THE OFFICIAL TECHNICAL PUBLICATION OF THE UNITED STATES GYMNASTICS FEDERATION

September 1987 Vol. 7, No. 3

Collegiate Injury Study

Non-Profit Organization U.S. Postage

PAID Permit No. 7867 Indianapolis, Ind.

Septe'!lber -~ 987

2

4-10

Inside This Issue

Two Year Study of Injury In Collegiate Women's Gymnastics

by W .A. Sands A.P. Newman C. Harner LE. Paulos B.B. Shultz

11 Safety Video Announcement

12-19 Modifications To Class 11-111 Compulsory Uneven Bars Routines

Greg Marsden Bill Sands Celene Darst Kathy Kelly

Cover photo © USGF 1987 by Dave Black

1104 86-87 Supp. to W Code

The USGF Supplement is a pub­lication of the USGF Women's Technical Committee and the offi­cial rule interpretation for USGF competitions.

The Supplement is a must for all professionals involved in the com­petitive aspect of Women's Artistic gymnastics.

Contents include new rules, in­terpretations, and clarification of in­ternational rules, adopted by the Women's Technical Committee, plus over 300 additional elements of A,B,C, and D values.

CHANGE OF ADDRESS AND SUBSCRIPTION INQUIRIES: In order to ensure uninterrupted delivery of TECHNIQUE magazine, notice of change of address should be made six to eight weeks in advance. For fastest service, please enclose your present mailing label. Direct all subscription mail to TECHNIQUE SUBSCRIPTIONS, Pan American Plaza, 201 S. Capitol Ave. , Suite 300, Indianapolis, IN 46225. POSTMASTER: Send address change to TECHNIQUE, Pan American Plaza, 201 S. Capitol Ave., Suite 300, Indianapolis, IN 46225.

TECHNIQUE is published quarterly for $12.00 by the United States Gymnastics Federation, Pan American Plaza, 201 S. Capitol Ave., Suite 300, Indianapolis, IN 46225 (Phone: 317-237-5050). Third class postage paid at Indianapolis, IN. Subscription price: $12.00 per year in United States; all other countries $24.00 per year. Back issue single co­pies $2.00 plus $1 .00 postage/handling. All reasonable care will be taken, but no responsibility can be assumed for unsolicited material; enclose return postage. © 1987 by USGF and Technique. All rights reserved. Printed in USA.

For safety measures the USGF recommends that NO JEWELRY OF ANY KIND be worn during any gymnas­tics training and competition , nor during any coaching activity. Even though various photographs published in USA GYMNASTICS show gymnasts wearing jewel­ry, it is not part of the proper uniform.

Vol. 7, No. 3

Publisher Mike Jacki

Education/Safety Editor Dr. Gerald George

Production Michael G. Botkin

UNITED STATES GYMNASTICS FEDERA­TION BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Executive Director: Mike Jacki . Athlete Representatives: Lydia Bree; Peter Vidmar; Linda Kardos; Tom Beach; Kathy Johnson; Tim Daggett; Kelly Garri­son. Amateur Athletic Union: Jerry Hardy. Amer­ican Sokol Organization: Norma Zabka. Amer­ican Turners: Harry Warnken. Members at Large: Linda Chencinski. NCAA Gymnastics Coaches­Men: Fred Roethlisber_ger, University of Minneso­ta. NCAA Gymnastics Coaches-Women: Judi Avener, Penn State University. National Associa­tion for Girls and Women m Sports: Dr. Mimi Murray, Sprin~field College. National Associa­tion of Women s Gymnastics Judges: Dale Brown. NCAA: Sylvia Moore, Oregon State University; Gail Davis, Rhode Island College; Jerry Miles, do NCAA; Wayne Young, Brigham Young Universi­ty. NAIA: Bonnie Morrow. NHSGCA: john Brink­worth . National Federation of State High School Athletic Assoc. : Sharon Wilch; Susan True. National Jewish Welfare Board: Courtney Shank­en. NJCAA: Dave Rowlands, Truman College.

• NGJA: Mike Milidonis. USAIGC: Ed Knepper. Men's Elite Coaches Assoc.: Jim Howard, Uni­versity of Nebraska . USECA for Women: Roe Kreutzer; Steve Whitlock. Youni; Men's Christian Assoc.: Cliff Lothery. Jr. Boys Gym. Coaches Assoc.: Rich Boccia. President: Mike Donahue.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: President: Mike Donahue. Secretary: Judi Avener. Vice President: Jim Howard. Executive Director: Mike Jacki . FIG Technical Committee: Jackie Fie. FIG Rhythmic Technical Comm. : Andrea Schmid . FIG Men's Technical Committee: Bill Roetzheim. Vice Presi­dent for Women: Sue Ammerman . President Emeritus: Bud Wilkinson. Athlete Representa­tives: Kathy Johnson; Peter Vidmar; Larry Gerald. Members at Large: Mike Milidonis; Linda Chen­cinski.

Associate Content Editors SPORTS MEDICINE COMMITTH Merrill A. Ritter, M.D. SAFETY COMMITTEE Dr. Marc Rabinoff EDUCATION COMMITTEE Dr. Garland O"Quinn BIOMECHANICS COMMITTEE Dr. Marlene Adrian, Director SPORTS PSYCHOLOGY COMMITTEE Dr. Keith Henschen, Ph.D. EXERCISE PHYSIOLOGY COMMITTEE Dr. Pat Eisenman, Ph.D.

Unless expressly ldentlfled to the contrary, all art icles, starements and views printed ht::rdn are auributed soley to the autho r and the Un ited States Gymnastics Fede ration expresses no opin· ion thereon and ass um~s no responsibilit y thereof.

Technique

Call toll-fi-ee for ordering information

1-800-345-4087 In PA, AK, HI, and Canada, call collect , 215 -376-6522.

With the help of some of the best gymnasts in the country, Elite/ Gym-Kin has developed new Sleek Fit, the ultimate fit in competitive leotards. Elite/Gym-Kin's new Sleek Fit hugs the contours of your bod)~ mirroring your move­ments, creating long flowing lines of grace.

VVINNERS VVEAR

There's more! Elite/Gym-Kin has also developed a new Shadow­proof Lining, optional on any special order leotard, that elim­inates "show-through."

New Sleek Fit. New Shadow­proof Lining. And much, much more. All in our new 56 page, 1987-88 catalog. Send for yours today!

Coaches/ Instructo rs send catalog request o n school o r business letterhead. All others , send $3.50 to: The Elite/Gym-Kin , 1230 Spruce Street, Reading, PA 19602

A Two Year Study Of Injury In Collegiate Women's Gymnastics

4

W.A. Sands, A.P. Newman, C. Harner, LE. Paulos and B.B. Shultz

University of Utah and

Salt Lake City Knee and Sports Medicine Center

Injury in gymnastics is a complex and multifacet­ed problem. The gymnast, coach, trainer, sports medicine physician, and others are involved in the injury assessment and treatment process, with slightly different orientations. They all seek to

avoid injuries when possible. Considerable energy and time are devoted to understanding the injury process, results, and costs, both in human and monetary terms.

Many authors have sought to determine the epidemi­ology of gymnastics injuries at a variety of levels. Snook (1979, 1985) at the college level, Garick and Requa (1978, 1980) at the high school and college level, Weik­er and Ganim (1982) and Pettrone and Ricciardelli (1987) at the club level, and Sands (1981) at the com­petitive club level have all approached slightly differ­ent aspects of the injury issue. Some have even ven­tured opinions on how gymnastics might alter its rules to decrease the incidence and severity of injuries (Hun­ter & Torgan, 1983). Many coaches have a variety of opinions on the predisposition to injury and other relat­ed topics.

The purpose of this study was to identify certain in­jury characteristics of one successful collegiate wom­en's gymnastics team. A secondary purpose was to as­sess those injuries that do not conform to the typical definition of injury in previous studies (Chambers, 1979; Garrick & Requa, 1980; Snook, 1979; Whiteside, 1980).

A summary of the type of injury definitions common­ly used might be described as: Body ·part damage resulting in the missing of one or more practice ses­sions and/or requiring a visit to a sports medicine phy­sician or therapist. The injuries most commonly suffered by gymnasts are not severe enough to result in missing practice or require the intervention of a phy­sician, but they may result in diminished performance capacity. The additional criteria proposed here is that injuries in gymnastics are "skill specific."

Skill specificity refers to the fact that even if a gym­nast severely sprains an ankle, which usually sidelines an athlete in another sport, it simply means that the gymnast cannot tumble and vault. She will usually be able to perform on the uneven bars while being care­ful not to land on the injured ankle. Therefore, she still practices, but avoids those skills that cause pain. By studying the injury patterns of gymnasts we hope to make training more successful by preventing injury.

Kelly Garrison-Steves has found the hectic competitive sched­ule of the NCAA keeps her fitter. (USGF photo © 1987 by Dave Black).

Methods and Materials

The subjects were college age female gym­nasts; members of the 1984-1985 (!':! = 1 O) and 1985-86 lli = 13) University of Utah women's gymnastics team. The injury infor­mation included records from each training

day. An injury was defined as any damaged body part that would interfere with training that day. The data col­lection was performed by each gymnast, recording her own information at the beginning of each training ses­sion . The data were entered via an interactive computer program run on a personal computer placed in the gymnasium.

The records for each day included: 1. Attendance and injury date. 2. New injury or old injury. 3. Body part injured. 4. Event or activity where the injury occurred . 5. Skill the injury occurred on. This data collection scheme was aimed at determin­

ing when the injuries were occurring, who was being injured, what body parts were being injured, what skills were responsible, and which events and/or activities

Technique

were involved. A new or acute injury was an injury re­cored for the first time. An old or chronic injury was a pre-existing injury that still bothered the gymnast.

The definition of an injury in this study centered around whether the damaged body part would inter­fere with training. Pettrone and Riccardell i (1987) de­fined injury similar to the definition used in this study. Diminished performance is of great interest to the coach and athlete, and ultimately the sports medicine practitioner. The results of decreased performance capability and psychological stress, may be on in­creased likelihood of serious injury. In an effort to pre­vent injury we should become aware of injuries that may not be seen by the physician and may not require ab­stention from training.

The comparison of injury rates between the 1984-85 and 1985-86 seasons requires some adjustment of data. In order to accurately compare the two seasons by number of gymnasts and training exposures the fol­lowing ration was calculated.

Number of Injuries = Relative Injury Ratio Gymnasts * Exposures

Whiteside (1980) calculated a similar ratio and mul­tiplied the result by 1000 to obtain integers. The results of the injury ratios in this study, multiplied by 1000, are also included in the appropriate tables. Obviously, if there are more gymnasts and/or more training ses­sions, there is a greater probability of injury. This ratio was used to normalize the data so that the numbers of injuries were relative to the numbers of gymnasts and training sessions involved.

RESULTS

Incidence of Injury Per Exposure

Descriptive data were calculated to deter­mine if there were any differences be­tween the two training seasons. The 1984-85 season included 1 O gymnasts at­tending an average of 62.4 iliQ = 12.18)

training sessions, with a range of 40 to 76 individual sessions. The 1985-86 season included 13 gymnasts attending an average of 77.9 (SD= 27.35) training sessions, with a range of 28 to 108 individual sessions see Table 1.

The 1985-86 season had many more exposures (gymnasts times training sessions) with a total of 1012 to the 624 training sessions of 1984-85. This represents an increase of 62 percent in athlete-exposures. The difference in number of exposures is partly due to the increased number of team members. There was an ac­tual increase in training sessions; however, as demon­strated by the eight repeating gymnasts who had a to­tal of 493 exposures in 1984-85 while totalling 689 ex­posures in 1985-86. These totals represented a 40 per­cent increase in exposures for the gymnasts participat­ing in both seasons.

Technique

Injury Information University of Utah Women 's Gymnastics

Table 1 Attendance and Relative Injury Ratio By Team Member

Subj 84-85 New Relative Relative 85-86 New Relative Relative Code Trainings lnj. lnj.Ratio lnj.Aatlo Trai nings lnj. lnj.Ratlo lnj. Ratio

· 1000 ·1000

A 96 0.0079 7 .9 B 55 6 0 .0096 9.6 c so 0.0010 1.0 D 76 0 .0048 4.8 E 68 0 .0048 4.8 100 9 0.0089 8 .9 F 75 0.0080 8 .0 93 3 0.0030 3 .0 G 40 0.0080 8.0 67 10 0.0099 9 .9 H 4 1 3 0 .0030 3 .0 I 61 0 .0064 6.4 100 7 0.0069 6 .9 J 58 0.0112 11.2 89 7 0.0069 6 .9 K 108 1 0.0010 1 .0 L 28 3 0 .0030 3 .0 M 74 0 .0064 6.4 100 11 0 .0109 10.9 N 72 0.01 28 12.8 100 5 0 .0049 4 .9 0 45 0.0144 14 .4 40 2 0 .0020 2.0

Mean 62.40 5.40 0.0087 8.7 77.85 5 .38 0.0053 5 .3 Tot 624.00 54.00 0.0865 86.5 1012.00 70.00 0.0692 69 .2 Injuries/Exposure 0.0865 0.0692

The 1984-85 sum of the injury ratios, .0865, indicates that there was an 8.65 percent chance of any gymnast recording a new injury on any particular training day during this period. The 1985-86 season showed a decrease in this probability to 6.92 percent. The differ­ence in the sums of the relative injury ratios implies that the 1985-86 program reduced the likelihood of new in­jury per exposure. A matched pairs !-test of relative injury ratios of the eight repeating athletes did not reach significance (! (7) = .988, Q .05). However, th is may be due to the small sample size.

Incidence of Injury Per Month

The time history of the injuries is divided into injuries on a per month basis. The injuries per month are shown in Table 2 and Figure 1. These results show that the injury rates

· on a per month basis are quite similar. In particular, the months of November and January ap­pear to be most likely to produce injury. A Spearman rank-order r (rho) correlation coefficient calculated for the two seasons on the number of injuries per month was .86 (Q< .05, !:! = 8). This indicates that a moderate to high relationship of ranks exists between injuries sus­tained from the first year to the second. The coefficient of determination r (rho) was .86 (Ozer, 1985) indicating that 86 percent of the variability in the incidence of in­jury per month in 1985-86 could be predicted by the corresponding results in 1984-85.

Table 2 New Injuries By Month

Month 1984·85 Percent 1985·86 Percent Injuries Injuries

Sep 10 18.5 7 10.0 Oct 11 20.4 9 12.9 Nov 10 18.5 . 18 25.7 Dec 4 7.4 6 8 .6 Jan 10 18.5 17 24.3 Feb 5 9 .3 7 10.0 Mar 3 5.6 6 8 .6 Apr 1 1.9 0 0 .0

Means 6.750 per month 8.750 per month Totals 54.000 100.0 70.000 100.0 lnj/Exp 0.087 0 .069

•Missing three weeks of data In November due to computer repair.

5

6

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Sep

New Injuries By Month 1984-85 & 1985-86

Figure 1

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr

Months

1984-85 Injuries 1985-86 Injuries

Percentages

Unfortunately, the continuity of data in the 1984-85 season was disrupted by a computer breakdown dur­ing three weeks of early November in 1984. This result­ed in a loss of approximately 12 training sessions. Therefore, one should interpret the time history infor­mation with a measure of caution . Since the computer failed during three weeks in November, 1984-if it could be assumed that two or more new injuries would have occurred during this time period, then the Spear­man rank-order correlation would have been .94 due to the raising of November, 1984 to the highest ranked month in 1984. This also increases the coefficient of determination (!: (rho)) (Ozer, 1985) to .94. This would indicate that 94 percent of the variability in the inci­dence of injury by months of participation could be predicted by the previous year.

(813) 643-0050

For Low Prices call

NAPLES GYM SUPPLY

Specializing in Gymnastics & Weight Lifting Equipment

• NGS Mats • York Barbell • ucs • Universal • AAI • Little Tikes

568 Industrial Blvd . • Naples, Florida 33942

Discussion

Gymnastics Injury

The young athletes ages 6 to 17 years studied by Chambers (1979) were injured twice as frequently in unsupervised activi­ties as in organized sports, including gym­nastics. Whiteside (1980), in comparing

NAIRS data for men and women from similar sports, such as basketball, gymnastics, and baseball/softball , determined a relative injury ratio for gymnastics using a ratio similar to that calculated here.

The results of the Whiteside study showed that basketball had the highest relative injury incidence with a value of 19.5 for women and 15.9 for men , gymnas­tics was ranked second with 9.4 for women and 7. 7 for men. Softball for women was third with a ratio of 3.1 and baseball for men was third with a value of 2.9. Gar­rick and Requa (1980) determined that the injury rate in womens' gymnastics is the highest in women 's sports and slightly higher than the rate seen in men's sports, except football and wrestl ing. They demonstrat­ed that the injury rate in women 's gymnastics is not too dissimilar from women 's softball , cross country, or track and field.

They also mentioned that there was no evidence from their study to suggest that gymnastics had an unusually high incidence of severe injury. Acute injury rates per participant were 12/100 for class students (Weiker & Ganim, 1982), 39/100 for high school and college com­petitors (Garrick & Requa, 1980), 2.4/100 for all skill levels and 5/100 for competitors (Pettrone & Ridciardel­li , 1987), and 56.8/100 for Class I club gymnasts (Weik­er & Ganim, 1982).

The data collected here does not involve gymnasts across several programs and a relatively small sam­ple. The per participant injury rate per season in this study is reflected in the mean values of injuries per par­ticipant, not per 100 participants. In the 1984-85 sea­son the mean number of new injuries per gymnast was 5.40 while the mean number of new injuries in 1985-86 was 5.38. These indicate that each athlete was injured more than 5 times per season. These relatively higher results are most likely due to the more encompassing definition of injury used in this study.

The relevant epidemiological information on gymnas­tics injury indicates that gymnastics injury for women has a relatively high incidence. This is demonstrated at all competitive levels where 39 percent to 57 per­cent of the competitors have been shown to become injured enough to miss training or require a visit to a sports medicine physician .

The discrepancies in the supporting statistics and conclusions drawn may be the result of sampling from different gymnastics populations. Gymnastics compe­tition occurs in strata determined by ability and qualify­ing scores. Injury rate appears to be related to the lev­el of performance of the gymnast.

Technique

Incidence of Injury by Months

The time history results are relevant obser­vations due to the fact that the gymnasts are preparing and executing new routines at times which follow periods of reduced in­tensity training, such as skills training or a

short vacation such as Christmas break. Sands (1981) showed that competition injuries in club gymnasts oc­curred most frequently during January, in a two year study of club injury incidence from insurance compa­ny records. During the month of November many gym­nast are preparing new routines for the upcoming sea­son . These new injuries may be the result of increased fatigue during performance of longer combinations and routines, and/or hurried attempts to prepare routines with skills that are not quite ready for inclusion in the routine. The addition of competition anxiety and stress may also be a factor (Bergandi, 1985).

Events and Activities

0 our study showed the incidence of injury by events to be led by uneven bars in 1984-85 (24 percent) and by floor exercise in 1985-86 (27.1 percent). The second ranks went to nongymnastics activity

(22.2 percent) in 1984-85 and all skills (24.3 percent) in 1985-86. Weiker and Ganim (1982) determined that club gymnasts were most likely to be injured on balance beam, with floor exercise and uneven bars roughly sharing the second rank. Balance beam accounted for 46.3 percent of the total injuries reported. Uneven bars showed 24 percent of the injuries and floor exercise accounted for 22.2 percent of the total. Hunter and Tor­gan (1983), in calling for a reevaluation of scoring to change the emphasis on "sticking" dismounts, consi­dered dismounts to be very hazardous. They reported a high incidence of injury with twisting dismounts. Among 11 knee injured women gymnasts sustaining 12 major knee injuries, a majority were involved with twisting dismounts. Only one such severe injury oc­curred during tumbling on floor exercise. Garrick and Requa (1980) showed floor exercise had the highest incidence of injury with 38 percent , balance beam was second with 21 percent, uneven bars third with 18 per­cent, vaulting with 5 percent, and finally trampoline was responsible for the remaining 18 percent in high school gymnasts.

Their analysis of college female gymnasts showed a slightly different distribution of injuries on each event. The floor exercise was responsible for 47 percent of the injuries, "other" was 23 percent , the uneven bars and vaulting were third with 12 percent each, and balance beam resulted in 6 percent of the injuries. Trampoline was not included in the college training . Sands (1981) determined that vault (29.4 percent) and floor exercise (29.4 percent) were the most common activities to injure club gymnasts in competition . He showed that uneven bars resulted in 24.51 percent of the injuries while balance beam accounted for 15.69 percent of the injuries reported. Pettrone and Ric­ciardelli (1987) ranked the events in incidence of inju-

Technique

ry with floor exercise first followed by balance beam and vault.

The injury pattern due to events and activities ap­pears somewhat inconsistent between strata of partic­ipation, although floor exercise is frequently responsi­ble for the highest proportion of injuries. The results of this study are in agreement with some of the previ­ous investigations and not with others. It appears that across the board generalization regarding the role of events and activities in the injury process is inappropriate.

The nature of each gymnastics program changes from year to year at the college level. The gymnasts change with new freshmen arriving and graduating seniors leaving. The type of problems that the coach faces and the strengths and weaknesses of the gym­nasts contribute greatly to the type of training plans that are undertaken. The gymnasts in this study were weak as a team on tumbling and vaulting, therefore the num­ber of repetitions and time spent on these activities were increased. This may have accounted for the in­creased frequency of injury on floor exercise and all skills (i .e., overuse-syndrome).

New Injuries by Body Parts

T he data obtained here corresponds with in­formation obtained by others. Garrick and Requa (1980) showed that injuries to vari­ous body parts in their collegiate data result­ed in the following :

Garrick & Requa (1980) Body Part Percentage

1. Head 6 2. Spine and Trunk 18 3. Upper Extremity 18 4. Lower Extremity 60

Knee 19 Ankle 25

This Study Percentage

1984-85 1985-86

1.9 1.4 13.0 15.7 16.7 21 .4 68.5 61 .4

1.8 8.6 22.2 14.3

Snook (1985) determined that the lower extremity suffered more than half of the total number of injuries sustained . Snook (1979) studied collegiate women's gymnastics injuries for five years and determined that trunk had the lowest incidence of injury, the upper ex­tremity had a higher incidence, while the lower extremi­ty suffered the highest incidence. Weiker and Ganim (1982) determined that club gymnasts also had the highest incidence of injury to the lower extremity. They showed that overuse syndrome injury had the highest incidence at the knee, followed in order by the ankle and foot .

They reported that the ankle, foot, and wrist were in­jured with equal likelihood. The most likely overuse syn­drome problem was chondromalacia patella and se­cond was shin splints. Sands (1981) showed competi­tion injuries followed a similar pattern. Lower extremi­ty injuries accounted for 53.9 percent of the total inju­ries . The injuries to the trunk accounted for 23.3 per­cent while upper extremity and head accounted for 23 percent of the total injuries. Whiteside (1980) reported that the forearm/hand had the highest incidence of in­jury followed by ankle, foot, torso, and shoulder/arm.

The lower extremity appears to be the most likely lo­cation of injury in the female gymnast. This would fol-

7

8

low from the types of activities that the female gymnast performs. Three of the four events are performed primarily on the lower extremity.

All Injuries by Body Patts

This analysis attempts to show a type of in­jury problem faced by the gymnast which is not apparent in studies of new injuries only, or only those injuries that were seri­ous enough to require medical attention.

The injured body part in the "all injuries" category of the chronic injuries does impair performance, but the injury is below a threshold of pain or dysfunction that would result in the termination of training for a period of time and/or a visit to a physician. The total number of reportings of these types of injuries was 658 in 1984-85 and 1139 in 1985-86. This can be compared with the total number of new injuries sustained which was 54 in 1984-85 and 70 in 1985-86. And, the total number of training sessions which was 624 in 1984-85 and 1012 in 1985-86. The injuries per session however, were almost the same, 1.05 in 1984-85 and 1.13 in 1985-86.

The difference in the magnitude of these numbers can give an idea of what the gymnast faces during train­ing, and the near certainty that a gymnast trains with an injury at some time. Conversely, some gymnasts train with several injuries that may inhibit their ability to perform.

In other studies (Chambers, 1979; Garrick & Requa 1978, 1980; Snook, 1979; Whiteside, 1980) the primary criteria for defining an injury was whether or not the gymnast had to cease practicing, or the damage was substantial enough that the athlete had to see a train­er and/or physician : The "all injury" information is in­dicative of why the common definition of injury is not fully reflective of the injury problem facing female gymnasts.

The question of whether these common daily inju­ries have an impact on the severe injuries due to a diminished performance capacity remains to be resolved. The sum of the relative injury ratios for the two seasons using the "all injury" information shows that the gymnasts were more likely to record an injury in 1985-86. The 1984-85 sum of "all injury" ratios was 1.055 while the sum of the 1985-86 ratios was 1.126. These ratios indicate that a gymnast will record some kind of injury, on the average, every training day. Moreover, at least one athlete will record more than one injury. The increased relative injury ratio in 1985-86 in­dicates that the gymnasts had more nagging and old injury reports than they did in 1984-85. This informa­tion does not appear to support the idea that a chroni­cally injured gymnast is more likely to suffer a new in­jury since the new injury ratios showed a decrease in the 1985-86 season.

Incidence of Injury by Events and Activities

The events and/or activities considered in this study were the vault , uneven bars, balance beam, floor exercise (including tumbling) , nongymnastics (i.e., injuries not as a result of training), and all skills (see

Table 3, Figure 2) . All skills, refer to injuries that have had an insidious onset and the gymnast cannot recall any particular accident that resulted in the damage. This involves overuse syndrome injuries since there was no acute cause.

In the 1984-85 season the event most responsible for new injury was the uneven bars (24.1 percent) fol­lowed closely by nongymnastics activity (22.2 percent). Nongymnastics activity included many unusual acci­dents such as kicking a table and slipping on the ice. In the 1985-86 statistics there are apparent changes in the distribution of injuries by event . The highest in­cidence of new injuries occurred on floor exercise (27.1 percent) with "all skills " ranking second (24.3 percent). Uneven bars dropped to third in rank (21.4 percent) which represents a decrease of 2.7 percent from the 1984-85 results.

Event 1984-85 Percent Injuries

Vault 6 .0 11.1 Bars 13.0 24.1 Bean 6.0 11.1 Floor 8.0 14.8 Non-G 12.0 22.2 Al!Sk 9.0 16.7

Means 9.0 Total 54.0 100.0

28

26 ~

24 ---1

22 ---1

20 ---1

18 ---1

16 ---1

14 ---1

12 ---1 f--

10 -

I--8 -

6 -

4 -

2 -

0 Vault

Table 3 New Injuries By Event

lnj/Exp lnj/Exp 1985-86 Percent lnj/Exp lnj/ Exp ·1000 Injuries · 1000

0.0096 9.6 6.0 8 .6 0.0059 5.9 0.0208 20.8 15.0 21.4 0.0148 14.8 0.0096 9.6 8.0 11.4 0.0079 7.9 0.0128 12.8 19.0 27.1 0.0188 18.8 0.0192 19.2 5.0 7.1 0.0049 4.9 0.0144 14.4 17.0 24.3 0 .0168 16.8

0.0144 14.4 11 .7 0 .011 5 11.5 0.0865 86.5 70.0 100.0 0.0692 69 .2

New Injuries By Event 1984-85 & 1985-86

Figure 2

I--

Bars Beam

Events

Floor Non-Gym All Skills

CJ 1984-85 Injuries 1985-86 Injuries

Incidence of New Injuries by Body Part

Table 4 shows the results of the two seasons with regard to new injuries and body parts. A comparison of relative injury rates be­tween the two seasons shows that large decreases occurred in the ankle, shin,

groin, hip, and hand. Increases were observed in knee, back, hamstring, and wrist . It appears that the in­creases in relative injury rate were not as dramatic as the decreases.

Technique

Table 4 New Injuries By Body Part

Body 1984-85 Percent lnj/Exp lnj/Exp 1985-86 Percent lnj/Exp lnjfExp Part Injuries ·1000 Injuries · 1000

Toe 2.9 0 .0020 2 .0 Foot 1.9 0 .0016 1.6 2.9 0.0020 2 .0 Heel 3 .7 0 .0032 3 .2 4 .3 0 .0030 3 .0 Achil 1.9 0 .0016 1.6 Ankle 12 22 .2 0 .0192 19.2 10 14 .3 0 .0099 9.9 Peron 1.9 0 .0016 1.6 Calf 2.9 0 .0020 2 .0 Shin 13.0 0.0112 11 .2 12.9 0 .0089 8 .9 Knee 1.9 0 .0016 1.6 8.6 0 .0059 5 .9 Thigh 1.9 0 .0016 1.6 Hamst 3.7 0 .0032 3. 2 7.1 0 .0049 4 .9 Groin 11 . 1 0 .0096 9 .6 2 .9 0 .0020 2 .0 Hip 5.6 0 .0048 4 .8 2.9 0 .0020 2.0 Tailb 1.9 0.0016 1.6 1.4 0 .0010 1.0 Back 7 .4 0 .0064 6 .4 10.0 0.0069 6 .9 Rib 1.4 0 .0010 1.0 Shoul 3.7 0.0032 3 .2 2.9 0 .0020 2 .0 Neck 1.9 0.0016 1.6 Teeth 1.4 0 .0010 1.0 Arm 1.9 0 .0016 1.6 Elbow 1.4 0 .0010 1.0 Wrist 5 .6 0.0048 4 .8 10.0 0 .0069 6.9 Hand 7.4 0 .0064 6 .4 7 .1 0 .0049 4 .9 Flnge 1.9 0 .0016 1.6 2 .9 0 .0020 2 .0

Means 2.8 0.0046 4.6 3.7 0.0036 3.6 Total 54 100.0 0 .0865 86.5 70 100.0 0.0692 69 .2

The percentages of total injuries reflects a decrease in the ankle injuries from 22.2 percent in 1984-85 to 14.3 percent in 1985-86. Groin injuries decreased from 11 .1 percent to 2.9 percent. Back injuries increased slightly from 7.4 percent to 10 percent. Hamstring in­juries increased from 3.7 percent to 7.1 percent. Wrist injuries showed the largest increase from 5.6 percent to 1 O percent.

The lower extremity accounted for 68.5 percent of the new injuries sustained in 1984-85. In the 1985-86 season 61.4 percent of the new injuries were to the low­er extremity. The upper extremity resulted in 16. 7 per­cent of the injuries in 1984-85 and 21.4 percent of the new injuries in 1985-86. The torso resulted in 13.0 per­cent of the injuries in 1984-85 and 15. 7 percent of the new injuries in 1985-86. Again , a matched pairs t-test of body part relative injury ratios did not reach statisti­cal significance in evaluating the difference between the two seasons (!(22) = -1.31, Q .05).

All Injuries By Body Parts

' 'A II injuries" refers to the combina­tion of new (first time) and old (pre-existing) injuries. This anal­ysis reflects what body parts are most likely to impair performance

and provides a rough idea of the severity of the problem. Severity is reflected in the number of report­ings of a particular body part. For example, the gym­nast with an injured back may report the injured back every day for the entire season. This indicates that the back injury was not severe enough that the athlete could not train, but she was always hampered by the injury. The information for this categorty is listed in Ta­ble 5.

The back led all body parts during both seasons for the total number of recurrent reports. In 1984-85 the back resulted in 31.5 percent of the reportings while in 1985-86 the reportings accounted for 27 percent of the total. The 1985-86 season also showed reductions in heel, peroneal, knee, and hip reports. The increases in the 1985-86 season were seen in achilles tendon,

Technique

Tables All Injuries Reported By Body Part

Body 1984-85 Percent lnj/Exp lnJIExp 1985-86 Percent lnj/Exp lnj/Exp Part Injuries ·1000 Injuries ·1000

Toe 13.0 1.1 0.0128 12.8 Foot 8.0 1.2 0 .0128 12.8 13.0 1.1 0 .0128 12.8 Heel 23.0 3 .5 0 .0369 36.9 5 .0 0 .4 0.0049 4 .9 Achll 17.0 2.6 0.0272 27 .2 131 .0 11 .5 0.1294 129.4 Ankle 65.0 9 .9 0 .1042 104.2 68.0 6.0 0 .0872 67 .2 Peron 47.0 7.1 0 .0753 75.3 Calf 1.0 0.1 0 .0010 1.0 Shin 22.0 3.3 0 .0353 35.3 203.0 17.8 0.2006 200.6 Knee 33.0 5.0 0 .0529 52.9 27 .0 2.4 0 .0267 26 .7 Thigh 8.0 1.2 0 .0128 12.8 Ham st 8.0 1.2 0 .0128 12.8 31.0 2.7 0 .0306 30.6 Groin 22.0 3.3 0 .0353 35.3 2 .0 0.2 0 .0020 2.0 Hip 79.0 12.0 0 .1266 126.6 3 .0 0 .3 0 .0030 3.0 Talib 6 .0 0 .9 0 .0096 9.6 5 .0 0 .4 0 .0049 4 .9 Back 207.0 31 :5 0 .3317 331.7 307.0 27 .0 0 .3034 303.4 Rib 1.0 0 .1 0.0010 1.0 Shoul 10.0 1.5 0.0160 16.0 59.0 5.2 0.0583 58.3 Neck 3 .0 0.5 0 .0048 4.8 1.0 0.1 0.0010 1.0 Teeth 1.0 0.1 0.0010 1.0 Upper 1.0 0.2 0 .0016 1.6 Elbow 14.0 1.2 0 .0138 13.8 Wrist 89.0 13.5 0 .1426 142.6 229.0 20 .1 0.2263 226.3 Hand 7.0 1.1 0 .0112 11 .2 23 .0 2 .0 0.0227 22.7 Flnge 3.0 0.5 0 .0048 4.8 2 .0 0 .2 0.0020 2 .0

Means 34.6 0 .0555 55.5 54.2 0 .0592 59.2 Total 658.0 100.0 1.0545 1054.5 1139.0 100.0 1.1255 1125.5

shin, shoulder, and wrist. This may be indicative of the increased emphasis on tumbling and vaulting that oc­curred with the 1985-86 squad.

New Injuries By Skills

G ymnastics consists of the performance of elegant, acrobatic, and daring skills for the simple sake of themselves. The gym­nast attempts to perform the most difficult skill she can with consistency and

elegance. Table 6 shows the results of an analysis of the skills being performed when injury occurred. By not­ing the grouping of the numerical results it can be seen that there is a wide variation in the skills from the 1984-85 season to the 1985-86 season. Results would indicate that running, swinging, and tumbling are most responsible for injuries in both seasons. In tumbling, the double back tuck somersault, double twist, one and one half twist, and flip flop, appear to be responsible for a relatively large proportion of the injuries in both seasons.

Injuries by Skills

Weiker and Ganim (1982) support the idea that the more difficult skills are most responsible for injuries in club gymnasts. They also indicate that the gymnast most likely to be injured is the

advanced one who is doing these more advanced skills. They also report that most injuries occur on skills that the gymnast has been performing for some time. Snook (1985) also supports these ideas by reporting that 40 percent of the collegiate team injuries he observed were suffered by the seven gymnasts who were considered the most accomplished, the collegiate All Americans. As an exampJe, Hunter and Torgan (1983) discuss the twisting dismount as a major contributor to injury. The twisting dismount is a more advanced skill and requires a more capable gymnast. Pettrone and Ricciardelli (1987) did not support the contention that increased skill led to increased incidence of injury, but they did sup­port that dismounts seemed particularly responsible for severe injuries, primarily fractures .

9

Table 6 attempt to include injuries that impair performance as

New Injuries By Skills - Excluding " All Skills " well as those that require medical intervention . In our opinion, the most important direction that et-

Event Skills 1984-85 Percent 1985-85 Percent Injuries Injuries

forts of sports medicine, sports science, and coaching can have on improving gymnastics is to address and

Non- Walking 1.0 2.2 reduce all levels of injury, in particular to address the Gym Taping 1.0 2.2

Kick Tab 1.0 2.2 ?hronic inj~ry problems. The complete story of injury

Unknown 14.0 31.1 1.0 1.9 in gymnastics cannot be told by the new/acute injuries Aerobics 1.0 1.9 alone. Running 1.0 1.9 Club gymnast information may not always be applica-Leg Curls 1.0 1.9 Teeth 1.0 1.9 ble to the collegiate gymnast, or vice versa. There ap-

Vt Front 1/ 1.0 2.2 Running 2.0 4.4 3.0 5.7

pear to be some differences in the injury environment.

Hdsp Frt 1.0 2.2 Therefore, injury information should be considered with Vaulting 2.0 4.4 2.0 3.8 the population in mind. Tsuk 1.0 1.9 The goal of the injury prevention program at the

UB Swinging 2.0 4.4 6.0 11 .3 Free Hip 1.01 2.2 University of Utah is to reduce and/or eliminate both Brausel/ 1.0 2.2 types of injuries. The most important consideration for StBckHd 1.0 2.2 Hit Bar 1.0 2.2

the University of Utah has been the fact that the rela-Str Mt. 1.0 2.2 tive new injury rate decreased during the 1985-86 sea-Under 1/1 1.0 2.2 son. In our opinion, this reflects an increased aware-EagleGri 1.0 2.2 Rips 2.0 4.4 ness of, and commitment to, the reduction and elimi-Cali Hop 1.0 2.2 nation of those factors which were determined in the Kip 1.0 1.9 initial 1984-85 report, and an increased emphasis on Mount 1.0 1.9 Shtthru 1.0 1.9 conditioning . Geinger 1.0 1.9 The conditioning program , in particular, has been de-Deltchev 3.0 5.7 BncFull 1.0 1.9

veloped to help the gymnast smooth the transition from Pit 1.0 1.9 skill train ing to routine training that corresponds to the

BB RO Tuck 1.0 2.2 likely time period of increased incidence of injury. The Straddll 1.0 2.2 Front Mt 1.0 2.2 conditioning program was developed with reduction of Stag Jum 1.0 2.2 injury as its primary goal. The conditioning program Dism. 1.0 1.9 Fllc1/2 1.0 1.9

consisted of: Planche 1.0 1.9 1. A six week pilot study of bicycle ergometer inter-BWOFF 1.0 1.9 va~ training for conditioning by reduced intensity Beam 1.0 1.9 Frt Tuck 1.0 1.9

of impact. Four of the gymnast participated in th is Running 1.0 1.9 study in the spring of 1985, in conjunction with the

FX Dbl Tuck 1.0 2.2 2.0 3.8 Human Performance Research Laboratory, Flip Flo 1.0 2.2 1.0 1.9 Tumbling 3.0 6.7 11 .0 20.8 University of Utah. Running 1.0 2.2 2. Implementation of a bicycle ergometer interval Full 2.0 3.8 Dbl Twist 1.0 1.9

training program. 1Y2 Twist 2.0 3.8 3. Development of an anaerobic conditioning pro-Tuck Bek 1.0 1.9 gram utilizing skills specific to gymnastics and im-

Totals 45.0 100.0 53.0 100.0 plemented by a popular ' 'Aerobics ' ' style utilizing contemporary music.

Conclusion 4. A weight training program under the direction of

a specialist strength training coach.

The most pragmatic facet of this analysis is 5. Increased awareness of injury potential and in-

that the relative new injury rate from creased communication with the team physican

1984-85 to 1985-86 decreased while the all and sports medicine professionals.

injury reports increased. It would appear . '.he sports 1!1edicine staff, consisting of the team phy-

that although the training program sought ~1c~an and trainers, were instrumental in reducing the

to reduce new injuries, and appeared to do so, the in-1nc1dence and severity of injury. Injury assessment and

crease in reports of all injuries poses new questions. orthopedic evaluation were performed prior to the start

lnspite of the fact that there were more gymnasts and of training by the team physician and this information

more training sessions the relative new injury rate was communicated to the coaches and trainers. Sever-

,.

decreased. However, in spite of a more energetic ap-al rehabiliation devices were purchased and placed in

proach to reduce new injuries the all injury reports in-the gymnasium so that the gymnasts could receive

creased. This could be the result of many factors. The several treatments per day at convenient times before

simple increase in number of athletes and training ses-during, and after training. '

sions may have contributed. Future research will seek This collective effort was aimed at reduction of inju-

to extract more meaning out of the all injury reports. ry by enhanced conditioning programs, increased ther-

The all injury information shows that the injury rate, apeutic support, increased communication between the

by the definition in this study, among gymnasts at the sp.orts medicine physican and the coaches, and anal-

University of Utah is 100 percent. This type of analysis ys1s of the trends of the injury process. These have

is more indicative of the actual injury milieu that the helped to reduce the new injury rate from the 1984-85

gymnast faces each day. Future studies of injury should to 1985-86 season.

10 Technique

Safety Breakthrough Gymnastics Safety Video Complete, Available

In an effort to upgrade safety awareness in the gymnastics com­munity, the United States Gym­nastics Federation has announced the completion of its first safety video, entitled: Gymnastics Safe­ty First, Second And Always. ''This video is our most exciting en­deavor," said Mike Jacki, execu­tive director of the USGF. "We are pleased to announce its availabil­ity to all coaches and clubs."

This particular project has been over two years in the making. Trying to provide the best informa-

tion in the most effective presenta­tion, Gymnastics Safety First, Second And Always gives athletes, coaches and club owners an easy and enjoyable method of disseminating safety information. ''To add to the excitement, we have enhanced the impact by using some of gymnastics' most recogniz­able and knowledgeable personali­ties. Olympic gold medalists Bart Conner and Peter Vidmar are joined by silver medalist Kathy Johnson, and Abie Grossfeld, Greg Marsden, Judy Avener and Bela Karolyi additionally help identify the many safety concerns and issues that are of great signifi­cance in gymnastics.

''The entire video has been re­viewed and evaluated by a variety of gymnastics, education and legal experts. It is truely a 'state of the art' method to teach people about gymnastics safety and safety awareness," said Jacki. Recom­mended procedures for viewing will be provided. It will also pro-

vide the club with an excellent method to verify that safety in­formation has been provided to the participants, coaches and even parents of the athletes.

"We are enthusiastic about Gymnastics Safety First, Second And Always and encour­age all gymnastics professionals to join in helping spread the word," said Jacki.

(Note: The delivered price is $39.95-$29.95 to USGF members and safety certifiers. Please pro­vide membership number to re­ceive discount. See order blank below for details. Orders can be called in to the USGF, (317) 237-5060, or sent to: USGF Merchan­dising, P.O. Box 5562, Indianapo­lis, IN 46255-5562.)

·-------------------------------------------~---

ORDER #

2601

USGF Merchandising PO. Box 5562 Indianapolis. IN 46255·5562 CITY __________ _ STATE ___ _

MEMBER #

QTY DESCRIPTION PRICE

Gymnastics Safety; First, Second & Always

Member 29.95

Non Member 39.95

TOTAL AMT.

FOR CREDIT CARD ORDER ONLY, [ZJ [111•~ BA~~~~~ MASTERCARD

CALL 317-237-5060 CARDNO . _______________ _

MY CARD EXPIRES : ____________ _

Technique

ZIP __ _

TOTAL

11

The following are the modified Class II & Ill Uneven Bar Routines. These routines are effective for all Junior Olympic Age Group competitions Janu­ary 1, 1988. Each state may elect to implement these routines for the fall season.

Please notice that element #3 in the Class II routines has a slight correc­tion from the lists of elements that were published with the latest Junior Olympic Development Committee minutes. These routines will be insert­ed and included in all compulsory books that are sold.

Administrative Staff Greg Marsden Delene Darst Bill Sands Kathy Kelly

UNEVEN BARS COMPULSORIES CLASS Ill SP: Stand on the mat outside of the bars, facing the low bar.

1. MOUNT: GLIDE, STOOP THROUGH, BACK KIP-UP f0.6J Execute the GLIDE with legs closed, STOOP THROUGH and execute a BACK KIP-UP over the low bar to a rear support. Finish with body extended, arms straight.

2. PENDULUM SEAT SWING f0.4J Push upward off the bar, body in a pike position, seat up and behind the bar. Swing backward in pike position under the bar (" basket" ) and, with a counter swing, return to the top of the low bar into a rear support.

3. FORWARD LONG SWING f0.4J As the body returns to the top of the bar from the seat swing, immediately reach forward to grasp the high bar in a regular grip, swing forward to horizontal

7

•/

(LI ·~ ) ~- Jr~· , : . . j '' ... " -·-~ ' .' .

' .. 0 .... -: ....... - ~ _.

REVISED COMPULSORIES 31

MOUNT: GLIDE, STOOP THROUGH, BACK KIP-UP (0.6) I . Incomplete extension of glide up to 0.2 2. Lack of body tightness O. I 3. Insufficient amplitude (swing) to

stoop position O. I 4. Legs bent during stooping

action up to 0.2 5. Failure to clear bar with seat up to 0.2 6. Incorrect timing and/or lack of

opening body to rear support up to b.2 7. Excessive arm bend (see General · Faults) up to 0.3

PENDULUM-SEAT SWING (0.4) I . Insufficient rise in pike before

backward swing 0. I 2. Insufficient amplitude of backward

swing up to 0.2 3. lnsufficent amplitude of counter

swing up to 0.2 4. Legs bent during either

swing up to 0.2 each 5. Incorrect timing and/or lack of

opening to rear support up to 0.2

FORWARD LONG SWING (0.4) I . Lack of continuity from rear support

to regular grip on high bar 0. I 2. Lack of extension of body on forward

swing up to 0.2 3. Insufficient amplitude of

forward swing up to 0.2

REVISED 3 2 COMPULSORIES

4. COUNTER SWING TO SQUAT ON LOW BAR (0.8) Swing backward, lifting the hips to arrive in a squat stand on the low bar.

5. Jf• STOOP CIRCLE FORWARD (0.6) Immediately extend into a STOOP position and place the hands outside of the feet on the low bar with a reverse grip. Execute a partial STOOP SOLE CIRCLE FORWARD (3/4 circle approximately) . Switch hands into a regular grip on the same bar; disengage the feet to:

6. STRADDLE GLIDE, BACK KIP-UP (0.6) Continue the motion into a STRADDLE GLIDE. Close the legs at the end of the glide, stoop the legs through the hands and execute a BACK KIP-UP over the low bar to a rear support .

4 2.

4 2.

UNEVEN BARS CLASS Ill

COUNTER SWING TO SQUAT (0.8) 1. Insufficient amplitude of

counter swing up to 0.3 2. Insufficient height of hips/body

in clearing bar up to 0.2 3. Failure to arrive in squat position

with control up to 0.3

3/4 STOOP CIRCLE FORWARD (0.6) 1. Delay in straightening

legs into stoop 0.1 2. Lack of smoothness of

hand change 0.1 3. Insufficient amplitude of

forward circle up to 0.2 4. Lack of smoothness in hand change

or alternate hand change up to 0.2

STRADDLE GLIDE, BACK KIP-UP (0.6) 1 . Insufficient extension of body

during glide up to 0.2 2. Legs together on glide 0.2

(wrong connection) 3. Insufficient amplitude (swing) to

stoop position 0. 1 4. Legs bent during

stooping action up to 0.2 5. Failure to clear bar

with seat up to 0.2

~ . ~ -

3 4 .. " 9

UNEVEN BARS CLASS Ill

7. LONG HANG KIP (O.SJ As the body returns to the top of the bar from the back kip, immediately reach forward to grasp the high bar. Swing forward, extending the body, and execute a LONG HANG KIP into a front

.2

8. FORWARD HIP CIRCLE - CAST (0.6J From an extended position on the high bar and without hesitation, execute a FORWARD Hf P CIRCLE followed by a CAST. The cast is to be performed above horizontal with straight arms and extended body. _

,·/ \~~ ~Si];~

~ff) ~

3 '/

9. DISMOUNT: STRADDLE SOLE

"

l

REVISED COMPULSORIES 33

LONG HANG KIP (0 .8) I. Insufficient forward swing 2. Insufficient body extension

(body and shoulder line) 3. fnsifficient amplitude (swing)

of kip Excessive arm bend (See General Faults)

up to 0.2 up to 0.2

up to 0.2 up to 0.3

FORWARD Hf P CIRCLE - CAST (0.6) I. Failure to stretch body into circle 0. I 2. Lack of continuity of circle up to 0.2 3. Poor body position (failure to

extend) up to 0.2 4. Excessive arm bend (see General

Faults) up to 0.3 Insufficient amplitude of cast (horizontal) up to 0.3 Poor body position (failure to extend) up to 0.2

CIRCLE UNDERSWING WITH DISMOUNT: STRADDLE SOLE CIRCLE, 1aoo TURN (0.6J UNDERSWING WITH I 800 TURN (0.6) At the completion of the cast and as I. Insufficient amplitude before the body begins to drop, pike and straddle on up to 0.2 straddle the legs to place the feet on 2. Poor body position (alignment in the bar outside the hands, (Note : straddle and circle) up to 0.2 Begin backward swing before feet 3. Heaviness of straddle on 0. I contact.) to execute a STRADDLE _ 4. Insufficient amplitude of circle up to 0.2

SOLE CIRCLE ~ / ~--J ~ 5 Incorrect timing of I 800 turn

backwardw1th ~~/"' ' ~ / 1 ~- (early/fate) 0 .1 a 180° TURN at , :; · , \ / , \~I;'~~· ' ,,.).---;::- · 6 Incomplete stretch of body before the top of the , ( , 1(, <' ' ·:.; , '\\' \ . ,,::n/. _) _ _.. landing 0. I

upswing. Land • • 1~. ~-~ ~ ~--" ~~-·~ facing the high bar (j!}Jf/~~'. Q (' - ' ,

11 ,\

' <0~ \ ~ - .> · I

3 '/

REVISED 34 COMPULSORIES

2 Major Elements @ 0.8

4. Counter swing to squat on low bar 7. Long hang kip

UNEVEN BARS CLASS Ill

9 Major Elements

= 1.6

5 Major Elements @ 0.6 3.0

I . Glide, stoop through, back kip-up 5. 3/4 stoop circle on low bar 6. Straddle glide, back kip-up 8. Forward hip Circle 9. Straddle sole circle, underswing with I 80 ( 1/2) turn

2 Major Elements @ 0.4 0.8

2. Pendulum seat swing 3. Swing forward in long hang

These elements will draw a 0.8, 0.6, or 0.4 penalty if substituted. Omission is failure to attempt the element - Value + 0.5

NEW FROM ELITE/GYM-KIN!

WINNERS WEAR

•• e ~ Elite Sponswear, Ltd., 1230 Spruce Street, Dept. T, Reading, PA 19602 To orde1; call toll free 1-800-345 -4087 Ext. 600 In PA, HI, AK, call collect (215) 376-6522

GK32. The "World Class" Grip. A new traditional grip with competi· tive extras like extended length fo r added gripping power, Top U.S. Grade cowhide, pre-cut fi nger holes, and "D" ring buckle/ velcro fastening. Stocked in # 180 white. $16.00

GK33. The "Custom" Grip. Finally available - a grip that lets you personalize "the fo ld" to your specifications. Same features as our "World Class" Grip, but without pre-cut finge r holes. Stocked in #180 whi te. $16.oo

GK23. Beam Shoe. Elite/ Gym-Kin intro­duces The Affordable International Class Beam Shoe. Superior qua lity. An outstand­ing value. Genuine leather uppers with re inforcement stripes. Elast ic inset. Rubber patches on bottom. Stocked in #180 white; availab le in sizes 1 through 8. $25.00

For a complete E/ite/Gy111Kin catalog, coaches and i11stmctors please send request 011 business or scbool letterbead All otbers please include$3.50 witb your request.

UNEVEN BARS COMPULSORIES CLASS II

SP: Stand on the mat outside of the bars, facing the low bar.

1. MOUNT: GLIDE KIP - CAST f 0.6J Jump from both feet and grasp the low bar with an overgrip. Execute a GLIDE KIP with the legs closed . CAST to a 3/4 HANDSTAND.

2. CLEAR HIP CIRCLE f0.8J Execute a CLEAR HIP CIRCLE backward to 3/4 HANDSTAND. (Note : Does not have to attain handstand to receive maximum credit.)

7

REVISED COMPULSORIES 35

MOUNT: GLIDE KIP CAST (0.6) 1. Incomplete extension of glide up to 0.2 2. Insufficient amplitude (swing) to

kip O. J 3. Insufficient amplitude of cast up to 0.3

23° to 44° 0.2 Below 23° 0.3

4. Poor body position (failure to extend) up to 0.2

5. Excessive arm bend (see General Faults) up to 0.3

CLEAR HIP CIRCLE BACKWARD (O.B) 1 . Excessive arch or pike of body on

downswing or upswing of clear hip circle up to 0.2 each

2. Lack of control of downswing 0. J 3. lnsifficient height/extension of

upswing (See #1 Cast Deductions) up to 0.3

4. Excessive arm bend (see General Faults) up to 0.3

~ \'· ~ ' ~-. ~ 1-. . . ~ ~ -~\

,., ,...,

'I 1

REVISED 36 COMPULSORIES

3. STRADDLED GLIDE-BACK KIP-UP f0.4J As the body descends from the clear hip circle, GLIDE forward under the low bar with legs straddled. Close the legs at the end of the glide, stoop the legs through the hands and execute a back kip-up over the Jow bar to a momentary rear support.

4. LONG HANG KIP CAST 1/4

HAND ST AND f0.6J Immediately reach both hands to the high bar, swing forward, extending the body, and execute a LONG HANG KIP CAST TO 3/4 HANDSTAND.

5. SWING DOWN BETWEEN BARS f 0.4J Swing down between the bars by straddling the legs. Swing forward with body extended to horizontal position, closing the legs together.

I 2 3 ~

UNEVEN BARS CLASS II

STRADDLED GLIDE-BACK-KIP-UP (0.4) I . Lack of control of downswing into

glide 0.1 2. Insufficient extension of body

during the glide up to 0.2 3. Legs together on glide

(wrong conneaion) 0.2 4. Insufficient amplitude (swing)

to stoop position 0.1 5. Legs bent during stooping

aaion up to 0.2 6 . Failure to clear bar with seat up to 0.2 7. Excessive arm bend. (See

General Faults) up to 0.3

LONG HANG KIP CAST 3/4 HANDSTAND (0.6) I . Too long in rear support 2. Insufficient forward swing 3. Insufficient body extension

(body and shoulder line) 4. Insufficient amplitude

(swing of kip) 5. Excessive arm bend 6 . Insufficient amplitude

of cast (See #1 Cast Deduaion)

up to 0.2 up to 0.2

up to 0.2

up to 0.2 up to 0.3

up to 0.3

SWING DOWN BETWEEN THE BARS (0.4) 1 . Lack of control on downswing

between bars 0 . I 2. Lack of smoothness and extension

of forward swing up to 0.2 3. Insufficient amplitude of

forward swing up to 0.2

UNEVEN BARS CLASS II

6. COUNTER SWING TO PIKE ST AND ON LB (O.SJ With a COUNTER SWING backward, lift the hips and legs to arrive in a PIKE STAND on the low bar.

7. JUMP TO LONG HANG KIP (0.4J Immediately jump from low bar and swing down between the bars. Continue swinging forward, extending the body, and execute a LONG HANG KIP into a front support position on the high bar.

.2

8. FORWARD HIP CIRCLE - CAST (0.6J Without hesitation, execute a FORWARD HIP CIRCLE followed by a CAST (3/4 handstand.)

REVISED COMPULSORIES 37

COUNTER SWING TO PIKE ST AND ON LB (0.8) I . Insufficient amplitude of

counter swing up to 0.2 2. Insufficient height of hips/body

in clearing bar up to 0.2 3. Legs bent prior to arriving in

pike stand up to 0.2 4. Lack of control in arriving

in pike stand up to 0.2 5. Sitting on low bar

(Wrong Element) 0.8

JUMP TO LONG HANG KIP (0.4) 1. Too long in stand on LB up to 0.2 2. Insufficient forward swing up to 0.2 3. Insufficient body extension up to 0.2

(body and shoulder line) 4. Insufficient amplitude

(swing of kip) 5. Excessive arm bend

(See General Faults)

~ AL/

\\~,JI\~/'· ., ~~S)f1!3/

'/ (.

FRONT HIP CIRCLE, CAST (0.6) 1. Failure to stretch body into circle 0.1 2. Lack of continuity of circle up to 0.2 3. Insufficient amplitude of cast

(See#l - Mount - Cast) up to 0.3 4. Poor body position (failure to

extend) up to 0.2 5. Excessive arm bend (see

l General Faults) up to 0.3

REVISED 38 COMPULSORIES

9. DISMOUNT: TUCKED FLYAWAY f O.SJ Swing down between the bars, legs closed. Swing forward to execute a TUCKED FLYAWAY (tucked salto backward) to land with back to high bar.

3 Major Elements @ 0.8

2. Clear hip circle backward 6. Counter swing to pike stand LB 9. Tucked Flyaway

3 Major Elements @ 0.6

I . Glide kip cast 4. Long hang kip cast 314 handstand 8. Forward hip circle, cast

3 Major Elements @ 0.4

3. Straddled Glide, back kip-up 5. Swing down between bars 7. Jump to long hang kip

9 MAJOR ELEMENTS

2.4

1.8

1.2

UNEVEN BARS CLASS 11

DISMOUNT: TUCKED FLYAWAY (0.8) I . Lack of control on

downswing up to 0 .2 2. Poor body position on

downswing up to 0 .2 3. Failure to stretch body through

bottom of downswing up to 0.2 4. Insufficient tuck 0.1 5. Insufficient height - rise of

hips/late up to 0.3 180 or above 0.0 I 58 to 179 0.1 135 to 157 0.2 I 13 to 134 0.3

6. Lack of extension (opening) before landing up to 0.2

These elements will draw a 0.4, 0.6, or 0.8 penalty if substituted. Omission is failure to -attempt the element - Value + 0.5

~

• .. .. U.S. GY1v1NASTICS

FEDERATION SAFETY CERTIFICATION

TESTING· Everyone Needs To Be Safety Certified

1. Promotes a safer teachinsJJeaming environment. 2. Reduces insurance premmms. 3. Identifies your commitment to your profession, your sport and

your athletes. 4. Implementation of stricter safety practices will help reduce the

chances of accidents and/or injuries. 5. Helps in membership recruitment.

General Points of Information

1. The text book for the Certification Course is the USGF GYM-

USGF SAFETY CERTIFICATION PROPOSED COURSE/TEST SCHEDULE

Thursday, October 1, 1987 St. Louis , Missouri - 2:00-9:00pm Adams Mark Hotel Fourth and Chestnut Streets, St. Louis, MO 63102, 314-241 -7400 This course will be conducted by several USGF National Certifiers during the USGF National Congress. Course Contact: United States Gymnastics Federation -

317-237-5050 Please send registrations to the USGF Deparment of Safety, Pan Am Plaza #300 , 201 South Capitol.Indianapolis, IN 46225

Sunday, October 4, 1987 St. Louis , Missouri - 9:00am-4:00pm Adams Mark Hotel This course will be conducted by several USGF National Certifiers during the USGF National Congress. Please send registrations to the USGF Department of Safety at the above address.

Friday, October 9, 1987 Richfield, Ohio - 8:30am-3:30pm Richfield Holiday Inn 4742 Brecksville Road, Richfield, OH 44286 Course Directors: Ron Ganim - 216-526-2970

Dr. Gerald George - 318-988-1220 This course will be carried out during the Region V Gymnas­tics Congress.

Saturday, October 10, 1987 Binghamton, New York - 10:00am-5:00pm Sheraton Hotel - Binghamton Course Dir: Paul Spadaro - 718-816-6287 This course will be conducted during the New York State Coaches Meeting

NASTICS SAFETY MANUAL. This text/reference manual is to Sunday, October 11 , 1987 be purchased and studied prior to course participation. 1. Ames, Iowa - 9:00am-4:30pm Iowa State University

2. The course will take approximately six hours, including the PE Building

test. Course Directors: Dave Mickelson - 515-294-4444 3. The Course fee is $100.00 (retest cost is $25.00) . Mike Sharples _ 515-294-4182 4. Certification is good for four years.

l--------------------------1 2. Austin, Texas - 9:00am-4:00pm

Participation Registration Form Name: Mr./Mrs ./Ms.

Address: _______________ _

City: ________ State.: ________ _

Telephone: l.!(H~),__ _____ (-=B:..t..) _____ _

Course Director: _____________ _

Course Location: ________ __,D::..:a::..:t:.:::e.:...: __ _

Organization Represented: _________ _

If USGF Member, List Type and Number: ___ _ Form of Payment:

Check Visa Mastercard ___ _

Name on Card: --------------­

Number: -----------------Expiration Date: __ Signature: ______ _

Please make checks payable in full to: USGF SAFETY CERTIFICATION Mail Registration Form and Payment to Respective Course Contact.

•oo NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE - FOR OFFICE USE ONL r

Registration Form Received: _________ _

Confirmation Mailed: ___________ _

Course Dir: Hutch Dvorak - 713-995-3315 This course will be conducted during the Gymnastics Associ­ation of Texas (GAT) Congress

Friday, October 16, 1987 Midland , Michigan - 9:00am-4:00pm Valley Plaza Inn Course Dir: Steve Whitlock - 313-335-6770 Course Contact: Judy Freiheit - 313-742-2151

Sunday, October 25, 1987 San Diego, California -10am-5:00pm Peterson Gymnasium San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182 Course Dir: Ed Franz - 619-265-4576

Sunday, November 1, 1987 Minneapolis, Minnesota - 9:00am-5:00pm University of Minnesota, Cooke Hall, 1900 University Avenue Minneapolis , MN 55455 Course Directors: Julie Thompson Aretz - 612-890-9020

Fred Roethlisberger - 612-625-9567

Thursday, November 5 - Sunday, November 8, 1987 Massachusetts - During the Region VI Gymnastics Congress Course Dir: Paul Spadaro - 718-816-6287

Course Contact: Kathy Feldmann - 617-784-5830

Friday, November 13 - Sunday, November 15, 1987 During the Western Regional Coaches Congress Course Dir: James Stephenson - 505-277-3755

Dates, Times and Locations will all be listed in USA GYMNASTICS and USGF TECHNIQUE. They can also be checked by calling the USGF Department of Safety

and Education at (317) 237-5050.