- Moderator
- #1
Back when I posted my thread about how I hate hollow casts, Rick McCharles posted about my post on his blog. A heated discussion followed in the comments section, in which I briefly touched on similar issues I have with the progression used by USAG to teach a front handspring vault. So I'm going to expand on that.
I HATE HOLLOW FRONT HANDSPRINGS/HANDSTAND FLATBACKS/ANY PROGRESSION TOWARDS A FRONT HANDSPRING VAULT THAT EMPHASIZES A HOLLOW SHAPE.
I think there is a very widespread mindset among a lot of coaches that hollow=tight and arch=loose; this certainly seems to be the philosophy driving a lot of the deductions at women's USAG compulsory levels. This mindset is also hopelessly wrong; an understanding of a tight arch is EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANT as an understanding of a tight hollow, and nowhere is this more evident than in teaching a front handspring vault.
In both the level 4 and 5 vaults, the emphasis is on a straight-hollow position with the head in. Now, compare this technique with the following picture, which shows one of the most powerful vaulters in the world contacting the table while doing a front handspring-type vault (specifically, a handspring double front pike)
Look at that tight hollow, look how he has his head in line with his body.... oh wait.
In order to generate the maximum possible height and rotation, a gymnast should hit a tight arch with the head out right after they leave the board, and maintain that heel drive until just after they leave the table. This technique is very obvious in.... well, pretty much anybody who does a front handspring type vault. Sacramone, Produnova, Dragulescu, Blanik, etc.
Now, let me say that I can completely understand where the mistaken perception that a hollow vault is ideal comes from; watch a very powerful vaulter warm up a simple front handspring, and you will find that most either do somewhat of a yamash ita or a hollow front handspring. However, it's important to understand why they do this: they do it to kill their power. THey do it because they are capable of generating the rotation necessary for a handspring front (or more), and they need to take deliberate steps to slow themselves down.
But by teaching a hollow shape right off the bat, such as seems to be the goal of the level 4 and 5 compulsory vaults, we are teaching girls to kill their power before they've even learned to generate that power.
I think this is a large part of the reason why you rarely see women in the USA doing front handspring style vaults; at the lower levels, the compulsory system encourages coaches to teach them so poorly that most gymnasts can never learn to add a flip, so they opt to do a tsuk or yurchenko instead. This is unnecessary; when properly taught, a front handspring front is not a difficult vault.
To clarify; I think the current boys compulsory vaults are pretty stupid as well -- but they're so obviously stupid that most boys coaches don't even bother spending much time on them, opting instead to use their own drills and progressions for vault. THe boys compulsory vaults are a whole different can of worms, which I may or may not open later.
EDIT:
I HATE HOLLOW FRONT HANDSPRINGS/HANDSTAND FLATBACKS/ANY PROGRESSION TOWARDS A FRONT HANDSPRING VAULT THAT EMPHASIZES A HOLLOW SHAPE.
I think there is a very widespread mindset among a lot of coaches that hollow=tight and arch=loose; this certainly seems to be the philosophy driving a lot of the deductions at women's USAG compulsory levels. This mindset is also hopelessly wrong; an understanding of a tight arch is EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANT as an understanding of a tight hollow, and nowhere is this more evident than in teaching a front handspring vault.
In both the level 4 and 5 vaults, the emphasis is on a straight-hollow position with the head in. Now, compare this technique with the following picture, which shows one of the most powerful vaulters in the world contacting the table while doing a front handspring-type vault (specifically, a handspring double front pike)
Look at that tight hollow, look how he has his head in line with his body.... oh wait.
In order to generate the maximum possible height and rotation, a gymnast should hit a tight arch with the head out right after they leave the board, and maintain that heel drive until just after they leave the table. This technique is very obvious in.... well, pretty much anybody who does a front handspring type vault. Sacramone, Produnova, Dragulescu, Blanik, etc.
Now, let me say that I can completely understand where the mistaken perception that a hollow vault is ideal comes from; watch a very powerful vaulter warm up a simple front handspring, and you will find that most either do somewhat of a yamash ita or a hollow front handspring. However, it's important to understand why they do this: they do it to kill their power. THey do it because they are capable of generating the rotation necessary for a handspring front (or more), and they need to take deliberate steps to slow themselves down.
But by teaching a hollow shape right off the bat, such as seems to be the goal of the level 4 and 5 compulsory vaults, we are teaching girls to kill their power before they've even learned to generate that power.
I think this is a large part of the reason why you rarely see women in the USA doing front handspring style vaults; at the lower levels, the compulsory system encourages coaches to teach them so poorly that most gymnasts can never learn to add a flip, so they opt to do a tsuk or yurchenko instead. This is unnecessary; when properly taught, a front handspring front is not a difficult vault.
To clarify; I think the current boys compulsory vaults are pretty stupid as well -- but they're so obviously stupid that most boys coaches don't even bother spending much time on them, opting instead to use their own drills and progressions for vault. THe boys compulsory vaults are a whole different can of worms, which I may or may not open later.
EDIT:
me said:Going through this thread again, I realize I did a very poor job of explaining my point, so I'm going to try again.
In a properly done front handspring, you do not have enough time to think about flying through the air in a hollow before hitting the table; the preflight should be lightning fast, and shouldn't give you enough time to do anything but get the heels up as fast as possible. If you are doing everything else correctly but taking the time to try to hit a hollow before hitting the table, you are not going to get the snap you need for higher level vaults.
This being the case, I first start by teaching my kids to aim for a tight, slight arch in preflight, and after that all I really worry about is getting them to turn over as fast as possible on the entry. The chest will naturally be hollow as they contact the board; that's something we rarely if ever have to actually teach; so once they learn to hit the board properly and then immediately think about driving the heels over, they will hit that tight arch JUST as their hands are comming off the table. Which is absolutely IDEAL for a handspring front.
My primary objection to the level 4 compulsory vault is that it scores all the wrong elements of the preflight n my opinion. Because there seems to be such an emphasis on the hollow shape, the easiest way to score well is to move the board way way back from the mat, causing a long, floaty, hollow preflight. A level 4 vault with a long floaty preflight will almost guaranteed score in the 9's, but such a vault has NOTHING to do with a correctly executed handspring vault.
Last edited: