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!
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?
At root, if we think of gymnastics as āhuman motionā 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 ) āhuman movementā, then the 3 (and only 3!) aspect of same that are measured are :
1 (THE fundamental one) ā¦ economy of line or movement
2 Complexity of movement
3 Oneās 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 ā¦ 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 ā¦ which is better than a single ā¦ 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 ā¦ āeleganceā and the āaestheticā underlie everything about principle #1, economy of line or motion ā¦ my personal objection to gymnastics as it has evolved in the 21st century is the blind worship (or less inflammatorily put) belief that āadditive complexityā is the direction that gymnastics should go ā¦
Elegance is elegance because it implicitly illustrates a harmony and efficiency in a movement (any movement) that inelegance does not ā¦ 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 ā¦ 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?
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.
ReplyDeleteLiukin 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