Zhang Qingying - would you deduct 1.0 for a fall?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2023
- Former title included the “Yurchenko Loop,” but the loop aspect caused confusion and misinterpretation of the skill. According to the Code of Points the backward hip circle is optional.
The judges deducted for a fall for Zhang Qingying. Do you find this deduction too severe? It may have cost China a medal.
Included the originator of the Yurchenko skill and a clip of Groshkova as well, because, why not?
Update: the skill was performed in a similar fashion in event finals and not counted as a fall.
I own none of the visual footage and audio in this video.
FAIR-USE COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER:
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, commenting, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. 
Спорт
I wish they judged Wolf Turns on floor this harshly. The amount of atheletes that fall/roll out of them with no control.
Agreed!!!
I wish they’d deduct for the awkward, horrible arm flailing that occurs during Wolf turns. There is no beauty or grace on display when your arms are in frantic motion in an obvious attempt to keep you from toppling over. Ugh. I hate Wolf turns. 😂
Ican't stand wolf turns. I don't find anything graceful or beautiful about them. In fact I think they disrupt the flow and fluidity of the routines
The code should clarify what counts as a fall and what doesn't for this skill so it's not judged inconsistently
I don’t think it necessarily should count as a fall considering she didn’t touch the ground, but I think a .5 deduction would have been fair for grabbing the beam for support. She was pretty off-balance
Although she was off balance, the skill inherently includes a certain level of support at the hips, so personally I think Qingying deserved a lesser deduction than a full point (for a fall). If this continues to be an issue, perhaps the back hip circle should be included in the skill? Or like still rings (on strength moves at ring height), maybe head should not dip below beam level?
it's also interesting that under the COP the Teza does require the hip circle, which raises the question if anybody can submit a side flick flack 1/1 with no hip circle as a new skill
she technically broke rhythm and changed direction after contacting the beam, in order to complete the support element. :/ I could see a .5 deduction being suitable, not sure a full point was appropriate
Oh wait, whoa a whole point?! Yeah, no that's excessive. She *stayed* on the apparatus. Even .5 is a bit harsh; I think .3 would be more reasonable holy wow, a whole point?!
may be a bit esoteric, but this is reminding me of omelianchik vs shushonova re: roll out tumbling passes. The lightness Omelianchik brought to the roll out brought with it a sense of trustability. Whereas, for me, when I watched Shushunova do the roll-outs, I was terrified. I am reminded of that here with Zhang. Yurchenko had this lightness to her performance of the skill, but Zhang comes down with such force it looks concerning.
Beyond that, full agreement with what others have said. The direction in which her body lands, the need to adjust her hand position after the landing. Every time we saw it in the arena, my seatmates and I gasped like it was a fall. It didn't look or feel right, though she seemed just fine!
Love your analogy about Omeilianchik and Shushunova! Agreed!
Roll outs were scary no matter who did them.
As sad as it is, she should’ve counted a fall. She lands with her hips on the beam, goes the wrong way (forward) on the beam and grabs the beam to hold on instead of landing in front support. Front support looks like hands first+ arms being the only support with minimum body contact on the beam, and hips falling behind the beam (her hips fall forward). It would be like doing a release move on UB and landing on the bar- even if you catch yourself (like Qingying did- see her hands flip to hold herself on the beam) it’s definitely going to count as a fall. A “fall against apparatus” instead of a “fall off apparatus,” which is what most people expect a fall to look like.
PS: I’m not a hater I love her gymnastics and I love watching the Chinese team. It’s just very clear to me that she fell here.
There's a rule that you can't fall out of a wolf turn on floor, max you can get off is 0.3 for poor balance. The reason is basically that you're already so close to the floor, that it wouldn't be fair to count falls as falls or something. It's a dumb rule. But it IS a rule, and I don't see how that's different than this case.
@@erinm9445 Unfortunately, the WTC never approaches things in a holistic manner. It's why Tkatchevs are limited to 1 per entry, while Shaps (for ex) are not on UB... and why the Tsvdaridou ("Rulfova" mount) is a D when a handful of other Acro mounts were raised.... etc. So, whatever logic used to create that rule (which I agree, is dumb) is limited to the wolf turn alone.
They should just let judges, ya know, judge. Deduct between -0.05 and -0.50 on every element... we'd likely see a bell curve of sorts where 1 judge thinks it was a minor issue (-0.10), 1 thinks it was a fall (-0.50), and the middle 2-4 see it around -0.30, and the average gives us a fair assessment of what actually happened. The D Panel could then apply a Neutral penalty of -0.30 for a touch of the mat/apparatus and -0.50 for a fall on top of the E Panel's -0.10 to -0.50.
I don't know that I'd count it as a complete fall, but she NEVER did it well enough (in these clips) to get full credit. Yurkchenko, like, "floated" (?) through the entire skill...this gymnast (whose name I've forgotten and I didn't watch thr competition on TV) really kinda belly flopped it.
Very, VERY few gymnasts can do this (or the wold turn, or the side somi, or the koebut, or the Rudi vault, or any of the Maloney bar transitions well), and this gymnast does not appear to be one of them (at least for this move).
Having said that, I can't even *walk* on a balance beam and that isn't an exaggeration. So she's got mad respect for even trying it (*shudder*)
@@jjs5056 Sigh, yeah, you're right. I do kinda like your idea for judging. The problem is that any time you have such subjective judging you open up the door to corruption and favoritism, which were such huge problems in the 90s and earlier. They're still issues now, but not nearly as much.
I would like to see a subjective artistry/rhythm bonus on floor/beam, in place of some of the current artistry deductions, worth up to 0.3 or 0.5. Keep a few artistry deductions for things like extension that are important to every routine, but give gymnasts that are really bringing something extra to their expression and dance some credit for that, and I don't see how that can ever be objective.
You'd think they could take a holistic look at the whole code instead of slapping it together with whims and duct tape, but I'll be very surprised if that ever happens.
Oh, that’s exactly what I was trying to say in my comment, but you explained it much better.
Yes. She had no control and had to reverse grip the beam to keep herself from falling.
Grabbing the beam is a 0.5 deduction, so 0.5 is a good deduction to take instead (e.g. like simone's grip on beam at the rio balance beam finals)
@@ansonpang I disagree. If she wasn’t doing a side beam skill, especially the yurchenko, she would have been off. Because the nature of the skill, she has more room for error. It’s not a skill that you land on your feet and then grab because of a balance check. It’s the equivalent of being so off on a layout and falling while grabbing the beam on the way down with no control. The yurchenko without the loop is caught chest up, she literally fell, the beam just happened to catch her. If you fall on a leap but land on the beam it’s still a 1.0 fall. Just because it was in the way doesn’t mean it wasn’t a complete fail to do the skill in a recognizable way. It’s 1.0 for a fall on or against the apparatus. That’s exactly what it was and how it should have been scored.
No idea why anyone calls it a Yurchenko "LOOP" if the hip circle isn't completed, it is just a flick to hip support and that was popular throughout the 90's...she was very far forward for a hip support, so the deduction should have been .5
In the Code of Points it can be done with or without the loop (hip circle).
in the COP it's not named after anybody; the name "Yurchenko Loop" is not an official one
The camera angle wasn't great, but you can see when she lands the sideways trick that it is her chest that is supporting her and her hands are scrambling for purchase. I believe the rules state that the hands and arms must be the primary support, so yes, she 'fell' here because she was only saved by her chest keeping her on the beam.
No matter, it is an ugly half-move when the hip circle is deleted. It basically looks like a beam belly flop.
First of all that wasn't a Yurchenko loop cuz she didn't go around the beam like Yurchenko did period. Second she landed totally on her hips first instead of on her hands first and then shifting to her hips on the beam so technically it could be categorized as a fall (also executing it like this must be so much more painful than in the correct way). A shame, indeed a unique move in times of cook cutter routines and it'd nice to see her upgrading the skill to a truly Yurchenko loop if she's up to it, it'd be an eye candy for sure.
And also i don't think Zhang herself is calling what she is doing a Yurchenko loop, i think this was the commentators fault so no blame should be put on Zhang for that is not like she's going out and about doing a watered down version of a skill and calling it he full skill, it was really the commentators mistake here.
In the Code of Points you can do it with or without the back hip circle for D credit.
@@worldartgym Jesus so then get the freaking LOOP out of the skill name, give something else as name otherwise it's very contradictory
@@nekohuntress99 I wasn’t necessarily disagreeing with you, just letting you know there are two ways to perform the skill. Not looking to secure; rather have a civil discussion about the severity of the deduction.
From the CoP:
5.305
Flic-flac from side position to front support or with hip circle bwd
@@worldartgym i known hhhh sorry if my reply sounded aggressive, it wasn't towards you, i was just trying to emphasize how terrible the code of points can be especially with older lesser common skills. Like is insane to have the no hip circle version and the with hip circle version considered the same skill and valued the same when the with hip circle version is probably way harder to execute.
Oh okay good! I welcome dialogue with all worldartgym-ers, I never want to argue or have a hostile environment! ❤️
If not a fall, a major deduction. She clearly did not have balance/control
I do agree it was a fall. She CLEARLY wasn’t in control and had to pull herself back onto the beam.
I'm glad they showed older footage of her doing same move. Looks like she's not doing a Yurchenko at all and the older footage shows that. Can't make same mistake everytime.
She fell onto the apparatus. She's supposed to hit the beam on the side when she makes contact, yet she lands directly on TOP of it. I've never done a Yurchenko on beam, but I can imagine the loss of form that results in what she did, and that's a total fall.
You have never done a Yurchenko? Oh it's easy peasy!! 😂
I think it’s meant to be landed more on the side of the beam, rather than a fall on top… I think it was a fall.
I think it's fair of the judges to want to discourage this kind of "landing", and deduct a full point. The way she lands it now, she could easily crack some ribs, or worse, rupture the spleen or some other internal organ.
Yes. It's a fault . El yurchenko no está realizado correctamente. La posicion del cuerpo despues del salto no es correcta. La gimnasta vence el cuerpo hacia adelante y lo frena para no caer. Es una falta
The problem is sometimes she touches down with her hands and the rest of her follows which tells me she’s controlling the landing. Sometimes she lands way too draped over the beam and her hands are quickly readjusted to face the other way, which tells me her hands weren’t where they needed to be when she sandwiched, hence the fall. Land hands first, fingers facing forward then bring yourself down so you hips are on the beam, like you’re on the uneven bars…I wouldn’t see a problem. If you have your whole stomach on the beam….nope.
Touching the beam when you shouldn’t counts as a fall in and of itself, and she didn’t complete the skill while bracing in her hands to try to save it, so fall
That big balance beam? Sir it’s 4 inches wide
A fall includes grabbing the apparatus. In some of her execution she landed more cleanly than others and on some she did appear to be falling against the apparatus. She either needs to remove the skill or change the execution of it as it looks clumsy at best
She did not catch the beam.. the beam caught her. Its a fall .
Umm the ones that dont involve looping under the beam look lame and dangerous.
I would agree with the judges. I see it as a missed element since the expectation is an upward balanced position a la Yerchenco.
She misses the balance position and ends in a head down position absent extension of the upper body. She is so far out of position that the correction is obvious and there is nothing graceful about it. The hip circle can be optional but to complete the skill as invented the extension and balance point are essential.
Well said!
ok but in beam finals she almost landed excatly the same way and they did not count it as a fall hmmmm
also, remember that there are two type of falls in gymnastics, one being the most common when the gymnast falls and the other being when they’re falling out of a skill
You can fall off an apparatus or fall onto the apparatus.
a fall of sorts - not an actual fall off the beam, i see it being similar to when a gymnast stumbles and grips the beam to stay on but doesn't touch the floor. so not a full deduction. cant quite see 3 full points of deductions though? did they count it as 2 falls or something?
One fall so her execution would have been around an 8.0 without the issue.
Grabbing the beam is now a 1.0 deduction just like a fall off the beam. It used to be only 0.5 off, but they changed it either for this code or the last one.
So I don't see 3 full points no.. but her yurchenko doesn't seem very fluid at all and almost resembled a fall or mistake so that for me is a deduction but I think they were too harsh
That looks painful even when it's done right.
for me was not a completely fall, maybe some adjustments, but definitely not a fall
I agree with you. I’d love to know how the Code assesses the skill in terms of deductions.
@2FLIPS3TWISTS003 yiu come back!
@2FLIPS3TWISTS hopefully has infinite YT lives! ❤️
yes it was a fall. she let her stomach catch the beam for support. it was supposed to be her hands to catch support her flip
Broke my ribs watching it
How many points were taken off at the competition at 1:47? Because the error looked worse there.
She got a 7.7 execution so clearly not counted as a fall
It's hard for me to articulate, but that's a fall. Otherwise, how else can a fall be counted on this element? Other than catastrophic failure, it's basically guaranteed to land on the beam.
There are lots of ways to fall on this move. If your hips are too for forward or back, you'll slide right off the beam in one direction or the other, which surely happens occaisionally in training. Or if you miss your hands, you end up doing a backflip to the floor. It is still harder to fall on this skill than most other beam skills, but that's true of most moves where your center of gravity is down by the beam instead of up in the air. Such as the Korbut, or even the wolf turn. Yes, people do sometimes fall on their wolf turn, but it's pretty rare. Tons of elite gymnasts do a triple wolf, but almost none do an ordinary triple turn, called an Okino, because it is sooooooo much harder to stay on.
@@erinm9445she had to regrasp the beam in the opposite grip to keep from falling off the beam. It was a fall.
@@agent606 My comment was giving no opinion on whether this was a fall, it was responding to OP's claim that there are not really any other ways to fall on this move.
@@erinm9445 I was replying to the entire thread, ops comment included.
@@erinm9445People fall on wolf turns all the time. I remember one junior nationals where like 10 girls were taken out by the wolf turn.😂
She didn't seem in control of the routine, seemed to be chasing it. Long pauses, & that "fall," which I thought was definitely a fall.
It’s not a ‘fall.’ It’s a different move. She should challenge the score when they do that.
She cannot inquiry about the score, because E scores are not able to be inquired about, only the difficulty score can be challenged.
That shit looks like it hurts.
Ridiculous
The deduction should match the error. Seems very egregious.
This is one of my favorite beam skills and wish it was still used. I can say that about so many skills that have either been banned or have been given such low scores so that gymnasts don't even want to perform them anymore not just in one event but all of them. Women's gymnastics have lost so much of its style, gracefulness, and beauty and has become not much different then men's gymnastics. There's so much focus on strength and height and difficulty of skills so much so that there's very little dance left in floor and beam exercises and the uneven bars don't have a much transitioning between the high and low bar so much so that they might as well just start doing the high bar like the men. Plus there's very little uniqueness to the routines anymore, all the gymnasts perform the same handful of skills
i would give her a gold medal just for doing a move we haven’t seen in like two decades. points for uniqueness and creativity i say
If I were her coach I'd be taking this one out of her routine regardless - she clearly can't hit it consistently and it's a deduction magnet whether she gets the full point off for falling or not.
It' s not a fall from the beam but a fault. The element was not performed properly🤷🏻♀️😔
Such an amazing gymnast! However, it was a definite fall on to the apparatus imo. Her shoulders were well below the beam and there was no control.
No.
That isn't a fall , she just had a little trouble in the execution, but those judges were qualifying very weird this championships, lots of E-scores were just ridiculous . And that wasn’t a Yurchenko , was her own skill btw
Nah this is 100% a yurchenko loop. It’s been in the code of points since, they just recently removed her name from it. It can be done with or without the hip circle.
Wow! Beautifully done.
It was a fall. No question about it.
Form deduction not a fall she stayed on the apparatus 😊
All that buildup and the one that you’re asking if it’s a fall happened off camera 😂
Here’s a different angle for you:
ruclips.net/video/UTZrkyZECi4/видео.htmlsi=HPiHPNmS9qqMJQH7
This should be a totally different move because she did not to anything resembling the loop part of the move as its in the CoP. She basically only did a flip flop sideways to a stand. She should not even get credit for a Yurachenko Loop cause she didn't do one. Period.
I’m actually glad they counted it as a fall. Gymnastics is supposed to look athletic, bouncy and flowy. This Chinese gymnasts make elements look painful 😰. Let me tell you, judges DO NOT like that.
She wuz robbed!
it's a problematic element that she should stop performing; Zhou Yaqin's combination of side somi (D) + side tuck jump full (D) + side straight jump full (C) is much better
Just because it gives her trouble doesn’t mean she can’t perform it correctly. I think it’s a more original element, especially in combination, that she just needs to take this as a lesson and make sure the landing was more precise
@@davfb8622 it's hardly an "original" element if it was invented in the 80s. And she clearly hasn't mastered the technique for it. So between now and the Paris OGs, she's much better off training a safer but equally valuable element, especially one that her teammate has mastered. Look at Simone Biles, she never goes for any element or combination she hasn't basics mastered, it's about a balance between risk and reward
Better but hardly given cv since she’s so slow with it
@@Bxyxox Zhou was given CV for those side connections. She may have gotten 0.1 off for slow connection but each connection was worth 0.2 so she still ended up better off. And the slow connection deduction applies almost every time anyway, it's not a reason to avoid a valuation connection
@@poshbo a side leap series to a swing down she’s the only one doing that at the moment. Obviously others don’t want to take the risk, but she had been quite consistent at domestic comps, so I don’t think why she shouldn’t keep it. It’s her first international comp, she needs to learn to be consistent anyways
Well no I don’t agree with the judges, I can’t find 3 points in deductions. But she fell and an 8.0 E score is really good on balance beam in 2023. A fall is a whole point
This move was not even close to being completed as it should be, and definitely should have had at least 0.5 taken off. A fall? That’s a lineball call but I definitely don’t disagree with what the judges decided to do. She should definitely take the move out if she doesn’t want that to happen again.
It's a fall.
Not a fall ridiculous this is definitely going to discourage gymnasts to do unique skills
It’s going to discourage them from preforming poorly
So..where is this "fall"..I just see difficulty and perfection..
3 points seems extreme. Though she faltered on the move in question, she didn't leave the apparatus, so not a "fall". Judges are the worst part of sports like gymnastics.
You didnt even see it but you have an opinion it wasn’t a fall, haha
@@leykimayri ok post it on your channel at 1/20 speed so I can see it and I'll be happy to give you no views.
@@AG-iu9lv Check the comments there is a link to another video from a different angle. I’ll try to copy paste it as a reply here but sometimes RUclips automatically deletes links so if it doesn’t work, check the comments
@@leykimayri read my comment closer.
@@AG-iu9lv Again, that is a FALL. You don’t just fall off an apparatus, you also fall ONTO the apparatus. Jeez…. And by the way, the judges are almost all of them ex gymnasts, some of them even having won world and Olympic medals so for sure they know more than your ignorance does.
That was not a fall! These judges need to keep in touch with what are moves, both PAST and PRESENT!
That wasn't a fall; wasn't smooth and graceful, either. -0.3