- Apr 23, 2014
- 84
- 53
Neither should a punch front vs punch front forward roll.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I hate, HATE punch front forward rolls. Luckily so do the coaches of my daughter's Senior 3 team. lol There's not a single PF, FR to be found ;)Neither should a punch front vs punch front forward roll.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
My quote from above: Please note, I'm just taking his example and NOT saying that was his circumstance, I think we have all had moments where we question decisions. I used your example and tried to be as clear as possible in stating that I was not stating this was your circumstance.
I disagree that there's "no arguing difficulty", some of the tumbling I've seen is not what I personally consider competition worthy and should not be counted in the ratio.
I hate, HATE punch front forward rolls. Luckily so do the coaches of my daughter's Senior 3 team. lol There's not a single PF, FR to be found ;)
But according to the rules as I understand them, if the skill is completed it counts. Execution is a separate score. I don't totally disagree with you, but under the rules, as they stand now, if you complete the skill you get credit.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I definitely agree that the rule needs to change. I have seen some SCARY tumbling put on the mat. I was just saying that as it stands now, any completed skill gets counted. I don't know exactly how to go about changing it, or how to develop a definition of a completed skill that is objective enough that it can be universally applied though.My definition of "completing a skill" is evidently different than most. I do not believe head grazing, twisting, or fetal position BWO's or BHS's are "completed skills", along with head grazing tucks, and severely under rotated fulls. I do believe there is a difference between "execution" and "safety" and feel very strongly coaches should not be rewarded for competing unsafe tumbling. I applaud any judge that refuses to count a skill as "complete" when it's putting an athlete's brain, back or knees at risk just to max out their difficulty score.
My definition of "completing a skill" is evidently different than most. I do not believe head grazing, twisting, or fetal position BWO's or BHS's are "completed skills", along with head grazing tucks, and severely under rotated fulls. I do believe there is a difference between "execution" and "safety" and feel very strongly coaches should not be rewarded for competing unsafe tumbling. I applaud any judge that refuses to count a skill as "complete" when it's putting an athlete's brain, back or knees at risk just to max out their difficulty score.
@cheer25mom I'm not sure the rule needs to change, I just think people are interpreting it in different ways. To me, under rotated anything, is not a "completed skill", and anything unsafe is not a "skill". I haven't seen enough score sheets, or asked a coach, to know if judges do or do not count what most would consider gasp worthy tumbling as complete, or not. Are there any coaches that can answer that question?
Yes, but for some coaches, they will keep doing it unless and until the score sheet makes them pay for it.The problem isn't that the judges give you credit for an unsafe skill. If the skill is performed it should get credit on the difficulty side of the score sheet. If its done poorly then you'll get hit on the execution side of the score sheet. If we let the judges decide if it should count or not, then that brings in a whole host of other problems concerning the subjectivity in judging of this sport.
The main problem is the fact coaches let them perform a skill they can't do safely. Also as big a problem is the parents that want Suzie on a level 3 team even though she should be level 2 or even 1, more than they want her to be safe. Fix those 2 problems and you'll stop seeing unsafe tumbling and the judges will never have to choose what should count.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
This has been the experience with my CP's level 2 team as well. They JUST make the 75% standing tumbling. They don't put unsafe tumbling on the floor. If everyone throws, they always hit the high difficulty range, even when a kid does something mental or just missteps and and the BHS looks awful. As long as it doesn't count as a tumbling touchdown it counts.In my experience, even really ugly slow bhs that land in the crouched position or have really bent arms are still being counted - it's just getting hammered in the technique section. The amount of times I've seen gyms put round-off, short pause arm swing ugly bhs on the floor.... ugh. It makes me cringe. They're literally sacrificing a point in technique just to gain however many tenths in difficulty.
I mean it's a balance. I would gladly take an ugly (but I'd never allow an unsafe) skill and take the hit on technique if it meant getting into the next difficulty range (majority, full team, etc.).Yes, but for some coaches, they will keep doing it unless and until the score sheet makes them pay for it.