Is anyone else disappointed at the new FINA decision to allow dolphin kick on breaststroke starts and turns? It may be that the "short-axis"strokes now become indistinguishable from one another! With this new FINA ruling and the currently-allowable armstroke breaking the plane of the water on recovery, why not go all the way back to the 1950's designation of "butterfly-breaststroke"? Kitajima's 2004 "victory" certainly prompted this ruling, but that doesn't make the decison a proper one.
Parents
Former Member
Kitajima's 2004 "victory" certainly prompted this ruling, but that doesn't make the decison a proper one.
But the rule does not address what Kitajima did, it does not address the 'long-standing controversy' and it makes things more complicated for judges.
What happened in the infamous Kitajima's race is that he pushed off the wall, did a large butterfly kick, followed that with a pull down, and when he finished that pull down, pretty much simultaneously, he did another butterfly kick, and followed that with a breastroke kick.
The first butterfly kick has always been illegal and would never have been controversial. It is easy to judge as a violation of the rule. The second kick is difficult to judge, as if it occurs as a natural part of the pull down it is OK, and that kick, done often by breaststrokers, is controversial. A rule which allowed a significant kick during the pulldown could be justified as making judging easier, less controversial, and acknowledging what is almost common practice already.
However, the way the rule appears to be worded, things are not simpler. Now the judge could watch Kitajima's first kick, say in his mind "that's one" and when he saw the second kick, would wonder "is that an illegal or legal motion?" So really, the new rule allows a big dolphin kick and a still-controversial little one.
Kitajima's 2004 "victory" certainly prompted this ruling, but that doesn't make the decison a proper one.
But the rule does not address what Kitajima did, it does not address the 'long-standing controversy' and it makes things more complicated for judges.
What happened in the infamous Kitajima's race is that he pushed off the wall, did a large butterfly kick, followed that with a pull down, and when he finished that pull down, pretty much simultaneously, he did another butterfly kick, and followed that with a breastroke kick.
The first butterfly kick has always been illegal and would never have been controversial. It is easy to judge as a violation of the rule. The second kick is difficult to judge, as if it occurs as a natural part of the pull down it is OK, and that kick, done often by breaststrokers, is controversial. A rule which allowed a significant kick during the pulldown could be justified as making judging easier, less controversial, and acknowledging what is almost common practice already.
However, the way the rule appears to be worded, things are not simpler. Now the judge could watch Kitajima's first kick, say in his mind "that's one" and when he saw the second kick, would wonder "is that an illegal or legal motion?" So really, the new rule allows a big dolphin kick and a still-controversial little one.
