Sunday, July 4, 2010

NABIEVA BARS!!!

Holy hell!  Tatiana Nabieva pulled out a whammy of a laid out Tkatchev at the Japan Cup like it was a walk in the park.  She had some Jordan-style airtime going on. HOT!!!! Pity about what happened after......

You just have to watch through Dementieva's decent routine, and Mustafina's untidy routine (that Pak was messy). I love the composition of her bars though, for some reason.

Then behold what Nabieva's has been keeping up that sleeve!  Poor girl was very upset it didn't work out.

(Question: Was she planning to Pak right out of that?)


or HERE


*******

9 comments:

  1. Nabieva is impressively powerful (see those shoulders) and so emotional. I LOVE her!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow! Has that ever been done before? She should do layout Hindorf + Tkatchev + Pak!

    ReplyDelete
  3. What would her d score be if she had connected it to the pak?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I love that Mustafina and Nabieva are both doing the Khorkina transition (and they do it better than the queen herself!)

    If I were choreographing Nabieva's bars I'd put the pak right after, or to the lo tkatchev to immediate giant, instead of trying to kip out of it. She clearly has enough power to do that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That was amazing by Nabieva. I knew I liked this girl when I saw her last year! Her problem reminds me of Dominique Dawes @ 96 worlds..just not enough time for a gymnast to think of whether or not they can do a giant swing out of it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I've watched that routine about 10 times now and every time it still makes me jaw drop. It's amazing.

    ReplyDelete
  7. PolyisTCOandbannedJuly 4, 2010 at 6:33 PM

    She has the power to do tkatchev tkatchev.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nabieve's toe on layout tkatchev was brilliant! Though i wonder if she'll be able to do one without the toe on first for speed. Too bad she was going too fast to connect the Pak. it was a smart decision on her part, she most likely would have crashed strait into the low bar with all the speed she had.

    ReplyDelete