Nastia Liukin did very strange Switch Ring Leaps in Olympic 2008!

[Iminhanoi]

When Nastia Liukin did Switch Ring Leaps in Olympic 2008! Her head was strangely very high.

It is unclear whether she was given any deduction or not? (Probably not, her executive score away too high).

Other gymnasts always showing upper back arch & release of head when they doing Switch Ring Leaps. Such as Anna Pavlova, Li ShanShan, Koko Tsurumi (who compete in Olympic 2008 as well)

 

[MaryClare]

Nastia Liukin has the most technically accurate ring position. Anna Pavlova is throwing her head further back in an attempt to pull her fore leg up, which she struggles with

 

[Iminhanoi]

Nastia Liukin has the most technically accurate ring position. Anna Pavlova is throwing her head further back in an attempt to pull her fore leg up, which she struggles with

Nastia Liukin not showing arch due her head was too high

 

[KristyJ]

The 2006-2008 code had different requirements for the position. That said I believe Nastia's leaps would be credited now, as well. Her foot is at forehead height and she does show head release. You don't have to have your head hit your calf.

 

[Iminhanoi]

The 2006-2008 code had different requirements for the position. That said I believe Nastia's leaps would be credited now, as well. Her foot is at forehead height and she does show head release. You don't have to have your head hit your calf.

Her back looks a bit straight

Nastia Liukin has the most technically accurate ring position. Anna Pavlova is throwing her head further back in an attempt to pull her fore leg up, which she struggles with

every other gymnast to so

 

[MaryClare]

Nastia Liukin not showing arch due her head was too high

Her head isn’t too high. This is what a ring position is actually supposed to look like.

She shows greater range and control than the other 2 examples. Both of whom don’t achieve enough “over fore” to really call it a ring. They are using their backs to try to achieve it. It is an easy cheat, if you like.

Both feet should be close to the same height off the floor as possible.

 

[MaryClare]

Nastia’s doesn’t only look different, it is performed with a completely different technique, as were her leaps on FX. Why? Well I think it’s unlikely she was taught those by her father

 

[irichluck21]

Likely taught by her mother, Nastia's execution on leaps was very rhythmic like, IMO.

 

[MaryClare]

Likely taught by her mother, Nastia's execution on leaps was very rhythmic like, IMO.

Yes and her technique is very rhythmic too. Having that person in your coaching set up really makes a difference. Natalia Pavlova had been technical dance/compulsories assistant to Nadezhda Maslennikova. They produced Oksana Averkova together and also coached Olga Chudina for a while. When Natalia left in 1987 to have children, she wasn’t replaced and didn’t return until Anna started training at a higher level, around 1996. The gymnast that Nadezhda produced on her own during that period? Elena Zamolodchikova.

Most gymnasts who perform a switch ring on beam, need the switch, because it generates their position. A standard ring leap would actually be harder for them, because the technique is wrong.

It’s like when you see Shawn Johnson’s beam acro. The technique is all wrong.

 

[Iminhanoi]

Gabby Douglas’s switch ring leap was very similar to Nastia’s

 

[Iminhanoi]

Nastia Liukin has the most technically accurate ring position. Anna Pavlova is throwing her head further back in an attempt to pull her fore leg up, which she struggles with

Nastia didn’t show upper back arch



The right switch ring leap, according to fly high channel

 

[MaryClare]

Gabby Douglas’s switch ring leap was very similar to Nastia’s
View attachment 11351
View attachment 11352

It isn’t similar at all. This is the poorest example you’ve posted so far. Look at the head to feet distance

 

[MaryClare]

Eaker clearly shows sufficient upper back arch. That isn’t what’s wrong with the leap!

It is the head and shoulders that should be released, not the back.

 

[Iminhanoi]

Eaker clearly shows sufficient upper back arch. That isn’t what’s wrong with the leap!

It is the head and shoulders that should be released, not the back.

But fly high channel say no (x) (in 01:10)

 

[irichluck21]

Eaker is a poor example. Judges were on both sides of the fence with her. Some competitions she would receive credit and then some competitions she wouldn't. Especially the case was in 2019 when her initial beam routine received credit and then once the inquiry went in, the judges devalued. Some judges saw her as correctly executing her leaps and some judges saw opposite.

 

[MaryClare]

But fly high channel say no (x) (in 01:10)

They are right, it’s not a good ring. But not for that reason. Arching the back is a “cheat code” for a ring leap. The element should lead from the feet and not the back. The back foot should be close to the head without excessively arching the back.

 

[RedBirdie]

Also, the expectations from the WTC about what constitutes an acceptable ring position have changed significantly over the years. Eaker's would have been fine in 2008. Heck, it would have been mostly fine through 2016.

The fault lies with the WTC, as is so often the case. As Denn likes to say, the rules are so ridiculously busybody. What the code asks for now is essentially a Yang Bo with a slightly bent leg. With the amount of arch being demanded, along with the foot being at or above crown (rather than just at head height), I believe almost anyone showing a classic ring position would be hit with a downgrade.

Finally, Al Fong remains a fucking idiot. Such appallingly bad routine construction. Although Valeri gave him a run for his money with Gabby's routine construction this year.

 

[rlayt]

@MaryClare I would assume a dance teacher like yourself would be very helpful as well in learning to do body shapes and positioning correctly.

 

[MaryClare]

@MaryClare I would assume a dance teacher like yourself would be very helpful as well in learning to do body shapes and positioning correctly.

We don’t do much dance, someone else does the ballet work. Officially we are known as technical trainer. Our job basically is to ensure the gymnasts have the necessary requisite skills and abilities to do the elements their main coach wants (and also to score highly in national compulsories). Basically the boring shit that no one wants to have to spend their time on.

I mostly do leaps, jumps, spins and anything flexibility related as that’s my background. If you’ve a gymnast who needs to correct her front handspring technique in order to progress her forward tumbling, I am not your girl.