumbling. Which is not to say I think the artistic element should be removed entirely; I just think dance skills should be devalued accross the board.

I also think the rules should accomodate specialists, like the men's rules do. I have known at least a couple girls who loved one event, but quit because they didn't like another. Allowing specialists would help keep kids in the sport. For example, all those girls who quit and do cheerleading instead could be floor specialists.

On the men's side, I think an iron cross on rings should be at least a C (it's a B right now); in fact, I think most of the strength values should be bumped up at least one letter in value.

I think a strong case could be made for entirely eliminating vault as an event for both men and women; it doesn't really cover any ground that isn't covered by floor.

[rbw]

To be honest, I think I'd be happiest if they just got rid of the floor music in WAG.

I realize that lots of people like it, and that some gymnasts actually used to dance to the music; perhaps some still do, at least for that relatively small portion of their routines when they are not tumbling or striking poses or just standing in place and making some sort of arm movements. It just looks...odd...when a gymnast changes suddenly from dancing to tumbling at a markedly different tempo and the music doesn't change. At the upper levels, with many tumbling passes, it seems that much of the routine--most of the time spent on the floor--features movements that are unrelated to the music.

[maddiekate]

I also want floor to be more tumbling, less dance. I've never really liked dancing as much, and makes the routines boring to watch at times.

[BlairBob]

I believe once upon there was quite a bit of artistry and creativity in Men's FX...and then the Russians came and everybody played catch-up. While there is some creativity here and there, it's become more about power and strength. This is what I believe has led to the disinterest in Men's FX.

I think the problem with music in optional level routines gets down to poor choreography. Basically half arsed dance with music that the gymnast/coach likes. Being a guy and not coming from a dance background, I can remember being at a few gyms or seeing other optional routines...and thinking " they're dance and choreography " look forced.

I just had this discussion with a fellow coach at my old gym that I still visit when talking about our optionals vs the optionals at the old gym. Our optional coach at my old gym has become an awesome choreographer, keeping consideration with different gymnasts and their styles vs her vision of what such and such gymnast should do or just enough dance to get through with made up transitions. These routines stick out like a sore thumb. In our area, we really only see really good choreography from a few gyms. Maybe good music at a few others, but both?! Not really.

I've heard a lot of the girls talk about wanting to try High Bar. However, I think they should move to setting the bars as far apart as possible with new generations of uneven bars. I would still say it is very important to set apart the men's and women's events. BB is as particular to women as PH is to men's. Of course, the men also have SR and PB which bare some similarities to each other and HB. Maybe if women came to High Bar, they would challenge the men when it comes to pirouetting and form; but High Bar is very exciting to watch for the Men as Uneven Bars is for women because of the bigger dismounts and releases. Perhaps women could get more into this if they switched to steel rails vs wood/composite/whatever.

Don't take out Vault! Come on. While it's basically tumbling with a longer run than Power Tumbling...there is that major distance of an obstacle.

The men's strength is a bit weird. OTOH, there are Victorians being done.

Another point. The reason people still watch Women's floor is the artistry and creativity. I've had this argument with my friends. While it's great, that Men's FX has become about uber power and strength...Men's gymnastics has also become a skeleton of what it used to be. Elitism might be great to push the sport but ultimately it might die off with some bad decisions. Especially, here in the US.


My boss had an awesome idea about scoring. Personally, I'd be very interested in scoring by video analysis after a routine. The technology is here now, but it would take a bit more time per routine. There is some thought that inputting judging on the fly, but I'm thinking after the routine, at least as a check. Check visual vs video.


Another thought he had was to divide events per categories but not make them mandatory in their current sense. A routine would have to have so many of each letter value, but the gymnast could input them where they would shine. Perhaps they were poor front tumblers, but awesome side tumblers. They could then individualize routines so routines did not become so cookie cutter. There would be bare minimums for routines. Well it was something like that.

Instead of all this new 15, 17.xx scoring go back to the Perfect 10. Instead of re-evaluating skills every quadrennium, deduct from a value score.

[I-Heart-Beam]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey Taucer I think a strong case could be made for entirely eliminating vault as an event for both men and women; it doesn't really cover any ground that isn't covered by floor.

If you stop me doing vault I'll totally move to your gym

[CoachL]

double back on floor is a D for women. Full twisting tuck is a B

[hammy]

Not having to do a particular event is one of the most glorious things about college gymnastics!

[gracefulone]

I used to hate vault, but now I love it. Anyway.

I do think some of the ratings as far as skills seem quite odd, for both dance and tumbling. It amazes me when my coach tells me "that counts as a b you know" and it's not even a difficult skill(like on beam, any scale on releve is a B)

Personally, I love the dancing part of floor. I just got my routine and it is NOT just moving arms around, there are a lot of little dance steps(jetes, kicks, and more.)