Page 6

USA VS. CANADA- OLYMPIC QUALIFICATION MATCH York University - Toronto, Canada February 7 and 8, 1976 The USA competitive delegation was composed of the following gymnasts as selected by the Foreign Relations Committee for Women: Kathy Howard, Kolleen Casey, Ann Carr, Trish Reed, Roxanne Pierce, Debbie Wilcox, and Tammy Mannville - alternate. Official coaching staff was represented by Dale Flansaas, 1976 Olympic Coach and Bill Coco, serving as assistant. Other coaches present to assist with training sessions were: Ron Cresentini, Mary Welin, Mary Ann Hachette, and Rod Hill. Judges for the Women's Competition were: Head Judge - Mrs. Valerie Nagy representing FIG, Mrs. Mary Gould Canada, Mrs. Valerie Nye - acting neutral, Ms. Ursula Baer - neutral (Great Britain), and Mrs. Jackie Fie - USA. Both the men's and women's competition in compulsories were scheduled in the same gymnasium Saturday evening at York University Tait McKenzie Physical Education Building. The crowd was most acceptable in size for a compulsory competition and was most appreciative and rewarding for our gymnasts, who performed the compulsories on all events with exceptional international flair and technique to average 9.45 as a team with a compulsory total of 189.05. Seven USA gymnasts competed in all events with Mannville performing first in all four events with no possibility of a counting score as alternate. In vaulting we performed well totalling 4 7.10 for a 9.42 team average. We showed no identifiable fault that was common to all gymnasts. Each Yamashita performed seemed to be slightly lacking in only one area of technical execution. One execution showed too early a pike in preflight, another slightly insufficient hip rise, the next late pike, another late extension, one an insufficient length, etc. Carr's vault was superior in all categories of execution, receiving a 9.6. On the uneven bars, we again executed very well earning 47.05 for a 9.40 average. The most common fault occurred during the hecht dismount due to incorrect body position during flight and insufficient extension before landing. A total of 1.0 was lost from team score on this move alone. The other faults were

slight, but noticeable on i:he cast 'h turn-straddle amplitude, length of the LB gl ide, minor arm flexion at the end of the front hip circles, and insufficient height of the cast on HB preceding the hecht dismount. Debbie Wilcox performed almost flawlessly earning a 9.6 afte r breaking the LB on the hecht. The score could have been a 9.7 had this not occurred. We performed very solid beam routines to equal our vaulting total of 4 7.10, an average of 9.42 for the team. Only one of the 5 counting scores showed an error of 0.2 for any movement or element; all other errors were of a 0.10 nature with the exception of the dismount. With an improvement in the dismount height, completion of twist, and landing an additional 0 .7 could have been added to the counting scores. Casey performed a lovely solid routine with less than 0.1 deductions except on the dismount to score 9.55. Floor Exercise was definitely our superior event with a total of 4 7.80 team points, an average of 9.56! The most common error occurred with the second phase of the handspring step-out and dive handspring lacking slightly in amplitude. Other errors were visable in not more than 1/2 tenths. Howa rd performed brilliantly to score 9.7. Optionals were held Sunday evening for both men and women with a standing room only crowd - an audience that was both gymnastically educated and quick to show their enthusiasm with generous applause . With both men and women's events running simultaneously, the physical set up was necessarily somewhat congested. This might have been a factor causing the t1nsteady beam performances which occurred. In vaulting the gymnasts performed below the level at which they are capable. The team score totalled 46.70 for a 9.34 individual average. The girls performed 6 handspring full twists and 6 Tsukaharas. The 3 handspring fulls earned 27.95 and an equal score total was earned for the Tsukaharas. However, 3 handspring fulls and only 2 Tsukaharas counted toward the team total. In general the height, distance, and completion of turn in the post flight of the handspring

4

fulls could have h~en better, as they have been . during this year's competition. The Tsukaharas must show better defined position of tuck or pike, more complete opening and extension before landing, and the necessary force and proper angle of repulsion in order to accomplish these techniques. Landings in general could have been improved to add about 1.0 point to the team score. Casey 's handspring full tied with Wilcox's Tsukahara for a 9.40. Each of the girls has performed much better during the last 1 and 2 years of competition. During the uneven bar competition, we drew two 0.5 point deductions for hand supports on the mat after dismounts. Our resulting team score was only 46.30, or a 9.26 average, which could have easily been 1.0 full point higher without these two large errors. The level of superi.or difficulties, the risk and originality are definitely there. The errors evident are in the category of predominantly 0.1 deductions for lack of complete amplitude and optimal fluency . It was unfortunate also that two of the better executed routines were the two that faulted with the hand support on the dismounts, moving these two scores to the lower end of the team scores. Wilcox performed with her usual excellent technique and power to score 9.5, an exercise that could have received 9.6. As previously stated, the area around the beam was quite congested. Within about 8 feet of the beam was the parallel runway for men's long horse vault. Coaching, flashing of vault number, gymnast readiness, and start of the run were all taking place while the girls were competing on beam. Due to the vaulting in progress, it was not possible for two women judges to sit on that side of the beam. In retrospect, these two events should not have been run simultaneously. This might have contributed to the 6 falls by five of the seven USA gymnasts. We scored a very unfortunate 45.55 to average 9.11 on an event that we have internationally proven our excellent ability. It is possible that the beam score in this event could have been 1. 70 more. However, there were large errors, some fatigue due to the long meet, a great deal of risk in the routines, and nervousness

. •

Profile for USA Gymnastics

USGF News - March 1976  

USGF News - March 1976