Dear FIG?. | The Couch Gymnast

21 Aug 2011, Posted by admin in Uncategorized, .

Can I just say for the umpteenth million times, I do not like this code?

In her review of the shambles that was the first night of the Visa Nationals, Blythe at The Gymnastics Examiner ever-so-aptly described it as an ?embarrassing display of non-mastery of difficulty.? ?And in many ways she wasn?t far wrong. ?The general improvement in many of the women?s performances on Day 2 proved that for some the ?hot mess? that was the first competition could be put down to nerves. ?Still, there is something in what Blythe says. ?So much energy-too much energy- is going into the mastery of difficulty, the kind of difficulty that ends up in injury and low quality gymnastics.

We have all said it before, there is too much focus on difficulty in this code. ?Sometimes we are saying it because of the persistent and probably salient truth that all this difficulty sacrifices execution. ?It is also sacrificing both the quality of the sport and the gymnasts themselves. Now, I love a big, high gorgeously stuck Amanar as much as the next gymnastics spectator, but I would trade it in if it meant I never had to see the dangerous, barely-there knee crunching versions.

And frankly, the lay person, the everyday gymnastics spectator who understood the sport back when there was a 10.0 scoring system doesn?t know the difference between an Amanar and a 1.5 Yurchenko. ?Most of the time, they are impressed by the sheer acrobatic skill it takes going over the board backwards, no matter how many times the gymnast flips and twists into the air. ?I have had friends come to gym meets and I have pointed out something incredible, like a Patterson dismount and they don?t really see it as any more or less spectacular than the double pikes they have been seeing all day. ?They think it is all incredible. ?We have lost sight of that. ?Gymnastics is already incredible, it doesn?t need to be any more so.

So who is all this difficulty for? ?Not for me. ?Like I said, I would trade spectacle for safety any day. ?I would take a little less difficulty for integrity- for some quality gymnastics. ?And no, I am not just talking about execution and elegance. ?You can still have power gymnasts without Amanars and Pattersons. ?Alicia Sacramone doesn?t do the most difficult vaults out there but what she does, she does spectacularly. I?ll take that any day over seeing her add another twist- if it means she lasts longer in the sport. ?In my eyes, gymnastics is just getting too hard.

In the last year we have seen some of the sports? fiercest talents, women like Rebecca Bross, Aliya Mustafina, Viktoriya Komova go down. ?I don?t want to lose any more. ?Why does this sport have to get harder every quad? ?Who decided this and why?

Why is it forcing gymnasts to think they have to be superheroes to win medals? ?Why can?t they just be what they are in other sports, excellent athletic specimens capable of incredible displays of physical mastery? ?Heck, they were already doing that in 1972 when Olga Korbut?s salto on beam was considered spectacular. ?There is no need to be persistently upping the ante?..

This sport is now too hard to compete at a world level, too hard to watch when we have to see utter champions like Mustafina crushed under the weight of difficulty they needn?t be attempting and too hard to understand for anyone who even wants to bother to try. ?I know we will never see the 10.0 system again, but this open-ended difficulty is becoming perilous. ?Is there no way to cap it in some way, to ensure that safety comes before the building of a score, a score that has seen gymnasts take titles with falls, seen gymnasts perform dangerous, ill-performed moves to win a medal, seen competitions descend into nail-biting splatfests for the sake of trying to pull big numbers? ?I?m tired of it. ?It?s dangerous, scary and sometimes just substandard to watch.

Bruno Grandi put out his war cry some months ago, saying the code has gone top far awry and that it needs to be fixed. ?He asked coaches and gymnasts to come forward and speak about changes they would like to make. ?I asked a few gymnasts and coaches myself at Covergirl Classic and the coaches definitely had their opinions, mostly to do with injuries and difficulty. ?The gymnasts had less to say, too young, too involved, too obedient or just too inside of it to know.

But Grandi should have also asked the fans. ?Face it, sport is for athletes, but in this mediated, marketed world sport is also entertainment, a commodity that must be produced, packaged and sold to an audience. ?And face it, artistic gymnastics is already damaged goods as a product these days with its incomprehensible code, its restrictive age rules and its dangerous demands. The existent audience should be cherished for we are fewer than we should be and despite all this confusion, there are many of us who still adore it, fight for its visibility and wish it were embraced by more.

But as spectators who are also aficionados of gymnastics, we love and know a lot about our sport. ?We also have the distinct advantage that comes with those who stand on the outside looking in- we can see a big picture, not just the devil in the detail. ?Who knows- maybe, just maybe we have some insight on why this system just isn?t working.

So, given the chance, what would you tell Bruno Grandi is wrong with our code?

?

Source: http://www.thecouchgymnast.com/?p=3307

elvis presley donut the nine lives of chloe king the nine lives of chloe king apollo 13 blaise pascal blaise pascal