WAG L4 mobility score

[3rd_time_around]

My two cents is the same as its always been. I call shananigans on mobility scores. Conditioning and skill acquisition should determine level advancement.

As I watch my daughter progress this sport and I view the giant scope of gymnastics from Level 3-10 what becomes apparent is Hard work, desire, strength, and flexibility are the requirements to gain levels and chase dreams. If your gymnast has those traits they will be successful. If their coach can develop confident athletes they can be successful. An athletes struggles in level 3 or 4 or 5 will be memories long forgotten should they stay in the sport and achieve higher optional levels.

My take away is do not sweat the small stuff as each year there are only larger and larger hurdles.

I also disagree. I've witnessed too many gymnasts rushed through levels by coaches and parents because they "had the skills," only to burn out, get injured, or get stuck in an optional level due to extreme fears that they developed. Judging is scary and heart-attack-inducing when the gymnast is not ready for a level, but can throw some impressive skills here and there. Mobility scores slow down the gymnast long enough to be sure they can compete competently and successfully before moving on to harder and more dangerous skills. The compulsory levels do more than just focus on hand movements and perfecting arm placement, they make sure the proper strength is achieved for the harder skills, and the stamina is there as well. They also are supposed to ground the Gymnast in core skills that lead to harder skills. If the foundation is bad, the structure is bad. A well-seasoned judge/coach explained to me the process of teaching a proper round off, and it floored me. She said it takes hours and hours to teach it and for the gymnast to do it properly, sometimes even months and months. That's just one example of what I mean.

 

[3rd_time_around]

GA AAU has addressed this pretty well. The level 3 girls vault front handspring on the table to flat back, the level 3 bars eliminated the stride circle and FHC, and does a BHC cast squat-on jump to long hang pullover, counter swing, tap swing, counter swing straight drop dismount. At a recent large meet in the state, only 9 out of 63 girls who competed AA failed to score a 34.00, and the ones who didn't scored 33.00+. Now, not all of them competed GA AAU, but many did. USAG does need a better bridge from 3 to 4 in my opinion. I'm very happy my level 3 is already on the high bar. She scored a 37.350 at her second meet, with a 9.35 on bars.

I need to amend this to say that at the large Meet, I was referring to the level 4s, not Level 3s.

 

[Peachy88]

I need to amend this to say that at the large Meet, I was referring to the level 4s, not Level 3s.

The vault and bars do sound like much more of a bridge, but are six year olds jumping to the high bar? Mine does it, but not sure I would have wanted her working on it when she was just six and about to compete level 3.

 

[RTT2]

I also disagree. I've witnessed too many gymnasts rushed through levels by coaches and parents because they "had the skills," only to burn out, get injured, or get stuck in an optional level due to extreme fears that they developed. Judging is scary and heart-attack-inducing when the gymnast is not ready for a level, but can throw some impressive skills here and there. Mobility scores slow down the gymnast long enough to be sure they can compete competently and successfully before moving on to harder and more dangerous skills. The compulsory levels do more than just focus on hand movements and perfecting arm placement, they make sure the proper strength is achieved for the harder skills, and the stamina is there as well. They also are supposed to ground the Gymnast in core skills that lead to harder skills. If the foundation is bad, the structure is bad. A well-seasoned judge/coach explained to me the process of teaching a proper round off, and it floored me. She said it takes hours and hours to teach it and for the gymnast to do it properly, sometimes even months and months. That's just one example of what I mean.

I think this is key to so much in gymnastics (and in life!). I suspect kids can advance to a point even with a weak foundation, but I believe that without major corrections things begin to collapse down the line.

 

[3rd_time_around]

The vault and bars do sound like much more of a bridge, but are six year olds jumping to the high bar? Mine does it, but not sure I would have wanted her working on it when she was just six and about to compete level 3.

If they’re 6 years old, then yes.

 

[raenndrops]

This above is why our gym ditched L3 in favor of Xcel Silver. They are getting girls over the vault table sooner, and spending less time on shoot throughs and mill circles and more time on kips earlier. My dd did 2 years of L3 (before the gym ditched L3) and I would say that the new crop of girls coming up through Xcel Silver in lieu of L3 are stronger on bars and vault sooner than dd's group was.

** yes I know this is not the spirit in which Xcel is intended.

Actually, it kind of is in the spirit of Xcel ... giving the girls the chance to compete (and add skills in as they become competition ready).
It's not like Level 3 is required... so they could technically just train without competing for a year. However, for many gymnasts, they want to compete. Having them compete Xcel Silver while training for L4 seems like a great plan.

 

[duyetanh]

I understand that the mill circle and front hip circle are never used again, but don’t they still serve a purpose? I could be completely wrong in this, but don’t they teach the gymnast how to shift their wrists for harder skills later?

Yes they do

 

[sce]

I do think that the JO 3 vaults and bars are not helpful for transitioning to level 4. Our new gym does Xcel Silver to level 4 which makes a lot more sense. They do a front handspring vault over the sideways mat stack and the bars are much shorter and almost all skills lead to level 4 skills. This gives them more time to uptrain the kip. Spending hours and hours trying to get a front hip and a mill circle perfect seems less constructive to me. Even the floor seems more advantageous except the choreography. The routines look slow to me and I imagine level 4 is pretty shocking in that manner, but as others have said, most girls struggle bars and vault.

The proposed vaults for the next routine cycle has level 4 going over the mat stack, I believe. So only level 5 will do handspring over the table.

 

[Peachy88]

The proposed vaults for the next routine cycle has level 4 going over the mat stack, I believe. So only level 5 will do handspring over the table.

That sounds like a great idea! Get the form and shape down of the handspring vault without the fear inducing table. Then take it to the table.

 

[mommyof1]

The proposed vaults for the next routine cycle has level 4 going over the mat stack, I believe. So only level 5 will do handspring over the table.

This would work well for gyms that compete L5. But what about the large number of gyms that score out of L5? Those kids would just have to get the FHS over the table passable enough to score out, then they would immediately move on to the timers for flipping vaults. I really like the idea of breaking vault down into a more gradual progression, but I think more of that progress needs to happen at the very lowest levels.

 

[amiandjim]

The proposed vaults for the next routine cycle has level 4 going over the mat stack, I believe. So only level 5 will do handspring over the table.

I thought level 3 would to over the mat stack in the next cycle?

 

[amiandjim]

https://usagym.org/PDFs/Women/Member%20Updates/2021_29_compelements_preview.pdf

 

[reluctant]

This would work well for gyms that compete L5. But what about the large number of gyms that score out of L5? Those kids would just have to get the FHS over the table passable enough to score out, then they would immediately move on to the timers for flipping vaults. I really like the idea of breaking vault down into a more gradual progression, but I think more of that progress needs to happen at the very lowest levels.

It looks like level 5 is when the Yurchenko time or Tsuk timer is introduced. Maybe those gyms that skip level 5 should reconsider. I've noticed that girls from gyms that compete Level 5 often do better later even if they are slowed down for a year. Compulsory skills matter.

 

[TumbleTimes4]

It looks like level 5 is when the Yurchenko time or Tsuk timer is introduced. Maybe those gyms that skip level 5 should reconsider. I've noticed that girls from gyms that compete Level 5 often do better later even if they are slowed down for a year. Compulsory skills matter.

Our gym used to have girls compete 4, test out of 5, and then compete 6. This year though, they are having them compete 5 while uptraining for 6/7. The head coach thinks that level 5 bars are a good foundation for level 7.

 

[coachmolly]

Our gym used to have girls compete 4, test out of 5, and then compete 6. This year though, they are having them compete 5 while uptraining for 6/7. The head coach thinks that level 5 bars are a good foundation for level 7.

Level 5 is a good year to really build a foundation for solid optional skills. The routines are essentially the same as level 4, so not as much focus needs to be placed on teaching the little tiny details of the routines and can instead be placed on learning their level 5 skills and then progressing beyond them as they are achieved making for a great opportunity for up training throughout the season. I think skipping 6 is a better option for those kids who are progressing quickly, but I do think it's a necessary level for lots of kids and am glad it's there.
I think the projected changes for vault and the option to do a straddle cast handstand in level 5 are good ones and might encourage more gyms to compete it.

 

[mommyof1]

Level 5 is a good year to really build a foundation for solid optional skills. The routines are essentially the same as level 4, so not as much focus needs to be placed on teaching the little tiny details of the routines and can instead be placed on learning their level 5 skills and then progressing beyond them as they are achieved making for a great opportunity for up training throughout the season. I think skipping 6 is a better option for those kids who are progressing quickly, but I do think it's a necessary level for lots of kids and am glad it's there.
I think the projected changes for vault and the option to do a straddle cast handstand in level 5 are good ones and might encourage more gyms to compete it.

Ooh, I like the option for a straddle cast in L5. We have a few L6s who compete a straddle cast almost-handstand. My kid is working straddle CHS and would probably prefer to do that in L5. She does not like to cast really high with legs together. But the changes will come too late for her.

Why are they moving the yurchenko/tsuk timer down to L5? That FHS vault seems so very difficult, and I see very few L4s who have really mastered it. Is the idea that the new L3 vault over the mat stack will improve the quality of the L4 vaults enough that the kids will only need to go over the table with the FHS for one level?

 

[mommyof1]

I thought level 3 would to over the mat stack in the next cycle?

That makes more sense!

 

[reluctant]

That makes more sense!

It does seem nuts that the FHS over the table was previously the vault for Ls 4,5,6,7 and now it will be just for L4.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

. I know success in compulsories do not equal success in optional.

Depends on how you define success and yes to a degree scores matter. Long one here.

No you don’t have to score 37s, 38s, and higher to be successful in optionals.

But there is a point where if you don’t perform a skill solidly and well you simply won’t score well. So if a gymnast is consistently doing foundation skills badly it will be reflected in their scores. And they are unlikely to make to optionals.
But their scores will be very low and consistently low under 32 much of the time. And showing very little improvement.

A kid with somewhat decent skills but getting hammered with text errors. Those kids won’t medal often but their scores will show improvement. The 32-34 scorers. Those are the kids who can end up blossoming in optionals. We have such a kid at our gym. I happen to be friends with the kids Mom. Mom took a lot of heat from Dad. Dad was if she is not going to win why bother. He would of pulled her out at Level 2. She is now a L7 and getting some wins.

A couple other things to note.

Looking at one meet and one gymnast is not the way to go when deciding how good or bad a gymnast is. Bad days happen.

Gymnasts typically get multiple opportunities to meet a minimum score.

Had a first hand experience with this this year. My kid spent most of her season injured. Finally was able to do a meet. She, coaches, us parents knew she wasn’t going to score well, but she was capable of mid to upper 8 on most events, vault not so much yet. She was doing ok, AA was looking to be in the high 32s may be even 33s (which was going to her lowest score ever). And she had a bar routine that can only be described as a train wreck. This kid is capable of 9s on bars. And I sat there thinking, if someone is watching this routine and knows nothing about my kid. They are thinking....What are her coaches doing, who let this kid near a bar. Coach was stunned as were we. She plowed through and kept smiling. Had an great bar practice the next day, according to her coach (who is known for telling it like it is). I can assure you my daughters score that day doesn’t reflect her actual capabilities. But you need to see more than one meet to know that.

When she was finally ready it was.... Mom, I don’t know what happened. My hands just wouldn’t stay on the bars.

Regarding the compulsory debate. Again you don’t have to enter The JO stream until level 4. So really it’s 2 mandatory levels and you can even score out of those. Solid skills should mean a minimum score is met, so it shouldn’t be an issue. How gyms and coaches chose to do compulsory varies widely. But there are foundation skills that can’t be “skipped” they may be taught differently but they aren’t “skipped”. Some kids get skills quicker then others but again they are not “skipping” them.

Our coaches feel that JO compulsory teaches important foundation skills. Back when NY had an Early State meet for compulsory levels. Our kids did early states and moved to IGC, which allowed them to work different skills and have their own routines, but they still had the compulsory foundation. I thought it a good way to do things. My kid got a solid foundation and didn’t do compulsory routines for months.

Now that there is no early state option our gym still does JO compulsory and they score out the kids who are ready for the next level. Something they didn’t do when we did early states.

And other gyms have minimum scores of 36 or 37 to move. Or mandatory years at multiple levels.

Different paths but all should have solid foundation skills. And if you have solid foundation achieving a minimum score should not be an issue if given multiple opportunities.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

It looks like level 5 is when the Yurchenko time or Tsuk timer is introduced. Maybe those gyms that skip level 5 should reconsider. I've noticed that girls from gyms that compete Level 5 often do better later even if they are slowed down for a year. Compulsory skills matter.

My kid stayed 5 while the rest of her team moved to 6. She did 6 they did 7. When she did 7, they all met up again as they all repeated 7. She ended up out scoring them at states, numerically. And is one of the better bar kids.

They are all in the same score range, despite them not doing 5 but spending more time at 7. Coach felt mine need more work on the skills level 5 emphasizes, particularly bars. Even my kid would tell you her bars are better because of L5.

They all got to the same place. Coach gives them what they need.