Discussion in 'Women's Artistic Gymnastics (WAG)' started by dbean, Mar 20, 2017.
who needs a pencil when you have meetscoresonline... lol
i think it's partly cultural. i know our region is struggling to become more competitive with other regions. they are (the USAG and judges) trying some things to up our game in our state. there aren't any home school programs, that i know of, for gymnasts. and i only know of one elite gym in our state (there may be more but i don't know if there are) and they just lost their coach to the australian olympic women's team.
i just want my gymmie to do her best at states - so i can have great pictures! i still have yet to get any good beam photos this year.
I wonder if scoring system will change once 9.8 and above become common occurrence and more and more gymnasts fit into that narrow slot. Perhaps judging will have to become more stringent at some point, or scores may have to go above 10 to cover wider range of deductions, difficulties, executions, starting values. Also more girls are trying for Hopes and elite, and they are very talented and qualified. Regular coaches raise top talent these days and many successful. Those are the same girls who compete JO up to certain point.
Its like those 10s on YouTube, that even the untrained eye can see are not even close to perfect. Yet 2 judges gave them a 10. I think it depends on the area. In 10 years of my dd competing, I never saw a 10 in our state or region. I saw 2 last year, one in Level 1 and one in silver. But some states/regions have 10s a lot.
nearly spit out my tea...............
Yes to this.......
I also think it is about hours.
We have made a conscious decision to keep our daughters hours on the low side. I would rather she score a 9.3-9.5 on an event and be able to do more then gym, including the occasional just chill day, then have to live and breathe gym for a 9.7 and above. And so would she.
tell it to the college judges - girls who were scoring 9.6/9.7/9.8 in level 10 are routinely scoring 9.9s in college....
at any rate, i don't think there's an epidemic of 10s, at least in the level that counts: level 10.... so far this year, there has been four 10.0 scores, all in vault, and presumably due to the fact that the gymnasts were all performing 1 1/2 and double twisting yurechenko where the SV is 10.1 - seems like 3 of those 4 scores came from the same meet, the WOGA classic...
Was thinking it is just a volume thing. CA has so much more gymnasts... AmandaLynn's stats with NC pretty much confirms that. And no, that doesn't take away from your original point -this is happening in many places I think it is just a matter of a lot more high caliber training/gyms popping up.
Not in the gyms that OP are talking about. 37-38+ from compulsory through L10 for these teams.
That is not what is happening with the gyms that OP is talking about. She was talking about the teams as a whole. and those gyms generally compete one level a year (except 5>7 in fall>spring). The teams as a whole do not have girls who are not ready to go to the next level.
I think it is a combination but certainly CA will have a larger talent pool to draw from just by sheer numbers in the state and they have numerous excellent programs, which creates competition and forces the gyms to go to that next caliber of training to survive financially (meaning the rec parents will go to the gyms they view as more successful). Also, see below about the difference in hours between programs.
It took my dd getting to L9 before I truly "got" this. We want all these talented younger girls to move up to the levels they can complete in, which means they would get to level 10 even earlier than they do now, and then we complain about them having so many years of experience when our girls finally get there. And it increases the risk of burnout/injury for those gymnasts. It makes no sense once you truly think it through but when you are in the moment, it is hard to see the long term consequences. I will say, however, that I do not see the purpose in gyms having their girls train elite level hours from an early age if they don't intend to coach elite. many teams train 30+ hours from L7 or even earlier. those 5-10 hours a week add up really fast and make the difference between a good routine and a near perfect routine. Not saying one is right vs wrong. It just is what it is - and parents and gymnasts have to go into it knowing those facts. Talent/potential/effort being the same, the gymnast training 5+ more hours a week for years is going to have cleaner, better scoring routines, even if all they are working on is conditioning during those extra hours because that is what helps create the tightness, perfect pointed toes, correct body shapes, etc
I'm with you OP. I saw this level 6 team in action at a recent meet at event finals. When a Level 6 team put up multiple girls with routines that would score great in Level 7 (this was abundantly clear especially on bars and floor), it is my opinion that this passes the level of fair play. You have to see it in person to understand. It wasn't that they were scoring so high, it was what they were doing in their routines. And they were young (10), but not that young. There are plenty of Level 7,8s and 9s that are the same age.
That being said, I would love to know the gym's secret. High hours? Talented gymnasts flock there from other places? The body type allowed and age appeared limited. Clearly the coaching is out of this world, but there is only so much available talent. Their floor routine choreography was amazing.
Wow 37s are not that common here.
I think the main difference here is that L6 is NOT required. I don't mind my girls getting beat by better gymnasts - they put in more time and sacrifice than mine do. But in this case, I feel the gym is intentionally competing a legion of girls who demonstrated mastery at L5 and have perfected L7 but they are choosing to compete a non-required level just to win. And they are not all in Child A - they had several in the Junior A and B as well, so they are not all itty btty.
The other elite gyms in our state move their gymnasts from L5 to L7. Some do L5 in the fall and straight to L7 in spring. Others wait a year to do L7. But they don't waste their time with a not required level
We had a 10 at States this past year. Very exciting. Nice kid too.
I think the gym in question does train high hours and they start them young and are selective about who gets on team. They have great coaching and they are located in a fairly affluent area and, from what I have heard, many of them home school. I have heard they are intense, but we have talked to more than one parent from there that said they love the gym and the coaching. From what I have seen, they do not hold back and repeat levels and they rarely skip levels. A previous poster is correct in that they are one of the few highly competitive gyms that competes level 6 in NC. Most go 5 to 7 either directly or the next season. A lot of other gyms go 4 to 6 and skip 5. I noticed that they don't compete many meets at 6 though (only 2 plus the state meet). I, like many others, do have to wonder if it is a little bit about claiming the state title. But I think it's also about the fact that they aren't in any hurry. Their goal is to produce college gymnasts and by starting so young and taking their time, I think their gymnasts are successful at all their levels.
I know a couple people have said that they aren't all really young and that is true. Last year, in level 4, they added a handful of older gymnasts from their xcel team. I have to admit that at first some of the parents, including myself, were wondering if they were just trying to stack the deck as you say. These girls came in and were scoring upper 37's to mid 38's from their first meets. They dominated their age groups and pretty much guaranteed first place team at every meet. My husband was talking to one of their dads at one of the meets and he said she had just started gymnastics the year before and done xcel bronze and just done so well that they offered to move her to the JO team. Anyway, these girls scored out of 5 and they are the older ones in 6 that are scoring really high. I think it's kind of impressive that the gym gave them a chance and are now trying to get them to catch up to their peers (age wise) on the team. I'm not sure why they didn't send them straight to 7 though.. perhaps they were trying to guarantee a win at states. Who knows? I do agree that it seems a bit unfair to their competitors.
One interesting thing is that it used to be the talent was spread amongst 4 or 5 teams here in the norcal. recently, 1 particular gym not only has been able to produce their own top gymnasts but many top gymnasts from other teams join as level 8s/9s or 10s seeing this gym's success.
Must be frustrating to lose a top talent gymnast that late in the game...
Our gym recruits from the Excel Bronze team for compulsory team. Typically the girls are a little older than the average compulsory girl and my sense is these girls are more or less new to the sport, more athletic and talented than most and that the choice to go Excel at first was a good step into the sport and the transition to team is a reflection of their desire to invest more into the sport.
I think it makes sense. But, as you've probably read on here, it's not always common to allow gymnasts to cross over between the xcel and JO tracks, especially at high performing gyms. I think it's great that they were willing to do that for these girls and they obviously are living up to the expectations. They must be very talented.
I think this also shows that the gym has faith in their training methods, they can take these kids and make them as successful as their hotshot kids picked out at four years of age. Some clubs seem to look good by having young talented kids who can do skills with ease not always because of best training methods. However the days of this are basically over - like others had said the standard has lifted - you can't win simply by having the most talented kids anymore.
This made me laugh. I have kept track of the whole team's scores the past two meets.
Not because I give a rat's behind, but because it gives me something to do to keep my mind off my nerves. We have a mom who is "team photographer" for the same reason. I don't know what I would do with myself at meets if I didn't keep score.
i would love to speak my mind in depth, but i won't. what i will say is that i think if they brought back mandate scores along with current mobility you would see some things shift to the benefit of gymnasts progressing in skills.
i think it needs to happen. i also think they should put a halt on coaches shifting back and forth between jo and xcel. i thought i read somewhere this was already implied, but it is highly ignored.
i could provide examples of why of each, but i think it opens up an accountability to some of these slippery coaches.
Separate names with a comma.