- Jan 21, 2007
- 4,926
- 6,324
Alright, so let's talk high-level backhandsprings.
More and more coaches seem to be coming around to the viewpoint that arms vertical and straight to "block" is suboptimal for high level backhandsprings, because it does not allow the center of mass to pass far enough over the hands before pushing off. I can think of three solutions to this, all three of which I've seen used to great effect (and, of course, combinations are possible).
1) Arms wide. This slightly delays the block, while allowing the center of mass to remain lower. This is fairly common in MAG and extremely common in power-tumbling, but very rare in WAG at the high levels. To me, this seems like the least efficient of the options, because it doesn't really give an efficient way to push off the floor with the arms, other than by blocking normally -- which tends to mean pushing too early. It would also, if trained at the low levels, present a risk of hyperextending the elbows. However, I'm hesitant to completely write this one off, because of how common it is in power tumbling; if there's any sport that hinges on optimization of backhandsprings it's power tumbling, and the fact that power tumblers use this technique so commonly makes me think there might be some advantage that hasn't occurred to me.
2) Arms angled back, chest pushed hard open, late snapdown. This is how Simone does her backhandsprings; watch from the side, and you can see that her arms are about 40 degrees off vertical for the entire support phase. This causes the block and snap to occur at a lower angle than they otherwise wood, which means greater acceleration of the CoM in the second half of the BHS. It's hard to argue with the results that Simone gets with this technique.
3) Arms bent. This allows for a delayed push off with the center of mass lower. This is the way I've usually coached backhandsprings. The elbows are protected, the block is delayed while the center of mass passes over, and the triceps can contribute to the push-off rather than relying only on the shoulders and core. To me, this seems like the most efficient approach, and the easiest to safely train.
What say you all?
More and more coaches seem to be coming around to the viewpoint that arms vertical and straight to "block" is suboptimal for high level backhandsprings, because it does not allow the center of mass to pass far enough over the hands before pushing off. I can think of three solutions to this, all three of which I've seen used to great effect (and, of course, combinations are possible).
1) Arms wide. This slightly delays the block, while allowing the center of mass to remain lower. This is fairly common in MAG and extremely common in power-tumbling, but very rare in WAG at the high levels. To me, this seems like the least efficient of the options, because it doesn't really give an efficient way to push off the floor with the arms, other than by blocking normally -- which tends to mean pushing too early. It would also, if trained at the low levels, present a risk of hyperextending the elbows. However, I'm hesitant to completely write this one off, because of how common it is in power tumbling; if there's any sport that hinges on optimization of backhandsprings it's power tumbling, and the fact that power tumblers use this technique so commonly makes me think there might be some advantage that hasn't occurred to me.
2) Arms angled back, chest pushed hard open, late snapdown. This is how Simone does her backhandsprings; watch from the side, and you can see that her arms are about 40 degrees off vertical for the entire support phase. This causes the block and snap to occur at a lower angle than they otherwise wood, which means greater acceleration of the CoM in the second half of the BHS. It's hard to argue with the results that Simone gets with this technique.
3) Arms bent. This allows for a delayed push off with the center of mass lower. This is the way I've usually coached backhandsprings. The elbows are protected, the block is delayed while the center of mass passes over, and the triceps can contribute to the push-off rather than relying only on the shoulders and core. To me, this seems like the most efficient approach, and the easiest to safely train.
What say you all?
Last edited: