Are the men's judges coming after Heath Thorpe?

[onodian]

I can’t for the life of me envision a double twisting wolf jump that wouldn’t be riddled with deductions.

 

[Doug1233]

I think Gogean tried it several times in Atlanta?

 

[MaryClare]

The gymnastics world is a conservative echo chamber?! On what planet…

 

[Denn]

@Doug1233 @irichluck21 I am surprised you think I didn’t know he’s gay. That was (obviously, I thought) a typo — I meant “not only gay”, not “not gay”.

 

[irichluck21]

I am surprised you think I didn’t know he’s gay. That was (obviously, I thought) a typo — I meant “not only gay”, not “not gay”.

You literally wrote “He’s not openly gay” which is what brought confusion as HT has been out and proud and an advocate for many years now.

Just figured I would clarify as your response seemed to indicate otherwise.

All clear now!

 

[GymBeauty]

Agree about Heath’s bar routine being underscored and also about homophobia playing a role in rejecting the leaps.

Men’s floor routines used to have some artistry, it’s sad to see. Especially since those “non-music” floor routines are still below the level of artistry MAG should have. There’s no reason aside from sexism they shouldn’t have to dance to music, same as the women. In professional shows the male gymnasts certainly used to dance on floor.

I can’t for the life of me envision a double twisting wolf jump that wouldn’t be riddled with deductions.

I don’t know of anyone who has ever even rotated a Wolf 2/1 jump. The E rating is completely deserved, and still not worth making it something you’d actually want to attempt. That is a very difficult element.

I think Gogean tried it several times in Atlanta?

She hardly even got 1.5 rotations, if that’s what she was attempting.

Wolf 1.5 is currently not a listed element, very strange. I wonder if they would rate it C or D. Straddle 1.5 is rated D, but they only give the Wolf 1/1 a B compared to the Straddle 1/1 being C.

 

[Denn]

Why is this “homophobic”?

Someone else can spell it out. I find explaining this stuff exhausting (nothing to do with you)

 

[Denn]

[…] it would be a fairly significant decision for the TC to take so I don’t think their present stance of dance elements being “kept out” can be considered in any way controversial

Would it though? Butterfly jumps are in the code. Jumps with twist to prone are, too. And so are scales with 180° and no hand support.

The question is “why don’t they want leaps with splits”? These are clearly gymnastics elements and floor-oriented.

Ask 10 guys in MAG who are against this why, and see their reactions.

 

[Doug1233]

Sure, they can put forward an opinion (which I would gladly read!). I don’t think I need it “spelled out” though .

I still don’t know what’s “homophobic” about it. There’s a huge difference between male femininity/grace/balletic style and being gay. They aren’t synonyms. The FIG may (unreasonably) dislike the former, but I can’t see any connection to the latter.

Unless you’re arguing that it’s because Heath submitted the skill (rather than the skill itself) that’s the reason it’s not being added to the Code? You think if Brody Malone submitted it, they’d give it a C and add it in? That’s the only way this could be construed as “homophobia”.

 

[GymBeauty]

Ooph.

Men being feminine and balletic is exactly equated to being gay in the minds of many (most?) conservatives. Thus, since they are homophobic, they refuse to vote for leaps in men’s gymnastics.

 

[Doug1233]

I don’t think this applies to the minds of those on the mens technical committee.

 

[MaryClare]

The stereotype of men in artistic sport must be gay is not one that is universal across all countries and cultures and the FIG, especially the mens side of things, is not an organisation dominated by the anglosphere.
Where I live, mens artistic gymnastics is a very macho sport. I can assure you that no one has called Denis Ablyazin gay because he does a stag leap on floor.

 

[JDB]

If we’re going to promulgate unsubstantiated hypotheses, I might as well share mine here. I think the MTC members really dislike leg day so they’re discouraging leaps.

 

[Angelika]

Back in the day (1968 OG) didn’t Caslavska do a double axel type of leap in FX?

 

[Denn]

Why do you think that? You know those guys?

 

[Denn]

Okay, that’s fine. What’s your alternate hypothesis on why the MTC is hellbent on keeping dance elements (leaps, spins, etc.) out of FX even though they have, say, butterflies in the code?

 

[Denn]

The gymnastics world is a conservative echo chamber?! On what planet…

Time after time, the MTC has caused gymnastics to become more and more “standard” by rejecting elements and removing rules that reward creativity and evolution of the sport in any way except difficulty and clean, straightforward execution. And the men’s gymnastics world, at large, has not only stood by but actually many support it.

That’s definitely a kind of conservatism, and it’s been consistent for about 15 years now.

Look at gymnastics 30-40 years ago – it was far more varied and inclusive of a variety of ways of doing gymnastics.

 

[MaryClare]

Because rejecting elements because you don’t want the sport to go in that direction is quite different from removing existing elements that are never performed anyway. You might not agree with that decision, but it’s a legitimate one.

I don’t particularly want to see women doing flares on floor, even if one particular gymnast doing it made it look really cool.

I’m not very familiar with the MAG code, but there’s nothing actually preventing him doing that skill is there? He wouldn’t be penalised, he just wouldn’t get any credit?

I agree that mens floor exercise of 30+ years ago was far more artistic. But there’s nothing stopping someone doing that sort of routine, other than that it would score very well.

 

[Denn]

Because rejecting elements because you don’t want the sport to go in that direction is quite different from removing existing elements that are never performed anyway

But why? That’s the crux of the matter.

 

[MaryClare]

I don’t think there particularly needs to be a reason. Why are certain elements undervalued? Why is it often pointless doing a full in? Why do we need the best gymnasts in the world prove they do some hand waving whilst sitting on the beam just to satisfy a requirement?

The role of the technical panels is to set the direction of the sport. Both MAG and WAG have become less artistic since 1996. We might not like it, but it isn’t a conspiracy against men expressing themselves (not sure how sexuality is in any way relevant to that)