gymn Digest Sun, 18 Dec 94 Volume 3 : Issue 52
Today's Topics:
Devils?
Dortmund and the 7-6-5 System
Dortmund and the 7-6-5 System (was Re: Worlds)
finally caught up!
ftp/faq drawings and such
funny camera effects (2 msgs)
gym tricks
NBC: A letter to Santa
RE: Judging article (2 msgs)
Results Files
Shannon Miller article in NY Times
Shannon Miller article in NY Times Fri 12/16/94
Steve's departure -- no surprise
Steve at the airport (2 msgs)
Wor[l]ds thoughts
Words thoughts
Worlds (13 msgs)
worlds coverage (5 msgs)
This is a digest of the gymn@athena.mit.edu mailing list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 23:42:37 -0400 (AST)
From: ***@is.dal.ca
Subject: Devils?
Does anyone know someone that is with the Devils? Someone with an
email account?
I'm trying to get in touch with one of the gymnasts.. but she
doesn't have an email account..
Thanx in advance..
ttyl
Staulker
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 02:53:27 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Dortmund and the 7-6-5 System
>> Question for Susan: I don't remember Lebedeva anchoring all the events.
Wasn't Fabrichnova up last on floor and Khorkina on vault?<<
Ah ha ... digging through my trash from Dortmund, which is still conviently
laying upon my living room floor, I discover that yes indeed the rotation
orders for finals was different from that of prelims. I didn't see women's
finals live from the stands but from outside in a little metal house with
many monitors so it was vaguely surreal and not really like being there so my
memories of that session are distorted accordingly.
Ever since I wrote my earlier message I had this niggling feeling that I saw
it posted to "turn in line-ups 24 hours before the finals" somewhere ...
which isn't as funny as the sign on the cafeteria door in Russian saying not
to steal the silverware or something like that. Inside joke right Beth? ...
(PS to Squires - if you hadn't lost your pass then you *would* have had press
room access <g> ... besides I know I gave you a copy of that press release).
Anyway ... in the finals Lebedeva lead off on floor, was second to last on
vault, 3rd on bars, and last on BB. Fab was supposed to be last on floor. She
was also last up in the line-up during prelim optionals but didn't compete
remember? Khorky sure 'nuff did cap off vault.
Also, Presecan was moved into the lead off position on most events for
Romania.
-Susan
Hey Mara,
I somehow lost my ladies results sheets for compulsories and optionals
(prelim rounds) if you happen to have yours still (or Beth if you kept the
copies I gave you) would you run me off a copy and send them to me. I must
have left a pile of stuff in Dortmund since I lost those damn t-shirts I
bought for people too ... c'est la vie.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 21:02:57 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Dortmund and the 7-6-5 System (was Re: Worlds)
>>[Elena Lebedeva] I think they were attempting the ploy of putting her up
last in the hope that she'd benefit from the escalation in scores.<<
Well actually (and I know that Beth knows this but some of you out there
might not since it *was* kinda' confusing so I'll go ahead and explain) with
the 7-6-5 system that was used in Dortmund the coaches had to submit line-ups
24 hours before the event began (the same line-up had to be used for the
entire comp - I'm 99% sure of that anyway though you may be have been able to
re-vamp your line-up for finals but if that was so I know that most teams did
not). Some teams actually had a true alternate that traveled so the 7
competing gymnasts had to be confirmed. The Ukrainian men, for instance,
brought Alexander Svetlichnyi as well as the 7 men they used.
Anyway, once the order was set and the comp. began the coach was responsible
for making sure that the judges knew what 6 athletes - of the 7 on the team
- would be competing on that particular event. This information had to be
submited by the end of timed warm-ups. If it was not the 7th person on the
line-up would automatically be dropped from the order. This rule lead most
teams to put the person who was likely to sit that out event up "last" (the
traditional spot for the strongest team member) in the official line-up just
as a safety precaution.
When Arkaev made up the line-up for Russia Natalia Ivanova was still healthy
(She hurt herself the morning of women's compulsories. In a side note she did
say it was an old injury made worse and not a brand new one.) so Lebedeva was
put up "last" on every event since she was expected to be the non-competiting
member. When Natasha came up hurt Arkaev was stuck with this line-up.
The same thing happened to Romania where Hategan was injured the day before
the women's compos. Claudia Presecan - who hadn't even podium trained with
the team! - was stuck in the 7th position on many events. Hategan was able to
compete compo bars and beam and I think all but floor in optionals (I'm far
too lazy to look it up right now).
-Susan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 16:35:12 EST
From: ***@MIT.EDU
Subject: finally caught up!
Hi, I'm finally caught uo on my email.
I wanted to say that if there is still anyone on the list who asked to
unsubscribe over 24 hours ago, please *do* resend your request now. I
was a little less thorough than usual at trying to find a possible
address on the list if the one you gave me or mailed from was not on
the list -- I was more likely than usual to assume that it must have
been a repeat request and you were already off the list. So... if you
got missed, it's probably because you're subscribed from a different
address than the one you mailed from. It will speed things up if you
know (and tell me) the address that you are subscribed from.
Thanks, and congrats to all the new parents out there!
Oh yeah, I found some no-expiration-date coupons for SMA and/or Nursoy
lying around (2x50 cents off ready-made, 1x1.00 off powder). If you
use this stuff, send me your address and I'll drop them in the mail for
you. (I know that's not twins specific, but parents of multiples who use
formula go through soooo much of it...)
--Robyn
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 06:42:02 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: ftp/faq drawings and such
(Rachele's note deleted because I lost it but it basically said that there
was no room at the ftp site for the entire code and also it would be a
copyright infringement to scan and upload the entire code of points because
it has a market value of $40)
I had no intention of scanning the whole darn code of points in the first
place my life is not THAT sad. I was only suggesting a few main moves that
would likely be useful in the faq if one ever exists anyway and not two
hundred. For those that have NOT ever seen the code of points it is more than
drawings fyi. As for copyright infringements I doubt the FIG would mind
terribly in this instance. In _World of Gymnastics_ it states something along
the lines that the FIG is happy to have any of its contents reproduced but
that they always like to see a copy of whatever. Of course the USGF (oops I
mean USAG) would probabaly mind because after all even though they don't own
the copyright to the Code they do pack away $40 for every one they sell minus
whatever they buy them for. I could write to Norbert and ask him. But if it
is such a big deal that why should I even bother I mean *I* know the
difference between a Cuervo and a Barani-out myself. :-)
Just trying to be helpful
Amanda
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 16:40:45 EST
From: ***@MIT.EDU
Subject: funny camera effects
What's with the "strobe effect". (I'm talking about the way it almost looked
like you were looking at several frames of stop-motion animation in some
cases, esp when legs or arms were making large movements. I noticed it a
lot on Mo's floor exercise.) I have asked about this before, but now that
we have TV folks online, I thought we could get a better answer. Is it some
kind of frame rate incompatibility or something?
--Robyn
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 11:41:59 -0800 (PST)
From: ***@leland.Stanford.EDU
Subject: funny camera effects
Robin ponders:
>
> What's with the "strobe effect". (I'm talking about the way it almost looked
> like you were looking at several frames of stop-motion animation in some
> cases, esp when legs or arms were making large movements. I noticed it a
> lot on Mo's floor exercise.) I have asked about this before, but now that
> we have TV folks online, I thought we could get a better answer. Is it some
> kind of frame rate incompatibility or something?
>
> --Robyn
>
I'm not a video technician, so please don't sue me if I'm wrong. This
is my understanding of the effect. It's caused by the high-speed shutter
("super-slo-mo") video camera, and it allows sharp slow motion replays.
The refresh rate of a video screen is somewhere around 60 Hz, meaning that
a new image is sent to the CRT about every 1/60 sec. (This is somewhat
simplified--it may actually mean that each _point_ on the screen is
refreshed by the "sweep" every 1/60 sec., but work with me.) With a
standard video camera, the shutter speed (the amount of time the CCD is
exposed to the subject for each screen) is in the neighborhood of
1/60 to 1/250 sec., meaning that the camera has almost constant "vision."
That is, each 1/60 sec, the camera gets another 1/60 sec. (or slightly
less) "look" at the action. There are few gaps in the action.
With a high-speed (1/1000 or 1/10,000 sec.) shutter, the camera
(and therefore your brain) sees a quick, but sharp "slice" of motion
at a particular time, then, 1/60th sec. later, another "slice." This
leaves a gap of (.0167-.0010=) .0157 sec. where action is happening,
but neither you nor the camera sees it. This results in the stop-action
effect you described. By the time you get another "slice" of the
action, the arm (moving especially quickly) has apparently instantaneously
moved through a gap in space.
I guess the key is that with a standard video camera, each 1/60 sec.
(and for that entire 1/60 sec. until the screen in refreshed) you see
most of the action that happened during the previous 1/60 sec.
(resulting in a blur, as any still photographer can tell you), while
with with a high-speed camera, you see only what happened during the
initial 1/1000 sec. (or 1/10,000 sec.). But you still see it for
the entire 1/60 sec. before moving to the next 1/1000 sec slice after
that .0157 sec. delay.
Hopefully someone can correct my errors and fill in the gaps, but I
think that's essentially the way it works.
-Patrick
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 11:07 EDT
From: ***@ROO.FIT.EDU
Subject: gym tricks
Could anybody explain to me the different moves that are named after people?
On TV, sometimes, it's so confusing when they mention a move named after a
person, but they don't explain exactly what part it was.
BTW, I do know Tkatchev on HB and a Yurchenko entry vault. :)
Thanks!!
-Laura
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 13:04:36 -0800
From: ***@powergrid.electriciti.com
Subject: NBC: A letter to Santa
Dear Santa Claus,
Can we *please* have a Steadicam under the tree?
We've been extra good this year.
(kissing noises)
NBC
P.S. Nancy wants some Dramamine
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 02:09:25 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: RE: Judging article
>I just read the article you sent to gymn. I'm glad you put it in. Isn't
>there some rules that prohibits judges from watching the practice >sessions
>at least? Judging is subjective enough without the bias of watching
>practice sessions.
>-Laura
The judges are definitely allowed (encouraged?) to watch the warm-ups. It
gives *them* a chance to warm up their skills as far as figuring out the
start value and such of the routines, and to avoid surprises in the meet (ie
a previously unseen move that has yet to be given a value).
In Brisbane at the end of each one-touch warm-up (while the gymnasts were
still practicing) a tone would sound and the announcer would say, "Gymnasts,
you are now at the hands of the contol jury", meaning, the judges are now
watching you. Perhaps the FIG is aware of this study or knows the bias?
-Amanda
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 10:15:15 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@minerva.cis.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Judging article
> The judges are definitely allowed (encouraged?) to watch the warm-ups. It
> gives *them* a chance to warm up their skills as far as figuring out the
> start value and such of the routines, and to avoid surprises in the meet (ie
> a previously unseen move that has yet to be given a value).
While it is *definitely* useful for judges to see what a new move looks like
before they have to judge it, they do not have to worry about being
surprised by a previously unseen move that has yet to be given a value.
Descriptions of new moves are submitted in advance to whomever is in
charge of the judging (the WTC at Worlds and Olympics), who gives them a
provisional value, and the description and value assigned are given to
all the judges. If they *are* surprised by something, they don't have
to worry about it because a skill without an assigned value is the same
as no skill at all, and they can just ignore it.
> In Brisbane at the end of each one-touch warm-up (while the gymnasts were
> still practicing) a tone would sound and the announcer would say, "Gymnasts,
> you are now at the hands of the contol jury", meaning, the judges are now
> watching you. Perhaps the FIG is aware of this study or knows the bias?
I believe you're referring to the announcement that the warmup is
over? The control jury then takes over from the person timing the
warmups and all that. It is in charge of getting the actual competition
*on that event* underway and running it, i.e. telling the gymnasts when to
come and go (telling the secretary or assistant when to flash the green
and red lights), and the gymnasts have to pay attention to them and obey
them, not anyone else. It doesn't mean the judges were not (or shouldn't
have been) watching before. The control jury, btw folks, is the group in
charge of the judging panel on each apparatus. Each one is made up of 1
or 2 members of the WTC (Women's Technical Committee) and 1 Expert judge
and 1 STC (scientific technical collaborator -- the one who calculates
start values) (these things can vary depending on the competition. I'm
just describing what Worlds and Olympics look like). The WTC types sit at a
main table with computers that show them each judge's score and the
final score. The Expert and STC sit at the apparatus with the judging
panel. The control jury deals with any problems (they can decide stuff
like whether a problem with the apparatus was the gymnast's
responsibility or not) and reports to the Main Jury and/or the WTC
President. The Main Jury is made up of the President, V.P., and
Secretary of the WTC. The WTC Pres, in consultation with the main and
control juries, can hand out warnings and sanctions. The final level is
the jury of appeal, which is made up of the FIG President (or a
representative) and the Main Jury.
Wow, I didn't intend for this to get so long...
:)
Adriana
PS -- I've been getting 2 or 3 copies of my mesages. Sorry if the rest
of you are (I hope not!!), but I'm not resending or anything. I don't
know why it happens.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 23:13:51 -0800
From: ***@netcom.com
Subject: Results Files
For anyone who is interested, I have uploaded some results files (Europeans,
Jr. Europeans, World Cup and Olympics) to the FTP sites at Penn State and
Netcom. Please be advised that it is very difficult to access Netcom, so
your best bet would be to grab them from the primary site.
Debbie
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 94 11:27:29 GMT
From: ***@ic.ac.uk
Subject: Shannon Miller article in NY Times
> Having gone over the key comparisons between Shannon Miller and Martina, I
> find several:
> 3. They both compete in individual as opposed to team sports.
Even when there was a chance for Shannon to compete in a "team sports" at
Dortmund she didn't really do it :)
Just kidding.
Sherwin
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 94 00:03:15 PST
From: ***@eworld.com
Subject: Shannon Miller article in NY Times Fri 12/16/94
Having gone over the key comparisons between Shannon Miller and Martina, I
find several:
1. They are both female.
2. They are both athletes
3. They both compete in individual as opposed to team sports.
4. They have both been participating in the sport since childhood.
5. They have both won some and lost some.
What else is there?
BTW, I am CERTAIN that Mr. Nunno was making no comparisons between the two in
terms of longevity, number of victories, disposition, or sexual preference.
David
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 09:58:30 -0700 (MST)
From: ***@rmii.com
Subject: Steve's departure -- no surprise
I doubt that th other coaches were "lead to believe" that Miller would
be there for the whole competition. For one, they know Nunno, they
couldn't have been too surprised. Two, it was said all along that
Miller would probably compete just compulsories... I think we even
said that on Gymn. I distinctly remember *expecting* her to compete
just compulsories well before the competition began ... whether I
heard this on Gymn or somewhere else, I can't remember for sure.
As far as finding the press release about the topic... all that will
give us is USAG's public version of the story. IMHO, Press Releases
are closer to disguised advertisements to send to the media, rather
than "The Great Revealer of All Gymnastic Truth" (grin), and so
reading the press release is no closer to What Really Happened With
Miller and Nunno in Dortmund than to listen to Steve talk to a camera
as he's walking out of security at Chicago O'Hare.
The whole fiasco (hmm, the bars score was the Shannon fiasco, so I
guess I'll have to distinguish this one by calling it the "Nunno
fiasco") just exemplifies how bad things can turn outin the land of
Gymnastics Politics. Nunno didn't want Miller to go at all (which is
why he was probably acidic (good word Amanda) in the airport -- he's
probably thinking "listen, we didn't want to go at all, and so now
we're finally here only to get beaten up over leaving early"), and
USAG wanted her there the whole time, which results in the compromise
of competing just compulsories? Is that really such a good deal?
Certainly not for Shannon, whom I'm sure would rather just forget the
whole competition ever even happened. I can't really believe that
anyone won with this whole situation, except perhaps the gymnasts who
remained and were able to prove that they don't fall apart without
Shannon, but rather on the contrary can do pretty well when asked to
perform.
Actually, in my opinion, one could almost say that the greater loss
when Nunno and Miller left was Nunno, not Miller. MLT/Hill (which
one?) was right when she said that Nunno's departure meant a loss of
leadership for the team, because he certainly does add that quality.
I doubt that any of the gymnasts are upset with Shannon -- they're
smart, they know what happens. However, there is probably certainly a
rift now between the coaches left behind and Nunno -- if there isn't,
then that's a big credit to the coaches, because I'm sure most people
would be upset.
Rachele
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 23:20:28 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Steve at the airport
As far as I know, Steve had NO IDEA an NBC crew was going to be at O'Hare
when he and Shannon arrived. Before the taping of the intro segment with Dan
Hicks, Tim and Elfi, they were talking about Steve's and Shannon's
"disappearing act" being THE story to focus on. And someone made a remark about
Steve's being surprised by the camera crew at O'Hare, and they were kind of
laughing about it. So I think Steve was VERY flustered when he found himself
having to face on-camera questions! It seemed to me that he was searching for
excuses and trying frantically to dig himself out of a hole. I didn't think it
seemed too convincing that the USAG suggested he and Shannon leave, since the
other US coaches seem to have been in the dark about it and kind of rattled
when Steve left. As Elfi said in the intro, they'd been led to believe that
Steve and Shannon would be there for the entire competition, whether or not
Shannon competed, and I don't see why the USAG would suggest to Steve that he
leave and not bother to consult with/inform the other US coaches. The whole
thing was extremely bizarre. There was a press release about it, which Mara
said she'd post (I don't have a copy). I had the feeling the US coaches found
out about Steve's and Shannon's departure from the press release, but I could
be wrong. I didn't have access to the press center, and I didn't talk to the US
coaches. Susan and Mara might know more.
Question for Susan: I don't remember Lebedeva anchoring all the events.
Wasn't Fabrichnova up last on floor and Khorkina on vault?
Beth
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 14:44:28 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Steve at the airport
>There was a press release about it, which Mara
said she'd post (I don't have a copy).
I don't have a copy in hand at the moment, but basically the USAG Press
Release expressed extreme gratitude to Stev and Peggy for allowing Shannon to
make a contribution to the team effort (or words to that effect).
Mara
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 18:30:15 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Wor[l]ds thoughts
>>Overall, I think NBC was above average in it's coverage,
although someone should tell them that when showing a
beam routine, it kind of nice to be able to SEE THE BEAM.<<
Well not to overally praise TV or anything (they get big heads easily <g>)
but in this particular situation NBC is not at fault since they had only 2
personal hand held type roving cameras (ok so I don't what they're
technically called) and the rest of the footage was from German TV cameras
over which they had no control. Most of their beam shots were all from one
side so it's kind of like sitting in the audience watching the routine with
the girl's back to you 90% of the time (see the live GER coverage).
I personally think that it would have been nice to see a few other things but
the restraint of time is ever present ... I saw a few places that they could
have dropped or added stuff (like why show Lebedeva's vault ... she's the
worst Russian girl and there was plenty of better stuff to put in the brief
time non-US gymnasts were alloted) but you know 2 hours (with commercials) is
not a hell of a lot of time (esp. when NFL previews/updates take at least 15
minutes of that). I guess I should be happy they showed anything at all.
-Susan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 16:19:52 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Words thoughts
Random thoughts on the Team Champs:
* I was pleasantly shocked that NBC didn't gloss over the
Miller fiasco. I expected that they would only mention it in
passing, and they did a really good job covering it. I'm glad
that Tim Dagett pointed out that it was Nunno's, not
Shannon's decision.
*Kerri Strug looked great! IMHO, at trials she looked kind
of sluggish in her routines (and she had every right to be
because of the injury) but she had lots of energy in every
routine at Champs.
*Dom's Hindorff is amazing. I am so glad she added it.
*Khorkina did the best triple I've seen. Nice
haircut, by the way, but bad hairstyle. VO5 is making a
killing in Russia, I presume.
*Overall, I think NBC was above average in it's coverage,
although someone should tell them that when showing a
beam routine, it kind of nice to be able to SEE THE BEAM.
*It took guts for TIm Dagget to contradict the US Men' s
team excuse for their performance. Keswick bugs. He would
have been more credible when complaining about being
underscored if he could stay on an event once in a while.
*But again, congrats to the US Women's team on their
performance.
Amanda
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 16:13:24 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@minerva.cis.yale.edu
Subject: Worlds
It just doesn't get better than this -- gymnastics Worlds first, then
the Niners, and later tonight, Torvill & Dean! happy happy joy joy
Wow, 32 routines! But why Lebedeva *twice*?! No Fabrichnova, Grosheva
just once. Would've liked more of other countries, of course, but also
would've liked to see something from Jaycie Phelps, since I've never seen
her perform.
I thought Strug looks very good, at least as good as before, and
happier. I don't mind her hoe-down music at all. I think it suits her
better than the classical routine. Now if only she'd *smile*! (good
full-in at the end, though!)
I just love Khorkina. Whatta triple full! (though I don't think her FX
dance is that great)
What is it with Romania and the funky versions of Fur Elise? I don't
know which one I dislike more, Milo's or Silivas. But at least Dana's
choreography was better and she had a personality.
Love Mo's beam! China's (well, Mo's anyway) beam looks like what Romania's
used to look like, style-wise.
Amy Chow is good, but she's so *slow* on beam (floor too). A little
dull, I thought, and she needs to tighten up her form.
On Shannon's fall, well, I've confirmed what I originally thought. It
should've been 0.5.
Gogean and the 7+ score (for Beth): I need to know what exactly else she
did, but she did have at least her 2 C value parts and 1 B, plus her acro
series. She loses 0.6 (0.2 x 3) for her missing A's (unless she did some
somewhere) and 0.8 (0.4 x 2) for missing B's (again, unless there was
another one in there), plus 0.5 for the fall, 0.3 for a routine with no
dismount, 0.6 for missing special requirements (no gym series, no
mixed series, for no full turn, no leap with great amplitude, no element
close to beam, no B gym element). I don't know whether she's deducted for
no B dismount if she's deducted for no dismount at all. That comes to
2.8. Again, I'd need to know whether she did have some of these
requirements in there that they didn't show, but if not, she'd have a 7.2
max.
It looks to me like *everyone* was overscored. Podkopayeva's bars, for
example.
All those multiple whip and front tumbling second passes are ok, but I'm
nostalgic for a side 1-3/4 (which would be illegal to do now, but still...)
The "magic" of gymnastics, Elfi? <roll eyes> And Mo's transitions are
what make her routine special, huh? Might've said something nice about
Lebedeva on BB instead of just waiting to pounce on a mistake. But
otherwise, I think Tim & Elfi did ok.
Is it true Nadia is the only Romanian to compete in two Olympics? What
about Grigoras (Cristina, not Anca). Didn't she compete in '80 and '84?
Scott made himself sound like an idiot with that comment about performing
better than the girls. GMAFB, Scott.
:)
Adriana
PS to Amanda (George too!) -- interesting interview with Primetime. *Cool*
intro to the game. John Steven Young? I like that. :)
^^^^
Oo! TD Watters!!
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 16:36:46 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@tiger.hsc.edu
Subject: Worlds
ARGH! I knew they were on today! Argh!
But of course, I missed them.
Julius
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 18:38:21 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Worlds
Oh yeah PS from Adriana's post ...
>> but also would've liked to see something from Jaycie Phelps, since I've
never seen her perform<<
Jaycie really deserved the coverage too (though *I* wouldn't take away what
little coverage the foreign athletes got) since she, in her first worlds,
never had a major error. She was consistant, calm, and collected throughout
the meet. Amy's "comeback" was certainly more dramatic and praise for her
turning it around at the eleventh hour is well deserved but it's sad that by
doing it the right way all along Jaycie's story is considered not exciting
enough.
>>China's (well, Mo's anyway) beam looks like what Romania's
used to look like, style-wise.<<
Sorry but huh? China and Romania look about as alike on beam as Shus and
Bogie on FX. China was the only team there (with the exception of about half
the Russian girl's - Roschina in particualr) who could do the compuslory
beam correctly. It was absolutely stunning and each one was better then the
last. Even though the Chinese finished in the final compo round the scores do
not accurately reflect how much better they were on this event then any other
team. With them it was actually a flowing routine and not a mish-mash of
independant movements.
-Susan Again
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 19:55:19 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@minerva.cis.yale.edu
Subject: Worlds
> >>China's (well, Mo's anyway) beam looks like what Romania's
> used to look like, style-wise.<<
>
> Sorry but huh? China and Romania look about as alike on beam as Shus and
> Bogie on FX. China was the only team there (with the exception of about half
> the Russian girl's - Roschina in particualr) who could do the compuslory
> beam correctly. It was absolutely stunning and each one was better then the
> last. Even though the Chinese finished in the final compo round the scores do
> not accurately reflect how much better they were on this event then any other
> team. With them it was actually a flowing routine and not a mish-mash of
> independant movements.
I mean Romania in the mid-to-late '80's. I also just mean style. The
Chinese may have better amplitude on leaps and such, but the choreography
and the sharp, quick style (Mo's, anyway, we weren't shown anyone else)
was very reminiscent to me of ROM back then. Maybe I should watch my tapes
again. Romania *now* is a totally different story. They're much worse
on beam.
:)
Adriana
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 20:31:31 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@emerald.tufts.edu
Subject: Worlds
I know I don't contribyte that often but there were two things that
really irritated me.
1. Scott Keswick's bitter attitude is appalling! How can he say
that the girls didn't work as hard? He really needs to get that in
check-no wonder his routines have been off!
2. I was didappointed not to see Larissa Fontaine at all!
They just named a move after her-the least they could have done is
shown her doing it!
The slow-mo effects were definitely weird and I didn't like the
TV angle on the bars! Other than that, I was happy with the overall
coverage though nothing would have been as good as being there!
Have a nice weekend everyone!
Melissa
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 20:32:38 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Worlds
I agree 100% with Susan that NBC should have shown Jaycie Phelps on at
least ONE event. I was probably more impressed with her than with anyone else
on the team (even though Amy's comeback was outstanding). Jaycie also had never
competed in a Worlds before, but she showed remarkable composure the whole way
through, and I really liked her style (so did the judges!). I think we could
have lived without Lebedeva's vault to have seen Jaycie, and Larissa too. ALL
the US girls contributed to their silver-medal finish, so it would have been
nice to have seen all of them. But I guess it's the whole time constraints
problem. I'll be happy to get videos from Billy Mispel, and John Whitmore of
Sports Image should have very thorough coverage once he edits all his tapes. He
brings multiple cameras, so even if stars are going up at the same time, he can
get everyone's routines. He'll have the men too. :)
About Adriana's question re Gogean's beam routine. After she fell, as far
as I remember she got back up and just did the two leaps before Belu shouted at
her to get down. You might want to double-check with Susan, Mara and other
Gymners who were there, but I don't think she got much farther than that; I
don't recall her doing her front somi (smart move on Belu's part, since no one
knew at that time whether she was really hurt or not).
I would have loved to have seen Kochetkova, Fabrichnova or Khorkina on
beam, but I figure NBC was kind of "forced" into showing Lebedeva, since the
Russians put her up last, thus making her performance the crucial one. She was
by no means the Russians' best on beam; I think they were attempting the ploy
of putting her up last in the hope that she'd benefit from the escalation in
scores. Sovetsky Sport called her the "alternate" (even though there really
wasn't any such thing in this competition), but that led me to think that they
hadn't planned on using her much, if at all. Ivanova's injury changed that,
though...
Many many cheers to Kelli Hill, who I think has the best coaching style
I've ever seen (well, heard)! Everything she said to the girls was so positive
and encouraging :). I really like the way she focused on the positive instead
of harping on whatever little errors the girls might have made. It seems like
her technique really brought out the best in the athletes, too.
Scott Keswick's remark was puzzling, to say the least. Does anyone know
exactly what he meant about the US men performing better than the women??! It
sure didn't seem that way to me. And if I were one of the US girls, I don't
think I'd appreciate that comment. He seemed to be detracting from their
accomplishments, to be implying that they didn't belong in the top four. Or did
I just read him wrong? I'm also glad Tim Daggett had the guts to publicly
disagree with the men's assessment of their performance. I agree with Tim -
something needs to change, SOON.
Lastly, I feel really bad for Shannon Miller. Again, Tim was 100% right
that all the shenanigans were Steve Nunno's decision, and perhaps his goal WAS
to protect her reputation, but I think he ended up doing the exact opposite.
Abandoning the team in the middle of the competition just doesn't look good. He
still could have pulled her from the competition but let her be on the floor
encouraging her teammates, couldn't he? I thought Shannon looked pretty
mortified and uncomfortable during the airport footage. What a terrible
position to be in. WE may know that everything was Steve's decision, but does
the average Joe really realize that? I wonder what the whole incident has done
to Shannon's image? Seems to me she loses no matter how you look at it. Either
she agreed with Steve's behavior, which was less than sportsmanlike, or she
lacks the courage to stand up to him. All in all, I feel really bad for her...
Beth
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 94 01:13:00 UTC
From: ***@genie.geis.com
Subject: Worlds
Random thoughts (still recovering from last night's office Xmas party)...
It was great to see the US girls do so well (and without Shannon -- it *can*
be done!). If only they had shown more of the foreign competitors,
especially ROM. I would have liked to see exactly WHY they won the gold.
It certainly wasn't for their choreography, if Milo's routine is any
indication. God, did Poszar visit Deva recently?
Khorkina's V was super. They need to downgrade the Hristakieva and quickly.
Scott's crybaby segment was laughable. I guess NBC didn't want to twist the
knife by showing us more examples of our men's superiority over our women's
team. And anyway, Scott, it doesn't matter how much better y'all are than
the girls, since you compete against *men*.
And Adriana wrote:
>Is it true Nadia is the only Romanian to compete on two Olympics? What
>about Grigoras (Cristina, not Anca). Didn't she compete in '80 and '84?
Yeah, and Anca was on the '72 and '76 teams.
Debbie
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 14:44:15 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Worlds
> About Adriana's question re Gogean's beam routine. After she fell, as
far
as I remember she got back up and just did the two leaps before Belu shouted
at
her to get down. You might want to double-check with Susan, Mara and other
Gymners who were there, but I don't think she got much farther than that;
If I recall correctly, she got back up on the beam and after a few dazed
seconds did one leap, then Belu shouted for her to get down.
Mara
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 14:44:34 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Worlds
>It was great to see the US girls do so well (and without Shannon -- it *can*
be done!).
The interesting comment that was made at the time was that it was the first
meet where the US women took a team medal without either Bela or Steve as a
(positive) factor.
>Scott's crybaby segment was laughable. I guess NBC didn't want to twist the
knife by showing us more examples of our men's superiority over our women's
team.
Oh, I think just Scott's flair was *more* than enough ;-)
Mara
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 14:47:47 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Worlds
>Scott Keswick's remark was puzzling, to say the least.
Not to mention vindictive. What's really unfortunate is that it was directed
at some of the people who deserved it least, the US women - who showed up
throughout the meet to support and cheer on the men.
Mara
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 15:44:45 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@minerva.cis.yale.edu
Subject: Worlds
> > About Adriana's question re Gogean's beam routine. After she fell, as
> far
> as I remember she got back up and just did the two leaps before Belu shouted
> at
> her to get down. You might want to double-check with Susan, Mara and other
> Gymners who were there, but I don't think she got much farther than that;
>
> If I recall correctly, she got back up on the beam and after a few dazed
> seconds did one leap, then Belu shouted for her to get down.
What I need to know is exactly *what* steps and leaps she did besides the
front on and the ff layout.
:)
Adriana
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 17:54:03 -0500 (EST)
From: ***@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Worlds
> >Scott Keswick's remark was puzzling, to say the least.
>
> Not to mention vindictive. What's really unfortunate is that it was directed
> at some of the people who deserved it least, the US women - who showed up
> throughout the meet to support and cheer on the men.
>
> Mara
>
That is a VERY good point. Not only did the girls cheer on the men, but
before the men's optionals (qualifying), the US girls came into the men's
training gym where the men were finishing their warmups, and gave them all
balloons on which they had written messages of good luck, etc. I don't even
remember what Susan, Joe and I were doing in the training gym at that point,
but it was a nice thing to witness, and I think Japanese TV got it on tape.
The men brought the balloons onto the competition floor with them. I thought it
was really nice that the US girls went to this effort to encourage and cheer on
their male counterparts. Too bad Scott couldn't have shown a little more
gratitude and respect for them. I can understand his being frustrated, etc.,
but there was no reason to take it out on the girls and begrudge them their
high finish.
Beth
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 19:03:44 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: Worlds
>>Not only did the girls cheer on the men, but before the men's optionals
(qualifying), the US girls came into the men's training gym where the men
were finishing their warmups, and gave them all balloons on which they had
written messages of good luck, etc ... I think Japanese TV got it on tape.<<
Well actually it was Canadian TV so maybe one of our Northern Gymn-ers could
tell is if they used it.
Also the US men as a whole *were* supportive of the women. During Women's
compulsories the American guys - namely Billy Roth who was the most vocal -
and coaches (the US had a record 22 accredited coaches for 14 athletes) not
on the floor were very loud and encouraging of the girls. John Roethlisberger
and Mihai Bagiu also joined in (others may have but that was all I remembered
seeing in the section). Despite Scott's comments (which however tacky they
may have been I don't think were designed to take away from the women's
success), there was a definate team spirit with both the guys and the girls.
-Susan
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 21:29:44 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: worlds coverage
Re: the competition and judging:
-I was a little surprised at Groscheva's beam score (see all other routines).
-I felt really bad for Lebedeva. She did a great job considering she wasn't
even supposed to compete beam (she didn't even podium train any event) let
alone anchor the team.
-Gogean's 9.85 beam score completely showcases what a joke the code is. Is
that really what a 9.85 routine should look like?
-The American women seemed to root for each other and support each other more
than I've seen them do in a long time. Anyone want to speculate on why? ;-)
Re: the NBC coverage
-more international would have been nice. And of the international, it
seemed they only picked one person to show for each (non-US) team:
Podkopayeva, Khorkina, Milo, and Mo. Especially considering the depth of the
Russian and Romanian teams, more routines of theirs would have been nice. At
least we didn't have to see Borden's floor though.
-I was impressed with the way the Shannon "check ya later" fiasco was
covered. They didn't try to pretend it was something it wasn't.
-Ditto for Keswick's (what high horse is HE on?) remark about the American
men being better than the American women. Sure, maybe on rings or pommel
horse. That statement is absolutely untrue in every aspect. The women are
more consistant (ie they HAVE consistancy), display a greater level of
difficulty as far as what's internationally competitive these days, and
overall are a deeper team. Individually as well, the women are brighter.
I'm glad they showed the comment and Tim contradicted it and explained why
it was untrue.
-Men would be nice, even if no Americans. Would only I not die from
non-American exposure?
-Steve's comments at the airport seemed strange. Does anyone else find it
hard to believe that the USAG suggested Shannon not compete and they leave
early? Like they didn't bend over backwards to get her there in the first
place. Steve's question about if anyone knew how the American team did was
asked extremely acidly.
-Romania didn't seem to get very much attention at all, especially
considering they WON. I had thought that there was supposed to be another
profile on Deva from the same footage shown at the last dual meet.
Does anyone know if the Sabae team worlds will be covered?
Amanda
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 1994 20:09:42 -0700 (MST)
From: ***@rmii.com
Subject: worlds coverage
Amanda said:
| -The American women seemed to root for each other and support each other more
| than I've seen them do in a long time. Anyone want to speculate on why? ;-)
I don't really see this as true. I think it's just that NBC showed
more opportune shots. The teams -- both men and women -- have always
been extraordinarily supportive.
I thought that NBC actually had a good balance of American and
internatioanl. Remember, the hard core gym fans are a very minute
percentage of their viewing audience, and the audience at large wants
to see the American athletes. I thougth it was about 50/50, which if
I were a producer (and, obvoiusly I'm not), is the ratio I'd think
would be good.
| overall are a deeper team. Individually as well, the women are brighter.
I assume you mean "brighter gymnasts"? If you mean intelligence or
personality, then I strongly be to differ...
| -Steve's comments at the airport seemed strange. Does anyone else find it
| hard to believe that the USAG suggested Shannon not compete and they leave
| early? Like they didn't bend over backwards to get her there in the first
I can see the USAG saying to themselves "Steve's not going to let
Shannon compete, but maybe he'll go along with just comps" and so
suggesting the idea to him...
Rachele
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 02:00:46 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: worlds coverage
>I can see the USAG saying to themselves "Steve's not going to let
>Shannon compete, but maybe he'll go along with just comps" and >so
suggesting the idea to him...
But I doubt that they'd suggest it AFTER compulsories were over (which is
when he said they had the talk).
Amanda
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 13:41:37 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: worlds coverage
>>Lebedeva. She did a great job considering she wasn't
even supposed to compete beam (she didn't even podium train any event<<
Lebedeva *did* podium train with Russia but she was the obvious alternate and
received less attention then the other girls (1 quick run thorough of most
things and that was it). It was Claudia Presecan of Romania that didn't
podium train at all with the Romanians (at least not in the optional session
which is the only one I saw).
>>Steve's question about if anyone knew how the American team did was asked
extremely acidly. <<
That interview took place the day *before* women's finals so I think that
Steve was basically saying "hey they haven't lost yet" or something to that
effect meaning don't blame Shannon/Me until you have something to blame us
for. Not that I agree with anything he did/said but I think that's the
context it was meant in.
>>Does anyone know if the Sabae team worlds will be covered?<<
Sabae is not only a team worlds but is actually the last (or so they have
said) "full" worlds that will feature a team comp. with compulsories and
optionals as well as a new life AA and EF. It will also serve as the
qualifier for the Atlanta Olympics. It will be covered, as Worlds almost
always are, by ABC.
-Susan
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 1994 15:01:07 -0500
From: ***@aol.com
Subject: worlds coverage
>It (Sabae) will be covered, as Worlds almost
always are, by ABC.
Oh, Joy!!! I can almost see the 15 minutes of coverage now.
Mara
------------------------------
End of gymn Digest
******************************