- Jan 21, 2007
- 4,872
- 6,137
Most of us who coach have probably run into at least one kid who is physcially incapable of completely straightening their legs, due not to lack of tightness but due to simple joint structure.
I was thinking about this recently, and I came to a realization. I have seen four gymnasts with this problem (myself being among them). If I were to list the top 5 most powerful tumblers/vaulters I've seen at my gym, ALL FOUR of those kids would be on that list.
Is there a correlation, or is it coincidence? It seems to me entirely possible that an inability to completely straighten the legs would force the quadriceps to do more work in regular day-to-day activities, which could cause them to become stronger over time than they would for an athlete who can completely straighten the legs. There may also be some mechanical advantage, allowing for better turnover in a roundoff.
Thoughts? Does anybody know of any studies on the subject? It seems striking that every kid I've run into with this issue is a very powerful tumbler, but four kids is not exactly an ideal sample size.
I'd particularly like to hear from Valentin and dunno on this, though anybody's input would be welcome.
(this is mainly a matter of curiosity; I don't think a conclusion either way would change how I coach)
I was thinking about this recently, and I came to a realization. I have seen four gymnasts with this problem (myself being among them). If I were to list the top 5 most powerful tumblers/vaulters I've seen at my gym, ALL FOUR of those kids would be on that list.
Is there a correlation, or is it coincidence? It seems to me entirely possible that an inability to completely straighten the legs would force the quadriceps to do more work in regular day-to-day activities, which could cause them to become stronger over time than they would for an athlete who can completely straighten the legs. There may also be some mechanical advantage, allowing for better turnover in a roundoff.
Thoughts? Does anybody know of any studies on the subject? It seems striking that every kid I've run into with this issue is a very powerful tumbler, but four kids is not exactly an ideal sample size.
I'd particularly like to hear from Valentin and dunno on this, though anybody's input would be welcome.
(this is mainly a matter of curiosity; I don't think a conclusion either way would change how I coach)