What's allowed at level 8? Urgent, please help!

[JudyS125]

Hi, I've been following Gymdad57's thread and adding questions, but I thought I might get more clarity if I start a separate thread. Here's my situation--my daughter is a 2nd year level 8. However we just changed gyms (not because we were unhappy, but because my dh lost his job and we had to move). We are now at a much smaller gym and my dd is the only level 8 at the gym. We moved during the summer when there was still confusion about what is allowed at level 8 with the new changes.
Specifically my questions are: the back tuck on the beam--my dd competed it last year, was told by her coach and a judge that came for a clinic that she could still do it but it would only count as a B. The discussion here seems to agree that back tucks are not allowed.
The yurchenko entry--she competed this last year--was told that level 8s could not do it this year--and has been busting her butt trying to learn a new vault. Now I hear it is allowed.
We have our first meet this Sunday--much later than we are used to. I have been lurcking here for over a year, but finally pushed myself to join today so that I could get your wisdom. Please help!! Can she do her back tuck or yurchenko?

Thanks!!

 

[gymkat]

As we said in the other thread, no to the back tuck, yes to the Yurchenko entry as long as her vault is on the chart for L8: :: USA Gymnastics ::

 

[Granny Smith]

Yurchenko tuck = 9.8 SV
Yurchenko pike = 10.0 SV
Can not do a Yurchenko layout.

Definitely no back tuck on beam, that's a C Acro skill and this is not allowed.

C acro skills are also not allowed on floor either, nor on bars with the exception of the pirouette and clear hip to HS. Can not do double back off of bars, nor can you do front giants or hecht to HB.

You can still do a shootover, as long as it is a B (which means it can not start in a HS, nor finish in a HS.)

Obviously, there are quite a few restrictions because of the C skill thing, but the above are what I would see most commonly used last yr for "advanced 8s."

From talking to our in house Judge, one thing that has changed this yr though is if you do a C acro skill in your routine you will reduce your start value by .5, but the routine will NOT be voided - which she said was the case in the past.

 

[gympanda]

I just want to reiterate what everyone else has said.

A back tuck on beam at L8 will result in a .5 deduction, reflected in the Start Value. Plus, no value part for the element, and if you are using it for your series you will also loose your series.

A yurchenko tuck or pike is allowed at L8.

It sounds like your coaches might be getting second hand information, rather than going to a clinic or utilizing the USAG materials. There have been a TON of "rumors" this year regarding rules and skills. They probably just got some bad information and probably got a little confused. I know more than one judge in my area has been very confused with some of this stuff and didn't understand some of the new rules regarding Cs...which is likely the case with the judge who came into your gym.

 

[JudyS125]

Thanks so much for your information. I will pass it on to her coach--and I guess we will be adjusting routines before this weekend. i think it is too late to do a yurchenko when she hasn't trained them for a few months, but we will definitely take that back tuck out.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

wow...our sport is in deep trouble when a parent is passing on this kind of info to a coach. and if your a judge? even sadder...

 

[Deleted member D3987]

and before anyone starts in on me...i am stating a truth. not intended to offend anyones feelings or sensibilities.

 

[gymjoy]

So, my question is why all these changes for L8? I feel like they are "dumbing it down." I watched many L8 last year compete bt - not just the "advanced L8s." Isn't that going to make the transition to 9 and 10 even harder? Or are there similar changes to L9? Maybe they are trying to push the "Advanced L8s" to 9?
I'm curious,
anyone have some knowledge or thoughts on this?

(Dunno may only answer after taking a nap?)JJ

 

[Deleted member D3987]

yes. the system is being dumbed down intentionally due to injuries and so many kids quitting from year to year. it's becoming a problem. and if you follow usa gymnastics statistics, our industry only replaces those that quit from the prior year. low level is growing and high level is diminishing. i have posted before, less than 2% are producing the kids that go to level 10 nationals and then the elite level. it is a minority sport at the high end.

the only tools that usa gymnastics can put in place to control injuries/safety is to require less. and then disallow other skills altogether.

i can tell you that for every 'good' yurchenko you see at level 8, there will be 5 that follow that are downright reckless. poor judgement is being used in allowing these children to perform these vaults to soon. and the judges are starting to voice their opinions about having to watch kids almost kill themselves EVERY week end.

what you will see happen is the kids stay down at certain levels longer to allow them the time they need to develop. prior to 1988, we had 3 levels of gymnastics. class 3 compulsory, class 3 compulsory & optional, class 2 compulsory & optional, and class 1 compulsory and optional. as you can see, you entered class 3 first doing compulsory only. then progressed to compulsory and optional routines practiced and competed at 3, 2, and 1. it took years, and rightfully so, to become a gymnast in this system.

television is the reason compulsories were eliminated. same for figure skating. i can expound if you want, but i'm sure most of you are sophisticated enough to see how compulsories could take up alot of advertising time. and television controls sports and their governing bodies...not the other way around.

when compulsories were eliminated, us old timers knew that it would be detrimental to a developmental system and deleterious to the children. i travel all over the country. i'm brought in to do clinics for gyms and regional congresses. i am amazed how little is known about uneven bar complex. i am saddened that kids don't climb ropes in their gyms. if you can't climb a rope...you can't do bars. this would be the reason that rope climb was implemented in to the tops program. i'm amazed that coaches don't naturally know that children must be taught ALL uneven bar work with straight elbows. form is one thing, and takes time to develop. but so many kids doing bars with bent elbows.

i could go on and on. usa gymnastics can see what is going on and what the trends are. and now everyone wants to start competing level 3 and down. i predicted this would happen over 10 years ago. i am VERY vocal in my state, my region, and at the national level.

i could touch on all the events, both boys and girls, but would like to simplify for time. and for all the coaches that might read the following here, i ask only that you be honest. you have a girl moving from 5 to 6. they hit the dreaded dead end with a scary fly away. your instincts tell you that the fly away will be the end of their career. what are the options? a tanac, comaneci, toe on front off, blind change to some kind of front dismount, a cross grip giant to front somi, single bar hecht dismounts, clear hip front offs, and giant swing to snap down tsuk to name a few.. now, how many of you know how to teach these skills? and how long will it take to go another direction with dismounts such as these as they now don't fit the norm and will make the construction of a bar routine a little more complicated. and how will you explain this to the parents? and how will you get your owners to get you the education you need to teach skills like these for the kids THAT YOU KNOW will have chronic fly away problems?

the gymnastics education system in the USA is limited by a free enterprise system. and most club owners today want nothing to do with high level optional gymnastics. so we have a chasm in what could be done and what no one wants anything to do with.

i don't want to go off in several directions. there are so many issues affecting gymnastics today. and gymjoy, you are right . it will make the transition from 9 to 10 almost impossible. and you're right again about the advanced 8's moving to 9 even though they may have fundamental deficiencies. there is a shortage of level 9's and 10's. the numbers are down all over the country. even in region 5. this might be what the sport is demanding so that the children that need to move to more advanced gyms will do so.

i realize my response/rant to the dad on the other post looks outta line. and i don't need to put someone in their place as gymgranny let me know. i'm trying to help YOU ALL out. the dad is frustrated/anxious by what he is beginning to realize in his daughter's trials and tribulations in gymnastics, thinks somehow that he can "fix" it by becoming knowledeable. someone else told me that nothing was wrong with having the knowledge, etc; but in gymnastics, what good is this knowledge if you don't know how to coach? all this knowledge will accomplish is making you gymnastics smart. now what?

i think that this dad started out on a post about a "blind change". i recognized in his language what was going on. at the risk of being presumptious to all of you, i bet a steak dinner [i love steak] that his daughter/athlete is not able to do 10 perfect giants swings in a row to a fly away, 5 clear hip to handstands with straight elbows, 5 perfect press handstands in a row on a floor bar and then some kind of floor bar blind change drill whether done on a floor bar, the floor itself, or tramp bar. this gym is figuring it out as they go along. and unless they have a coach with lots of experience and has taught hundreds of blind changes to hundreds of children, then the dad will have to be patient until the gym's learning curve catches up to where his daughter is. or it could be waiting for his daughter's learning curve to catch up to where her ability lies. either way, patience is called for.

so, big changes are on the horizon for 2012 and beyond. you will see our country become more centralized in our training of athletes. the writing has been on the wall for 5 years running.

so, if you have any other questions you know where to find me. right here with the rest of you.

 

[gymjoy]

HHMM, that's a lot to think about, Dunno. I know that you are a coach, and it seems that you have been around this sport for a long time. Longer than most of us here. I have loved gymnastics since I was a little girl, and I was thrilled when my dd fell in love with too. This lead me into the crazy world of competitive gymnastics - and created a desire for me to understand how all its parts work together.

As a parent I know that my main role is to support my child and guide her in what I can. I can not tell her how to do gymnastics, but I can be there to listen to her frustrations and celebrate her triumphs. As a parent of a gymnast, as well as a fan of gymnastics, I want to know more about the sport, about the development of the system we now use and, yes, about the judging and coaching.

I understand that our system in the us is driven by the numbers. More gymnast equal more money for club gyms and more money for USAG. I've seen the pie chart with its diminishing slices for each higher level until the elite level is almost invisible. But isn't that as it should be? Shouldn't only the best of the best reach the top, top level?

The JO program is only a feeder for elite, and most girls and parents understand that they will not make it that far. Shouldn't the goal of the JO program be to allow as many girls and boys interested in the sport the opportunity to give it a try whether they compete for 1 level or all 10?
IMHO, (and I know it means nothing at all) the dumbing down of levels to keep girls in the sport gives a false sense of accomplishment to the gymnast and the gym as well as weakening the sport itself.

OR, (I think you alluded to this) are we seeing a separating of tracks for those that want to stick with JO and those that have a chance for elite? What is the role of HOPES and TOPS in this system? I have always disliked both these programs, and viewed them as a way for USAG to suck in more money from gyms and gym-moms (you can slam me for that if you want). I good gym will know how to train gymnast for the elite levels. They will have the skills and experience to train and coach girls without these extra programs ans hoops to jump through? DO these program really bring girls to the attention of the national staff? Do they really help give newer coaches gain more experience? Or are they just an excuse for gyms to charge more money and parents to shell it out in the hopes that this will give there child a leg up towards elite?

I have to say that I dislike seeing lower and lower levels and ages competing. But, as I said, maybe the role of the jo program is to allow anyone a chance to compete. Though I think there should be a strict age limit of at least 6yo. Younger children do not need the stress of competing and being judged. (I honestly would make that age higher if I thought anyone would agree) So we could see 6 and 7yo competing at level L2 or L3 - giving them the chance to experience competition earlier than they would if they were not ready for L4 or L5. ( did I just answer one of my own question?)

One last thing, as a parent I know it is a fine line between understanding this sport and trying to support our gymnast, and trying to coach our gymnast. Dunno, you have probably had some bad experiences with parents who step over that line. I have watched this several times in the past 6 years we have been involved in gymnastics. It has never turned out well. I have witnessed a gymnast expelled from a gym because the parents couldn't stay on their side of that line.

Thanks for sharing your experience. (And for reading my babble)

 

[Deleted member D3987]

not babble at all. only 6 years? you have a better understanding of the way things are more than most.

 

[fishchimes]

Dunno, I wish you were my coach... One time I did a horrible vault with bent elbows and legs and the works. Before I had done them with better form but they were slow and kind of just flopped off the table; no pop or anything. The bad one was faster and one of my coaches said "that was better; you popped."

O_____O

 

[GikiGirl]

Does anyone else find it odd that yurchenkos are allowed at level 8, but not C acro? I know developmentally a yurchenko makes more sense than a hand full or a tsuk for a gymnast that's on track for high levels, but the kids are also awfully young and small in many cases. I noticed some scary level 8 yurchenkos at many meets, more than I noticed scary back tucks on beam or 1 1/2s on floor in the past.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

you are absolutely SPOT ON!

 

[Granny Smith]

I, too, think it is odd. With the small sample of girls that I've seen at our gym most of the injuries (wrist) come mainly from the Yurchenko. When you think of the age that a lot of the girl is Level 8 are, there are many younger gymnast. Many who have not gone through puberty and their growth plates are wide open - the Yurchenko puts a ton of pressure on the wrists and wrists are just not meant to bear full body weight. The new watered down version of level 8 has nothing to do with safety, because if it did in my opinion, Yurchenkos would not be allowed. Just saying, I know many say the new version of 8 was to keep more in the sport and I do believe that too, but I have heard some talk about the safety perspective.

Like you I have seen some scary Yurchenkos at level 8, but I have seen far more scary Tsuks because I find not as many gyms do the Yurchenko for whatever reason.

Does anyone else find it odd that yurchenkos are allowed at level 8, but not C acro? I know developmentally a yurchenko makes more sense than a hand full or a tsuk for a gymnast that's on track for high levels, but the kids are also awfully young and small in many cases. I noticed some scary level 8 yurchenkos at many meets, more than I noticed scary back tucks on beam or 1 1/2s on floor in the past.