WAG Numbers of L9 and 10s moving from Regionals to Nationals.....something seems crazy!

Parents... Coaches... Gymnasts...
Gymnastics Questions?
Don't Lurk... We've Got Answers!

New For 2022
MEMBERS ONLY Parent Group!
Join for FREE!
Status
Not open for further replies.

Sasha

Proud Parent
May 15, 2013
1,583
Wait. Major problem, folks.
This new map would have me traveling to CT in the winter.
I rather prefer to travel South from NC in February so I withdraw my support.
:cool:

Haha. In another scenario, we make all regions a slim, vertical slice of the country, and have the southern-most State host everything in winter. Done! :D

Alternatively, Hawaii hosts everything, always. :rolleyes:
 

BachFlyer

Proud Parent
Mar 29, 2010
1,103
Haha. In another scenario, we make all regions a slim, vertical slice of the country, and have the southern-most State host everything in winter. Done! :D

Since I'm a northerner, I am on board. So long as there is also an accompanying rule created that compensates parents for travel expenses for the full season! USAG might not be so thrilled with us by the time this thread is complete...
 

Flyaway

Proud Parent
Jun 1, 2014
1,380
What a fun experiment! Nice work Sasha! I'm down with traveling to Hawaii. Where do I sign?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sasha
D

Deleted member 14190

Since I'm a northerner, I am on board. So long as there is also an accompanying rule created that compensates parents for travel expenses for the full season! USAG might not be so thrilled with us by the time this thread is complete...
You will be on the same travel plan as Hawaii and Alaska . ;)
 

dbean

Proud Parent
Dec 16, 2013
166
Ok, Y'all, have some fun tearing this apart and seeing if you can do better :D

Pretty much whoever competes with Texas is going to complain - there are no bordering states with strong numbers. So what would you do?

(Based on numbers posted above mining State Championships representing L10's scoring 34+)

View attachment 6663 View attachment 6667
Would hate to have to travel north for meets. Mainly because of drive. We are in NC and like traveling to SC and TN
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seeker

gymgal

Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Aug 22, 2008
4,660
Oh, heck yes. Being in NC, I LOVE this reconfiguration. Moves us into a much smaller travel territory.
Would be dreamy!
Where would you propose the W/E divide be in this configuration for Level 9? (Just for shiggles.)
oh heck no! I like regionals in FL!! LOL. seriously though, if it means evening or the numbers, I am all for it.
 

gymgal

Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Aug 22, 2008
4,660
Another point to ponder...if you live in South Dakota or any other "smaller, weaker gym state" and you have coaching that is not up to par or ONE choice of gym within 100 miles you do the best you can with what you have. In the "larger, stronger gym states" you can move to a new gym, coaches are attracted to living in Texas or Florida while Boise might not appeal. Just because labels are applied without specific names, it still stings that my DD might be considered "lucky" to qualify....she works her butt off just like most girls.
But the question becomes why do the girls in the Dakota's count more than the girls in MS or AL? You are implying that the states in the smaller regions deserve a break because they don't have as good of coaching. But several other states in other regions are in the same sparse opportunities and they don't get to send their girls with barely 35s. In regions like 8, they don't even get to send them to regionals because there are so many girls that the region upped the qualifying score to a 35.

I get it, those from the smaller regions don't want to give up their spots, but there really is no legitimate reason not to redraw the lines for the good of the entire system.

For the record, no one here is saying that the spots should be taken away from anyone this year, but the conversation needs to take place to bring forth change for future years.
 

gymgal

Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Aug 22, 2008
4,660
I am confused. The map shows CT in region 6 (pink) but the chart shows R7. Honestly, I think for ease, it needs to stay in R6

Great job BTW! A little tweaking and it's ready to present! :)
 

flippinam

Coach
Gymnast
Nov 8, 2014
242
Another point to ponder...if you live in South Dakota or any other "smaller, weaker gym state" and you have coaching that is not up to par or ONE choice of gym within 100 miles you do the best you can with what you have. In the "larger, stronger gym states" you can move to a new gym, coaches are attracted to living in Texas or Florida while Boise might not appeal. Just because labels are applied without specific names, it still stings that my DD might be considered "lucky" to qualify....she works her butt off just like most girls.

I feel like one thing that's been forgotten is not every gymnast in the "power" states has the same opportunities. Yes gymnasts living in Dallas or Austin or San Antonio have lots of options but those living in smaller cities are in the same boat with one option within a 100 mile radius. Looking at absolute numbers, there's likely just as many or more gymnasts in the power states living in cities with few opportunities as there are in some of the entire smaller states. So to say the qualification numbers need to account for differences in opportunities would mean it would only be fair to have a "lower" tier of qualifiers from the power states if they live in small cities. Obviously this is not practical or right.
Also I don't think anybody is referring to your DD at all when talking about gymnasts that are lucky to go to nationals due to region size. Sophia is amazing and would have an excellent shot at qualifying regardless of how regional lines are redrawn.
 

wallinbl

Proud Parent
Jan 30, 2012
1,708
Some of the girls that go to our gym drive up to 80 miles to get there. Sometimes, it's not just about having a quality gym, but also about having one that's the right fit.
 

gracyomalley

Proud Parent
Aug 5, 2013
944
I suppose you could also say there are gymnasts in region 2 who wish they had access to the type of coaching and powerhouse gyms you see in region 1.
THIS....in spades.
However, for "average kids" smaller regions make for happier gymnasts I sometime think as they aren't left behind or never allowed to compete at all.

But having very few experienced coaches, no TOPS or ELITE or FUTURE stars options, few gyms to move to if you struggle where you are, no other upper level kids to train with, coaches who have never taught upper level skills before, it really does change the playing field. Our state rarely has more than 10 level 1os...and we are the second largest in region 2.

It really is apples to oranges...
 

gracyomalley

Proud Parent
Aug 5, 2013
944
if someone just gets a list of all state qualifiers to regionals, it would be pretty easy to shift the states around. Now don't freak out I didn't look at any numbers so I am just throwing this out there. For instance, Utah, , Colorado, Wyoming, N Dakota, S Dakota, Nebraska, all go to Region 2 (looks big but it's not) . Illinois, AR, KS goes to region 4 . WV and TN goes to 5 , NJ goes to region 6, LA goes to 3. Anyways, there are many different possibilities that could pretty much even out the regions for the next 10 years or so.
sounds good numbers-wise, but this would mean that kids in region 2 would possibly need to travel for many more meets in order to actually see their competition - and I'd bet that Colorado and Washington would contribute 75% of the national qualifiers due to their coaching depth...kids from Wyoming won't be suddenly getting better training...however, this kind of redistribution may well help athletes in smaller geographic regions with more large urban centers and I don't think its fair for 37s to sit home when 34s go...however, there is some talent in regin 2 and without getting to nationals those kids won't be noticed at all due to coaching differentials, so there's that too....
 
  • Like
Reactions: sce and Flyaway
D

Deleted member 14190

In every region those smaller states exist as well. The bottom line is competition breeds work ethic, it's true! And if a score that once would qualify isn't going to anymore, then people get better. They just do! :)
 

wandrewsjr

Coach
Proud Parent
Sep 4, 2009
2,468
THIS....in spades.
However, for "average kids" smaller regions make for happier gymnasts I sometime think as they aren't left behind or never allowed to compete at all.

But having very few experienced coaches, no TOPS or ELITE or FUTURE stars options, few gyms to move to if you struggle where you are, no other upper level kids to train with, coaches who have never taught upper level skills before, it really does change the playing field. Our state rarely has more than 10 level 1os...and we are the second largest in region 2.

It really is apples to oranges...
You know who also rarely has more than 10 level 10's? New Mexico in Region 3, Alabama and Mississippi in Region 8, Kentucky in Region 5...etc. Balancing the Regions might give those kids just a little better shot at a chance to shine at Nationals. There is some talent there too. I know the system will never be perfect or fair, but doesn't seem quite right that the smaller states in large Regions might get to send one kid a year to JO's while all the states in the smaller Regions get to send every kid that scores a 35. If the Regional system was designed to make sure gymnasts in geographical areas that are undeserved by quality coaches get their chance to shine at Nationals, then that system is failing those kids in small states in huge Regions miserably.
 

gracyomalley

Proud Parent
Aug 5, 2013
944
You know who also rarely has more than 10 level 10's? New Mexico in Region 3, Alabama and Mississippi in Region 8, Kentucky in Region 5...etc. Balancing the Regions might give those kids just a little better shot at a chance to shine at Nationals. There is some talent there too. I know the system will never be perfect or fair, but doesn't seem quite right that the smaller states in large Regions might get to send one kid a year to JO's while all the states in the smaller Regions get to send every kid that scores a 35. If the Regional system was designed to make sure gymnasts in geographical areas that are undeserved by quality coaches get their chance to shine at Nationals, then that system is failing those kids in small states in huge Regions miserably.
totally agree - and to be clear, I have no horse in this race - my L10 boy is quitting and my DD was out for 3 years so won't be heading to nationals - my youngest boy is a slow and steady kiddo...and you are absolutely right. DD has friends who are hitting L9 and L10 nationals now with less than amazing scores (although they are very good gymnasts, they are still from our small non-competitive state/region...), so I sort of see both sides. And have known two L10s from our area who made it to college gym, one would have been at nationals from any region - and did well in a big D1 college team, and one wouldn't have been there if from another region, and didn't find college gym a good fit for her (she competed one event). Both were awesome athletes but I know that their stories might be different in a different region.

Actually, what I really wish is that gymnastics weren't such a brutally competitive sport here in the USA...and so skewed based upon things out of the athletes control...but that is life, right?
 

Natasha

Proud Parent
Jan 28, 2011
1,712
You know who also rarely has more than 10 level 10's? New Mexico in Region 3, Alabama and Mississippi in Region 8, Kentucky in Region 5...etc. Balancing the Regions might give those kids just a little better shot at a chance to shine at Nationals. There is some talent there too. I know the system will never be perfect or fair, but doesn't seem quite right that the smaller states in large Regions might get to send one kid a year to JO's while all the states in the smaller Regions get to send every kid that scores a 35. If the Regional system was designed to make sure gymnasts in geographical areas that are undeserved by quality coaches get their chance to shine at Nationals, then that system is failing those kids in small states in huge Regions miserably.

YES. And for those small states in Region 8? Some of those kids know they don't have what it takes to get to Nationals in region 8, but Regionals is a big deal for them, especially since their state meets are so very small (and honestly kind of a let down after attending invitationals). And now, because region 8 is so large, there were gymnasts who were consistently scoring mid-high 35 and occasional 36 who had one more mistake than usual at their state meet and didn't even get to go to regionals because they scored a high 34 at state. So now you have these L10 gymnasts who have worked very hard not even getting to enjoy the experience of their state meet because they are stressed about getting the 35, where you have gymnasts in small regions who can enjoy states, get their 34, go to regionals, hit a 35 and go to Nationals. And some of these girls are seniors, competing in their last JO meet. Now, if all the regions are going to switch to a 35 to qualify that is one thing, but for these girls to know that they didn't get to go to regionals because their region is too big and that if they lived in ANY other region they would get to go?
 

tomtnt

Proud Parent
May 26, 2010
526
looks like current rules and procedures for JO runs to 2018 and then the next rules/procedures/code of points runs from 2018-2022. Any hope for change to affect that 4 year period should probably take place now in hopes of bringing it to the attention of USA Gymnastics in time for their 2017/2018 Congress.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.