Where are the 6.9+ bar routines

[KristyJ]

She lost a couple of tenths on it in finals maybe (obv can’t see the judges’ actual deductions and there are some judgement calls there), though, not five or six. With Andrade, I think she can do it really well, the question is only how consistently.

 

[GymBeauty]

She has .7 in possible deductions: .1 angle + .1 body alignment on the Giant 1/2, .1 flexed feet + .1 bent arms on the Jaeger, and .3 angle on the Cast 1/2.

The Cast 1/2 was definitely .3 short, that shouldn’t be a judgement call, it’s clear in real time and verifiable with measurement angles in slo-mo. The bent arms on the Jaeger are so minor that it really shouldn’t be a consideration here, although there are other times she’s deserved the deduction. The judgement call here is whether to take both deductions on the Giant 1/2 or just one.

 

[KristyJ]

I would not take on the blind. I would take the flexed feet on the Jaeger, though I could see some judges maybe not. She has oddly conscious toe flex on both her Jaeger and Tkatchev where her feet stay mostly pointed and she gets the tiniest flex to clear the bar. I do not see a reasonable elbow deduction on the release, maybe on the kip after but that’s nitpicky. On the cast 1/2 I had .1, and I went and found a much better angle to see it at as the first angle I had stunk. I could see .3 more from the second video.

 

[Concorde]

The Cast 1/2 was definitely .3 short, that shouldn’t be a judgement call, it’s clear in real time and verifiable with measurement angles in slo-mo. The bent arms on the Jaeger are so minor that it really shouldn’t be a consideration here, although there are other times she’s deserved the deduction.

What am I missing here? Andrade performs the 1/2 turn on her left hand, then regrasps the bar with her right hand within 30 degrees of handstand, which is when I would consider the turn to be completed using the ‘when both hands grasp the bar’ criteria. I do see the grip adjustment and subsequent regrasp of the bar with her left hand occurring past 30 degrees of handstand, but since she already had both hands on the bar prior to this point, I didn’t think this is where the turn would be considered complete.

I agree with you on the bent arms on the piked Jaegar.

 

[GymBeauty]

It’s judged as when the other hand has regrasped the bar in regular grip, AFAIK. Otherwise it would be literally impossible to do a standard Cast 1/2 with no deduction, since there would inherently be a “grip adjustment” built to the skill. In any case, in Andrade’s routine (and practically every instance of a Cast 1/2) the turn hasn’t been fully completed before her hand leaves the bar to regrasp. So the angle has to be judged as when she regrasps.

 

[KristyJ]

I came back here to note that her Jaeger was caught much closer to the bars in qualifications than finals, and that there the elbows were bent. But her handstands were also better for the two in question- the blind and the cast 1/2. I went to check because I realized we had two routines and not perfect mention of which we were watching. I do think she is fully capable of routines that at least avoid the .3 on handstands, though the endurance required might make it hard for her to have no handstand deductions throughout.

 

[GymBeauty]

So are we in agreement yet. Rebecca should be ditching these moves and incorporating Weiler 1/2 to get a better score.

Shilese should be ditching the Stalder 1/1, Toe 1/2, Reverse Giant, and Double Front dismount, for Weiler 1/2 and FTDB dismount.

Actually I think there’s a better dismount option than FTDB that should have become standard since the 2006 code, or earlier, but that’s a whole other discussion…

 

[Yarotska]

I think with Shilese, her Stalder 1/1 is just fine. I do think the toe 1/2 is unnecessary, though. It’s not even a counting skill.

As far as Weilers, she is a taller gymnast, maybe that could be an issue. It’s more body to pull around, and not all Weiler 1/2’s go right to handstand, either. She could also have a leg separation. Then there’s the fact that a lot of them rush the skill and have to fight to keep it up. She would be better off taking the .1 on the front giant. She’s training a half out of that double front, too.

The Weiler suggestion for everyone is kind of giving “send her to Chow’s” for me.

She used to do a FTDB bar dismount, but she bent her knees really early and usually had a slight leg separation. They changed to a double front in her 2nd year as a senior, perhaps the growth was also affecting her lift. These new/old coaches aren’t going to change back to another bar dismount that requires extra work to make it as floaty as what she has now.

 

[GymBeauty]

I think with Shilese, her Stalder 1/1 is just fine.

It is, but the problem is the extra skills on top of it to get the reverse grip into the routine, plus the Double Front dismount apparently getting .3 leg separation from some very dirty judges and a very annoying code of points.

I mean, ideally I would be wanting most gymnasts to learn Tkatchev 1/2 variants as a priority these days. But the Weiler 1/2 is a quicker solution that happens to fit perfectly into the routines of Andrade and Shilese (and others) without needing other adjustments.

These new/old coaches aren’t going to change back to another bar dismount that requires extra work to make it as floaty as what she has now.

Well, that’s simply hindering their gymnasts’ potential. Something being “floaty” is a useless attribute in competitive gymnasts these days, when that skill is being hit with many deductions. I still cringe thinking about the .3 deduction we had for Pak salto angles last quad. But it is what it is, competitors have to go by the rules in front of them…

 

[Yarotska]

Well, it’s not just about being floaty, it’s about getting enough air time. If she were doing the FTDB already, I’m sure they’d work to fix it, but she has another dismount now, for better or for worse. Yes, it’s a risk of .3, but with the .2 bonus she’s still netting positive even with a hop. Perhaps when she adds the half they may not even take the .3 if she kicks out quickly enough.

But IMO changing your dismount and then having to fix the bad habits from years ago on top is a waste of time, considering what she has now still puts her in conversations. It’s about minimizing the extra deductions on top of the built-in. That’s the strategy that saw Nastia Liukin take 5 Olympic medals and had the girls confused about how she managed to do so lol.

 

[GymBeauty]

Nastia Liukin constantly changing her routines to keep gaming the code better with each passing year is what resulted in her winning all those Olympic medals, actually.

The degree to which people had to change their routines in general for 2006-2008 shows that MUCH more adaptability is possible in a short amount of time than might be assumed. With life in general, people are capable of more change than they think, when they actually try to do it rather than staying in their safe/lazy zones. The coaching culture of sticking with the status quo is an issue.

Anyway about the FTDB…it’s a FTDB. Shilese was doing it fine a few years ago and seemed to change to the Double Front just because of other routine changes and her coach thought that dismount sequence was the best way to get reverse grip in. I don’t see her current dismount saving any deductions, just opening her up to higher leg separation (also risking dismounting too close to the bar). Maybe there really is some other reason she can’t do the FTDB, an element that nearly every gymnast at this level is capable of doing if their life depended on it, but I put the odds of that as being very low.

It does seem the Double Front 1/2 could be an improvement for her, she’s shown it perfectly in practice, but then why isn’t it being pursued more urgently? The same can be said about her Stalder Nabieva; the ability is clearly there and Paris Cup was the perfect place to be putting it in, but an attempt was not made. Keeping that Toe 1/1 in its current place in the routine is simply an admission of setting someone up to not progress; you can’t be planning that pirouette before such a difficult release if you want to maximize your chances. It would make far more sense to open the routine with Toe 1/1 + Stalder 1/1, so then the way can be clear to aggressively go after the new release (and to properly connect out of it, with not just the Pak, but also hopefully the shaposh afterward).

 

[Yarotska]

Maybe there really is some other reason she can’t do the FTDB, an element that nearly every gymnast at this level is capable of doing if their life depended on it

McCusker and Achampong found crying in a corner.

 

[Doug1233]

You guys know too much about the Code to not judge with us at meets on the Gymnaverse Panel!

 

[KristyJ]

No, we are not in agreement, lol.

I still don’t see the Weiler as a better connective element than others similarly valued, nor do I see it as a deduction-free option. As I’ve said before, I see it as a good option for gymnasts who have an affinity for it and other skills that flow well with it in a routine. I see all skills in that light, even less favored ones. And I am firmly against the idea of one composition fitting all in any code.

As for whether or not Andrade or any other could have an affinity for it, I have no idea. I’ve never seen them try one, and have not heard their opinions of the option. It is a more tiring skill than a cast 1/2, so given that fatigue can already affect the degree of perfection with which one completes skills later in a routine that may weigh in.

And as for Shilese, if there is any one gymnast who could hit every handstand in her routine, it’s her. I think she could hit the nines in execution with some work. (Edit- but I would like to see her find a better dismount option, not going to argue there.)

 

[GymBeauty]

Nobody has said a Weiler is a “deduction free” option…I don’t get why you keep saying that. It’s going to be lower deduction for most people than 3 other moves in total though. And factually brings a .1 difficulty score increase to routines like Andrade’s…

There are lots of skills athletes could do if they actually trained them, and they simply don’t. Most competitors don’t seem to think about routine construction much, just what their coaches say. And coaches can definitely be blind to certain things in the code or routine changes that would benefit their athlete. But hopefully the more these things get talked about, the higher chance it trickles down to competitors who might find it useful.

 

[YurchenkoLoop]

Nabieva F
Nabieva 1/2 + Ezhova GD .2
Inbar 1/1 + Komova II + Bhardwaj EEE .4
Chow 1/2 E
Full-out D
GFEEEEDD 4.1 + 2.2 + .6 = 6.9

Healy + Ling + layout Jaeger + Pak EEFD .5
Inbar + inbar 1/1 + Van Leeuwen DEE .2
Ray G
GFEEEEDD 4.1 + 2.2 + .7 = 7.0

 

[KristyJ]

I will agree with you that the building blocks of a Weiler should at least be worked some in training, as developing a potential variety in skills is good for long term gymnastic development and scoring flexibility.

 

[Doug1233]

Weiler 1/2 is probably one of the most under-utilised and valuable Ds there is in WAG UB. It ticks so many boxes. But you need insane upper body strength to do it properly. It’s not an option for many F athletes. It’s historically a “MAG” skill for a reason. Nastia wouldn’t have had a hope in hell of doing it, as fantastic a bar worker she was.

 

[MaryClare]

Yes. Several of us have said exactly the same, several posts ago.

But some people seem absolutely obsessed with weilers

 

[GymBeauty]

Inbar 1/1 + Inbar Shaposh + Bhardwaj is something we should definitely be seeing, but nobody has done it yet. I like this plan for Wei Xiaoyuan, she is so inconsistent with connecting out of the Pak. If doing the “Fan Yilin” routine with that modification and the E dismount it’s 7.0 start value.

And I’d like to see Luo Rui do this 7.0 routine:

Cast to undergrip + Healy 1/2 + Layout Gienger
Cast to undergrip + Healy + Layout Jaeger + Pak
Cast + Van Leeuwen
Cast + Giant 1/2 + Ling + Double Font 1/2