Level 7 no flight

[momocay]

If in a level 7 beam routine you leave out the flight element entirely, what is the deduction? Is it a lower start value and a deduction? What if you perform the flight and fall? Which is better? Just curious.

 

[cher062]

I don't know the official answer but I know for my dd's connection move if she doesn't connect she has a lower start value. If she does a skill and gets both feet on the beam the skill is counted as complete and she gets the deduction for the fall (don't know what that deduction is).

Personally I think it's better to go for the skill then to be afraid of getting a lower score for a missed skill or fall then not try it at all.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

it's a special requirement. it's big. i regret that my wife or myself can't remember which is which to the levels.

 

[gymdog]

It's a special requirement, so eliminating it will be .5 off the SV. The reason it is better to do the skill and fall is because in some cases (if it safe and there aren't bad habits) it is worth it to learn how to warm up and compete skills at the early optional levels even if it results in some deductions.

Other deductions depend on the rest of the routine. Missing an acro element may mean the gymnast is also missing a B (value part credit, also reflected in the SV -.2). Another deduction that might apply in the case of a missing acro skill is that the gymnast doesn't have either forward/side acro, or backward acro (.1). Again this would depend on the other elements performed in the routine.

 

[momocay]

This was a discussion I overheard recently. One gym had girls that were afraid of the skill so opted not to do it. They received decent scores, so I was confused. Here is another question, If a gymnast falls directly on there butt after the fly away, is that a bigger deduction than landing and falling? All these strange things I overhear just make me curious.

 

[gympanda]

At L7 it is typically "cheaper" to omit the flight series than to attempt it and fall. It is a .5 reduction in SV for omitting the flight series. Falling is .5, but there is also additional execution deduction that are likely to come with it (legs, arms, etc.) The coaching philosophy behind these decisions typically doesn't have much to do with the deductions, especially at L7. However, from a judging point of view, I've seen plenty of routines with no acro skills that score high 8's or even low 9's because they only do the skills they have and have a 9.5 start value. I had an injured gymnast at our state meet last year who went 8.9 with the routine of: split jump-split jump, full turn, straight jump-tuck jump-straight jump, front tuck dismount. There are no composition deductions at L7, so we can't take additional for fwd/side & back deductions or "choice of element" deductions like we can at L8 and up.

 

[gymdog]

This was a discussion I overheard recently. One gym had girls that were afraid of the skill so opted not to do it. They received decent scores, so I was confused. Here is another question, If a gymnast falls directly on there butt after the fly away, is that a bigger deduction than landing and falling? All these strange things I overhear just make me curious.

Well the fall is still the same deduction, .5 for the fall. But I think if you don't land feet first, then you won't get value part credit (could be a SV deduction depending on the other skills in the routine), which means you'd also be missing a special requirement (-.5 from SV) and a dismount (-.3). Doesn't happen that often with single saltos though. Usually the feet hit first...they just have to touch first in order to get the value part credit. It would be somewhat unusual to rotate all the way to the back without the feet touching at all unintentionally. Possible (in the case of peeling off bars) but not very likely. Usually this happens when the gymnast is going for a double back dismount but performs a "timer" to land on her back instead.

Obviously that goes for optional scoring. If that happened in the L6 routine (would be even more unlikely from tap swings, though) then I am not sure, but I assume if the feet didn't land first the gymnast wouldn't receive credit for the element and would receive a deduction of twice the value of the element.