Women L5 beam - fall and scoring question

[suebee]

Asking for a friend, since she is not on here and I am not sure.

If a kid falls off beam on the BWO without touching any part of a foot to the beam, and then gets back on the beam and resumes the routine with whatever comes after the BWO, does the kid get a deduction for the fall plus a deduction for missing the element of the BWO?

I think I read here before that you don’t get credit for an element if you don’t land a foot, and that if you don’t do a required element, you lose double the value of that element. Is that right?

So in this case, does the kid get a 0.5 deduction for the fall, plus double the value of the BWO for not landing a foot, plus any form deductions? What is the value of the BWO?

If the kid fell like this on the BWO, should she have reattempted the BWO after getting back up on the beam (assuming that she almost always makes the BWO and it was an unusual error to fall at all, much less fall without getting a foot on)?

But if she fell after landing a foot for the BWO, should she not repeat the BWO since she at least got credit for the element?

Thanks.

 

[CoachAlex]

I believe the BWO on beam is worth 0.6 (if not, then it is 0.4). Because the gymnast attempted the skill, it is not considered omitting the skill (which is a deduction of 2xthe value of the skill), it is just a failure to complete the value part (VP). So in this situation, she would lose 0.6 (value of the skill) + 0.5 (fall) + any form errors, so a minimum of 1.1.

If this was a freak thing, then yes, I would have my athlete repeat the skill - but this is a risk as they could fall again, or miss the skill again.

If the athlete lands one or both feet on the beam and then falls, they still get VP credit, so no, I wouldn’t have them repeat the skill.

 

[3rd_time_around]

I believe the BWO on beam is worth 0.6 (if not, then it is 0.4). Because the gymnast attempted the skill, it is not considered omitting the skill (which is a deduction of 2xthe value of the skill), it is just a failure to complete the value part (VP). So in this situation, she would lose 0.6 (value of the skill) + 0.5 (fall) + any form errors, so a minimum of 1.1.

If this was a freak thing, then yes, I would have my athlete repeat the skill - but this is a risk as they could fall again, or miss the skill again.

If the athlete lands one or both feet on the beam and then falls, they still get VP credit, so no, I wouldn’t have them repeat the skill.

There's no VP credit in Level 5, just required skills. If they do not get at least 1 foot on the beam, it doesn't count. They get all form deductions, the fall, and--I think-- the value of the skill (or maybe double the value, my brain is tired, I'm not sure). If they get up and repeat the skill and get at least 1 foot on, even if they fall again, they get credit for the skill.

 

[suebee]

Thanks to you both!

So could someone clarify what is the value of the BWO and whether you lose just the value of the BWO or double the value of the BWO if you attempt it, but fall without landing a foot on the beam?

In general, would a coach generally advise trying the BWO again in this situation or just moving on to the next part of the routine? Kid doesn’t usually fall at all on BWO, much less miss both feet, but I’m thinking that maybe a kid would be frazzled after an unusual fall like that and as a result, may fall again with another attempt. Or maybe kid will nail it because it is rare to fall on this skill.

Thanks!

 

[wandrewsjr]

The deduction for an incomplete major element is up to the value of the element. So up to 0.6 for not completing the back walkover(plus the fall). Getting hands on but not feet would generally incur 0.2-0.4, depending on how the rest of the walkover was performed. I would not have a gymnast with fear or consistency issues perform the skill again, but would if it is a skill they perform successfully a vast majority of the time.