Three back handsprings

GYMNASTICS
Parents... Coaches... Judges... Gymnasts...
DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members See FEWER Ads!
Join for FREE!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Depends on a few things. GymPanda answered this recently- maybe you can search her posts. My dd has three but they are all different skills so she gets credit for all of them- she does two in series-step out and two foot, and BHS -BT dismount.
 
If they are all step out (or alternately all two foot), there is no deduction for that specifically, but the third one won't count as a value part so that could have repercussions for the SV. There will still be execution deductions taken on it though.

For examples, if the child does a BHS step out intending to do their series, feet on the beam but they wobble or fall, they get VP credit for it, deduction for wobble/fall and any form deductions. Then they reattempt the BHS BHS series successfully and land on the beam. The second BHS (first of the series) gets credit - it "exited" differently than the first one...the third does not receive VP credit. Execution deductions taken on all BHS. But because the 3rd received no VP credit, the gymnast wouldn't get credit for their series and would lose .5 off their SV unless they have another acro series meeting the level SR in their routine.

BHS step out and BHS to two feet are considered different shapes so if one of this BHS ends up being two foot, then they could all count.

In an alternate scenario, if on the first attempt the gymnast missed the beam with their feet entirely, they would receive no VP on this first attempt...a fall and other execution deductions. So if they got back up and successfully repeated the series, both BHS would count.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
If they are all step out (or alternately all two foot), there is no deduction for that specifically, but the third one won't count as a value part so that could have repercussions for the SV. There will still be execution deductions taken on it though.

For examples, if the child does a BHS step out intending to do their series, feet on the beam but they wobble or fall, they get VP credit for it, deduction for wobble/fall and any form deductions. Then they reattempt the BHS BHS series successfully and land on the beam. The second BHS (first of the series) gets credit - it "exited" differently than the first one...the third does not receive VP credit. Execution deductions taken on all BHS. But because the 3rd received no VP credit, the gymnast wouldn't get credit for their series and would lose .5 off their SV unless they have another acro series meeting the level SR in their routine.
This was pretty much the case. She landed the first one but wasn't "feeling" the connection. So she went on with her routine then successfully completed the series on the next try. So am I right in understanding that she would not get credit for the series? .5 deduction? So if she had attempted but fell on series it may have been the same deduction? I am really just curious that's all, trying to understand the ins and outs of judging.
 
This was pretty much the case. She landed the first one but wasn't "feeling" the connection. So she went on with her routine then successfully completed the series on the next try. So am I right in understanding that she would not get credit for the series? .5 deduction? So if she had attempted but fell on series it may have been the same deduction? I am really just curious that's all, trying to understand the ins and outs of judging.

As it was she got these deductions:
1. Form/execution on first BHS
2. Fall on first BHS (.5)
3. Form/execution on second BHS
4. Form/execution on third BHS
5. No acro series (9.5 SV), but gets credit for two B skills (first and second BHS)

Attempted but fell on series (if I understand what you mean - you mean on the first try if her BHS was crooked but she connected the second one anyway and fell?):

1. Execution on BHS #1
2. Execution on BHS #2, possible rhythm deduction on connection
3. Fall
4. 10 SV (assuming other SRs and VPs), credit for two Bs. Also has acro series so not likely to get compositional deduction.

If she did no other BHS after the first fall:

1. Execution on BHS
2. Fall
3. Missing SR (.5 off SV)
4. Possibly missing a B (would be .3 off SV)
5. Possible compositional deduction (not up to the level? I'm not a judge, I think they take that at level 8...definitely at 9 and 10)

So it depends on the rest of her routine really and whether she depends on those Bs. The truth is it's hard when they train BHS BHS series to really have a good scenario when they miss the first one. It's good that she was able to do it successfully though, even if she didn't get credit - it's a step towards being able to do it consistently in competition on the first try.
 
Actually, I don't think she would get credit for the 2nd BHS.

1: Standing BHS (B)
2/3: BHS BHS. However, the 3rd BHS is not counted as an element, so that's a standing BHS connected to nothing (B + 0)... this makes it the same element as the 1st BHS, which then makes it a skill repeated in the same connection (0 + 0).
 
Actually, I don't think she would get credit for the 2nd BHS.

1: Standing BHS (B)
2/3: BHS BHS. However, the 3rd BHS is not counted as an element, so that's a standing BHS connected to nothing (B + 0)... this makes it the same element as the 1st BHS, which then makes it a skill repeated in the same connection (0 + 0).

I thought about that but then this was the hotly debated topic at our state judges meeting which I was in the room for (I'm not a judge, I was just in the room) and most were saying they should give credit because it could be considered jumping out of a BHS...I dunno, there was some controversy though. Not sure what kind of national clarification there has been on this issue, but at least in my state some judges were saying to give it, and some were saying no. Some kept repeating but a BHS straight jump would get credit and if they are landing with their feet coming together and jumping it is a different exit than if they first landed in a lunge. I guess I'd agree, even if they jump into "nothing." But again that's why I'm not a judge. ;) I guess it could be an issue when a kid is trying to attempt a series, they may have brought their legs together and "jumped" into the fall.

But my state isn't really the tightest with these things so I'm guessing in R5 this debate already played out and you'd probably lose the B. :)
 
Actually, I don't think she would get credit for the 2nd BHS.

1: Standing BHS (B)
2/3: BHS BHS. However, the 3rd BHS is not counted as an element, so that's a standing BHS connected to nothing (B + 0)... this makes it the same element as the 1st BHS, which then makes it a skill repeated in the same connection (0 + 0).
Well now I am certainly glad I am not judge!
 
I would post a video but since it is not my child I don't feel comfortable doing that. There were no falls in routine. Basically she did bhs bhs series connected and stuck, but prior to that did a single bhs. All were step out. She scored 8.6 but I did not catch her SV.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.