WAG L4 beam handstand

[mommyof1]

What is the deduction for going over on the L4 beam handstand? Is it 0.5 for the fall plus 0.6 for the value of the skill since the gymnast's feet never touched the beam on the way down? Can there be an additional deduction for failing to hold the handstand for 1 second before going over, or does losing the value of the skill cover all the problems with the skill other than the fall?

 

[amiandjim]

Yes, it is 0.5 plus 0.6 and also deductions for form and failing to hold for 1 second.

 

[CuriousCate]

Yes, it is 0.5 plus 0.6 and also deductions for form and failing to hold for 1 second.

JEEZ!

 

[3rd_time_around]

If her feet never touch the beam, she needs to repeat it to get credit for the skill. If even 1 foot is on the beam, she does not need to repeat it.

 

[amiandjim]

If her feet never touch the beam, she needs to repeat it to get credit for the skill. If even 1 foot is on the beam, she does not need to repeat it.

Yes, this is true. However, she will also get form deductions on the second attempt as well. I only clarify this bc I’ve had fellow gym parents confused by this.

 

[wandrewsjr]

The deduction for incomplete element is up to the value of the element. It is up to the judge to evaluate how much of the element has been completed. A gymnast who kicks up to vertical and then goes over should be deducted around half the value of the 0.6 value skill (0.2-0.4), plus the fall(0.5), plus form deductions like posture/bent arms/bent legs. If a gymnast hits handstand, holds, and then goes over I tend to deduct 0.3, if agymnast doesn’t hold, 0.4.(plus form and fall) Repeating the handstand can eliminate the up to the value of the element portion of deduction for the first attempt, but form deductions are taken on the second attempt in addition.

 

[3rd_time_around]

Yes, this is true. However, she will also get form deductions on the second attempt as well. I only clarify this bc I’ve had fellow gym parents confused by this.

Maybe, but the incomplete element deductions may often be more than form deductions on the second element.

 

[mls529]

Back in level 4, my DD was coached to repeat the handstand if she fell over and then fell off the beam. And that definitely happened a couple of times.

 

[wandrewsjr]

Back in level 4, my DD was coached to repeat the handstand if she fell over and then fell off the beam. And that definitely happened a couple of times.

This used to be how all coaches would do it. But a couple/few years ago the deduction changed, so missing feet didn’t automatically mean losing the entire value of the skill. So now it depends on the coach, and sometimes the consistency if the particular gymnasts handstand, what coach wants a gymnast to do in the situation..

 

[coachmolly]

This used to be how all coaches would do it. But a couple/few years ago the deduction changed, so missing feet didn’t automatically mean losing the entire value of the skill. So now it depends on the coach, and sometimes the consistency if the particular gymnasts handstand, what coach wants a gymnast to do in the situation..

Thanks for the clarification! I noticed this wording in the compulsory code the other day and it made me rethink having the kid repeat the skill (especially the back walkover/full turn in level 5), but I thought perhaps I was just interpreting it wrong. Glad they made the change, because a kid who goes for the skill and misses her feet doesn't deserve the same deduction as a kid who omits the skill altogether.

 

[3rd_time_around]

Thanks for the clarification! I noticed this wording in the compulsory code the other day and it made me rethink having the kid repeat the skill (especially the back walkover/full turn in level 5), but I thought perhaps I was just interpreting it wrong. Glad they made the change, because a kid who goes for the skill and misses her feet doesn't deserve the same deduction as a kid who omits the skill altogether.

Don't worry, an omission is double the value of the skill, so goimg for it and missing the feet, even if the entire value was deducted, is not the same as leaving it out completely.

 

[mommyof1]

I think she was vertical for well over a second before she went over, but there was an obvious struggle to avoid going over so I’m not sure the hold would have been counted. But now I understand why she didn’t repeat it. Thanks for the clarification, everyone.