GYMN-L Digest - 29 Oct 1995
There are 5 messages totalling 160 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Ruth Moniz
2. 7-6-5 rule and "injuries" (2)
3. Rebecca Stoyel
4. Ruth Moniz & Monique/Robin Allen (was Re: Worlds & some questions)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 20:26:06 -0500
Subject: Ruth Moniz
Oops! I erroneously posted earlier that Ruth was born in 1978
or 1979. I can see from some other postings that I was royally
mistaken on that one! Maybe I had Ruth confused with Rebecca Stoyle
(she was too young for 1991, right?) I'll be sure to do more and
better research next time!
Speaking of Rebecca, where was she at worlds? Was she
injured? She was so strong at Commonwealth, that it would really
surpise me if she didn't qualify. Bye for now!
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 14:05:53 -0500
Subject: 7-6-5 rule and "injuries"
Date sent: 29-OCT-1995 13:56:30
I've thought long and hard about posting this all weekend, and I
decided to put it up. I'm asking that noone flame me on this. I'm
simply looking to see if anyone else has any other opinions on it.
The 7-6-5 rule has been in effect now for, what, three years. It seems
to have had a reasonably positive impact, but I'm worried on two
points of the new rule. Number one, which someone brought up a few
months back, would be that in order to assure that the "right" three
athletes made all-around finals, athletes might be pulled from an
event. I think the case in point was Kerri Strug being pulled. The
second point, in relation to this, would be, if an athlete had a poor
compulsory round, but still was a proven threat in the all-around,
that any athlete that might prove a threat would be pulled from one
event to assure that other person's spot in finals.
In the past, before the 7-6-5 rule, when an athlete had mistakes and
was not in the top three on her team, we would see an "injury" crop
up. Now, it appears that will be a "passe" way of dealing with things.
The 7-6-5 rule might allow for a pull-out from one event that would
leave on three all-arounders.
Given that we are going to straight optionals after 1996, this may
become a moot point. I do not know what the competion format will be
regarding this change. Is it going to be like the US nationaks for the
junior women this year, where they person *two* sets of optionals? Or
will it be like the NCAA's, where only one set of optionals are
I'm sorry this came out so long. Sincerely, I just want to see if any
one else sees any possible problems with this system, and what people
think of the ethics that might go into the decision making process
with this new rule.
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 12:39:00 +1100
Subject: Rebecca Stoyel
Rebecca Stoyel was injured at the beginning of this year. I don't
know exactly what was wrong with her, but she had her foot in a cast
for a couple of months, and she went back to home to Adelaide (she
trains in Perth at WAIS) for a month or so.
At Nationals in May she competed very watered down routines - she had
to compete on each apparatus to be considered for Worlds. She went to
the Worlds training camp, but I'd say she struggled to come back from
the injury. I saw her in May, and she had grown quite a bit since
ps. Isn't it funny how all the Aussies are coming out of the woodwork
at this time of day? Everyone else is probably asleep!
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 09:46:00 +1100
Subject: Re: Ruth Moniz & Monique/Robin Allen (was Re: Worlds & some questions)
> When I was looking up the information about Ruth in Australia's
> Commonwealth Games team handbook, I noticed that the "Section
> Manager" for gymnastics was Robin Allen. It says that she is from
> Bruce, ACT and was an official at the World Championships (it
> doesn't mention which one(s)) as well as a manager for AIS. Does
> anyone know if she is Monique Allen's mother or is otherwise
> related to Monique? According to the date of birth listed, she
> turned 50 this year so she's in a plausible age range to be
> Monique's mother.
Yep, Robin Allen is Monique's mother. She currently works at the AIS
as house parent, and attends most of the big competitions as manager
or chaperone or just a general tag-along team member. She also
designs most of the leotards the girls wear - so you know who to
blame for any that you really hate (like the Barcelona one - I really
hated that, not too keen on the Brisbane Worlds one either). She's
been living at the AIS since about 1990 I think, although Monique was
there from around 1985 onwards.
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 1995 21:55:51 -0500
Subject: Re: 7-6-5 rule and "injuries"
> Subject: 7-6-5 rule and "injuries"
> Date sent: 29-OCT-1995 13:56:30
> The 7-6-5 rule has been in effect now for, what, three years. It seems
> to have had a reasonably positive impact, but I'm worried on two points
> of the new rule. Number one, which someone brought up a few months back,
> would be that in order to assure that the "right" three athletes made
> all-around finals, athletes might be pulled from an event. I think
> the case in point was Kerri Strug being pulled.
Kerr Strug being pulled? Could you be referring to the fact
that Jaycie Phelps did not compete on the floor, which guaranteed
Kerri would make it to AA finals? If so, I have a couple of comments.
Wasn't Jaycie just resting a sore knee?
Here's another point to ponder. Pulling Jaycie out of floor
made it interesting in a nummber of ways. Firstly, had both Phelps
and Miller competed on floor, then the US would have had four
potential qualifiers for the AA. This may have put less pressure on
Shannon to compete. As it stood in reality, had Shannon not competed
in the AA, the US would only have had two representatives (Moceanu and
Strug). Maybe it would have been a wise move to allow Phelps to
compete on floor (how bad was the knee anyway?)
I certainly hope that your comment wasn't implying that Strug
couldn't have qualified even if Phelps had done floor. I certainly
think she could have. I hope, Jennifer, that you will respond soon so
that we can clear this up. I hope my comments were appreciatable.
End of GYMN-L Digest - 29 Oct 1995