Proposals / Ukrainian Gymnastics Federation
Forms Current issues : It looks as if the judges of different panels (D1/D2 and D3/D4) remain very focused on analyzing of what is happening on the carpet rather than actually being able to see the element and write it down. The proposal is to add very simple looking forms that the judge would be able to follow in a simple way and write the evaluation of an element on that form. It appears that the judge works more efficient during the routine when she/he is not focused entirely on the routine without knowing what to expect next (BD, R, S or AD) but when she/he is aware of what at least SHOULD be coming next. FORM EXAMPLE :
Brief explanation : The coach writes down only succession of elements The judge evaluates only what she/he sees on the carpet but is somehow ready to what she should expect in this or that part of the exercise Gives the judges an understanding when they should expect to see an AD during S or BD during R. The judges may see the BD of 0.10 value already in the sheet and add their value if necessary. Judge may write some symbols in the respective cell and then the score if element was evaluated in the respective cell (in yellow) No need for the judges to spend lots of time trying to figure out the symbols on the sheet – it’s very simple, they will just know what they expect to see and will have at least some additional seconds to evaluate the element correctly S — dance step sequences Current issues : S are very much what reflects the Artistic component of the exercise Due to the current overuse of walkovers in AD as part of S, the Artistic component is somehow lost in the exercise and no time for the gymnasts to squeeze in. Disbalanced value. S costs 0.30 and lasts 8 seconds. AD costs 0.30 and lasts 1 second. Coaches choose an easy way to rather have 8 “false AD” rather than 1 S
Solution : NO AD (at least with elements with rotation) in S Increase the minimum requirements to S to 2 dance step sequences instead of 1. AD — Apparatus difficulty Current issues : Gymnasts currently overuse pre-acrobatic elements for AD Very vague understanding of AD scoring (too many elements in the routine, the judges get lost in evaluation and necessity to make immediate decision when the elements are going one after another) AD unlike BD is unlimited, takes less time than R or S. As a consequence, the coaches overuse AD or “false AD” to increase the D score of the exercise. Proposals in terms of this :
Solution : NO to AD with the use of pre-acrobatic elements and elements with rotation in S (unevitably leads to abruption of S).
Limit of AD to 5 elements per routine (the coaches will then choose the most visible and attractive elements that will be understood and evaluated by the judges and appreaciated by the audience) R Current issues : The major problems of routine evaluation are connected with the necessity of immediate reaction for R evaluating. That is getting too confusing for the judges and needs to be simplified Catching “in rotation” brings double value, overused by gymnasts and not appreciated by the audience – the definition needs to be changed.
Solution : NO to AD with the use of pre-acrobatic elements and elements with rotation in S (unevitably leads to abruption of S).
Limit of AD to 5 elements per routine (the coaches will then choose the most visible and attractive elements that will be understood and evaluated by the judges and appreaciated by the audience) Proposals : Rotations around vertical axis : 0.10 each Rotations around horizontal axis : 0.20 each
Meaning the minimum R may cost :
2 chaine : 0.10+0.10 = 0.20 2 rolls : 0.20+0.20 = 0.40 1 chaine+1 roll : 0.10+0.20 = 0.30
Eliminate this criteria (below). This criteria is quite confusing to count immediately during R and if we use the type of evaluation above it would be easier for the judges to evaluate the R
Either eliminate or change the wording for this criteria (below) . Proposed wording : “Catch DURING a rotation in case the catch is performed outside visual field and without hands”.
Add the possibility of performing leaps with rotation (like jete en tournant or any other leap with rotation of at least 360 degrees) UNDER the flight of apparatus and be evaluated by the BD.
Нужен видео пример.
Бросок – жете ан турнан, пересед, ловля.
Бросок – жете подбивной прогнувшись, пересед, ловля
R studying on video examples :
Current value : 0.20
New value : 0.20 (no change)
http://ukraine-rg.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/R020.mp4 Current value : 0.30
New value : 0.30 (no change)
http://ukraine-rg.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/R030.mp4 Current value : 0.40 (3 rolls + catch without hands)
New value : 0.70 (0.20×3 + 0.10 without hands)
Note : see massive difference in difficulty between 3 rolls under flight of apparatus and 3 chaine under flight of apparatus
http://ukraine-rg.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/R070.mp4 Current value : 0.30 (2 illusions + catch without hands)
New value : 0.50 (0.20×2 + 0.10)
Note : same as above, horizontal axis rotations are way more difficult to execute and should have higher value.
http://ukraine-rg.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/R050.mp4 Current value : 0.30 (2 illusions + catch without hands)
New value : 0.50 (0.20×2 + 0.10)
Note : same as above, horizontal axis rotations are way more difficult to execute and should have higher value.
http://ukraine-rg.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/R050-2.mp4 Current value : 0.20 (throw of 2 clubs below the leg) + 2 rotations = 0.40
New value : 0.60 (0.20 + 0.20×2)
Note : obviously, last rotation is not counted, catch before rotation. In any case, even if caught DURING the last rotation, we do not understand the double value that is currently granted under 2017 COP.
http://ukraine-rg.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/R060.mp4 Current value : 0.30 (3 rotations) + catch in rotation (?) + catch with 1 hand = 0.50
New value : 0.50 (2 chaine + 1 walkover + catch with 1 hand)
Note : EXAMPLE when the value does not change, but much easier to evaluate when the judge on the paper just writes 0.10 for vertical rotation, 0.20 for horizontal rotation instead of thinking about axis change, catch in rotation etc.
http://ukraine-rg.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/R050-3.mp4 One of the R that are not so fascinating BUT very difficult to evaluate due to COP confusion
- needs to be considered – very difficult for the judges to evaluate if the ball was caught with 2 hands or 1 hand.
— outside vision control criteria. Not valid? Clear NO from the COP (the ball is not caught in full backscale position), normally YES during competitions.
— According to 2017 COP, the last rotation here gives 0,10 as part of R rotations, 0.10 as “catch in rotation”, 0.10 as “change in axis”. Too complicated for the judges to consider in less than 1 second. Plus they need to think about “catch in one hand” and “catch outside visual field” which is not so obvious here.
Proposal for evaluation :
3 chaine + 1 walkover backwards
0.30 + 0.20 = 0.50 – VERY EASY to evaluate! In case the issue with “visual control” and “one hand” is clarified.
http://ukraine-rg.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Rtoconsider.mp4 Audience appreciation The public appreciates most of all : High throws with difficult catches (the issue may be solved balancing the R values and eliminated overlapping of “catch in rotation” that is overused and not appreciated by audience). Long lasting rotations (proposal – to come back to the old rules with the each rotation increasing by it’s value and not by 0.20 or 0.10 as it is now). Then coaches will pay more attention to these difficulties and include in the exercises. Now it does not make sense as it takes too much time and has very little value. COACHES GO ONLY WHAT THE COP DICTATES THEM TO DO. Beautiful high leaps (especially in Series, or During R) – hence our proposal to add the possibility to evalue leaps BD under the flight of apparatus during R All these proposed changes are targeted ONLY for the sake of improving the understanding of RG within the worldwide audience and are based on the observations during the whole 2017 season.
_pictogram.svg.png)
