WAG Hollow shape vs straight shape

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

TheXcelMom

Gold Membership
Proud Parent
In every event there seems to be a choice coaches can make.
Train the girls to do a hollow shape or straight shape. For instance on kip-casts, or handstands.
But what's the rule?
This is for Xcel, if that matters.
Our girls are learning hollow and it's not getting the appreciation of the judges.
(this is so specific I'm hoping our coach is not on this forum b/c I respect them immensely I just want more info)
 
General consensus is that casts should be hollow.

I am very much of the opinion that the general consensus is wrong.

(Might come back and give a more detailed breakdown when I get a chance to sit down in front of a proper keyboard)
 
The feedback our gym got from judges about casts specifically was straight. Over hollow risks not getting credit if it's borderline for the requirement.
 
I didn't realize there were different standards around casts. (I teach hollow casts.) I understand that if a gymnasts is casting with hollow body, then they will need to cast higher to meet the relevant angle requirements. But from a progression standpoint, isn't it better to teach hollow body casts?

Curious what @Geoffrey Taucer thinks:

I am very much of the opinion that the general consensus is wrong.
 
The cast discussion again... I agree with @Geoffrey Taucer.

First of all... hollow and arch in gymnastics have become these weird static positions that everyone really wants to achieve with perfection. The fact of the matter is that hollow / pike and arch are the shapes that you move back and forth between to generate power. So while the shapes can be appreciated as "just a good shape"... that is not the overall purpose of them... the shapes are used to do things.

Compulsory / low level casting in the WAG program has turned into this weird shape fest. Many clubs try to hit super hard and unnatural hollow shapes to get higher scores. What many are not understanding is the shape that is specified called "straight-hollow". Straight-hollow just means straight with the core engaged and the hips and low spine in the correct position... again... it means straight... like perfectly straight no curve.

Now let's go into the shape change that gets someone to handstand... it is a pike when the kip is wrapped around the bar into either straight-hollow or a slight arch.

Going from the pike of the kip to only hard hollow or hollow-hollow does not allow as much kick off the bar. Someone doing it this way must be very strong.

Here are some examples of athletes that first hit an arch before there final shape / position...



Screenshot 2023-02-27 at 12.07.00 PM.png




Screenshot 2023-02-27 at 12.08.57 PM.png




Screenshot 2023-02-27 at 12.09.54 PM.png


Basically what I am stating is that the hard hollow bar casting is something that some clubs believe will get them a higher score for that exact moment in time... it's not the way it is actually done by most upper level gymnasts.
 
I would like to add that whether the cast is straight body or straddle is irrelevant. You will notice that the screen shot of Nastia above is a straight body cast handstand... the other two are straddle casts.
 
Compulsory / low level casting in the WAG program has turned into this weird shape fest. Many clubs try to hit super hard and unnatural hollow shapes to get higher scores.

:D

Thanks for the extra context. I agree that shape training should be a means to an end and not an end in itself. (As you said, gymnastics is a dynamic activity that constantly passes through many fundamental shapes.)

I'm wondering more from a from a pedagogical perspective: Can teaching a hard-hollow cast serve the same long-term goal while also respecting the athletic limitations of young, inexperienced students? Perhaps teaching an exaggerated shape before delving into the nuances of straight-hollow vs. hard-hollow is reasonable for students that lack the requisite strength or kinesthetic awareness.
 
Last edited:
JBS summed up my thoughts pretty well. Compulsory levels often get these weird arms races with certain skills, where gyms end up putting absurdly heavy emphasis on certain points that aren't really relevant to upper level development, and casts are a perfect example.

At any rate, if you watch pretty much any elite athlete, you'll see an arch in their cast as they come off the bar. Which makes perfect sense mechanically; coming out of the pike position in a kip, the natural and efficient movement is to swing the legs back to an arch and drive the heels up. Obviously, we don't want a big loose floppy arch, but a tight heel drive is what makes the most sense to me, and a straight hollow at the top to transition into the next skill in most cases.
 
I also think there was this idea that took hold in the early 2000's (and possibly before that; I wouldn't know since that's when I started coaching) on the women's side in the USA, that hollow is the answer to life, the universe, and everything, which will solve all your problems, end world hunger, and grant you three wishes.

It is an important position, but it's not the solution to all problems.
 
Here is one...

 
Thanks for clearing this up. I appreciate all the input here and I have a better understanding of what the shapes are all about.
Apparently, her coach is Team Hollow. Since I am not my daughter's coach, I will respect societal boundaries and shut the heck up.
That just is what it is, I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
This is super interesting, I was reading this thinking my level 8 who does a straddle cast doesn’t arch….. then I went and looked at her bar routine from the last meet in slow mo, sure enough, arch position at the beginning before she pops her hips up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBS
I guess I don't really coach either. When working casts, I like to tell my kids its like the hollow and arch are fighting within their body. Heel drive "wants" your body to arch, and tightening your core "wants" your body to hollow. Staying over the bar while doing both will cause your center of mass to rise. That being said, we seem to spend more time telling them to hollow, as the extreme arch tends to happen more naturally the harder they try...
 
Thanks for clearing this up. I appreciate all the input here and I have a better understanding of what the shapes are all about.
Apparently, her coach is Team Hollow. Since I am not my daughter's coach, I will respect societal boundaries and shut the heck up.
That just is what it is, I guess. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I actually am glad you asked as we compete against some gyms where they really "exaggerate" for lack of a better term the shapes. The casts are like OVER hollow. Then they do these weird shoulder shrugs coming out of certain basic skills like handstands on the floor. Like you can see the gymnasts compete what they've been coached and it doesn't look "natural." Sometimes I start to let my mind wander to "wait should our girls be learning that?!" but then like was so well explained ... it almost confused the gymnast to "over coach" to a shape. In other words, learn the skill and get good basics and you have the foundation you need without stressing out over the most hollow body cast ever performed.
 
I guess I don't really coach either. When working casts, I like to tell my kids its like the hollow and arch are fighting within their body. Heel drive "wants" your body to arch, and tightening your core "wants" your body to hollow. Staying over the bar while doing both will cause your center of mass to rise. That being said, we seem to spend more time telling them to hollow, as the extreme arch tends to happen more naturally the harder they try...
I love this explanation :D

> its like the hollow and arch are fighting within their body

I guess with the kids that I work with, they simply don't have the requisite core strength yet. So if I asked them to attempt a straight-hollow cast, it would end up being too arched. That's why I teach the exaggerated hard-hollow cast first. As the students get stronger and their casts get higher, I stop emphasizing the hard-hollow.
 
I actually am glad you asked as we compete against some gyms where they really "exaggerate" for lack of a better term the shapes. The casts are like OVER hollow. Then they do these weird shoulder shrugs coming out of certain basic skills like handstands on the floor. Like you can see the gymnasts compete what they've been coached and it doesn't look "natural." Sometimes I start to let my mind wander to "wait should our girls be learning that?!" but then like was so well explained ... it almost confused the gymnast to "over coach" to a shape. In other words, learn the skill and get good basics and you have the foundation you need without stressing out over the most hollow body cast ever performed.
There is so much tension in the sport of gymnastics between the "ideal" and the "practical":
  • To be the best in gymnastics is to be perfect.
  • The perfect gymnast doesn't exist and will never exist.
It's not a surprise that a lot of gymnasts and coaches over-optimize on fictitious ideals instead of taking a more practical/holistic approach. Whenever I see gymnasts compete the really exaggerated shapes, it looks like they are trying way too hard demonstrate perfection at the cost of true artistry and dynamics.
 

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

Gymnaverse :: Recent Activity

College Gym News

New Posts

Back