Entries Tagged 'sport science' ↓

Bella Tucker is a “young gymnast who came down with a near fatal infection on Easter (2010) and underwent quadruple amputation surgery”.

Cathie Lowell, Owner of Phantom Gymnastics reports on Bella’s progress:

… We are happy to report that Bella’s spirits are high despite a few setbacks and additional operations during the last month. She has been in both the Children’s Hospital and the Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital in Boston. She has begun some physical therapy to strengthen her core, getting her ready for the Shriner’s hospital in Philadelphia where the real work will begin. Bella will receive prosthetics and she and her family remain hopeful and encouraged.

Bella celebrated her ninth birthday on Aug 12. She continues to have lots of visitors and has learned to use her electric wheel chair, which she operates with her elbow, to get around the hospital and garden. …

She’s also become proficient with her iPad, which allows her to use Facebook to view and respond to posts! …

read more on USAG

_____ KP sends update links:

My original post was much outdated. Bella got home before Christmas last year. She now has her own website. And Facebook page. Donations are gratefully accepted at both.

This is a great post - Bella returned to the gym!

I wonder if she’s yet seen Nick Vujicic’s video “I LOVE LIVING LIFE. I AM HAPPY.”

Print Friendly

A new text for coaches from Routledge Sport Science is now available everywhere, contributors including Bill Sands and John Salmela, titled The Science of Gymnastics.

Several people have told me it’s good.

• energetic, physical and physiological assessment
• training principles
• diet, nutrition and supplementation
• growth and development issues
• kinetics and kinematics
• angular and linear motion
• angular momentum
• stress, anxiety and coping
• motivation and goal setting
• mental skills training for practice and competition
• the psychology of learning and performance.

Amazon

It’s available in paperback or ebook for $54.95. From that same Routledge link you can preview some pages free. University instructors can request a Complimentary Exam Copy.

Print Friendly

Rosamond and Yeadon at Loughborough University, U.K. created this …

… study was carried out to design, construct and assess a training aid to assist in the learning of a backward handspring. …

Though they consulted many expert coaches, I doubt any of those experts would ever use this machine.

To see how it worked, download that 2009 research study – The biomechanical design of a training aid for a backward handspring in gymnastics (PDF)

Print Friendly

FIG Men’s Technical Committee Meeting
Lausanne (SUI), February 19 – 21, 2011

The Committee’s President Adrian Stoica (ROU) was very satisfied with the meeting’s outcome, stating:

“With the new World Cup format and the modified qualifying system for the Olympic Games we have implemented important changes in 2011 and look forward to an interesting year. …

FIG

There are a lot of good minds on that committee. I’ve nothing but respect for Steve BUTCHER and Istvan KARACSONY.

Edouard IAROV is one of the 2-3 coaches that have influenced me most.

Sadly they’ll not make significant improvements to the rules on Floor and H Bar until after the Olympics. It’s too late in the cycle.

It was a busy week at the FIG offices. WTC met, as well. And the Sport Science Commission had a meeting of the minds on the effects of intensive gymnastics training.

Print Friendly

… A dozen speakers from the USA, Great Britain, Belgium, Greece and Australia will be welcomed to the FIG Head Office in Lausanne, February 18 – 19, for a Scientific Colloquium, the conclusions of which are anticipated by the entire international gymnastics community. …

FIG

Organized by Keith Russell, of the FIG Scientific Commission, Dr Adam Baxter-Jones will chair.

Dr. Dennis Caine, Dr. Gaston Beunen, Dr. Robert Malina, Dr. Rob Daly, Dr. Alan Rogol, Dr. Richard Lewis, Dr. Neoklis Georgopoulos, Dr Neil Armstrong, Dr. Michel Leglise, etc. …

Many of the most important researchers in the field.

Nobody can claim FIG is ducking the issue of what intensive training does to kids. Respect.

Print Friendly

Lee Ann Gschwind posted a nice profile on Universal Sports:

from Aug 2010

With her fluidity, form, and old school Soviet style, Komova has drawn comparisons to a young Nastia Liukin. And while she’s not yet as polished as Liukin was when she won Olympic all-around gold in Beijing, Komova -with two years to go until London – is already more powerful.

Like Liukin, Komova is the daughter of former Soviet gymnasts. She too was a shoo-in to start the sport: as a toddler, she spent most of her time hanging around the gym. Komova’s mother, Vera Kolesnikova, never had the chance to compete at an Olympics, but scored a big win at the 1986 Goodwill Games, defeating teammates Yelena Shushunova and Oksana Omelianchik, then the reigning co-world champions, for the all-around title. (Shushunova, of course, would go on to win Olympic gold in 1988.) …

read more – Gymnast to Know: Viktoria Komova

The article questions current FIG age restrictions:

… Designed to “protect the athletes,” the rules instead prevent many talented gymnasts from winning major titles. (If they are cutting back their training time, competition schedules or difficulty levels because of the rules, it’s certainly not evident.)

The age restrictions also make 2010 something of a no-man’s land on the gymnastics calendar. Many of the likely stars of the London Games aren’t yet old enough to compete at the World Championships.

At least Komova and Wieber will be eligible to compete at 2011 Worlds; gymnasts born in 1996 won’t even get that chance. A loophole that allowed 15-year-olds to compete at Worlds in a pre-Olympic year – without which Shawn Johnson would not have won the 2007 world title – has been eliminated this quadrennium. …

Leave a comment if you have an opinion on that. I’m hearing about 90% of people in favour of dropping the age restrictions completely. Age can’t be scientifically tested. And the argument that older gymnasts are safer than younger doing high difficulty gymnastics, specious.

(via DEFYING GRAVITY)

Print Friendly

The new Science of Gymnastics Journal (vol.3, num.1, 2011) is out, Ivan Cuk, editor:

Dear friends,

last October we attended the World Championship in Artistic Gymnastics in Rotterdam. We had a lot of meetings, but the most important was meeting with the president of the International Gymnastics Federation professor Bruno Grandi. We presented him our work during the last year. At the end of December we have reached agreement about collaboration between FIG and Science of Gymnastics Journal. We have got a new editorial board member –Keith Russell, Ph.D., who is the president of the FIG Scientific Commission and Hardy Fink, M.Sc., a member of editorial board as the director of the FIG Academy. Both FIG institutions – scientific and educational ones will be involved in further development of our journal. …

read more

Laurita Marconi Schiavon, Roberto Rodrigues Paes
THE FORMATION OF BRAZILIAN FEMALE GYMNASTS TAKING PART IN THE OLYMPIC GAMES (1980-2004)

José Ferreirinha, Joana Carvalho, Cristina Côrte-Real, António Silva
THE EVOLUTION OF REAL DIFFICULTY VALUE OF UNEVEN BARS ROUTINES FROM ELITE GYMNASTS IN LAST 5 OLYMPIC CYCLES

Saša Veli?kovi?, Dragoljub Petkovi?, Emilija Petkovi?
CASE STUDY ABOUT DIFFERENCES IN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RUN-UP APPROACH ON THE VAULT BETWEEN TOP-CLASS AND MIDDLE-CLASS GYMNASTS

Marise Botti, Juarez Vieira do Nascimento
THE TEACHING-LEARNING-TRAINING PROCESS IN RHYTHMIC GYMNASTICS SUPPORTED BY THE ECOLOGICAL THEORY

Vasilis Kaimakamis, George Dallas, Panagiotis Stefanidis, George Papadopoulos
THE SPREAD OF GYMNASTICS IN EUROPE AND AMERICA BY PEDAGOGUE-GYMNASTS DURING THE FIRST HALF OF THE 19TH CENTURY

Here’s the current issue. And previous issues.

Print Friendly

Valentin Uzunov has just upgraded his The Gym Press site. I recommend coaches join that social network.

new URL – http://thegympresslibrary.phile.com

Valentin, now coaching in the States, is a great student of the game, collecting as many clinic videos as he can get.

That site links to books and videos. The best section, I feel, hosts the sport science articles.

It’s all FREE unless you decide to buy one of the resources.

The forum is yet to get going. The faster he has enough coaches join to gain momentum, the better.

The new site is a work in progress. Leave suggestions on their Facebook page.

Print Friendly

Last year we had two important books published, both linked from this site.

• Building the Gymnastic Body
• Championship Gymnastics

This year we anticipate the release of a new text, contributors including Bill Sands and John Salmela, titled The Science of Gymnastics.

UPDATE: likely a March 2011 release

• energetic, physical and physiological assessment
• training principles
• diet, nutrition and supplementation
• growth and development issues
• kinetics and kinematics
• angular and linear motion
• angular momentum
• stress, anxiety and coping
• motivation and goal setting
• mental skills training for practice and competition
• the psychology of learning and performance.

Amazon

Print Friendly

It’s widely known that competitive gymnasts have excellent bone density. Some of that research was done at my old stomping grounds, the University of Saskatchewan.

But this was new to me:

… Young recreational and precompetitive gymnasts had, on average, 23% greater bone strength at the wrist compared to children participating in other recreational sports. …

OSTEOPOROSIS INTERNATIONAL – Precompetitive and recreational gymnasts have greater bone density, mass, and estimated strength at the distal radius in young childhood

M. C. Erlandson & S. A. Kontulainen & A. D. G. Baxter-Jones

They surveyed 120 children age 4-9yrs-old.

Of course developing good bone density, especially in the growing female athlete, helps prevent Osteoporosis later in life.

M. C. Erlandson I know as ‘Marta“, one of my gymnasts from some years ago. She’s peeking out from atop the bleachers.

Print Friendly

A book review by site editor Rick McCharles

This is the best of their 4 men’s apparatus books, so far.

And definitely the best of the series for coaches of women as there’s a lot of WAG content.

Vault
Methods, Ideas, Curiosities, History (2004)

by Istvan Karacsony and Ivan Cuk
Forward by Mitsuo Tsukahara

… Tsukahara started working “his” vault on the women’s horse in 1969 as his Yamashita (the winning vault of the day) was poor.

He competed Tsuk successfully at Worlds 1970. (Andzej Szajna from Poland was first to attempt Handspring Front, at the same meet, but sat down the landing.)

There’s a chart showing who first did each vault for men and women, regardless of whether or not it’s named after them in the respective codes. That will help answer a few coach arguments.

The history of this apparatus is fascinating, the first historic images dating back to 2500 BC.

This text documents the evolution of both horse and spring board.

Interesting statistics from Worlds 2002:

• most women took 13-15 steps
• most men took 13-14 steps

The main reason I like this text the best of the four in the series is the detail. Vault has much less content than the other apparatus, so (in the same 150 pages) the authors could include more biomechanics, specific conditioning, etc.

Even if you fancy yourself a vault expert, you’ll still learn a lot from this book. If you could only get your hands on it. There’s no world wide distribution, as yet. (Leave a comment if you know of someone who might want to distribute for them.)

The conclusion was no surprise:

The faster you run, the better. Male gymnasts should strive for over 10m/sec velocity. Female gymnasts over 9m/sec. peak velocity, decelerating as little as possible on board contact.

Zamo topped out at 9m/sec at the 2002 Worlds, for example. Dragalescu was well over 10m/sec.

The most argued phase is not clarified all that much … the hurdle for non-Yurchenko vaults.

Time of the hurdle is between .24 and .30 seconds. Maximum height of the feet was 35cm. But the conclusion I wanted (the shorter the time for any given velocity, the better) is not there.

There is an interesting finding that I’d not seen anywhere else. The top Yurchenko vaulters (i.e Scherbo) have a longer round-off. (i.e. 322cm from the take-off foot to the landing on the Board)

Obviously you need to run fast to do that.

OK.

There are a hundred other interesting points in this manual.

• Defer’s morphological statistics one month prior to winning the 2000 Olympics
• statistics on Dragalescu’s vault
• technique on selected vaults
• conditioning drills

There’s a long section written by Matej Tusak on the psychology of vault, including preventing burnout. Strategies for success.

…Back in the 1990s we several times sent boys to train with Karacsony in Hungary. And several times had him come to Canada as a guest coach. I see many of his favourite vault drills in this manual.

Istvan Karacsony is on the Men’s Technical Committee.

Ivan Cuk edits the Science of Gymnastics Journal

Print Friendly

A book review by site editor Rick McCharles

Excellent.

Floor Exercises
Methods, Ideas, Curiosities, History (2005)

by Istvan Karacsony and Ivan Cuk
Forward by Arkaev

This is an advanced text including tumbling skills like double front and triple back. (It assumes you have background knowledge of basics, biomechanics and sport science.)

I enjoyed the informative and entertaining history of Men’s Floor Exercise, learning a lot about the evolution of Pommel work on Floor, for example.

The computer generated illustrations are quite well done. And accurate.

Spotting and progressions are good. Biomechanics is included, but not in any comprehensive way.

If I have any criticism at all, it’s the sports science context. Scientific language and wordy detail might confuse and obfuscate the content for coaches. Sport scientists do not state opinion, only FACT.

The book details, for example, 3 common “tuck” positions:

True. But a non sport scientist coach like myself might opine that #2 is the worst of the three. In fact, an error. I’d require that gymnast to “fix” the hand position, … or change to the piked position.

Once my gymnasts can consistently get a good grip on the shins, we’d vary the amount of tuck depending on the skill, and the phase of the skill. All this preparation work would be done on tramp.

The two main reasons so many gymnasts end up grabbing behind the thighs:

1) poor set
2) moving to the apparatus from tramp too soon

I digress. That’s only once example of where a scientific text is reluctant to weigh in with opinions not yet verifiable by research.

This book has some interesting statistics on knee pain coming out of a 1991 study by Karacsony (138 gymnasts from 16 nations). About a third reported lower patellar pain in a year. Boys are most vulnerable age 14-15. Taller kids more vulnerable than shorter.

It discusses Scheuermann’s disease and the much more common Osgood–Schlatter’s syndrome.

A career plan for training tumbling is included. Also a good deal of content on physical preparation.

The best section of all is the chapter on connecting salto skills (Tempo Jumps). In fact, that’s the most complete coverage on the topic I’ve seen anywhere.

Finally, the authors are very critical of modern choreography on this apparatus. Three gymnasts are mentioned as conspicuous good exceptions: Milissandis, Nemov, Shewfelt. That’s the reason I posted their Floor routines last week.

Karacsony is on the Men’s Technical Committee. He’s a super coach and a very intelligent man. It makes me wonder why that group doesn’t legislate more artistry in Men’s Artistic Gymnastics?

About Istvan Karacsony

About Ivan Cuk
editor of Science of Gymnastics Journal

These authors, both University educators, have 4 apparatus books for Men’s Artistic Gymnastics (FX, PH, R, V) and are working on the other two.

Unfortunately, it’s difficult to get your hands on them as there’s no world wide distribution, as yet. Leave a comment if you know where to get them.

Print Friendly

Respected expert Dr. William Sands responds to Andrew Thorton’s conclusion that at the execution score of the best gymnasts in the world has been in decline since the start of the open code. And, partly as a result, that execution scores of the top group of gymnasts in the world are ‘boxed’ between 8.5 and 9.0.

While the trends appear obvious, be aware that there is a fundamental flaw in evaluating judges – the lack of a “gold-standard” with which to compare. People have tried for decades to establish an approach to evaluate judges. Gymnastics judging immediately faces four paired problems: reliability and validity – and – cheating and incompetence. Some have argued that the actual score doesn’t matter much as long as the judges get the athletes in the right order (a sort of validity). Others have studied scores to see if the judges agree among themselves (inter-rater reliability). I would argue that the first is the most important, that the right athlete wins. The second, inter-rater reliability, is also important because when judges agree there is a tacit understanding that they’re seeing the same thing.

Unfortunately, what you often find is that people can rationalize athlete placements just about anyway they want. Both the advocate of a score and the detractor’s arguments rapidly collapse to circularity because neither has a gold-standard and must rely largely on opinion. The problem of inter-rater reliability is the very old game of “stay in range.” I think judging rules also have to combat the second pair of problems: cheating and incompetence. Fundamentally, these are unlikely to be changed by statistics.

If judges are supposed to be basically like court stenographers, then I would suggest that the “stream” of deductions and other information be recorded in terms of time on their computers. Clearly the technology now exists for this, and has existed for some time. Moreover, the tenets of systematic observation have been well known in scientific circles for decades. In this way, judges not only have to stay in range with their total score, they also have to be deducting for the same things (as seen in their time-based stream of data). I think editing should be allowed, in other words, the judge should be able to go back in the stream of his/her writing and add-in or change things that he/she couldn’t write fast enough or he/she simply changed his/her mind at the end. The original data stream is always preserved however, so that any changes are recorded as changes. However, once completed by the judge and scores are “locked” then the overall analysis of judges can proceed in several dimensions simultaneously and could serve as both an evaluative and educational tool for judges. For fans, the stream could be displayed in real time and finally reduce some of the mystery of “how on earth did they get that score” for fans.

I realize that to think this is likely to be implemented is naive. However, if you check the judging literature, you’ll rapidly find that these same issues have plagued judging since at least the 1951 (in my personal library), and probably before that.

All the best.

Wm A. Sands, PhD, FACSM, C-ARS, NR/WEMT

Bill’s now Director at the Monfort Family Human Performance Research Laboratory in Colorado.

On Vault I think we should judge exactly like they do in Diving. No paperwork. One number for execution is flashed immediately and transparently in real time.

On the other apparatus it might be possible to use an iPad or keyboard to record in real time. I recall an American MAG judge who used a keyboard to both record skills and execution on Horizontal Bar. It looked very accurate to me.

Bill’s citations on the gymnastics judging problem(s) are posted in the comments.

Print Friendly