

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
  <title>Coaches Internet Cafe</title> 
  <description></description> 
  <link>http://www.american-gymnast.com/forum/cic/index.cfm?forumid=1</link> 
  <generator>FuseTalk Basic Edition</generator> 

	
	<item>
		<title>Highlights from the 2007 World Championships - Men&apos;s Gymnastics</title>
		<link>http://www.american-gymnast.com/forum/cic/messageview.cfm?catid=27&amp;threadid=124</link> 
		<pubDate>2008-03-21T16:31:32 -07.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>RonBrant</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>2</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ <a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmArjI2TFoM">null</a><br /><br />The performance level keeps rising and only a year later what will the 2008 Olympic Games Highlights look like? ]]></description>
	</item>

	
	<item>
		<title>High Bar - A look Back and Present</title>
		<link>http://www.american-gymnast.com/forum/cic/messageview.cfm?catid=27&amp;threadid=112</link> 
		<pubDate>2007-12-16T10:38:04 -07.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>RonBrant</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ I like this video is shows a little of what has been lost and how the sport has progessed.<br /><br /><br /><a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XcdMpKsVXs">null</a> ]]></description>
	</item>

	
	<item>
		<title>Progression in the Sport of Gymnastics</title>
		<link>http://www.american-gymnast.com/forum/cic/messageview.cfm?catid=27&amp;threadid=25</link> 
		<pubDate>2007-05-22T11:00:07 -07.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>RonBrant</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>4</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ Mike, you make some great points. The sport has developed technically over the past 40 years. An excellent example has been posted here at the Coaches Internet Cafe - Titov vs Menichelli. (1956 into 1960's)

This development of the skill was excellent. It is exactly what gymnasts and coaches should be doing in the sport. Advancing the sport in both skill and technical development. Even a stutz on Parallel Bars has been refined over the same 40 years.

I would say the biggest point here is that the present day Inverted giant is aesthetically better for gymnastics over the older version of the Russian Giant.

There is a difference bewteen an el-grip and an inverted gianted in both wrist and body position. 

The new question now is with the older version returning with a higher skill value what is the performance requirement. The <u><b>old Russian giant does not go to a handstand so</b></u>, what are the excution deductions for this? 

<b>This A Panel rule change reflects the direction of the sport. What are other coaches thinking as far as the direction the sport is taking?</b>
<img src="i/expressions/clock.gif" border="0">
 ]]></description>
	</item>

	
	<item>
		<title>Russian Giant 1956</title>
		<link>http://www.american-gymnast.com/forum/cic/messageview.cfm?catid=27&amp;threadid=22</link> 
		<pubDate>2007-05-17T10:11:34 -07.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>RonBrant</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ Here you can see what the newest rule change on High Bar requires for a Russian / Inverted Giant to receive C value.<br /><br />If you perform the Inverted Giant as you have seen in the modern era, it is now a B and in the same box as the el grip giant.<br /><br />Thank goodness this update was made. I was afraid the sport of gymnastics was progressing in the develop of skills and technique. Now if we can just get the big arching handstand back then we are really making progess! ]]></description>
	</item>

</channel>
</rss>


