International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpan20

Development of the routine duration in artistic

gymnastics from 1997 to 2019

Alexander Seemann-Sinn , Stefan Brehmer , Falk Naundorf & Bernd

Wolfarth

To cite this article: Alexander Seemann-Sinn , Stefan Brehmer , Falk Naundorf & Bernd Wolfarth
(2021) Development of the routine duration in artistic gymnastics from 1997 to 2019, International
Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 21:2, 250-262, DOI: 10.1080/24748668.2021.1877601

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2021.1877601

Published online: 24 Jan 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 84

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rpan20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT
2021, VOL. 21, NO. 2, 250–262
https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2021.1877601

Development of the routine duration in artistic gymnastics

from 1997 to 2019
Alexander Seemann-Sinna,b, Stefan Brehmerc, Falk Naundorfb and Bernd Wolfartha,d,e
a
Department of Sports Medicine, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany; bDepartment Strength and
Technique, Research Group Artistic Gymnastics, Institute for Applied Training Science, Leipzig, Germany;
c
Department Artistic gymnastics, Artistic Gymnastics Centre, Cottbus, Germany; dDepartment of Sports
Medicine, Charité University Medicine, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany; eDepartment of
Sports Medicine, Research Group Sports Medicine, Institute for Applied Training Science, Leipzig, Germany

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

In this study, the development of routine duration (RD) in artistic Received 18 November 2020
gymnastics was investigated. Because of fundamental rule changes Accepted 14 January 2021
in 2006, the difference between the periods 1997–2005 and KEYWORDS
2006–2019 and between the Olympic cycles (OC) over the entire Artistic gymnastic; load
period was examined. Therefore, 1387 routines were evaluated characteristics; routine
using video recordings. The results were: I) RD increased from duration; energy supply
1997–2005 to 2006–2019 on pommel horse (36.0 to 44.0 s;
p = 0.00), still rings (SR) (42.0 to 53.0 s; p = 0.00), parallel bars (PB)
(35.0 to 50.0 s; p = 0.00), high bar (37.0 to 50.0 s; p = 0.00), uneven
bars (UB) (32.5 to 36.0 s; p = 0.00), balance beam (83.0 to 85.0 s;
p = 0.08) and floor female (87.0 to 89.0 s; p = 0.00), whereas floor
male (67.0 vs. 67.0 s; p = 0.96) shows no differences; II) RD increase
on SR from OC 2008 to OC 2012 (p = 0.00), at PB from OC 2012 to OC
2016 (p = 0.00), and reduced from OC 2012 to OC 2016 (p = 0.00) at
UB. The increase of RD must be considered by coaches in order to
prepare their athletes specifically for competitions.

1. Introduction
In order to improve the sport-specific performance, specific load stimuli must be set in
the training process. To design these as specifically as possible, knowledge of the sport-
specific load profile of the competition structure is crucial. The load profile is based on
the load characteristics, which include intensity, duration, volume, density and frequency
as well as the type of load (Hottenrott & Neumann, 2016; Plowman & Smith, 2014;
Schnabel et al., 2008; Stone et al., 2007). To describe the sport-specific load profile of the
competition structure, the intensity and duration as well as the type of load are crucial.
The intensity indicates the strength of the load stimulus and the duration indicates the
time of the load impact (Hottenrott & Neumann, 2016). In the case of the type of load,
the question of the used muscle mass, the contraction form and contraction speed of the
used muscle mass, as well as the coordinative difficulty of the load must be clarified
(Schnabel et al., 2008). These load characteristics also represent important criteria for the

CONTACT Alexander Seemann-Sinn alexander.seemann-sinn@student.hu-berlin.de Department of Sports

Medicine Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany
© 2021 Cardiff Metropolitan University
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 251

energy supply of the sports-specific load, since they are responsible for the interaction
and contribution of the different energy systems (Gastin, 2001; Sahlin, 2014). Adequate
energy supply is often a crucial factor in the sport-specific endurance capacity because
energy supply is involved in the multifactorial process of muscular fatigue (Sahlin, 2014).
In artistic gymnastics, like in other sports, fatigue processes limit the performance of
multiple explosive actions. Thus, the knowledge of the routine duration represents an
important factor in order to classify the energy supply of a load and thus to be able to
train the sport-specific endurance capacity more specifically.
Artistic gymnastics is a complex sport where different routines have to be shown
on different apparatus (Armstrong & Sharp, 2013). Male artistic gymnastics (MAG)
consists of six apparatuses: floor (FX), pommel horse (PH), still rings (SR), vault
(VT), parallel bars (PB) and high bar (HB) (Armstrong & Sharp, 2013). Women
artistic gymnastics (WAG) includes four apparatuses: vault (VT), uneven bars (BB),
balance beam (BB) and floor (FX) (Armstrong & Sharp, 2013). The routine duration
on the apparatus is subject to the regulations of the Code de Pointagé (CdP) of the
Fédération International de Gymnastique (FIG). The CdP specifies, for example, the
maximum number of elements in a routine that count for the difficulty value (D
score 1 ) or which special element requirements and element connections provide
additional points. At some apparatus, FX male and female as well as at BB the CdP
exactly specifies the maximum routine duration. For FX male, the maximum
routine duration is limited to 70 s and for FX female and BB to 90 s, while the
other apparatus have no time limit (Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique,
1997a, 1997b, 2001a, 2001b, 2006a, 2006b, 2009a, 2009b, 2013a, 2013b, 2017a,
2017b). However, it is useful to keep the routines time efficient since longer routine
duration’s needs additional energy and thus technical errors due to fatigue pro­
cesses can increase. Every four years (for each Olympic cycle), the CdP is updated,
so that slightly different demands are made on the gymnasts. At the 2004 Olympic
Games (OG), however, there was a scandal that sparked controversy over the
reliability and objectivity of the CdP (Kunčič & Mešl, 2017). As a result of this
scandal, the CdP was fundamentally modified and the previous maximum score of
10.0 points was replaced from 2006 on by a point system that was opened upwards
and which is still valid today (Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique, 2006a,
2006b). From 2006, the D score of a routine results from the 10 most difficult
elements (only 8 elements for WAG from 2009 on) of a routine including dismount
as well as the value of the element groups 2 and element connections (Fédération
Internationale de Gymnastique, 2006a, 2006b, 2009a, 2009b, 2013a, 2013b, 2017a,
2017b). In the CdP, each element is assigned to a difficulty level, which is indicated
in letters, and accordingly earns points for the D score. With a value of 0.1 points,
A is the easiest level of difficulty, followed by B with 0.2 points, up to I with a value
of 0.9 points. From 2006 on, the gymnasts tried to show as many difficult elements
as possible (up to 10 for MAG and 8 for WAG) in their routines in order to achieve
the highest possible D score. In preparation of these difficult elements, the gymnasts
usually have to perform additional simple elements, which are not included in the
D scores due to their low difficulty value, but influence the duration of the routine.
Before the CdP was modified, the D score was limited to a maximum of 5.0 points
(Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique, 1997a, 1997b, 2001a, 2001b). In the
252 A. SEEMANN-SINN ET AL.

CdPs before 2006, it was exactly defined how many points were awarded for
a certain number of simple elements (A, B and C elements) (Fédération
Internationale de Gymnastique, 1997a, 1997b, 2001a, 2001b). It was also defined
how many points can be achieved by difficult elements (D, E and Super-E elements)
and element connections (Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique, 1997a, 1997b,
2001a, 2001b). Further difficult elements or element connections did not bring
additional points for the D score, so that the gymnasts mostly only showed the
prescribed elements in their routines.
The data published so far in the literature on routine duration in gymnastics
show that with 61.0 ± 4.0 s FX has the longest routine duration in top international
male gymnastics (Jemni et al., 2001). The routine duration of the other apparatus is
32.0 ± 6.0 s for PH, 31.0 ± 5.0 s for SR, 41.0 ± 5.0 s for PB and 37.0 ± 7.0 s for HB
(Jemni et al., 2001). According to Jemni et al. (2000), the routine duration for FX is
60.9 ± 3.4 s; for PH 30.5 ± 4.5 s, for SR 40.7 ± 5.1 s, for PB 31.1 ± 6.2 s and for HB
36.5 ± 6.5 s. In the female top level, FX with 79.0 ± 0.5 s (Jemni et al., 2001) or
82.9 ± 3.2 s (Jemni, 2011) also has the longest routine duration. BB has a routine
duration of 66.0 ± 5.0 s (Jemni et al., 2001) or 81.8 ± 4.5 s (Jemni, 2011) and UB with
40.0 ± 5.0 s (Jemni et al., 2001) or 46.5 ± 3.5 s (Jemni, 2011) the shortest routine
duration. However, the origin of the published data must be critically noted. Firstly,
the data of Jemni et al. (2000) are from a training competition, those of Jemni et al.
(2001) and (Jemni, 2011) are from the 1999 World Championships. A study that
examined the development of routine duration at international competition high­
lights (World Championships (WC) and Olympic Games (OG)) over a longer
period does not yet exist. Secondly, it appears that the published data (Jemni,
2011; Jemni et al., 2000, 2001) date back to the time before the fundamental
modification of the CdP for 2006 and the following years. Data that are more recent
were no longer published, but the old data were referred to in the context of energy
supply (Armstrong & Sharp, 2013). This reference to obsolete data must be critically
evaluated in the field of energy supply since an increase in the routine duration leads
to an increase in the aerobic and decrease in the anaerobic energy supply (Gastin,
2001; Nummela & Rusko, 1995; Serresse et al., 1988). The routine duration at which
an equal contribution of aerobic and anaerobic energy is achieved amounts to
75 seconds (Gastin, 2001). Looking at the routine durations published so far,
anaerobic energy metabolism is the dominant metabolic pathway in the six appa­
ratus of MAG. In WAG, the dominance of the metabolic pathways is equally
distributed, as FX and BB are aerobically dominated and VT and UB are anaerobi­
cally dominated. Nevertheless, what also has to be considered is that a theoretical
increase in routine duration from 30 to 45 seconds can lead to an increase in aerobic
energy contribution up to 10% (Gastin, 2001).
Derived from the theoretical position and the prevailing state of research, the aim of
the present study was to examine the development of routine durations for the WC and
OG over the period 1997 to 2019. Concretely, the first question is to be answered
whether the fundamental modification of the CdP for 2006 and following years has
a significant influence on the routine duration at the individual apparatus. As a second
question, it should be clarified whether the slightly changed requirements in the CdPs
have an influence on the routine duration in the single Olympic cycles (OC). In this
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 253

context, it will be examined whether the routine durations of an OC differ significantly

from the previous OC.

2. Method
2.1. Data
For the determination of the routine durations per apparatus (except vault), the routines
of the apparatus finals of 17 WCs (1997, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009,
2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2019) and 5 OGs (2000, 2004, 2008, 2012
and 2016) were used. Because vault consists of only one element (Fédération
Internationale de Gymnastique, 1997a, 1997b, 2001a, 2001b, 2006a, 2006b, 2009a,
2009b, 2013a, 2013b, 2017a, 2017b), and so the fundamental rule change has no influ­
ence, vault was not considered in this study. A total of 873 MAG routines and 514 WAG
routines were evaluated. No video material could be found for 24 routines. Four further
routines were excluded due to drop-related and injury-related abortions. In 1998, there
was no WC, so no data is available for this year.

2.2. Data collection

The duration of the routine was determined by manual evaluation of video recordings
using video player software. The video recordings were obtained from own recordings or
from the site [https://www.youtube.com]. The time difference between the endpoint and
the start point was used to calculate the routine duration to the exact second. The start
point of the routine was defined as the first movement on the apparatus, the endpoint as
the first ground contact at the dismount. The duration of routine interruptions due to
falls was deducted from the total routine duration. To answer the first research question,
the male and female data were divided into two categories. The first category is the period
before the modification of the CdP (1997 to 2005); the second category is the period after
the modification (2006–2019). In the second step, the male and female data were divided
into the corresponding OC to clarify the second research question. In 2005 the CdP
2001–2004 was still valid, so that this year was not included in the OC until 2008.

2.3. Statistics
Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS software (version 23.0; SPSS Inc., IL).
The normal distribution of the data was checked using the Shapiro–Wilk test. Based on
the results of the Shapiro–Wilk test, which showed that the majority of the data were not
normally distributed, the data were subsequently examined for differences in the central
tendencies using Mann–Whitney U tests or the Kruskal–Wallis H test. The data are
presented as median [Interquartile range]. The significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05. To
counteract the problem of multiple comparisons and avoid Type I errors, the Bonferroni-
Holm correction was applied in multiple testing. Effect size r (Fritz et al., 2012) was used
to classify the significance of the results, evaluated as trivial (0–0.09), small (0.10–0.29),
medium (0.30–0.49) and large (0.50 and greater) (Cohen, 1992).
254 A. SEEMANN-SINN ET AL.

3. Results
3.1. Men’s artistic gymnastics
Figure 1 shows the routine duration per apparatus of the WC and OG apparatus finals in
the periods 1997–2005 and 2006–2019.
FX shows no significant difference (U = 3575.50; p = 0.96; z = −0.048; r = 0.00) in the
routine durations between the two periods. At PH (U = 737.00; p = 0.00; z = −8.770;
r = 0.66), SR (U = 1002.00; p = 0.00; z = −7.947; r = 0.60), PB (U = 488.50; p = 0.00;
z = −9.336; r = 0.71) and HB (U = 340.50; p = 0.00; z = −9.614; r = 0.74) the period

Figure 1. Boxplot of the routine duration per apparatus in the periods 1997–2005 and 2006–2019 at
MAG (* p ≤ 0.05; n.s. p > 0.05).
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 255

2006–2019 has significantly longer routine durations than the period 1997–2005. There is
a large effect for the four apparatus. At PH, the routine duration increases from 36.0
[34.0–38.8] s to 44.0 [41.0–48.8] s, at SR from 42.0 [38.0–46.0] s to 53.0 [47.0–58.8] s, at
PB from 35.0 [31.0–39.0] s to 50.0 [42.5–55.5] s and at HB from 37.0 [35.0–41.0] s to 50.0
[46.0–53.0] s. In percentage terms, routine durations have increased in the period
2006–2019 by 22% at PH, 26% at SR, 43% at PB and 37% at HB compared to the period
1997–2005. On FX, PH and HB there are some outliers, which occur due to a particularly
effective or ineffective composition of the routines.
Figure 2 shows the routine duration of the apparatus finals in the OC until 2000, 2004,
2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020.
FX shows no significant main effect in terms of routine duration for the OCs
(Chi2 = 6.47; p = 0.26). The longest routine duration was 68.0 s in OC 2004, the shortest
66.0 s in OC 2000. PH (Chi2 = 75.17; p = 0.00), SR (Chi2 = 90.97; p = 0.00), PB
(Chi2 = 93.87; p = 0.00) and HB (Chi2 = 87.10; p = 0.00) show significant main effects
in the routine durations over the OCs. At PH there is a significant increase in routine
duration of 7.0 s from OC 2004 to OC 2008 (U = 98.50, p = 0.00; z = −4.743; r = 0.63). HB
also shows a significant increase in routine duration from OC 2004 to OC 2008

Figure 2. Boxplot of the routine duration per apparatus in the OCs until 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016
and 2020 at MAG (* p ≤ 0.05).
256 A. SEEMANN-SINN ET AL.

(U = 37.00; p = 0.00; z = −5.334; r = 0.75), which is 10.0 s. All other OCs do not differ
significantly from their previous OCs in terms of routine duration on these two appara­
tuses. SR shows a significant increase in routine duration of 4.0 s from OC 2004 to OC
2008 (U = 214.00; p = 0.01; z = −2.822; r = 0.38) and 7.0 s from OC 2008 to OC 2012
(U = 166.00; p = 0.00; z = −3.614; r = 0.48). At PB the routine duration increases
significantly from OC 2004 to OC 2008 (U = 80.50; p = 0.00; z = −4.872; r = 0.66) by
11.0 s and from OC 2012 to OC 2016 (U = 291.00; p = 0.00; z = −3.113; r = 0.39) by 7.0
s. The longest routine duration of PH, SR, PB and HB is achieved in OC 2016.

Figure 3. Boxplot of the routine duration per apparatus in the periods 1997–2005 and 2006–2019 at
WAG (* p ≤ 0.05).
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 257

3.2. Women’s artistic gymnastics

Figure 3 shows the routine durations per apparatus of the WC and OG apparatus finals in
the periods 1997–2005 and 2006–2019.
Despite the unchanged time limitation of BB and FX in the regulations, the period
2006–2019 has significantly longer routine durations for UB (U = 2261.50; p = 0.00;
z = −3.535; r = 0.27), BB (U = 2538.500; p = 0.08; z = −2.647; r = 0.20) and FX
(U = 1691.50; p = 0.00; z = −5.315; r = 0.41) than the period 1997–2005. For UB and
BB a small effect is available, while FX presents a medium effect. At UB, the routine
duration increases from 32.5 [29.0 37.0] s to 36.0 [32.0–41.0] s, at BB from 83.0 [80.0–­
86.0] s to 85.0 [81.0–88.0] s and at FX from 87.0 [86.0–89.0] s to 89.0 [88.0–90.0] s. In
percentage terms, routine durations have increased in the period 2006–2019 by 11% at
UB and 2% at BB and FX compared to the period 1997–2005. The outliers at BB and FX
result, as already for the men, from an effective or ineffective routine design with regard
to the routine duration.
Figure 4 shows the routine duration of the apparatus finals in the OCs until 2000,
2004, 2008, 2012, 2016 and 2020.
UB (Chi2 = 46.37; p = 0.00), BB (Chi2 = 11.70; p = 0.04) and FX (Chi2 = 40.12;
p = 0.00) show significant main effects in the routine durations over the OCs. After the

Figure 4. Boxplot of the routine duration per apparatus in the OCs until 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, 2016
and 2020 at WAG (* p ≤ 0.05).
258 A. SEEMANN-SINN ET AL.

post-hoc tests, there were no significant differences between the OCs on FX. In contrast,
at UB the routine duration increased significantly by 7.0 s from OC 2004 to OC 2008
(U = 120.50; p = 0.00; z = −4.176; r = 0.57) and was significantly reduced by 6.0 s from OC
2012 to OC 2016 (U = 272.00; p = 0.00; z = −3.232; r = 0.40). BB also shows a significant
increase in routine duration from OC 2004 to 2008 (U = 182.50; p = 0.00; z = −3.102;
r = 0.42), which is 5.0 s. In contrast to men, the longest routine durations are found on
UB and BB in OC 2008 and on FX in OC 2012.

4. Discussion
The aim of this study was to investigate the development of routine duration for MAG
and WAG in the period from 1997 to 2019. The results of the study show that in MAG
the routine durations of PH, SR, PB and HB in the period after the fundamental
modification of the CdP (2006–2019) significantly increased compared to the period
before the modification (1997 2005). With 43%, PB has the largest percentage increase in
routine duration, followed by HB with 37%, SR with 26% and PH with 22%. FX shows no
significant difference in the routine duration between the periods, which was to be
expected due to the unchanged time specification in the CdPs. After the modification
of the CdP from 2006 on, the longest routine durations are still achieved on the FX with
67.0 [65.8–68.0] s, followed by SR with 53.0 [47.0–58.8] s, and HB with 50.0 [46.0–53.0]
s as well as PB with 50.0 [42.5–55.5] s. PH has the shortest routine duration with 44.0
[41.0–48.8] s.
The increase in the number of elements on PB and HB can be regarded as one reason
for the extension of the routine duration on both apparatus. When counting the number
of elements from the video recordings according to the rules of the CdPs, it shows that at
the OG 2000 a median of 14.0 elements (≥A elements) were performed at PB and 17.0 at
HB, at the OG 2016, respectively, 19.0 elements at PB and 23.0 elements at HB were
shown by the gymnasts (figure 5). SR and PH show only a small increase in the number of
elements. On these two apparatuses, element-specific changes are probably responsible

Figure 5. Number of elements for MAG (left) and WAG (right) per apparatus for OG 2000 and 2016
(evaluated according to CdP 2013–2016).
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 259

for the increase in routine duration. At SR, for example, a median of 6.0 force and swing
to force elements were performed at OG 2016, while there were only 4.5 at the OG 2000.
On the PH, the athletes performed with a median of 2.0 more Busnari and handstand
scissor elements at OG 2016 compared to OG 2000, where no handstand elements were
shown. These so-called Busnari elements are a combination of circle or stöcklis and
handstands (with/without rotation and with/without transport).
By WAG, the routine duration of the period 2006–2019 has significantly increased
compared to the period 1997–2005 for all apparatus. This is interesting in so far as BB
and FX have a constant time limitation over the period from 1997 to 2019. The
percentage increase in routine duration is 11% for UB and 2% for BB and FX, which is
significantly lower compared to MAG. The longest routine duration in the period
2006–2019 was furthermore with 89.0 [88.0–90.0] s on the FX, followed by BB with
85.0 [81.0–88.0] s. The shortest routine duration with 36.0 [32.0–41.0] s is shown at the
UB. An explanation for the increase in routine duration at BB and FX is also provided by
the increase in gymnastic elements. At OG 2000 a median of 15.0 elements (≥A elements)
were performed at BB and 19.5 elements at FX, whereas at OG 2016 17.0 elements were
performed at BB and 20.0 elements at FX (figure 5). At the UB, there is no increase in the
number of elements between OG 2000 and OG 2016. This is not surprising, as the routine
durations of OG 2000 and OG 2016 do not differ much at this apparatus either. However,
if OG 2012 is also analysed, an increase in the number of elements can also be proven on
this apparatus. However, due to the small or medium effect size and the relatively small
increase (<5.0 s) in routine duration, the results can be regarded as rather insignificant for
the sports practice at WAG. This is also evident from the point of view of energy supply,
as described in more detail later.
The analysis of the individual OC shows at MAG that the routine durations at PH, SR,
PB and HB have increased significantly from OC 2004 to OC 2008. This fact is not
surprising since the first routine with the fundamental modification of the CdP took
place in OC 2008. It is interesting to note that there was an additional significant increase
in the routine duration for SR from OC 2008 to OC 2012 and for PB from OC 2012 to OC
2016. This shows that even small changes in CdPs every 4 years can lead to significant
differences in routine duration. An explanation for the increase of the routine duration at
the PB could be the difficulty enhancement of the double somersault forward dismounts,
which were thereby presented more. For these dismounts, an additional element (usually
forward uprise to support) must be performed, which is not required for reverse
dismounts. In SR, the increase may be due to the fact that in CdP 2009 the direct element
connection of 2 force elements with ascending phase was no longer permitted, and to the
introduction of the rule that only 4 force and swing to force elements may be performed
in direct succession. It is also noticeable that the routine duration of PH, SR, PB and HB
increases from OC 2004 to OC 2016 per OC. For the OC 2020, a slight decrease of the
routine duration can be observed for all four apparatuses. This could be related to the still
incomplete data material of the OC 2020, since the most difficult routines are usually
performed at the end of the OC (Naundorf et al., 2009).
At WAG, the analysis of the individual OC shows that there is no significant change in
the routine duration from OC to OC at FX. The changes in routine duration from OC to
OC are too small to produce statistically significant results. In contrast to FX MAG,
however, there is a significant main effect within the OCs, which is presumably due to the
260 A. SEEMANN-SINN ET AL.

Figure 6. Classification of the routine durations per apparatus of the OC 2004 and OC 2016 in the
energy supply at MAG (left) and WAG (right) (modified from Gastin, 2001).

difference between the minimum value at OC 2000 and the maximum value at OC 2012.
At BB and UB, on the other hand, there is a significant increase in the routine duration
from OC 2004 to OC 2008. At UB, there will be a significant reduction in the routine
duration from OC 2012 to OC 2016. One reason for this cannot be found in the rules of
the CdPs. The longest average routine duration was achieved at UB and BB in OC 2008
and on FX in OC 2012. The regulation of the CdPs provides an explanation for the
longest routine durations in the OC 2008. During these three years WAG evaluated the
10 most difficult elements per routine, including the dismount, whereas, in the subse­
quent CdPs, only eight elements were evaluated, including the dismount.
If the results of this study are analysed from the point of view of energy supply, they are
important for MAG. According to Gastin (2001) at a load of 90 seconds 56% of the energy is
provided aerobically, at 60 seconds 45% at 45 seconds 37% and at 30 seconds 27%. Based on
the current results of the routine durations in MAG and the data of the proportional energy
supply of Gastin (2001), the aerobic energy contribution of the last complete OC in 2016 is
38% at PH, 44% at SR, 42% at PB and 40% at HB. Compared to the last complete OC before
the modification of the CdP, the aerobic energy contribution has increased by 7% at PH, 9%
at SR, 13% at PB and 7% at HB (Figure 6). At WAG, the increase in aerobic energy supply at
UB, BB and FX is rather insignificant due to the small increase in routine duration.
Based on this data, it can be assumed that the aerobic energy supply for MAG (except
FX) has gained in importance due to the extension of the routine duration. At WAG it can
be assumed that the aerobic energy supply at BB and FX was already important before the
modification of CdP. Marina and Rodríguez (2014) also point out that, due to a high
percentage utilisation of the maximum oxygen uptake at the end of the routines, aerobic
performance training at WAG cannot be neglected. Studies, which have directly deter­
mined the energy supply during routines in artistic gymnastics, do not yet exist. A goal for
future investigations would therefore be to determine the energy supply directly in order
to check the assumed increasing aerobic energy supply due to extended routine durations.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS IN SPORT 261

5. Conclusion
The study shows that in MAG the fundamental modification of the CdP for 2006 and the
following years significantly increased the routine duration at PH, SR, PB and HB. In
WAG, all three examined apparatuses also show an increase in routine duration, but the
consequences for sports practice are rather insignificant due to the small increase. The
available data help coaches to set specific stress stimuli in the training process to prepare
their athletes in the best possible way for competitions.
Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded that the increase of the routine
duration on PH, SR, PB, HB and UB has no influence on the competition procedure, as
the apparatuses with time limits still have the longest routine durations. Therefore,
a further time limit by the FIG is not necessary from an organisational point of view.

Notes
1. Starting with the CdP 2009, the difficulty value will be referred as D score; this designation
will also be used in the further course of the article for the difficulty values before 2009.
2. At MAG, the special requirements are referred as element groups from CdP 2006, at WAG
also as element groups in CdP 2006, and then as composition requirements from CdP 2009.

Acknowledgments
This research was funded by the German Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and
Community based on a resolution of the German Parliament.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References
Armstrong, N., & Sharp, C. (2013). Gymnastics physiology. In D. J. Caine, K. Russell, & L. Lim
(Eds.), Handbook of sports medicine and science: Gymnastics (pp. 85–97). John Wiley &
Sons.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/
0033-2909.112.1.155
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (1997a). 1997–2000 Code of Points Men’s Artistic
Gymnastics. FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (1997b). 1997–2000 Code of Points Women’s Artistic
Gymnastics. FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2001a). 2001–2004 Code of Points Men’s Artistic
Gymnastics. FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2001b). 2001–2004 Code of Points Women’s Artistic
Gymnastics. FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2006a). 2006–2008 Code of Points Men’s Artistic
Gymnastics. FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2006b). 2006–2008 Code of Points Women’s Artistic
Gymnastics.FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2009a). 2009–2012 Code of Points Men’s Artistic
Gymnastics. FIG.
262 A. SEEMANN-SINN ET AL.

Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2009b). 2009–2012 Code of Points Women’s Artistic

Gymnastics. FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2013a). 2013–2016 Code of Points Men’s Artistic
Gymnastics. FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2013b). 2013–2016 Code of Points Women’s Artistic
Gymnastics.FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2017a). 2017–2020 Code of Points Men’s Artistic
Gymnastics.FIG.
Fédération Internationale de Gymnastique. (2017b). 2017–2020 Code of Points Women’s Artistic
Gymnastics. FIG.
Fritz, C. O., Morris, P. E., & Richler, J. J. (2012). Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations an
interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 141(1), 2–18. https://doi.org/10.
1037/a0024338
Gastin, P. B. (2001). Energy system interaction and relative contribution during maximal exercise.
Sports Medicine, 31(10), 725–741. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200131100-00003
Hottenrott, K., & Neumann, G. (2016). Trainingswissenschaft: Ein Lehrbuch in 14 Lektionen (Vol.
7). Meyer & Meyer.
Jemni, M. (2011). Energetics of gymnastics. In M. Jemni (Ed.), The Science of Gymnastics (pp.
3–16). Routledge.
Jemni, M., Friemel, F., Lechevalier, J.-M., & Origas, M. (2000). Heart rate and blood lactate
concentration analysis during a high-level men’s gymnastics competition. The Journal of
Strength and Conditioning Research, 14(4), 389–394. https://doi.org/10.1519/00124278-
200011000-00004
Jemni, M., Friemel, F., Sands, W., & Mikesky, A. (2001). Evolution du profil physiologique des
gymnastes durant les 40 dernières années (revue de littérature). Canadian Journal of Applied
Physiology, 26(5), 442–456. https://doi.org/10.1139/h01-027
Kunčič, A., & Mešl, J. (2017). Aljaž Pegan gymnastic results development at world championships.
Science of Gymnastics Journal, 9(3), 225–249.
Marina, M., & Rodríguez, F. (2014). Physiological demands of young women’s competitive
gymnastic routines. Biology of Sport, 31(3), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.5604/20831862.1111849
Naundorf, F., Fetzer, J., & Brehmer, S. (2009). Entwicklungstendenzen im Gerätturnen bis zu den
Olympischen Sommerspielen 2008 in Peking (CHN). Zeitschrift für Angewandte
Trainingswissenschaft, 16(1), 137–146.
Nummela, A., & Rusko, H. (1995). Time course of anaerobic and aerobic energy expenditure
during short-term exhaustive running in athletes. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 16
(8), 522–527. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-973048
Plowman, S. A., & Smith, D. L. (2014). Exercise physiology:. For health, fitness and performance (4
ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Sahlin, K. (2014). Muscle energetics during explosive activities and potential effects of nutrition
and training. Sports Medicine, 44(Suppl 2), 167–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0256-9
Schnabel, G., Harre, H.-D., & Krug, J. (2008). Trainingslehre–Trainingswissenschaft: Leistung -
Training - Wettkampf. Meyer & Meyer.
Serresse, O., Lortie, G., Bouchard, C., & Boulay, M. (1988). Estimation of the contribution of the
various energy systems during maximal work of short duration. International Journal of Sports
Medicine, 9(6), 456–460. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-1025051
Stone, M. H., Stone, M., & Sands, W. (2007). Principles and practice of resistance training. Human
Kinetics.