Parents Advice: considering leaving JO program for Xcel

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

ChalkBucket may earn a commission through product links on the site.
She tested at a few gyms prior to us choosing one, because of the overwhelmingly consistant responses from highly credentialed (former elite and medaled Olympian)coaches stating she was one of the best at her age and level of training, they had seen in their 35+ years coaching! I don't want her potential lost on a bad decision in her training, since time and financials are not an issue! Thank you for your time!! :)

I'm kind of surprised that if she's tested at a few gyms, and done so well, that one of those gyms didn't decide to fast track her through compulsories vs having her compete Level 1...she's 6 so she could compete....and now you are considering doing prep op so she doesn't quit...what am I missing here?
 
Gymmom803, I don't know why in the world the your gym wants to compete an excellent gymnast in Xcel. If she is strong on a couple of events and not on bars, then xcel should not be the only answer. They should allow her only to train and not compete until she is strong enough on all events. Believe it or not it will not hurt her to uptrain without competing, because she will be doing basically the same thing as in Xcel(scoring out of 4/5 level) once she starts competing again. I figured it out for your dd long term big O dreams. She cannot get there for at least 10 more years, being the next one is in two years and every four years after that. She will not be old enough even by the next one after 2016, so it will have to be 2024. She will have plenty of time to up train and even skip a few levels if she is good enough. Doing conditioning at home will help wonders too. This is what I would ask for if I were you.
 
I'm kind of surprised that if she's tested at a few gyms, and done so well, that one of those gyms didn't decide to fast track her through compulsories vs having her compete Level 1...she's 6 so she could compete....and now you are considering doing prep op so she doesn't quit...what am I missing here?

That's what I was wondering! Lol! My DD tested as a 4/5 year old at a few gyms. They all recommended home schooling and fast tracks......no XCEL......LOTS of boring stuff for a while, but my dd is moving to optionals!! Whoohoo!
 
I'm kind of surprised that if she's tested at a few gyms, and done so well, that one of those gyms didn't decide to fast track her through compulsories vs having her compete Level 1...she's 6 so she could compete....and now you are considering doing prep op so she doesn't quit...what am I missing here?

Could it be an issue of the available gyms around? Although I did read that the OP is saying these are highly credentialed coaches. We have no gyms in our area that can handle elite level training, and honestly, it is questionable that any of the gyms nearby can handle even level 10 training. Maybe she is in a situation like that? I personally can't imagine even entertaining elite level gymnastics at 6 years old and level 2 though. Especially if you are at a gym working through compulsory levels one per year like the gyms around here. And then to suggest Xcel is indeed confusing, unless they really plan to move from Xcel to level 4/5 with training hours for Xcel being comparable to level 1 and level 2 training hours. As an aside, I would love to know what gyms around here would do if Gabby Douglas walked through the door at a young age. Maybe recommend shipping her off to Texas?? But I digress...
 
Before you make a decision, you should definitely check with your gym to see how xcel is handled. Some gyms dont take xcel seriously, some do. My dd competes platinum. She is in the same practice group as the L7. There is absolutely no difference in her training. The reason she competes xcel is she had fear on the beam, but did very well in the other events. For a point of reference, she competes cws on beam and a full on floor. If the gym treated the xcel as less competitive she would have stayed in jo and just continued with her struggles. She has the option to move to optionals. Her coach said when she is ready, she will compete one meet as a 5 and then go to 6 or 7.
 
My DD tested as a 4/5 year old at a few gyms. They all recommended home schooling and fast tracks.

I find it very frightening that coaches are looking at kids who aren't even in kindergarten yet and recommending homeschooling and fast-track training. When your kid is that age and the coaches start talking about team, it is easy to become overly excited about the idea that your kid is talented, which could lead to poor decision-making without the benefit of experience and perspective. The moms of a couple of the more talented kids in my daughter's group are clearly convinced that their kids are the next Olympians. They have had a tough time accepting the "gymnastics is a marathon, not a sprint" philosophy. For example, one kid's parents were unhappy when their daughter was not immediately placed on preteam when she walked into the gym at 4.5 years old and was instead sent to the preschool developmental program for a year to gain maturity. I am absolutely certain that if some of these parents had been advised when their daughters were 4 or 5 years old to homeschool them and send them to 20 hours of gym a week instead of kindergarten, they'd have jumped at the chance. I just can't see pulling a kid out of school at that age just for sports. (Note that I am NOT bashing homeschooling here, just saying that at that age the decision should be made for educational reasons, not for sports, and the parent needs to have the skills and resources to do it well.) Besides, what does it even mean to fast-track a 4-year-old? It's not as if they can safely be doing much skill work at that age.
 
I find it very frightening that coaches are looking at kids who aren't even in kindergarten yet and recommending homeschooling and fast-track training. When your kid is that age and the coaches start talking about team, it is easy to become overly excited about the idea that your kid is talented, which could lead to poor decision-making without the benefit of experience and perspective. The moms of a couple of the more talented kids in my daughter's group are clearly convinced that their kids are the next Olympians. They have had a tough time accepting the "gymnastics is a marathon, not a sprint" philosophy. For example, one kid's parents were unhappy when their daughter was not immediately placed on preteam when she walked into the gym at 4.5 years old and was instead sent to the preschool developmental program for a year to gain maturity. I am absolutely certain that if some of these parents had been advised when their daughters were 4 or 5 years old to homeschool them and send them to 20 hours of gym a week instead of kindergarten, they'd have jumped at the chance. I just can't see pulling a kid out of school at that age just for sports. (Note that I am NOT bashing homeschooling here, just saying that at that age the decision should be made for educational reasons, not for sports, and the parent needs to have the skills and resources to do it well.) Besides, what does it even mean to fast-track a 4-year-old? It's not as if they can safely be doing much skill work at that age.

The poster above has a really exceptional child, but generally yes, I agree. We have a homeschooling gym in town that pushes the talented kids into their homeschooling program and basically neglects the non-homeschooled kids. It's led to many a kid leaving the gym. I know of two kids who were in the homeschooling program last year as first graders. They started the season as level 2's and finished the state meet as very successful level 3's. I'm sure they are probably 7/8 yr old level 4's to start the current season. They are literally training 30 hours a week. I've posted this before, and a few people thought I was mistaken, but nope, 30 hours a week. That's absurd. In my opinion this shouldn't even be considered until the child is well into optional levels and older for sure! I guarantee those two kids are going to burn the heck out. Anyways, way off subject. Sorry, OP.
 
So she is 6, but does not have L3 bar skills, yet experienced coaches wanted to fast-track her? Something doesn't add up here. Most young girls that show exceptional talent for gymnastics (read candidates for fast track) would not have difficulty with L3 bar skills at age 6 if they have been in the sport for 2 years already. Generally when coaches evaluate young girls (age 4-5) they would be looking at natural strength as one of the indicators.
And, I am not a fan of "fast tracking" girls that young anyway….
 
I find it very frightening that coaches are looking at kids who aren't even in kindergarten yet and recommending homeschooling and fast-track training. When your kid is that age and the coaches start talking about team, it is easy to become overly excited about the idea that your kid is talented, which could lead to poor decision-making without the benefit of experience and perspective. The moms of a couple of the more talented kids in my daughter's group are clearly convinced that their kids are the next Olympians. They have had a tough time accepting the "gymnastics is a marathon, not a sprint" philosophy. For example, one kid's parents were unhappy when their daughter was not immediately placed on preteam when she walked into the gym at 4.5 years old and was instead sent to the preschool developmental program for a year to gain maturity. I am absolutely certain that if some of these parents had been advised when their daughters were 4 or 5 years old to homeschool them and send them to 20 hours of gym a week instead of kindergarten, they'd have jumped at the chance. I just can't see pulling a kid out of school at that age just for sports. (Note that I am NOT bashing homeschooling here, just saying that at that age the decision should be made for educational reasons, not for sports, and the parent needs to have the skills and resources to do it well.) Besides, what does it even mean to fast-track a 4-year-old? It's not as if they can safely be doing much skill work at that age.

Completely agree that 4-5 was too young for a fast-track/homeschool. We visited several different gyms at that age for reasons that involved gymnastics, but not DD's gymnastics in particular (long story.). However, we were only getting her evaluated for team/pre-team. All the talk about homeschool and such was too much too fast for my husband and me. We opted to keep her in a rec program until she was 5.5. We then selected a gym that put her on an old L4 team and she has progressed from there. She's 8 now and moving into L7 so I don't think she has moved too fast and I ultimately feel we made the right decision for our daughter. However, I do think something is off in Op's scenario. DD still struggles to some degree on bars, but the solution has always been to build strength and to give her time to grow. Her coaches have never suggested a less rigorous program as an alternative. That's not what my DD wants and she doesn't have any issues with boredom (now or back then).
 
Actually, I have to agree that the point of comparing different level scores in all-around seemed odd to me, for the very reasons you pointed out! I only shared that stat because others disagreed with me, and the competition itself put such an emphasis on sharing that info. Disregard that, ... but to compare "apples to apples" she finished 2nd out of 53 for all age categories (5-9) that competed the new level 1, when she had just turned 6, and was only beat out by a 9 year old. In her age devision for that level, she was first every comp. My intent was not to brag on her natural talent, and ability (although I will now!), it was to seek advice for how to best nurture that, by giving background as to her rare, natural abilites. Keep in mind, I am very objective, as a former athlete myself! She tested at a few gyms prior to us choosing one, because of the overwhelmingly consistant responses from highly credentialed (former elite and medaled Olympian)coaches stating she was one of the best at her age and level of training, they had seen in their 35+ years coaching! I don't want her potential lost on a bad decision in her training, since time and financials are not an issue! Thank you for your time!! :)
I want to be honest but careful here to not make you think I'm anything but supportive. Level 1 success is not a great ruler to judge higher success by. It means she is very precise and tight and does each skill very very well. but, it is level 1, the lowest level on the grade. Honestly, if she is as talented as you say, stay in JO or AAU. Xcel has "higher" scores, but the standards for getting those scores are not as rigid as JO. Truth. Most Xcel programs I've seen or know about use Xcel for the ones who aren't quite there for JO standards, are older, don't have the time or want to commit to JO training time, etc. One of mine did Prep Op (as it used to be called) and got nice scores, but I know they would have been so much lower in JO. That's why she didn't do JO. .
 
Yup. Of course there could be perfectly normal reasons for that (haven't had time to check back etc) ... Could also be (my cynical side is coming out) that what is being said isn't what the OP wanted to hear and/ or something is indeed "off" about the information we have been given. With as much experience as we have here collectively, it's hard to pull a fast one, and when a lot of people are questioning pieces of the story it may be that there is more to it than initially said. :)

But, definitely this is a busy time of year for a lot of people with back to school etc and I would love to hear more from OP about what they have decided!
 
Xcel has "higher" scores, but the standards for getting those scores are not as rigid as JO. Truth. Most Xcel programs I've seen or know about use Xcel for the ones who aren't quite there for JO standards, are older, don't have the time or want to commit to JO training time, etc. One of mine did Prep Op (as it used to be called) and got nice scores, but I know they would have been so much lower in JO. That's why she didn't do JO. .
Actually, Xcel has the same rigid standards for scores as the JO Optionals... Xcel gymnasts are doing OPTIONAL routines. They are judged on 1- did they meet the special requirements and 2- their FORM. There are a lot of girls getting NICE scores at L6 that are doing so after scoring out (barely) of Old L6 or New L5. Optionals are easier for girls that don't do so well with "prescribed" routines where perfection has been established. The advantage to OP's daughter doing Xcel (if she was being honest about everything... and the coaches suggested it) is that she could do the more difficult skills on floor and beam WHILE working on her strength for bars. It seems, with the coaches suggesting exactly that, that the gym plans to keep working on her strength... and probably has similar Xcel and JO hours.
 

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

College Gym News

The Hardest Skills: McKayla Maroney

3 Skills that FIG Would Ban at First Sight

Back