View previous topic | View next topic |
Author |
Message |
tulu
Joined: 31 May 2008 Posts: 15
|
Posted: Wed, 2-Jul-2008 23:56 Post subject: Movements of former RG times performed slower than nowadays? |
|
|
when I watch old RG videos and compare them with today's videos then I notice that the movements of former RG times were performed slower than the RG movements nowadays!
what do you think? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tahnee RSG.net Moderator
Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 3296 Location: Perth, Australia
|
Posted: Thu, 3-Jul-2008 1:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Well obviously..because back then they didn't have to fit in 18 (high level) body skills, plus 7 marks of apparatus handling bonuses... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Storm RSG.net Moderator
Joined: 02 Sep 2005 Posts: 4492 Location: Queensland, Australia
|
Posted: Thu, 3-Jul-2008 10:34 Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, but try to see the speed of movement of the apparatus.. 100 times than nowadays.
And I don't think they were slower at all.. they had less body difficulties. this Is a big difference.
Handling and expression were the major subjects of a past routine and the speed of the top gymnasts was something simply amazing to see. _________________ USE the same topics to ask, even if the links there are DEAD!
The POOR search button EXISTS! use it please.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Laughs and smiles
Joined: 02 Nov 2003 Posts: 458 Location: London
|
Posted: Sun, 20-Jul-2008 10:20 Post subject: |
|
|
My thoughts exactly - All you need to do is look for any of the clubs routines of the 80s to prove this point.
This is one of my favourites: http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=YCWKjv1WEbQ
Hope this helps explain the difference better! =
P.S: Completely OT - Look what I found!!! http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=VGhppM0PEOo _________________ I believe in nothing but this is my nothing |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rhytmicmama
Joined: 13 Jan 2006 Posts: 79
|
Posted: Sun, 20-Jul-2008 17:23 Post subject: |
|
|
is it just this exercise or was there also way less extreme flexibility back then?
Even if you look at the jumps,it seems as if they aren't even 180° |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Janita
Joined: 06 Apr 2004 Posts: 2884
|
Posted: Sun, 20-Jul-2008 17:53 Post subject: |
|
|
there was a lot less extreme flexibility then. Kabaeva has all started it. Well... not really, as Yanina was also extreem flexible, but Kabaeva had more succes. Every little girl wanted to be like her. Till the end of 2000 in the code it wasn't necessary to receive good points by this extreem flexibility. In 2001 if you wanted to still have high scores, you needed this, as leg flexibility became almost no points. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Storm RSG.net Moderator
Joined: 02 Sep 2005 Posts: 4492 Location: Queensland, Australia
|
Posted: Sun, 20-Jul-2008 20:20 Post subject: |
|
|
Also Zaripova in middle 90's was really flexible but the code was based on throws and handlings at that time...
Then came Batirchina, the Kabaeva and the flex mania started _________________ USE the same topics to ask, even if the links there are DEAD!
The POOR search button EXISTS! use it please.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Marts85
Joined: 20 Jul 2008 Posts: 634 Location: Italy
|
Posted: Sun, 20-Jul-2008 20:26 Post subject: |
|
|
i think that alina's superflexibility changed RG, but she had a lot of expressivity and very good handling too. Today a lot of top-level gymnasts have superflexibility, little expressivity and medium handling.. That's the problem in my opinion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Katerina
Joined: 19 Nov 2006 Posts: 116 Location: Athens
|
Posted: Sun, 20-Jul-2008 21:16 Post subject: |
|
|
Storm wrote: | Yes, but try to see the speed of movement of the apparatus.. 100 times than nowadays.
And I don't think they were slower at all.. they had less body difficulties. this Is a big difference.
Handling and expression were the major subjects of a past routine and the speed of the top gymnasts was something simply amazing to see. |
Hope those days will come back again :
Just look the new COP
Body dificulties 5 out of 30 points
Apparatus dificulties + music/chorografy 15/30 points
In my opinion (as a spectator NOT an expert) if i want to see EXTREME flexibility i go to the circus, i prefer handling&expresion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
CoCoNuTsiopatHic
Joined: 14 Apr 2006 Posts: 819
|
Posted: Mon, 21-Jul-2008 0:45 Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know if "slower" is the right word to describe it, but there were a lot of elements that gymnasts had more opportunity to elongate back then, particularly the free rolls of the apparatus.
But with clubs, without the criteria we have today to value the elements, gymnasts had a lot more movements with the clubs that were small and sometimes subtle but still very quick and intricate. There were routines in the past where the clubs took on the look of gears from a machine at work which gave the gymnast the opportunity to let the apparatus take on a character all of its own playing a role to interpret the music. Nowadays there are often so many fragments of simple handling done in the clubs routines where the gymnast is just trying to transition cleanly and set up the next big trick that it breaks the character of the movements of the apparatus and thus inhibits the gymnast from making the apparatus to appear to take on a role of it's own within the concept and structure of the exercise. _________________ *Elegance is an attitude.* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
FaerieDevilish
Joined: 10 Apr 2006 Posts: 1080 Location: Mexico City, Mexico
|
Posted: Mon, 21-Jul-2008 2:07 Post subject: |
|
|
CoCoNuTsiopatHic wrote: | I don't know if "slower" is the right word to describe it, but there were a lot of elements that gymnasts had more opportunity to elongate back then, particularly the free rolls of the apparatus. |
I agree with the whole post (it's difficult to disagree with you :p), but especially with this bit.
I do not think the elements themselves are performed more slowly. It may be true that some balances were in general held for a tad bit longer than balances today, but there is no real difference in terms of speed between jumps/leaps, pivots and flexibilities from 20 years ago and today.
Apart from the 'opportunity to elongate', the gymnasts also had the actual chance of having a choreography into which they integrated the elements, rather than having a choreography entirely composed by body elements. Few elements in those days were performed in a row. For this, 1) there is more time between each element, which makes the routine less busy, and 2) in some very well done choreographies, the elements seem longer because of perfect integration with the previous and upcoming movements. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Storm RSG.net Moderator
Joined: 02 Sep 2005 Posts: 4492 Location: Queensland, Australia
|
Posted: Mon, 21-Jul-2008 10:49 Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Apart from the 'opportunity to elongate', the gymnasts also had the actual chance of having a choreography into which they integrated the elements, rather than having a choreography entirely composed by body elements. Few elements in those days were performed in a row. For this, 1) there is more time between each element, which makes the routine less busy, and 2) in some very well done choreographies, the elements seem longer because of perfect integration with the previous and upcoming movements. |
I strongly agree with this..
A well choreographed routine of the past was an endless flux from the beginning till the end, because it was based on the music! And as we all well know, the music doesn't stop in a routine...
Try to see Georgieva WC 1983 clubs and the tell me if that routine is slow. _________________ USE the same topics to ask, even if the links there are DEAD!
The POOR search button EXISTS! use it please.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|