Skip to main content

Who's the best? Guest post from coach Jim Holt

Jim Holt, men's head coach in Scotland, commented rather usefully on my post of 9 April regarding three dimensions of the nature of human movement, which I will partially summarise below.  Jim has now added to this with a video exercise in judgement ... please join in the conversation by adding your comments! 

At root, if we think of gymnastics as ‘human motion’ and we recognize that even the various pieces of apparatus have evolved over a somewhat random development, regardless of the nature of the apparatus, if we agree that gymnastics is (and its rules evaluate or compare some measures of ) ‘human movement’, then the 3 (and only 3!) aspect of same that are measured are :
1 (THE fundamental one) … economy of line or movement
2 Complexity of movement
3 One’s ability to overcome the forces of time and/or gravity (a subset of time in this context).
1    Economy : a straight arm felge handstand is better than a bent arm, not because it is more difficult, although it is, but because it has a better line (i.e. fewer angles … a layout is better than a pike is better than a tuck because of the same principle).
 

 2    Complexity: double double back salto is better IN PRINCIPLE than a full-in which is better than a double … which is better than a single … not because they are harder, but because axiomatically due to our second principle
 

3   A 10 second cross (or high high back salto on floor) is better than a 3 second cross/low flip because we can measure principle #3. 
 
... 
 

Now, to a specific … ‘elegance’ and the ‘aesthetic’ underlie everything about principle #1, economy of line or motion … my personal objection to gymnastics as it has evolved in the 21st century is the blind worship (or less inflammatorily put) belief that ‘additive complexity’ is the direction that gymnastics should go …

Elegance is elegance because it implicitly illustrates a harmony and efficiency in a movement (any movement) that inelegance does not … a Ferrari idling is more elegant than a Hyundai idling, not because it has a higher top-end speed, but because its combination of form and function make it more harmonious, efficient … et al.

Who has the best exercise/elements here? What's the best and WHY?




Or this guy?



Maybe this guy?



Everybody knows this guy



So what do you see? Which is the best? (Not every skill on the best routine is the best, by the way ...). Now the important question ... WHY is it the best?


Comments

  1. Taking the three principles that Coach Holt speaks on into consideration, I would say that the best of the four men shown/examined is Bilozerchev. Liukin is flash, but by being flashy, he loses the economy of movement and ability to overcome the natural forces. Liukin misses his handstands and has a hard time holding his positions for as long a time as Bilozerchev. Artemov is one of my all time favorites, but you can tell he struggles to hold the handstands and positions against the downward pull of gravity. There's a lack of control in his gymnastics that Bilozerchev has. Same with Novikov. It might be because of his youth in that particular exercise, but Novikov seems to struggle with keeping control of his movements. He's a bit jerky and has to fight to keep the positions stable. Bilozerchev, however, has no problem with his exercise. All of his handstands end straight at the vertical, there's no struggle against the downward pull of gravity, and all of the complexity exists without any visible struggle.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Liukin had that bitching face back then and still has it today. Love Bilozerchev I wish he could have won and Liukin wouldn't have even gotten in the podium.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

More thoughts on US gymnastics, Karolyi - and Zaglada

I’d like to add some thoughts to my earlier post about USA gymnastics and Bela Karolyi:  1. What Bela did, he did. He would agree that his actions were his responsibility. 2. Abusive relationships in USA gymnastics (and no doubt elsewhere) pre-existed Bela’s move to the USA and still exist today. 3. Harsh training existed and exists in all of the ‘artistic’ sports and dance-related forms - eg ballroom dancing, ballet, ice skating, circus.  The training involved in most of these activities is founded on an assumption of the benefits of early specialisation.  It revolves around  ‘ideal’ forms, shapes and postures that are difficult to achieve without early years training - women especially.   4. Wherever prodigious early talent exists, there are predators whose main desire in life is to take advantage of that talent - music, entertainment, maths, sport.  The boundaries very easily become confused.  Who owns the talent?  Who decides how many hours to work, at what level?  FOR WHOSE BENEFI

RIP Bela Karolyi

RIP Bela Karolyi. We were all mesmerised by the gymnastics that Nadia Comaneci brought to the world.    Some of us wanted to be like Nadia.    Others wanted to share her glory. When Kerri Strug saluted the judges with a hop and a cry of agony, thousands of adults cried for joy, felt inordinate pride that a love of country had inspired such courage and strength.   When generations of elite gymnasts, many of them gold medal winners, spoke out about the abuse they had experienced whilst practicing their sport, those thousands and millions of cheering adults didn’t stop appreciating the gold medals. They did start to look for someone to blame, someone who could take responsibility for the entire systemic nastiness that enabled the abuse to take place.    Some chose the man who came to fame as Nadia Comaneci’s coach, and went on to shape elite gymnastics training in the USA, Bela Karolyi. But who facilitated and enabled Karolyi?    Who endorsed the training that earned the medals?   It was

Vladimir Zaglada - coach, author, friend, father

It is with great sadness that I report here the sudden and completely unexpected death, on 5th October, of our friend Vladimir Zaglada.  I send my love and condolences to his daughter, Olesya.  My thoughts are with the whole family.   Vladimir was born in Lvov, Ukraine, in November 1944.  His father was a progressive lawyer of great courage who was known to defend those who challenged the Soviet authorities.  Vladimir trained as a sports acrobat under the developing Soviet sports system, working in the same club as Olympic champion Viktor Chukarin.  After moving to Moscow, he became a leading coach of women's gymnastics, supporting the development of high level acrobatics.  He worked particularly closely with the up and coming young gymnasts of the early 1980s - you can see him at work in the video 'You in Gymnastics'.  At the national training centre, Lake Krugloye, he worked with Filatova, Mostepanova, Yurchenko, Arzhannikova, Mukhina and more.   Around the mid 1980s Vlad

RRG Archive - scroll by date, from 2024 to 2010

Show more