2010 may well be looked back on as a revolutionary year for Russian women’s gymnastics, although the turn round is not yet complete. Only outstanding results in 2011 will cement the good beginning of 2010 and provide a basis for the key year of 2012. New and even newer talent will need to establish itself in what is becoming a fearsomely competitive national and international scene. All gymnasts will have to perform at their best if the team is to show its strongest face.
The Russian coaches will have to make some difficult selection decisions if they are to strengthen and deepen the team as they approach the Olympic year. Their ultimate goal will of course be to present the best possible team in 2012, in addition to making a strong showing at this year’s major competitions. They have a very young squad, many of whom will need battle hardening before the London outing, and they also need to solidify their team identity and roles, and enhance reputations.
I suppose there is one theme that we are all expecting to be dominant: Komova versus Mustafina, the Olympic Youth Champion versus the senior World Champion. Both gymnasts already possess a significant pedigree that most nations would envy. Yet I wonder how long we will have to wait for the much expected duel to materialise. The Russians may well be justified in considering themselves to have the top two all around gymnasts in the world: why on earth would they want to make either of them face a certain defeat? Europeans are the first major competition of the year, but do they really need to risk both of their top gymnasts if they are to win?
Expectations of Komova are extremely high, and reasonably so based on her competitive performance. Yet a reputation is only what a gymnast did in the past. Mustafina’s successful 2010 was based on her astounding and precipitous progress from uncertain junior to imperious world champion. Her transition embraced many of the most difficult psychological changes an adolescent gymnast can face: a changing team role, self knowledge and a developing self belief. Komova will have to work hard to defeat Mustafina in the coming year even if her technical abilities exceed that of her senior partner, and I expect their relationship to be characterised by a degree of rivalry that may well make for some tensions within the team. The Russians will need to accept a certain level of discomfort if they are to drive home their advantage and develop strength in depth.
If team selections follow a pattern established during the Soviet years, we should expect some surprises and even disappointments. For example, veteran Naimushina, a favourite of many, reserve at the 1981 European Championships while untested Mysnik and Bicherova took the floor. World Champion Omelianchik on the bench at the 1988 Olympics. Alternative Olympics Champion Mostepanova substituted in the all around final at the 1985 World Championships. Many of these decisions are still debated today and often considered to be brutal and unfair. Most of these scandalous decisions also resulted in a good outcome for the Soviet team and the enhancement of reputation that was based on the outstanding performance of multiple gymnasts, not just one or two leaders. Developing strength in depth implies a need for diverse gymnasts to medal at diverse competitions.
The Russians do not have the same logistical advantages as the Soviets and the team competition format is now a lottery, designed to encourage the kind of boring risk-free gymnastics that has become characteristic of the sport over past years. Exactly the kind of gymnastics we want our Russians to kill off. The Russians will have to be more than heads and shoulders above the rest of the field if they are to win gold medals in 2012, and I trust that in achieving this they will shoot for the moon. I do not think that they will dominate the medals in the same way as before, but I do think that if they are successful they will provide long term innovation and direction for the sport, and challenge the boundaries of a Code to which other teams have become remarkably subservient. One of the sub-themes of this Olympiad will hopefully be the return to power of the coach and competitor as shaper of the Code.
The table provided at the sister site to this blog, Index on Russian Gymnastics, provides an overview of trends as regards the senior medal winning performances of the latter part of 2010. I have recorded ranking, not marks as I consider marks to be a misleading and inconsistent measure across competitions and ranking, when a glance is taken across competitions, gives an indication of how the gymnast performs under pressure. Results are recorded only where the gymnast qualified to finals.
An outline analysis of the results shows that with the exception of Semenova all seven members of the World Championships team have won individual medals at European, World Cup, World Championships or supra national (eg Pacific Rim) level. (This is probably a little unfair to Semenova as she was not selected for the ‘easier’ competitions such as the World Cup.) Myzdrikova is the only gymnast not to have medalled since Rotterdam, although she was unlucky in the Glasgow floor final. Kurbatova achieves medals at roughly the same level wherever and whenever she competes. Sadly, Afanasyeva remains very unpredictable and rarely succeeds at the highest level of pressure. Semenova is a fierce team competitor, yet appears to be receding as an individual. Taking into account a broader swathe of competition, Nabieva is growing a long list of successes at the smaller competitions, but may have a bit of a mental block at the big competitions. Dementieva achieves results in a surprisingly high proportion of the events for which she is entered, and is usually tabled for the biggest competitions only. Mustafina’s medal haul tells only part of the story.
I have already discussed the Mustafina-Komova partnership and I believe this pair will spearhead Russian team efforts to establish world leadership. Both share the same all around ability and are well balanced gymnasts who appear capable of competing at the top of their game, on demand. The Russians will need more than two gymnasts to win the Olympics, though. One gymnast who really intrigues me is Tanya Nabieva. This spitfire gymnast from St Petersburg changes almost every time I see or hear of her. She is volatile, powerful, extrovert, emotional, a little vulnerable – she could do almost anything, and is the Russian wildcard. After a tough transitional year in 2010 she will be expected to make or break in 2011 and possibly prepare for a team leadership role in 2012. Nabieva was a beautiful young gymnast who has yet to show her best as a senior, and I hope for some surprises from her in 2011.
2010 was unusual in that the Russians transitioned three young gymnasts to the senior team and used them all in medal winning positions at world championships. While two of these girls – Mustafina and Nabieva – had been blooded at the European Championships, Anna Dementieva had not performed previously in high pressure situations, and she remains a relatively unknown quantity. She brings great sophistication to the team with her superior beam skills and floor presentation and is a deceptively feisty competitor.
The impressive strength of the younger Russian girls (and I have not even considered all of them) makes it difficult to see how veterans such as Semenova, Afanasyeva, Myzdrikova and Kurbatova might survive. There is a likelihood that none will be selected for the London team, yet based on previous patterns the odds are against this. Despite excited claims that future prospects such as Grishina, Sidorova are already ‘locks’ for the Olympics, there are only six places available on the Olympic team. Based on past selections the Russians will normally take at least one experienced Olympian with them to London, and I would guess that at most one newcomer will qualify for the team in 2012. The Russians will need every gymnast at their disposal to create the buffer zone necessary to protect their top performers from over exposure and risk to injury.
Between now and 2012 all of the gymnasts will need to navigate very difficult waters of personal and sporting transition, and competition results may well provide only a partial indicator of selection potential. The only guiding principle will be development of the team.
The Russian coaches will have to make some difficult selection decisions if they are to strengthen and deepen the team as they approach the Olympic year. Their ultimate goal will of course be to present the best possible team in 2012, in addition to making a strong showing at this year’s major competitions. They have a very young squad, many of whom will need battle hardening before the London outing, and they also need to solidify their team identity and roles, and enhance reputations.
I suppose there is one theme that we are all expecting to be dominant: Komova versus Mustafina, the Olympic Youth Champion versus the senior World Champion. Both gymnasts already possess a significant pedigree that most nations would envy. Yet I wonder how long we will have to wait for the much expected duel to materialise. The Russians may well be justified in considering themselves to have the top two all around gymnasts in the world: why on earth would they want to make either of them face a certain defeat? Europeans are the first major competition of the year, but do they really need to risk both of their top gymnasts if they are to win?
Expectations of Komova are extremely high, and reasonably so based on her competitive performance. Yet a reputation is only what a gymnast did in the past. Mustafina’s successful 2010 was based on her astounding and precipitous progress from uncertain junior to imperious world champion. Her transition embraced many of the most difficult psychological changes an adolescent gymnast can face: a changing team role, self knowledge and a developing self belief. Komova will have to work hard to defeat Mustafina in the coming year even if her technical abilities exceed that of her senior partner, and I expect their relationship to be characterised by a degree of rivalry that may well make for some tensions within the team. The Russians will need to accept a certain level of discomfort if they are to drive home their advantage and develop strength in depth.
If team selections follow a pattern established during the Soviet years, we should expect some surprises and even disappointments. For example, veteran Naimushina, a favourite of many, reserve at the 1981 European Championships while untested Mysnik and Bicherova took the floor. World Champion Omelianchik on the bench at the 1988 Olympics. Alternative Olympics Champion Mostepanova substituted in the all around final at the 1985 World Championships. Many of these decisions are still debated today and often considered to be brutal and unfair. Most of these scandalous decisions also resulted in a good outcome for the Soviet team and the enhancement of reputation that was based on the outstanding performance of multiple gymnasts, not just one or two leaders. Developing strength in depth implies a need for diverse gymnasts to medal at diverse competitions.
The Russians do not have the same logistical advantages as the Soviets and the team competition format is now a lottery, designed to encourage the kind of boring risk-free gymnastics that has become characteristic of the sport over past years. Exactly the kind of gymnastics we want our Russians to kill off. The Russians will have to be more than heads and shoulders above the rest of the field if they are to win gold medals in 2012, and I trust that in achieving this they will shoot for the moon. I do not think that they will dominate the medals in the same way as before, but I do think that if they are successful they will provide long term innovation and direction for the sport, and challenge the boundaries of a Code to which other teams have become remarkably subservient. One of the sub-themes of this Olympiad will hopefully be the return to power of the coach and competitor as shaper of the Code.
The table provided at the sister site to this blog, Index on Russian Gymnastics, provides an overview of trends as regards the senior medal winning performances of the latter part of 2010. I have recorded ranking, not marks as I consider marks to be a misleading and inconsistent measure across competitions and ranking, when a glance is taken across competitions, gives an indication of how the gymnast performs under pressure. Results are recorded only where the gymnast qualified to finals.
An outline analysis of the results shows that with the exception of Semenova all seven members of the World Championships team have won individual medals at European, World Cup, World Championships or supra national (eg Pacific Rim) level. (This is probably a little unfair to Semenova as she was not selected for the ‘easier’ competitions such as the World Cup.) Myzdrikova is the only gymnast not to have medalled since Rotterdam, although she was unlucky in the Glasgow floor final. Kurbatova achieves medals at roughly the same level wherever and whenever she competes. Sadly, Afanasyeva remains very unpredictable and rarely succeeds at the highest level of pressure. Semenova is a fierce team competitor, yet appears to be receding as an individual. Taking into account a broader swathe of competition, Nabieva is growing a long list of successes at the smaller competitions, but may have a bit of a mental block at the big competitions. Dementieva achieves results in a surprisingly high proportion of the events for which she is entered, and is usually tabled for the biggest competitions only. Mustafina’s medal haul tells only part of the story.
I have already discussed the Mustafina-Komova partnership and I believe this pair will spearhead Russian team efforts to establish world leadership. Both share the same all around ability and are well balanced gymnasts who appear capable of competing at the top of their game, on demand. The Russians will need more than two gymnasts to win the Olympics, though. One gymnast who really intrigues me is Tanya Nabieva. This spitfire gymnast from St Petersburg changes almost every time I see or hear of her. She is volatile, powerful, extrovert, emotional, a little vulnerable – she could do almost anything, and is the Russian wildcard. After a tough transitional year in 2010 she will be expected to make or break in 2011 and possibly prepare for a team leadership role in 2012. Nabieva was a beautiful young gymnast who has yet to show her best as a senior, and I hope for some surprises from her in 2011.
2010 was unusual in that the Russians transitioned three young gymnasts to the senior team and used them all in medal winning positions at world championships. While two of these girls – Mustafina and Nabieva – had been blooded at the European Championships, Anna Dementieva had not performed previously in high pressure situations, and she remains a relatively unknown quantity. She brings great sophistication to the team with her superior beam skills and floor presentation and is a deceptively feisty competitor.
The impressive strength of the younger Russian girls (and I have not even considered all of them) makes it difficult to see how veterans such as Semenova, Afanasyeva, Myzdrikova and Kurbatova might survive. There is a likelihood that none will be selected for the London team, yet based on previous patterns the odds are against this. Despite excited claims that future prospects such as Grishina, Sidorova are already ‘locks’ for the Olympics, there are only six places available on the Olympic team. Based on past selections the Russians will normally take at least one experienced Olympian with them to London, and I would guess that at most one newcomer will qualify for the team in 2012. The Russians will need every gymnast at their disposal to create the buffer zone necessary to protect their top performers from over exposure and risk to injury.
Between now and 2012 all of the gymnasts will need to navigate very difficult waters of personal and sporting transition, and competition results may well provide only a partial indicator of selection potential. The only guiding principle will be development of the team.
Did you ever consider doing a video blog instead of a regular one? No real gym fan has one but there are many 'blogs'.
ReplyDeleteKomova has something the others just don't! Everyone who watches her is just astounded. Of course she has work to do... But I cannot at this stage believe that she will not triumph over all the other possibilities.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment!
ReplyDeleteKomova is amazing - hope she can overcome her injury and fulfill her potential.