WAG Can you come up with a reason why...

[Flippin'A]

I totally agree that gymnastics isn't about the scores. I just remembered being the only one on my level four team who didn't qualify to states, which I can assure you, wasn't fun. I guess that's where that comment came from. Consistently struggling from meet to meet can be frustrating, even if there isn't an emphasis placed on medals and scores. If this girl is enjoying herself and her coaches feel that she is competing safely, then great.

 

[suebee]

I worked a level 5 session at a meet earlier this year. The scores, especially the bars scores, from all the gymnasts from one gym were very low. Bars scores were in the 5-6 range without any falls or spots.

As a mom, I would say that that the gymnasts could do the skills, and I wasn’t worried about safety, but the form was very lacking. Kips were muscle up kips. Casts were well below horizontal. Lots of pausing between elements, so the routine was not fluid. Flyaways were very low. Tap swings were small. Lots of separated legs, bent knees, and just not tight in general.

Before this, I would have assumed that scores in the 5-6 range meant either multiple falls or missing skills, but I realized this was not the case.

I did feel, though, that the kips, casts, and tap swings I saw wouldn’t have scored well even in level 4. And it did make me wonder whether these gymnasts would have benefited improving these basics before moving on, and it made me wonder whether they’d be able to get the next skills, like CHS and giants, without significantly improving their kips, casts, and tap swings.

 

[CoachAlex]

She has the skills, just not very clean and the highest level at that gym is level 7 — my guess is this is a newer team program OR a team program that previously existed but maybe restructured and lost coaches/got new coaches etc. Could be that she is actually very good at “big tricks” and just not very clean - there are some coaching philosophies that basically are “learn the tricks first then clean them up.” At the compulsory level, that type of gymnastics is safe, but definitely NOT going to be scoring high.

 

[MBJ974]

I just read an article that has some insight to this philosophy.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...g-2018-winter-olympics-medal-count/350369002/

 

[ayyyrial]

There's so many reasons why a gymnast might be not scoring well but still advancing. Without knowing the individual or their family/coaches, we can't know their personal goals, their background, their personal experience with the sport (both in practice and in competition), etc. As others mentioned, some people perform much better in practice than in competition (yours truly for example). Some kids might have physical or mental conditions which affect their ability to score well. Some kids and programs don't care much about competition at all. I think there are a range of reasons to move a kid up when they are barely making the mobility score - some I might agree with more and some less. The only time I'd truly disagree with moving kids up is if it has a negative impact on the kid's safety or their mental state.

 

[wordsmith]

There are 2-3 kids on our team. who were low scorers in level 4 and 5. A 33 would of been a huge score for them. They were not unsafe. They were definitely not pretty, froggy comes to mind. They are now starting to shine in optionals.

Are you possibly talking about my child, lol?
Stunk at compulsories. No, let’s make it clearer. She SUCKED at compulsories. Made the score outs but that was about it. But the coaches just knew something we didn’t, and we trusted the process....and it worked.

At my current gym, we've had two girls in the past 4 years who we determined would struggle throughout their compulsory career; but shine and thrive if they ever made it through to optionals.

The first kid was a level 3 when I met her. She had a certain lack of focus in details; but "tricks" came kind of easily to her and she always wanted to just flip around. We also thought excel program might be better suited for her. In the end, she quit the sport.

The other kid was also physically talented and acquired a number of skills pretty easily. However, she had no sense of dance presentation, extremely tight shoulders, and no toe point. So she continually got hammered at every compulsory level. We felt she would do better once she reached optionals because she would have had some time to mature; but also because in optionals, we could choreograph her routines to disguise some of her weaknesses. Unfortunately, she left us for another gym. The dad had been unhappy with us for years due to her placements at meets and took her out at a time when she was really doing quite well- a cascade of new skills each week, it felt like. Our strategy at the time was to have her compete out of level 5 and focus on building her up at the optional level. We wish her all the best at the new gym; but the move up requirements there are for gymnasts to score 37+ at two meets. And this will pose a great challenge. I can see her spending 2 or 3 years as a level 5 (she already had a rough first season; and if she had started at their gym, she'd still be at level 4, most likely). Now, depending on the goals of the athlete, spending as much time as needed at a certain level can be a positive thing. But knowing her and her father and what they want, I do not think they are happy. Athlete was happy with us. Father wasn't. And I think he's now finding the grass not so green as he thought on the other side.

 

[RTT2]

At my current gym, we've had two girls in the past 4 years who we determined would struggle throughout their compulsory career; but shine and thrive if they ever made it through to optionals.

The first kid was a level 3 when I met her. She had a certain lack of focus in details; but "tricks" came kind of easily to her and she always wanted to just flip around. We also thought excel program might be better suited for her. In the end, she quit the sport.

The other kid was also physically talented and acquired a number of skills pretty easily. However, she had no sense of dance presentation, extremely tight shoulders, and no toe point. So she continually got hammered at every compulsory level. We felt she would do better once she reached optionals because she would have had some time to mature; but also because in optionals, we could choreograph her routines to disguise some of her weaknesses. Unfortunately, she left us for another gym. The dad had been unhappy with us for years due to her placements at meets and took her out at a time when she was really doing quite well- a cascade of new skills each week, it felt like. Our strategy at the time was to have her compete out of level 5 and focus on building her up at the optional level. We wish her all the best at the new gym; but the move up requirements there are for gymnasts to score 37+ at two meets. And this will pose a great challenge. I can see her spending 2 or 3 years as a level 5 (she already had a rough first season; and if she had started at their gym, she'd still be at level 4, most likely). Now, depending on the goals of the athlete, spending as much time as needed at a certain level can be a positive thing. But knowing her and her father and what they want, I do not think they are happy. Athlete was happy with us. Father wasn't. And I think he's now finding the grass not so green as he thought on the other side.

I find this really interesting, and impressive that the coaches have such a well thought out strategy for each kid. Do you think this is common in coaching?

 

[John]

I do think the good coaches have a plan for each of their athletes. I do not believe it is communicated openly to parents or athletes. There may be honest coaching reasons for that lack of communication.

 

[Mamabear123]

At my current gym, we've had two girls in the past 4 years who we determined would struggle throughout their compulsory career; but shine and thrive if they ever made it through to optionals.

The first kid was a level 3 when I met her. She had a certain lack of focus in details; but "tricks" came kind of easily to her and she always wanted to just flip around. We also thought excel program might be better suited for her. In the end, she quit the sport.

The other kid was also physically talented and acquired a number of skills pretty easily. However, she had no sense of dance presentation, extremely tight shoulders, and no toe point. So she continually got hammered at every compulsory level. We felt she would do better once she reached optionals because she would have had some time to mature; but also because in optionals, we could choreograph her routines to disguise some of her weaknesses. Unfortunately, she left us for another gym. The dad had been unhappy with us for years due to her placements at meets and took her out at a time when she was really doing quite well- a cascade of new skills each week, it felt like. Our strategy at the time was to have her compete out of level 5 and focus on building her up at the optional level. We wish her all the best at the new gym; but the move up requirements there are for gymnasts to score 37+ at two meets. And this will pose a great challenge. I can see her spending 2 or 3 years as a level 5 (she already had a rough first season; and if she had started at their gym, she'd still be at level 4, most likely). Now, depending on the goals of the athlete, spending as much time as needed at a certain level can be a positive thing. But knowing her and her father and what they want, I do not think they are happy. Athlete was happy with us. Father wasn't. And I think he's now finding the grass not so green as he thought on the other side.

Just curious, was the plan for girl number 2 communicated to the parents? I'm in a position now where I'm going to be asking my DD's coach what her plan for my kid is.

 

[Flyaway]

I do think the good coaches have a plan for each of their athletes. I do not believe it is communicated openly to parents or athletes. There may be honest coaching reasons for that lack of communication.

Agreed. If you were to survey the parents of the girls on dd's team, most would probably say that the communication between parent and coach regarding their specific gymnast is slim to none. However, I have found that dd's coaches are ALWAYS willing to have a meeting if I ask. And when we do have those meetings I'm always amazed at coach's specific understanding of my dd and her goals and quirks and personality. A casual observer of practice might not pick up on the nuances of relationship between the coaching and each individual gymnast, but I know they are there. I would say that if a parent doesn't know what the coaches plan is for their kid, they should start by asking. They might be surprised.