Can Someone Please Explain .....

[bookworm]

I wonder why what I am seeing in the gymnastics world is so different from this board? We may be moving and both gyms I visited in the immediate area we are moving told me that J would do this fall as a 5, 1 meet @ 6 and then move on to L7. That would put her as an 8 year old L7. They seem to think this is the norm? One gym has two girls that competed at the National championships (one as a senior, one as a junior) Both were level 10 by 10 and the gym owner told me that for kids with potential, thats her preference. She anticipates having 4-5 10-11 year old L10s next year..

I really don't see why people are bothered by the younger, talented athletes moving faster?

I don't think people are bothered by them moving faster if they are talented, I think the question was more of why would you move them up fast if they did not have the skills.

Some gyms (and it seems like the ones you've spoken to) want their girls with any potential to move into the optional levels as soon as they can and that seems to be the strategy that they are going with for your daughter. It was similar with my daughter and it worked fine for her.

 

[gymjourneymom]

I wonder why what I am seeing in the gymnastics world is so different from this board? We may be moving and both gyms I visited in the immediate area we are moving told me that J would do this fall as a 5, 1 meet @ 6 and then move on to L7. That would put her as an 8 year old L7. They seem to think this is the norm? One gym has two girls that competed at the National championships (one as a senior, one as a junior) Both were level 10 by 10 and the gym owner told me that for kids with potential, thats her preference. She anticipates having 4-5 10-11 year old L10s next year..

I really don't see why people are bothered by the younger, talented athletes moving faster?

I agree that there are some younger girls who really DO have the whole package. As I stated, those girls can be a pleasure to behold!!! What we are questioning in this thread is pushing very young gymnasts, who are displaying very poor form, through the levels. They may have all the required skills...but they perform them with very poor technique/form. At what point will the coaches slow down & address form? It's not going to just fix itself!!! And(as Tumblequeen's mom said) if the girls keep practicing with poor form, muscle memory will kick in & it will be hard to undo the damage.

I have to say watching THOSE type of situations just makes me feel bad for the gymnast. She's only doing what she is told/coached to do. It makes me lose respect for the coach that's training the child. Where are the corrections?!?! Will the child ever learn how to take a corrections & use them appropriately??? I think THAT is a skill unto itself!!!

bookworm & mariainlv, I guess the difference is--maybe your DD's coaches have been addressing form ALL ALONG instead of just focusing on attaining "big" skills. Would you say that is how your DD's have been coached??? I would think THAT is how it should be done. Glad your DD's are doing well! JMHO.

 

[gymdog]

I wonder why what I am seeing in the gymnastics world is so different from this board? We may be moving and both gyms I visited in the immediate area we are moving told me that J would do this fall as a 5, 1 meet @ 6 and then move on to L7. That would put her as an 8 year old L7. They seem to think this is the norm? One gym has two girls that competed at the National championships (one as a senior, one as a junior) Both were level 10 by 10 and the gym owner told me that for kids with potential, thats her preference. She anticipates having 4-5 10-11 year old L10s next year..

I really don't see why people are bothered by the younger, talented athletes moving faster?

That seems to be a regional thing. I'd be surprised if there were 5 10 year old L10s in my state, much less in one gym. We aren't the most competitive region though. Personally I think 10 would be quite young even for L8.

 

[gymmomntc2e6]

My original thought was what is the hurry if they end up having to spend 6 or more years at L10 or Elite before they are age eligible for the Olympics. Why not let them do a year / season at each level ?

6 years of those upper levels is an awful lot of wear & tear on tne body with the difficulty of the skills.

I am not intending to criticize any coaches or parents. Just don't see why here Is a rush to get there and then try to maintain skill & health for 6 years.

I wasn't necessarily talking about form, but I do agree that the form should be there too. Just because someone can throw a skill does not mean they should compete it.

 

[MdGymMom01]

Gymmomntc--maybe people (parents and coaches) feel the need to "rush" because they figure that with the burnout rate, injuries and unexpected growth spurts, they want to "beat the clock" and get as high as possible in levels before all that happens. We all know that making it to elite is very rare, so if they can get to say Level 8 or at least 9 before the "uncontrollable factors", ie puberty sets in, at least they got as far as they could in the sport. So, in some cases it can be a "race against the (biological) clock" in some respects.

 

[bookworm]

bookworm & mariainlv, I guess the difference is--maybe your DD's coaches have been addressing form ALL ALONG instead of just focusing on attaining "big" skills. Would you say that is how your DD's have been coached??? I would think THAT is how it should be done. Glad your DD's are doing well! JMHO.

That is how she has been coached for as long as i can remember so her progression was just natural for her

 

[mariposa]

While I am against girls being pushed through the levels that don't belong there for many reasons, I have no problem with younger kids competing at the optional level if they are ready, have the form and can safely do the skills (and I would hope that they are training "normal" hours, not excessive, but that is another story). I don't have a kid that will be flying through the levels. She will slowly move through the levels and she really hopes to get to optionals so she can have her own routines and I hope she can make that goal because I would love to sit through at least a season of optional meets, LOL.

The reason I can see letting a child compete at the higher levels when they are young is that there are no guarantees in life. They could get injured and sidetracked, their parent's could end up being financially unable to pay for gymnastics, they could hit a skill plateau, go through a huge growth spurt, develop fear issues or they could decide they don't want to do gymnastics anymore and that they want to be a rock climber! If they are capable of competing at that higher level and it is done safely and done well, I say go for it.

And I think that most of these girls will NOT fly through the optional levels and onto level 10 by age 10, at least not successfully. Most will hit rough patches and repeat a few levels, some will battle injury and fear issues and growth spurts, etc. And I think reality is that most won't even make it to level 10, as we have all seen with those statistics from USAG.

Sadly, there will always be kids that are competing levels they have no business competing and risking injuries, etc, because of overzealous coaches and parents. Why? Who knows. There will be kids training WAY more hours than a kid should train, and those kids will likely end up battling overuse injuries. There will be kids that quit because they never feel they are good enough, have never been given a chance to shine just a little, have parents that criticize everything, sit at the window and make faces at them, quiz them on every car ride home, etc. But that is in every sport all over this country.

 

[Panda-girl's Mom]

I think it should be individualized but I do not think it really is going to make a difference if your daughter is a certain age at a certain level if she no longer wants to do the sport. I have seen many girls who were naturally talented picked up things fast moved up and than one day they just do not want to do it any more. I wonder if the pressure just makes the sport no longer fun. On the other hand if they are talented and have the skills then why hold them back. At our daughters gym they do not really hold them back but the ones that have talent and are doing well might skip levels. This seems appropriate to me because everybody is different and it is based on their skills. Sadly I have seen so many quit and it usually alot of the really talented girls or the girls who are level8 and above. Instead of pushing girls to climb the levels maybe they should look at ways of retaining them in the sport.

 

[Kiwi]

I must admit I am amazed at how young the girls are doing the higher levels in the US. It doesn't happen so much here in NZ, but then we are a very small country and not especially good at gymnastics internationally. At our gym, most of the girls in my DD's level 1 class are 6 to 7, and that seems to be the norm. We have an international development program with girls around the same age who competed level 1A this year (similar to level 2) but are training higher level skills. We have very few girls at higher levels.

I think we actually have the opposite problem sometimes, I've heard that some girls (not at our gym) repeat a level in order to win medals in the competitions, when really they should have moved up. But this could have been a vicious rumour! I think there is a new system being brought in next year with rules being introduced to try to prevent this. That is, a minimum score you need for moving up, a score beyond which you have to move up, and a score beyond which you have the option to skip one level. I think they are also introducing age groups for the competition levels, for example 6 and under, 7 to 8, 9 and over.

 

[gymnut1]

That is, a minimum score you need for moving up, a score beyond which you have to move up, and a score beyond which you have the option to skip one level.

Wow I like this idea. Wonder if that would work in USAG.

 

[Bobby]

Can someone please explain the need to rush young talented children through the USAG levels ????? I am seeing all of these videos on youtube of very talented little gymnasts who are 6-8 years old and doing L7 or L8. ....Maybe I just don't get it because my child is not ubertalented and not Olympic bound...

Honestly - why do you care? How is it affecting you and your DD?? It sounds a little like you're searching for reasons to be annoyed. Why not just skip the videos that annoy you. Try specifying the age you do want to see as well as the skill/level you want to watch. Works great.
And why do the converted keep asking to be preached to??
I think it's been thoroughly documented on thread after thread (whether directly relevant to the OP topic or not) how the majority on CB are agreed that fast progression is usually bad and usually created by pushy parents and coaches who breach their duty of care. I'd respectfully suggest giving it a rest. The point has already been made. Successfully. I'm pretty sure the people you're trying to send a message to have picked it up by now.

 

[gymmomntc2e6]

I don't really care, and it doesn't annoy me. I enjoy watching videos of amazingly talented young gymnasts. I really was just curious, sorry.

 

[MdGymMom01]

I don't really care, and it doesn't annoy me. I enjoy watching videos of amazingly talented young gymnasts. I really was just curious, sorry.

Don't apologize gymmomntc. You did nothing wrong--you just asked a question. If posts like yours bother people, then they can simply "skip over any posts that annoy them". It works both ways.