Contents Information Events and Results Gymnasts Archive
Contents Archive Archive

Message board

Welcome to the new RSG.net message board! Please behave!
Please remember, that the message board is not responsible for the opinions expressed by its members.
Also don't insult, blame, accuse, discriminate, or debase other people here.
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

2009-2012 COP flexibility and waves
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Rhythmic Gymnastics Forum Index » Code of Points
View previous topic | View next topic  
Author Message
Eulucil



Joined: 11 Sep 2008
Posts: 524
Location: Spain

PostPosted: Fri, 2-Apr-2010 0:15    Post subject: Reply with quote

You can see in the COP that the triple italian fouetté with rotation, passing by attitude position (and not ring one) is worth 0.5 (when you do it as a flexibility element, of course)

Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Iva



Joined: 31 Jan 2006
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Fri, 9-Apr-2010 17:20    Post subject: Reply with quote

chik_ucv wrote:
Sery wrote:
Iva wrote:
Sery wrote:
Svet T. wrote:
Sery wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFr_zsq4nHY
0:43
Interesting example: She writes 0.70 for this difficulty in her form
Passing from a split to another split with rotation +0.40
but the additional swing is attitude! which must be a split or ring.


Is this difficulty cancelled? Thank you.


This is 100% wrong technique.


Why? in CoP it is stated that should be passing from split to another split with additional swing + rotation, but it doesn't say that swing is supposed to be a split or ring.


oh, then we can do any swings? maybe should i make a swing on just 20 degrees and get 0.10? or only on 5 degrees? how about 1 degree?
swing in those difficulties must be OR split OR boucle, this is flexibility.
Be sure that this is wrong technique - I talked on this element with CT ;P


I talked to one of the best national coaches about this last year, and he explaines to me that the ONLY difference betwen the flexibility fouettes y and the balance fouette, is the releve, you can use ANY position, even if it´s not a complete split or a ring position, so this one is perfectly fine


well, I don't think it is right, there's a huge difference in technique and positions. you can't use any positions for flexibility kicks.

Sery - that's how I understand this - by description flexibility difficulties have to be done in maximum amplitude. So yes it would be understandable if the girl will do third split or ring if she is capable of. But because not all of them can do so and CoP doesn't specify the need of doing 3 split/ring, I think any 3 swing ( or kick may be better word) is good as long as she showed that is it maximum she can do that i think should be attitude or higher.

I would really want to have official clarification on this though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tahnee
RSG.net Moderator
RSG.net Moderator


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 3296
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Thu, 15-Apr-2010 1:50    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was told that in the penchee rotation flex you could no longer bend your top leg, at least not completely - but I still see many girls doing this in their routines (eg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGXBA8jf2hc&feature=related )
Anyone know for sure?
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/Tahnee2612
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Olya



Joined: 10 Mar 2004
Posts: 941
Location: Hungary

PostPosted: Sun, 25-Apr-2010 12:40    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is it true that you can't have flexibility elements which are in the same row in COP in the routine, so only 1 element per row? (so for example no "front split with side roll" and "back split with side roll" in the same routine?)

I know it's really basic but I don't remember reading it anywhere (could be my mistake) - I know about that list with the 'same form - not the same form" elements, but our federations claims this "same row" rule now.
_________________
oLyA
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Tahnee
RSG.net Moderator
RSG.net Moderator


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 3296
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Mon, 26-Apr-2010 0:10    Post subject: Reply with quote

Olya wrote:
Is it true that you can't have flexibility elements which are in the same row in COP in the routine, so only 1 element per row? (so for example no "front split with side roll" and "back split with side roll" in the same routine?)

I know it's really basic but I don't remember reading it anywhere (could be my mistake) - I know about that list with the 'same form - not the same form" elements, but our federations claims this "same row" rule now.


We heard this too, but I don't think for flexs like that it's followed. Eg. I've been told that you can perform both the E and F value elbow balances (first one to arch, and second from walkover)..
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/Tahnee2612
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Eulucil



Joined: 11 Sep 2008
Posts: 524
Location: Spain

PostPosted: Tue, 27-Apr-2010 19:48    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tahnee wrote:
Olya wrote:
Is it true that you can't have flexibility elements which are in the same row in COP in the routine, so only 1 element per row? (so for example no "front split with side roll" and "back split with side roll" in the same routine?)

I know it's really basic but I don't remember reading it anywhere (could be my mistake) - I know about that list with the 'same form - not the same form" elements, but our federations claims this "same row" rule now.


We heard this too, but I don't think for flexs like that it's followed. Eg. I've been told that you can perform both the E and F value elbow balances (first one to arch, and second from walkover)..


Yes, FIG wasn't very clear about "same elements". I think that is one way to keep the coaches paying the judges in order to know what elements they can put in the routines
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rhythmix



Joined: 31 May 2009
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Fri, 3-Sep-2010 23:45    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was told by my coach that it is illegal to do two from one row, but I've seen it done
Stupid

Also, does anyone know what value/skill this is?
0:44 - 0:47
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7JUDtoWYzw&feature=related
Is it the 0.6 value?
_________________
"Aerodynamically, bumblebees shouldn't be able to fly, but they don't know that so they continue flying anyway."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tahnee
RSG.net Moderator
RSG.net Moderator


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 3296
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Fri, 3-Sep-2010 23:48    Post subject: Reply with quote

rhythmix wrote:
I was told by my coach that it is illegal to do two from one row, but I've seen it done
Stupid

Also, does anyone know what value/skill this is?
0:44 - 0:47
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7JUDtoWYzw&feature=related
Is it the 0.6 value?


Yes.
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/Tahnee2612
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
rhythmix



Joined: 31 May 2009
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Sat, 4-Sep-2010 4:36    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tahnee wrote:
Yes.


Thank you Smile
_________________
"Aerodynamically, bumblebees shouldn't be able to fly, but they don't know that so they continue flying anyway."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mariav



Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 363
Location: israel

PostPosted: Tue, 14-Sep-2010 10:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k28u_07oZEM&feature=related

Please tell me is the element on 1:16 is puete worth 0.7?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tahnee
RSG.net Moderator
RSG.net Moderator


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 3296
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Tue, 14-Sep-2010 15:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

mariav wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k28u_07oZEM&feature=related

Please tell me is the element on 1:16 is puete worth 0.7?


This fouette balance is worth 0.8 (Unheld split is 0.3 + 0.5 base).
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/Tahnee2612
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
rhythmix



Joined: 31 May 2009
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu, 7-Oct-2010 21:41    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tahnee wrote:
rhythmix wrote:

Also, does anyone know what value/skill this is?
0:44 - 0:47
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7JUDtoWYzw&feature=related
Is it the 0.6 value?


Yes.


Would this skill be counted? It doesn't even include the base position (two legs straight).
_________________
"Aerodynamically, bumblebees shouldn't be able to fly, but they don't know that so they continue flying anyway."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tahnee
RSG.net Moderator
RSG.net Moderator


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 3296
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Thu, 7-Oct-2010 23:31    Post subject: Reply with quote

rhythmix wrote:
Tahnee wrote:
rhythmix wrote:

Also, does anyone know what value/skill this is?
0:44 - 0:47
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7JUDtoWYzw&feature=related
Is it the 0.6 value?


Yes.


Would this skill be counted? It doesn't even include the base position (two legs straight).


Yes, I would count this. There doesn't need to be a point where both legs are straight - as long as the gymnast shows two positions, this is fine.
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/Tahnee2612
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
*Kalinka*



Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 2180
Location: Italy

PostPosted: Wed, 8-Dec-2010 20:54    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would like to ask about this 0.40 souplesse. Smile

In the image the gymnast performs the split position... Is it possible to perform this element without doing the split?
I mean: can I perform this position,

and then to exchange the position of the legs (to bend the left leg and to stretch the right leg)?
I'm not sure of being clear... Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tahnee
RSG.net Moderator
RSG.net Moderator


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 3296
Location: Perth, Australia

PostPosted: Wed, 8-Dec-2010 23:18    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, the legs must be straight for the 0.4 elbow balance. In the 0.6 one (with walkover), you can use the stag position.
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/Tahnee2612
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Rhythmic Gymnastics Forum Index » Code of Points All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 8 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Contents | Information | Events and Results | Gymnasts | Archive

last Modified: 25. October 2003

Copyright © 1996-2004 Alexander Kochanntrilobit GmbH
trilobit