WAG Can I post this? 3yr old gymnast on Ellen

[Taurus]

I wrote on Ellen's webpage a response to the piece, and included the USAG recommendation & link to the paralyzed 5 yo - they should have vetted this story better. And I agree that I do not think what she did was exceptional (her arms barely cleared her head when she was flipping) - my DD was doing all those same things at 3/ then we moved & she enrolled in a gym that was training USAG - they taught her the difference between being able to vs doing it correctly & safely

 

[gymdog]

I wrote on Ellen's webpage a response to the piece, and included the USAG recommendation & link to the paralyzed 5 yo - they should have vetted this story better. And I agree that I do not think what she did was exceptional (her arms barely cleared her head when she was flipping) - my DD was doing all those same things at 3/ then we moved & she enrolled in a gym that was training USAG - they taught her the difference between being able to vs doing it correctly & safely

How many three year olds do you try to teach gymnastics on a yearly basis? Are you aware of the three year old milestones? I'm really not sure how anyone can argue this child is not exceptional. That would mean many other three year olds could do or learn these things and that's not true. I don't let three year olds try back handsprings, but I do let them try handstands, cartwheels, and pullover progressions, and pretty much universally they are nowhere near doing these in a recognizable fashion. And that's totally fine. Maybe all your kids were exceptional too, I don't really know, and it doesn't mean that the gap won't close at 7. But simply put most three year olds cannot perform many gymnastics maneuvers because processes in the brain development that allow for bilateral coordination are not complete and they also do not have the attention span to practice or the vocabulary or understand to take verbal instruction. To me this is like a three year old reading a chapter book. It is obviously exceptional. Just because it doesn't mean that in ten years other kids won't read just as well or better wouldn't make it beyond the norm at three.

So I think what some of you mean to say is that all this is meaningless, which is different from "not exceptional." On the former point I would agree.

 

[Taurus]

I just don't see it as exceptional - especially due to the supposed hours she was training / I've seen neighborhood kids do backflips on tramps all the time - many children get the bar pullover and certainly can do a back walk over- just color me underwhelmed

 

[Taurus]

By the way- does anyone know where exactly the USAG has recommendations for training in respect to age?

 

[Taurus]

I just don't see it as exceptional - especially due to the supposed hours she was training / I've seen neighborhood kids do backflips on tramps all the time - many children get the bar pullover and certainly can do a back walk over- just color me underwhelmed

Plus, according to this thread, the child was almost 4

 

[Taurus]

How many three year olds do you try to teach gymnastics on a yearly basis? Are you aware of the three year old milestones? I'm really not sure how anyone can argue this child is not exceptional. That would mean many other three year olds could do or learn these things and that's not true. I don't let three year olds try back handsprings, but I do let them try handstands, cartwheels, and pullover progressions, and pretty much universally they are nowhere near doing these in a recognizable fashion. And that's totally fine. Maybe all your kids were exceptional too, I don't really know, and it doesn't mean that the gap won't close at 7. But simply put most three year olds cannot perform many gymnastics maneuvers because processes in the brain development that allow for bilateral coordination are not complete and they also do not have the attention span to practice or the vocabulary or understand to take verbal instruction. To me this is like a three year old reading a chapter book. It is obviously exceptional. Just because it doesn't mean that in ten years other kids won't read just as well or better wouldn't make it beyond the norm at three.

So I think what some of you mean to say is that all this is meaningless, which is different from "not exceptional." On the former point I would agree.

The real thing that was impressive was her press handstand

 

[Canadian_gym_mom]

How many three year olds do you try to teach gymnastics on a yearly basis? Are you aware of the three year old milestones? I'm really not sure how anyone can argue this child is not exceptional. That would mean many other three year olds could do or learn these things and that's not true. I don't let three year olds try back handsprings, but I do let them try handstands, cartwheels, and pullover progressions, and pretty much universally they are nowhere near doing these in a recognizable fashion. And that's totally fine. Maybe all your kids were exceptional too, I don't really know, and it doesn't mean that the gap won't close at 7. But simply put most three year olds cannot perform many gymnastics maneuvers because processes in the brain development that allow for bilateral coordination are not complete and they also do not have the attention span to practice or the vocabulary or understand to take verbal instruction. To me this is like a three year old reading a chapter book. It is obviously exceptional. Just because it doesn't mean that in ten years other kids won't read just as well or better wouldn't make it beyond the norm at three.

So I think what some of you mean to say is that all this is meaningless, which is different from "not exceptional." On the former point I would agree.

I think the main point is that it is not SAFE to have a child this age even attempting to do the backbends, walkovers and handsprings from a development perspective.

 

[gymdog]

I think the main point is that it is not SAFE to have a child this age even attempting to do the backbends, walkovers and handsprings from a development perspective.

Right, I don't see where that's in dispute and I've stated that multiple times myself not just in this thread, but in many others. But I don't think that was the main point for some people because they're claiming their kids could do all this stuff at 3 and they're "underwhelmed." I find that kind of silly because clearly it is exceptional. Doesn't make it right.

Actually, back bends are dangerous no matter what age someone is, if their body is unprepared to do it. That was my point about genetic suitability for some gymnastics skills and physical preparation. To be honest this three year old is probably more physically suited for it than many six year olds. But the point of those recommendations is that the risk vs reward of doing bridges under five isn't worth it and developmentally most kids don't have the proportions or maturity to learn it correctly. But nothing magical happens at age five, there is just a better chance that a kid will have the stature and maturity so as a baseline goes it's a good start to assess whether a kid might be able to start working on that stuff. So I think some people here are taking that out of context a bit. I'd say after seeing her bridge that it's just as dangerous for your 5 or 6 year old to repeatedly do back bends and bridges at home or anywhere else. The danger is really in doing repeatedly and on unsuitable surfaces and without feet being elevated, etc. if she was pushing up to a bridge for three seconds she'd be fine.

 

[gymdog]

Also in recent years I've found USAG is backing away from this 5 years assertion. Maybe because we are getting more and more voices in the gymnastics community such as Dave Tilley and learning more that back bends and bridges are dangerous for everyone in a way and nothing magical happens at age five. I was fairly recently at a USAG course and the instructor stated that the recommendation is for kids to do bridges and backward extension skills when they show physical readiness and maturity to learn the correct technique rather than an age (so, some 7 year olds should not do it WHICH I 100% AGREE WITH. THIS is underrepresented and under appreciated even on this thread where everyone loves the statistic about preschoolers - which at the time was a great guideline and still has some merit). Also, it's possible my instructor went "off script" and that was their own personal interpretation, but whatever, I agree with it nonetheless.

But coaches from Australia were aghast here that kids in the U.S. do head stands. Head stands and head springs are progressions in USAG courses and the boys compulsory program has headstands.

 

[Flyaway]

When a 3 or 4 year old is putting in 16-20 hours a week at the gym plus who knows how much at home with coach mom, of course she's going to be able to do the things she was doing. That's why I find it unexceptional. Now if you told me she got all that from just 2 hours a week at the gym, OR if she was logging all those hours but doing the skills with perfect form, then I'd be impressed. Otherwise, IMO she's just a cute, energetic little girl with way too much home equipment and parental involvement who's on the fast track to burnout and injury.

 

[needcoffee]

Huh? The girls level 6 compulsory routine has a headstand in it.

 

[Aussie_coach]

This has only been added in the last year, in the past coaches were taught at courses not to allow gymnasts to do headstands.

 

[munchkin3]

What is terrible is the press and sensationalism. The kid is very gifted.
I think what makes it so upsetting is to se the irresponsible adults. I don't know anything about real gym coaching, but I know that a 3/4 year old should not spent more than, say 9 hrs (at the MOST) doing any sport seriously.....they should be doing lots of things.....
I know that if my kid is being taught skills where her head is getting in the way, maybe we should wait? I know enough to think that the wear and tear on the body is huge in gymnastics.....why push at this age?
If she were good enough to make it to the Olympics, it seems that all the vested adults are doing the exact opposite to make it happen.

We have one of these prodigies at our gym.....she was amazing from the day she started at 4. Limited only by age restrictions per USAG rules. Mom said no to fast track, no to tops, and she is doing 'regular' gymnastics, coaches all agreed......she has won almost every meet L3, L4 scored out of 5 and will go to L7......she is 7. Her form is now impeccable, she is super strong, no injuries, and ready for more.

 

[LadyBugGymnast]

That's awesome for the girl at your gym. I hope she has a long career ahead of her. We know of one also at a gym near us who is also a 7 year old level 7 and is amazing. No pressure, just gifted. Trains about 22 hours.

I think what people are getting hung up on is that this girl trained 16-20 hours for a year and a half to get those skills. So, that is the game changer. She told Ellen she had only been in the gym 6 months, which wasn't factual. She turns 4 tomorrow. And yes, a few people have commented that their kids could do the same things at 3, other accounts can do the same things, but she just happened to be the one to go on national tv and show the world. Are the skills exceptional for 3? No doubt. But under extenuating circumstances, no.

What is terrible is the press and sensationalism. The kid is very gifted.
I think what makes it so upsetting is to se the irresponsible adults. I don't know anything about real gym coaching, but I know that a 3/4 year old should not spent more than, say 9 hrs (at the MOST) doing any sport seriously.....they should be doing lots of things.....
I know that if my kid is being taught skills where her head is getting in the way, maybe we should wait? I know enough to think that the wear and tear on the body is huge in gymnastics.....why push at this age?
If she were good enough to make it to the Olympics, it seems that all the vested adults are doing the exact opposite to make it happen.

We have one of these prodigies at our gym.....she was amazing from the day she started at 4. Limited only by age restrictions per USAG rules. Mom said no to fast track, no to tops, and she is doing 'regular' gymnastics, coaches all agreed......she has won almost every meet L3, L4 scored out of 5 and will go to L7......she is 7. Her form is now impeccable, she is super strong, no injuries, and ready for more.

 

[notthatmom]

Someone shared the video on my facebook account

Mine too! I commented saying how much it made me cringe (and why) and then j deleted it.

 

[profmom]

Ugh, just shared on FB by a coach. (Not at my kids' gym!!!) Could not stop myself from commenting.

 

[cbifoja]

It's on DD's old gym's Facebook page as some sort of preschool promotion.

 

[mobeans]

I think she is talented-the press handstand sealed that deal for me. I was cringing when I saw her back head springs, though . Her pullover is nice but I remember my own DD doing that at 3-4. I think many of us feel underwhelmed because our own gymnasts were similar at a young age, hence our signing them up for classes and still involved to this day! To the average Joe this is all pretty impressive, sure. To most of us gym parents it just isn't-maybe because our kids were doing more advanced stuff as youngsters than a typical 3 or 4 yo...or because of own kids' skills now-I mean a back headspring (even by a 3-4 yo) seems like small potatoes when compared to a 6-7-8 yo doing a proper one with good form on a high beam.

The girl is adorable and her mom seems genuinely nice and proud. I'd like to believe she is just clueless as to the potential future injuries or issues she may have due to doing these back (walkovers/bends/handsprings) so young. I was clueless when my then 3 yo would bend in half backwards and roll-she was super flexible and said it felt good - stretching her back. Only years later did I discover that it wasn't recommended for her to bend her back as much as she did in the early years.

Hopefully she will be at a gym that will progress her appropriately and safely sooner than later.

I am "over" these insta-gymmies, though. Some of the parents are so rude! They saw something in their kids and market the heck out of them. I think many of us saw early natural abilities in our kids but most don't need the social media "satisfaction". It's a strange phenomenon!

 

[Deleted member 18037]

I am reminded of the expression....

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

My kid is a pretty good gymmie. And she wasn't doing those skills at that age. Sure she might have if we had "trained" her hard enough. But she was busy doing more age appropriate things and not "training".

Kinda like the brilliant kids who read early. Used to freak me out that my kid wasn't reading yet. She reads just fine now and in fact above grade level. And videos are saved for people who actually know her.

 

[Flyaway]

I am "over" these insta-gymmies, though. Some of the parents are so rude! They saw something in their kids and market the heck out of them. I think many of us saw early natural abilities in our kids but most don't need the social media "satisfaction". It's a strange phenomenon!

Lol at "Insta-gymmies". Just add water?