BB and FX Artistry (Rules and Discussion)

[FrolovasDoubleLayout]

No, the element 1,101 is a leap onto the BB. If you recall in the previous COP there was a ‘B’ version of the mount - needing to meet the minimum 135° degree of split to get credit - but NOT needing to mark the free leg at horizontal. The ‘A’ version does not need to show a degree of split but must mark the free leg at horizontal or incur a 0,1 precision deduction.

The ridiculousness of the entire thing is that the jump mount in example 5 of the Help-desk video is just as valuable as mount 1,101. Give the A and take the precision if need be.

It is just another example of adding a few keystrokes to a document = look how hard “we” as technical committee are working to promote artistry.

 

[GymBeauty]

After doing some research, it appears that we have yet another incident of WTC contradiction.

What a surprise. In this case the contradiction itself doesn’t matter, since it’s a .1 deduction either way, but it’s still a problem in the code. Leaping onto the beam, regardless of not raising the free leg up to horizonal, should not be getting more penalized than the trash flank mount (which shouldn’t be A value).

I think the code should require a B mount compositionally (.1 deduction if only doing an A, .2 if not even A), and many of the skill values need to be adjusted. Several of the handstand and planche mounts should be upgraded (one-handed versions especially), split leap and front tuck should be upgraded, and forward roll should be downgraded.