The FIG (finally) publish the 2022-2024 Help Desk

Does anyone have PDF comparison software?

Holy 91 pages Batman

1 Like

I can compare PDFs - what is the original file to compare this to?

Damn they took it down:

https://www.gymnastics.sport/publicdir/rules/files/en_WAG%20Help%20Desk%20(Edition%207)%20.pdf

I don’t suppose anyone saved a copy? Maybe its on Twitter?

PMing

Doing a quick scan of the current version of the Help Desk, I’m not seeing much that jumps out as completely new, or not reflective of the changes to the COP following 2021 (e.g. dismount bonus rules, changes to CV on bars, side jumps on beam, artistry on beam/floor, etc.). A couple of things that I did spot:

4.1

In unusual or special circumstances the WTC president or authorized representative may nominate a judge to the competition. Any judge with the appropriate category that is available at competition venue (if there are no more reserve judges and there is no other solution) and with the approval of her/his Federation. This judge may be at the competition venue because she/he was working as a volunteer, watching as a spectator, etc.

Pike Jump (Body Shape Deductions)

  • less than 90 degree hip angle → No deduction
  • 90 degree hip angle → 0.1
  • greater than 90 degree hip angle → 0.3

12.6 - Turns in Tuckstand / Wolf Turns

  • Deductions for loss of balance are now up to 0.5 instead of 0.3

I feel like we might be seeing more pike jumps because of this. I imagine it’s easier to hit a pike above horizontal than it is to hit a straddle with both legs above horizontal. Whilst keeping toes pointed and legs straight.

Some new examples given for beam connections.

At 5:13, I would have absolutely given the whole of Becky Downie’s series there. But apparently the Split Jump into (pretty much immediate) BHS has too much arm swing - so no connection. I think that’s a little harsh, and I’m sure there have been plenty of connections less quick (and with just as much arm swing) that have been given - but maybe this is where the Code is going. You cannot do a “whole arm” swing like that - even if the connection is fast as fuck.

I think that’s been the code since 2017, no? Downie’s swinging her arms backwards and then forwards again before taking off for the back handspring. Ideally, she should land the split with her hands below and slightly behind her hips

The rules are ridiculous. Slightly sliding one foot towards the other on a landing should not be considered a broken connection. Swinging an arm without balance check should not be a broken connection. Slightly pausing with the free leg extended on a leap landing before going into the next should not be a broken connection. All acro connections shouldn’t have to be rebounding to get a bonus either.

The deductions for slow connection on top of it is even stupider. Instead of trying to connect elements would you prefer everyone to come to a standstill and wave an arm in the air as “choreography” between every element? Why on earth should that be worth more points?? If they supposedly want artistry on Beam then some slow connections should be fine. The rules literally state variations of tempo is wanted. HOW can there be variation of tempo if all Beam elements are supposed to be executed like a child rushing around from eating too much sugar?

Remove the slow connection execution deductions, remove the insanely nitpicky rules about what a connection is, and in the case of a slow connection between two elements that would garner .2 cv, just reduce the cv to .1 - that is fair. Then we’re rewarding connections that are truly difficult to do as rebounding, while not punishing everything else.

3 Likes

I wish they’d simply go back to the “continuous movement without a wobble or step/adjustement” criteria. The rest really is nit-picky. I don’t mind the slow connection deduction really, as long as it’s not over applied. It really makes no sense not to allow a downswing of the arms when that is usually a natural part of the movement.

1 Like

For the life of me I can’t understand what makes example #12 acceptable while #13 is not. And at this point I’m not even sure it’s worth bothering to try :roll_eyes:

It’s where the arms are when the skill starts. #12 they’re down at her sides, #13 they come from the top, indicating an extra “pump” before the skill.

Basically the arms have to be down and can only swing in one direction (forward/backward) before starting the next skill.

They’ve essentially made the Split Jump to Ring 1/1 obsolete by requiring the ring position to come before the full turn (see 2:00). I cannot imagine how fugly this might look. And yet they they do allow the Ring position to come mid-way trough the skill in a Ferrari (as it is a Tour Jete to Ring, then an extra half).

Semantics, IMO. But they’ve essentially made the jump version of the skill dead.

The even more infuriating logical fallacy to me here is that E can apply a ‘slow connection’ deduction while D declines to even credit the connection at all, an illogical double whammy.

@Yarotska - hmmm… in #12 I see a gymnast performing an aerial with arms down and in front, as you said, but then she cranks them backwards, and forwards again to initiate the split jump. I’m still seeing this as two “pumps” as you say, same as Becky, though I guess Becky covers a greater total range of motion - that much I can see. Which, I guess I’d have to see the actual no deduction exemplar to fully understand because even #12 is getting dinged in the “extra arm swing category”, but #13 is extra arm swing to a supposedly greater magnitude that also eliminates connection …yeesh. :thinking: I feel like speed and no intermediary bobbles were way more intuitive guidelines that would cause less differential judging outcomes.

1 Like

I think with what you’re describing this would be the no deduction example vis-a-vis speed and CV.

That makes sense to me, I guess I just don’t think it needs to be the basis on which to decide if a connection happened or not.

1 Like

Basically you have to land with your arms already all the way back to where you’d start an upswing for the next skill. Which frankly isn’t always great for the look or control of the previous skill.

1 Like

Liu Tingting mastered it very quickly

The requirement for the 1/2 turn version is nonsensical, and it’s also COMPLETELY wrong they are using Ferrari as an example as a sufficient Ring leap 1/1. Ferrari has NEVER achieved a good Ring position in this element and the way she does it is NOT acceptable to the current rules. This is 100% total and clear Nationalistic bias from Donatella Sacchi to hold up an Italian competitor.

I’m so mad looking at that.

What I find irrational is that the split ring leap full and the split ring jump full have completely different requirements for when the twist can be performed.

Can you imagine how fugly a split ring jump 1/1 would look under the new rules. The half is bad enough.

Visually, I prefer the look of the twist coming first.