M
mouey77
I had a great conversation earlier today with the gym owner of what is supposedly the most reputable gym in our area (Gym #2). DD was evaluated there last year. We could have switched, but she was very young at the time, and we decided to stay put for this year at Gym #1. As we are shelling out more money and feeling more and more frustrated at the lack of communication and very slow progress at our current gym, we are coming to the realization that we should have switched to the Gym #2.
It is pretty clear by now that gym #1's philosophy is to move the girls along very slowly and have them compete down a level so they will win the meets. They have a large group of lower level (levels 1-4) girls and no optional level girls (at best 1 or 2 if even). After talking to gym #2's owner, their philosophy is to have the child compete as close to her ability level as possible, even if it means not winning the meets or even not participating in the meets if the child isn't ready yet. (To illustrate what I mean, gym #2 placed DD on old level 3/new level 2 last year. The gym owner told me they will move young girls up even in the middle of meet season if they master the skills. When gym #1 had their try outs for new team members last spring, they placed all the new girls on the new level 1 team. They definitely will not move girls up in the middle of meet season if skills are mastered or not. I am talking about levels 1-4.)
So, my questions: what, if any, is the advantage to sticking with gym #1's philosophy of slow progression and winning meets? With the money and time we are investing, I am very inclined to switch to gym #2 in the future, but I feel like we should at least stick it out this season with gym #1, since DD is attached to her coach and we have already invested a lot of time there, plus she is super excited about her sparkly new team leotard.
It is pretty clear by now that gym #1's philosophy is to move the girls along very slowly and have them compete down a level so they will win the meets. They have a large group of lower level (levels 1-4) girls and no optional level girls (at best 1 or 2 if even). After talking to gym #2's owner, their philosophy is to have the child compete as close to her ability level as possible, even if it means not winning the meets or even not participating in the meets if the child isn't ready yet. (To illustrate what I mean, gym #2 placed DD on old level 3/new level 2 last year. The gym owner told me they will move young girls up even in the middle of meet season if they master the skills. When gym #1 had their try outs for new team members last spring, they placed all the new girls on the new level 1 team. They definitely will not move girls up in the middle of meet season if skills are mastered or not. I am talking about levels 1-4.)
So, my questions: what, if any, is the advantage to sticking with gym #1's philosophy of slow progression and winning meets? With the money and time we are investing, I am very inclined to switch to gym #2 in the future, but I feel like we should at least stick it out this season with gym #1, since DD is attached to her coach and we have already invested a lot of time there, plus she is super excited about her sparkly new team leotard.