Body type for future or current Elite Gymnastics

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

M

mirandakd

Hi,

I just wondering about everyone's thoughts in regards to body type (shorth and muscular or tall and lean) and elite gymnastics. Do you think one does better than the other? What about injuries? What do you think about future elites? Can coaches tell and at about what age?

Thanks!
 
If you look at the gymnasts competing at the world championship this week they are all sorts of shapes and sizes and body types. Body type means nothing in the long run.

Many many other things are more important.
 
At our gym, all the gymnasts selected for the development program (the 'A' stream) have a similar body type - they tend to be small for their age, with slim bodies, wide shoulders and narrow hips.

Even in the 'B' stream, I'm sure they look at body type when selecting. My DD doesn't have the classic gymnast shape at all, she has narrow shoulders and is quite curvy even at only 7 years old. I think she was selected because she performed well at novice competitions. But she is not going to be elite.
 
Hi,

I just wondering about everyone's thoughts in regards to body type (shorth and muscular or tall and lean) and elite gymnastics. Do you think one does better than the other? What about injuries? What do you think about future elites? Can coaches tell and at about what age?

Thanks!

1. no. one does not do better than another. in gymnastics, one athlete's weakness on one event can be a strength at another. example: ectomorphs can be competitive on vault but usually blow away the field on bars. same for men.

2. the 3 different body types experience a wide range and different from one another type injuries.

3. can't understand your 3rd question.

4. yes, and when we can tell varies and is dependent on the athlete.
 
again, it varies too much event to event, especially since specialists are common. there can be a general consensus possibly when it comes to AA for either gender but even then it depends as there will always be gymnasts out there that break what is thought to be the norm.
 
Means nothing at all. Look at Shawn Johnson, short and muscualer, then look at Nastia Liukin who is tall and lean. They're both very, very sucessful gymnasts with different body types.
 
Means nothing at all. Look at Shawn Johnson, short and muscualer, then look at Nastia Liukin who is tall and lean. They're both very, very sucessful gymnasts with different body types.

I was thinking almost the same thing except I was comparing Shawn Johnson and Svetlana Khorkina. I don't think that body type means anything. If anything counts it's hard work, dedication motivation and the ability to visualize your dreams.
 
It doesn't mean diddly squat.

Yes, it does.

Obviously it's not everything, but body style means A LOT in how well you can progress. Now, if we're talking non-elite gymnasts than body style is less important. But we're talking ELITE GYMNASTS. Body type means A LOT.
 
MMMmmmm.

shushonova, sacramone= endomorph

khorkina, boginskaya= ectomorph

sloan, mustafina= mesomorph

MMMmmmm......those are the only body types that exist. certainly you must mean something else OTHER than body types that might not lead to success.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with dunno! Unless by body type you mean height. I have a female friend who is 6' 3". She will never be an elite gymnast (assuming she started gymnastics as a child, she always told me even as a little girl they said she was too tall lol) simply because as she says, her knees would hit the mats if she tried the uneven bars. But as dunno pointed out, there's three body types all represented at the elite level. So different question I think.
 
Well I mean body shape, to a degree, it appears there is significant variation with potential to success. I'm not sure I'd extend that line of reasoning to like any body shape known to man period has equal chance of success. Also, there seem to be some common characteristics, even if the legs are longer relative to the torso or vice versa, usually tend to be smaller through the hips relative to the shoulders which is mechanically advantageous. There are plenty of females who have wider hips and relatively narrow shoulders and this is generally not a body shape I see much in gymnastics.

But I mean, beyond that, obviously there are other physical characteristics which appear to be much better indicators than body shape, within certain parameters. Certainly the presence of fast twitch muscle fibers, general tendency towards lean muscle would to me be a better indicator than anything shape wise. I've definitely known some larger girls who were very successful at gymnastics, but again shapewise they had an overall body distribution that had certain characteristics. Perhaps we could argue that stuff is the result of years of gymnastics training anyway, so maybe, I don't know. I'd definitely agree it's not the most important trait, simply because there is plenty of variation and other traits account for more. There seems to be less variation to me in rhythmic gymnastics. I have had some friends L10/elite in RG and from what I see I never could have made it (not just not being flexible I simply don't have the body shape that they ALL seem to have to me. Just an observation. Same thing with pre-pro or pro ballet. I don't have the lines). In that sense we tend to see more variation in artistic, I think.
 
I agree with dunno! Unless by body type you mean height. I have a female friend who is 6' 3". She will never be an elite gymnast (assuming she started gymnastics as a child, she always told me even as a little girl they said she was too tall lol) simply because as she says, her knees would hit the mats if she tried the uneven bars. But as dunno pointed out, there's three body types all represented at the elite level. So different question I think.

lol get her in the gym coaching, my coaches always complain about being to short to spot.
 
But I mean, beyond that, obviously there are other physical characteristics which appear to be much better indicators than body shape, within certain parameters. Certainly the presence of fast twitch muscle fibers, general tendency towards lean muscle would to me be a better indicator than anything shape wise.

Truth^^ When our teams have one spot and multiple talented girls want it, I know things like that are looked at. Shoulder/hip width, torso length, etc.
 
Looking the part

Having a "great body" for gymnastics isn't enough to be successful. Sure, being naturally small or having lean muscles will help, but those things just won't make you great. It's all about having a true drive and a great relationship with your coach.
I had a "perfect gymnast body" as they say, (think Nadia at 14, except I stayed that size through high school) but not much in the talent department. I looked the part, but honestly, I just was not a natural talent. Your body type can't help you with fear and coordination.
And, I still remember the times I was balking on a skill, my 45-year old, 140 pound mother of 4-coach would hop up on the beam and do it herself. And she did not look the part!
:cool:
 
only when skill selection comes in to play.:)

shawn could never perform an ono.

nastia could never perform a double double on floor.

alicia could never perform an ono or most of nastia's skill set.

skill selection is everything.
 
Can someone post how we adults can GET the body of an elite gymnast. DD is only seven, but man if I could look like that!! It is wasted on the youth!Jk of course- the wasted part not the desire to LOOK like them.
 
Yes, isn't that the truth! I'd kill to even have an out of shape gymnasts body!
Can someone post how we adults can GET the body of an elite gymnast. DD is only seven, but man if I could look like that!! It is wasted on the youth!Jk of course- the wasted part not the desire to LOOK like them.
 

New Posts

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

Gymnaverse :: Recent Activity

College Gym News

New Posts

Back