Draft of 2025-2028 WAG CoP

Welcome to our Gymnastics Message Board

Members see FEWER ads... so join today

Rich

Member
The draft for the WAG CoP for the next quad
VT
  • Vaults may have the same post-flight but a 0.20 VT Bonus will be awarded to vaults with post-flights in different directions.
  • Round off half-on vaults will now be deducted for insufficient LA turn in the first flight phase
  • Double salto vaults prohibited for juniors
    UB
  • Tkatchev principle will now also be applied to Jaegers (only one Jaeger with or without turn will be recognized)
  • No change in CV formula
  • All Tkatchev 1/2 variations to catch in mixed L grip has been devalued to their non 1/2 variation.
Element Value
  • Martins down to E
  • Black down to F
  • Kononenko down to D
  • Li Ya down to D
  • Derwael-Fenton down to E
  • Endo up to D!
  • Endo 1/1 up to E!
  • Tweddle down to D
  • Fenton II down to E
  • Derwael II down to F
  • Double Lay 1/1 dismount up to F!
    BB
-0.1 CV for B+D acro has specified that it should be “travelling bwd”

-Artistry deduction: 0.20 deduction option for body posture and rhythm is added

Element Value
  • Stag Jump (A) is added to ToE (same box as Sissone)
  • Garrison down to B
FX
  • CV: 0.2 for indirect C+D 0.2 for direct B+D
-Artistry: same as BB, 0.20 deduction is now possible for body posture.
  • The same is true for Musicality: poor expressive engagement and lack of connectivity to music.
  • 1/2 variations of Arabian double tuck and pike has been moved to Group 5 (Saltos Backward)💀
Element Value
  • Split Ring Jump 1/1 (Jurkowska-Kowalska) down to C
  • Oliveira down to E
 
The Garrison they are devaluing I assume is the mount? A B rating seems rather low. Also, are they attempting to simply eliminate the front handspring + front tuck combo? I get that there were issues with the walkover vs handspring technique, but surely that is overly restrictive? I would argue a Tkatchev 1/2 done properly is more difficult than a base Tkatchev… I am not fully sure what they mean by postflight in a different direction on vault. Do they mean twisting in opposition to the initial twist onto the horse? Or do they simply mean two vaults with a different postflight? And why would they do that to arabians? Surely that is also overly restrictive. I am thankful for the added posture deductions, though.
 
Also, are they attempting to simply eliminate the front handspring + front tuck combo? I get that there were issues with the walkover vs handspring technique, but surely that is overly restrictive?
B + D acrobatic connections where both skills are forward elements will still earn 0.2 CV.

Currently, B + D acrobatic connections where the series travels backward earns 0.1 CV. When the 2022-2024 COP was first released, there was some confusion as to whether back handspring + Onodi would be eligible for CV under this rule because an Onodi is considered to be a forward acrobatic element. The purpose of this clarification is to eliminate that ambiguity.
 
Last edited:
I am not fully sure what they mean by postflight in a different direction on vault. Do they mean twisting in opposition to the initial twist onto the horse? Or do they simply mean two vaults with a different postflight?
The purpose of the first change on vault is to allow a gymnast to vault both a double twisting Yurchenko and a double twisting Tsukahara vault. The second change will award a 0.2 in bonus if a gymnast does one vault with a forward salto and a second vault with a backward salto, or vice versa.

Example 1:
  • layout Rudi and Cheng - no bonus awarded since the post flight is forward on both vaults
Example 2:
  • Amanar and layout front full - 0.2 bonus awarded since one vault is backward flight and the other vault is forward flight.
 
The purpose of the first change on vault is to allow a gymnast to vault both a double twisting Yurchenko and a double twisting Tsukahara vault.
I call this …the Zamo clause

Screen Shot 2023-09-17 at 4.18.20 PM
 
the irony is that doing a correct, clean Kasamatsu is not doing a backward vault, and the Women’s Technical Committee may have just demonstrated their ignorance.
 
No, it’s the sort of sideways valdez-like thing she did. Totally should be a B. reasonable change.
image


 
Last edited:
Thank GOD they will finally start deducting pre-flights in half-on vaults. It’s absurd that it wasn’t happening before.

What on earth are they thinking giving a back 3/2 or front 1/1 + Double Tuck 0.2 CV? Totally unnecessary. We will probably see nothing but that pass for four years.
 
Ah, I just misunderstood what “in a different direction” meant. Personally I still feel that a Tsuk and a Yurchenko are substantially different vaults so dictating that a double twisting of both is somehow less still eludes me, but I see better what they were trying to do here. At least they are changing the rule to allow both, which should have been allowed all along.
 
Last edited:
B + D direct acrobatic connections and C + D indirect acrobatic connections would earn 0.2 in CV. Otherwise, the rules remain the same.
 

Welcome to our Gymnastics Message Board

Members see FEWER ads... so join today

Back