Teoriya i praktika fizicheskoy kultury №4 2019

Dr.Hab., Professor E.N. Medvedeva¹
PhD, Associate Professor N.N. Smirnova²
PhD, Associate Professor N.V. Romasheva^2
1Lesgaft National State University of Physical Education, Sport and Health, St. Petersburg
²St. Petersburg Mining University, St. Petersburg

Competitive performance in the modern artistic gymnastics is scored subjectively by expert teams governed by the rules of competitions – that are being revised on a permanent basis, with changes and amendments to the international rules of competitions made every Olympic cycle. Costs of the technical group elements are often revised or the elements are totally excluded from the scoring system. Cost rankings of the technical elements in every revised version are imposed by the discretional decisions of the Technical Committee members, and this is why the competitive accomplishments in the modern artistic gymnastics are scored so unfairly that the situation largely hampers the sport progress on the whole. Objective of the present study was to provide theoretical grounds for analytical solutions to fairly score balancing techniques in artistic gymnastics. The study data and analyses give theoretical grounds for the following solutions: scores of balancing technique difficulty levels in artistic gymnastics; individual sport mastery ratings by the difficulty levels and versatility of the balancing techniques in artistic gymnastics; and expert scoring of the balancing techniques in artistic gymnastics.

Keywords: balancing technique kinematics and stabilography, muscle electrical activity, difficulty factors, technical score.

References

1. Gorodnichev R.M. Sportivnaya elektroneyromiografiya [Sports electroneuromyography]. Velikie Luki: VLSAPC publ., 2005, 230 p.
2. Terekhina R.N., Medvedeva E.N., Suprun A.A. et al. Obosnovanie podkhoda k opredeleniyu slozhnosti elementov khudozhestvennoy gimnastiki i ikh tekhnicheskoy tsennosti [Justification of approach to determining complexity of elements in rhythmic gymnastics and their technical value]. Uchenye zapiski universiteta im. P.F. Lesgafta, 2015, 3 (121), pp. 146-149.
3. Titov Yu.E. Metody sovershenstvovaniya sistemy ob'ektivizatsii sudeystva v gimnastike [Methods to improve refereeing objectification system in gymnastics]. PhD diss.. Kiev, 1988, 106 p.
4. Khubbiev Sh.Z., Elmurzaev M.A. Novye podkhody k postroeniyu tekhnologii obucheniya dvigatelnym deystviyam [New approaches to movement teaching technology design]. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2014, no. 2, pp. 49-51.
5. Shishkovska M. Otsenka komponentov ispolnitelskogo masterstva v khudozhestvennoy gimnastike [Evaluation of the components of performing arts in rhythmic gymnastics]. PhD diss.. St. Petersburg, 2011,160 p.
6. Irwin G., Kerwin D.G. Biomechanical similarities of progressions for the longswing on high bar. Sports Biomechanics, 2005, Jul, 4(2), pp. 163-178.