WAG Continuing... top 10 @ state to move up

[2G1B]

Is your gym doing USAG? I have never heard of a level 3 who is 7 being in an age group with 8 and 9 year olds. Generally there are enough 7 year olds to have a 7 year old age group. Same with a 6 year old level 2... I didn't think at level 3 sanctioned meets you even could have an age group that would span 7-9 years old...

 

[mOm2gymnast<3]

Yes it's usag. My dd is 7 will be 8 this april. At the last meet, there she competed against 8 year old and the ones i guess young 9s. And yeah, sometimes she competes against 7 and under sometimes but usually 8 and 9s

 

[gymmomtotwo]

Is your gym doing USAG? I have never heard of a level 3 who is 7 being in an age group with 8 and 9 year olds. Generally there are enough 7 year olds to have a 7 year old age group. Same with a 6 year old level 2... I didn't think at level 3 sanctioned meets you even could have an age group that would span 7-9 years old...

My Level 4 young 8 year old competed age 7-9 for every meet this season except the state meet where it was 7-8. The 9 year olds always seem to be the hardest age group, so it was nice to not compete against them at state! It was a very common age group, probably because there are very few 7 year olds, and not that many 8s.

 

[iwannacoach]

Maybe the hc is saying this to avoid the annual circus of speculation surrounding move ups, and in the end will move up those doing well in training.

 

[flippin out]

This is the stupidest move up requirement that I've heard of. What if Kid A is in a low scoring group at States and can place 1st aa with a 34, but Kid B is in a super hot shot group and can't place top 10 with a 37? Would he seriously move up Kid A who continually scores 3.0 lower than Kid B but not move up Kid B? That's asinine!

I like skills based requirements.....let them train through the summer and then make decisions based on their training. Placements and scores are so subjective, and can mean nothing as to where a kid is in their development.

Regardless of how she places, I'd be looking for a different program. You've said this gym does not place well, and I am hearing nothing to commend this program for. I'd move to a gym that is better suited to keep kids loving the sport and help them grow as a gymnast. Sounds like your gym stalls them out. Doesn't even allow them to up train if they force them to stay in a level below. I see no potential for growth there.

 

[iwannacoach]

..... You've said this gym does not place well, and I am hearing nothing to commend this program for. /QUOTE]

Hadn't read that in earlier posts so maybe I should add that I've seen a few coaches do this sort of thing put the burden for a weak program on the kids. Then the hc can say.....

Aw geez.... Your kid didn't move up because she's just not that good.

 

[flippin out]

Iwannacoach, I'm pretty sure the OP had something about the team/level not placing well in the original thread that disappeared.

 

[mOm2gymnast<3]

Yes, the current lv4 team are not doing so well. But the lv3 team are. They are strong kids placing in AA most of the time.

 

[iwannacoach]

Yes, the current lv4 team are not doing so well. But the lv3 team are. They are strong kids placing in AA most of the time.

So what about the levels beyond L4?

 

[mOm2gymnast<3]

Gym has no lv5. Lv6 and up I guess are ok. I have not heard of them really winning big meets, but locally they are ok.

 

[Muddlethru]

Yes it's usag. My dd is 7 will be 8 this april. At the last meet, there she competed against 8 year old and the ones i guess young 9s. And yeah, sometimes she competes against 7 and under sometimes but usually 8 and 9s

She will UNlikely be competing against girls a year and up older at states. At local meets where there is not as many competitors, they do lump more age groups together. So, there really is no concen/issue as to your daughter competing with girls much older. Last year's Level 3 states competition in MI had 21 age groups! Child A-G, Jr A-G and Sr. A-G. So your daughter will competing with girls maybe 2-3 months older or younger.

That said, I still think placing at meets is a poor indicator of readiness to move up. I would also wait before sending an email to the coach. This whole issue may be moot if your daughter places in the top 10. Just try not to worry too much in the meantime.

 

[CoachMeg]

At regular invitationals, yes, the younger kids do often have to compete against older girls. However at state, they break the age groups up to almost 30 groups....some kids who are the same age are not in the same age group because they are born in different months. So I find it VERY hard to believe a 7 year old would be competing against a 9 year old at State. Maybe if she's just about to turn 8, she'll compete against some girls who JUST turned 8....but definitely not 9.

As for your HC's move-up standards...yes, they are quite harsh. But if he's trying to build a reputation for the gym as being the best in the area, you're going to have to hold kids back. Not at the expense of sacrificing the gymnast, but if they are not going out and having a winning year they will never strive for top placement. At our gym we find the girls who had a successful past season are the most successful at their new level. They know the feeling of getting 1st and 2nd and they go to every meet wanting it. The kids who would only place on a couple events or would get 9th or 10th became okay with their rank and as they moved up the levels never had that same motivation to win. So in a way, I can see where your HC is going. Harsh, yes, but it definitely promotes higher placement from the girls.

As for people saying it's unfair per age group....I can agree with you to a point. There is no way in HECK you can win state with a 34...no way whatsoever. So those of you saying "Well if gymnast A wins with a 34 and gymnast B places 11th with a 37 the move-up is unfair".....in what world do you live in where a State AA winner scores a 34? If you plan on placing in the top 10 at state you better have a high 36 or low 37 no matter what age group you are in.

So to summarize this long post....yes, your HC seems to have some high standards but I do see his point in a way. It moves up the kids who are serious about winning (after all this is COMPETITIVE gymnastics...if they don't want to be serious about competing then join a rec class). I do think the girls should be able to up train even if they are held back as long as they have perfected their past level skills. If they haven't, well then their is no point in up training. If they can't to round-off double back-handspring with tight legs and arms and gaining speed, they have no business working on back-tucks. (This goes for all skills).

 

[MILgymFAM]

Here is a snap from last years state championship. It shows two girls from my DDs gym that were the same level and got the same AA score- but based on age levels one was 5th and one 11th. It does happen. Also, I disagree heartily that the girls who win simply want it more or work harder. That's fairly insulting to the girls that leave blood, sweat, and tears at the gym day after day and never win- in my opinion those girls may want it more because they keep trying even without the validation of a medal.

 

[MILgymFAM]

Sorry, forgot the pic.

 

[profmom]

As for your HC's move-up standards...yes, they are quite harsh. But if he's trying to build a reputation for the gym as being the best in the area, you're going to have to hold kids back. Not at the expense of sacrificing the gymnast, but if they are not going out and having a winning year they will never strive for top placement. At our gym we find the girls who had a successful past season are the most successful at their new level. They know the feeling of getting 1st and 2nd and they go to every meet wanting it. The kids who would only place on a couple events or would get 9th or 10th became okay with their rank and as they moved up the levels never had that same motivation to win.

Empirically not true. Some girls and boys who are not all that great in compulsories go on to become very successful optionals, even if one defines success in the (IMHO) unhealthily narrow sense of placing well at meets.

Also, based on a very little bit of internet research and the admittedly unreliable reporting of mymeetscores, it appears that the 2014 Connecticut state champion in the 10-10.5 year old division at L5 had an AA of under 34. There is a GREAT deal of competitive variation among the states.

 

[CoachMeg]

All of those girls got a 35.650. Do you know how many places can happen between a 35.65 and a 36? I think it's fair to say that if you want to place in the top 10 at state you need to AT LEAST have 36- which is a 9.0 on every event. If you can hit a 9 on every event, you seem to have perfected the routines enough to justify your move-up. If you can't, well then maybe you need to spend another year working on those skills.

And I didn't say that was ALWAYS the case. I simply said that at MY gym, us coaches find that the girls who continually place high at their past season tend to score higher at the next level. Not only because they're scoring higher at that previous level to warrant their high placement, thus having more perfected routines but they also get the taste of winning and know the work ethic that it takes to get there as well as how to compete well.

For example, we have a 7 year old level 3 that was scoring low to mid 8s on beam the first couple of meets. She scored 8th or 9th and was content with that, as she walked away with a medal. One meet, she had one of the best routines I've ever seen from her and scored a 9.3- winning 1st place. She was SO happy and ever since then she's come to beam practice working harder than ever because in her words "she wants to be at the top of the podium at every meet now". Winning 1st has without a doubt had the most positive impact on her work ethic. So I stand by what I said.

 

[MILgymFAM]

And I am sad for that girl. Needing extrinsic motivation to work her hardest means she will have a hard road when things get really tough and the rewards aren't coming no matter how hard she tries. That happens to everyone at some point in life. I would hope that these kids work just as hard for a last place as a first place- I know my DD will probably never win 1st on anything, but I also know she is always the hardest worker in the gym.

I saw that both girls got a 35.65, of course. I thought the numbers were arbitrary as my point was girls could have the exact same scores and one move up and one not under the OPs team mandate. Coincidentally enough, one did move up and one not, but it was the 11th place who moved up and the 5th place repeated.

A quick look showed me that very few girls actually got over a 9 on every event. Second and third AA in both those age divisions fell short of that, even. There wouldn't be many girls moving up under that standard.

 

[profmom]

If winning is emphasized, it gets a heck of a lot harder when the winning stops happening, as it inevitably will for everyone at some point in the road. IMHO, and admittedly from someone who is not a coach, I would rather see kids trying hard to do the best routines they can do based on where they are. Last year a boy on our team won parallel bars at regionals but was unhappy with the routine because it was not up to his personal standards. He was much happier with the vault that did not earn him a medal, because it was the best one he had done all season. That's work ethic as I define it.

 

[Muddlethru]

At our gym we find the girls who had a successful past season are the most successful at their new level. They know the feeling of getting 1st and 2nd and they go to every meet wanting it. The kids who would only place on a couple events or would get 9th or 10th became okay with their rank and as they moved up the levels never had that same motivation to win. So in a way, I can see where your HC is going. Harsh, yes, but it definitely promotes higher placement from the girls.

So to summarize this long post....yes, your HC seems to have some high standards but I do see his point in a way. It moves up the kids who are serious about winning (after all this is COMPETITIVE gymnastics...if they don't want to be serious about competing then join a rec class). I do think the girls should be able to up train even if they are held back as long as they have perfected their past level skills. If they haven't, well then their is no point in up training. If they can't to round-off double back-handspring with tight legs

With all due respect, with respect to the bolded part of your post, I think that is an unfortunate and unfair assumption and dare I say a little narrow-minded. As a coach, I would hope that you would know a lot of varying factors go into winning. And more importantly, winning is not the only reason to do gymnastics, In my opinion, one's desire to win is a very superficial reason to do gymnastics. And to categorize those that win only on occasion as not serious and pass them up on moving up levels without a doubt does the gymnast a disservice. Gosh, I am glad or hope this is not the mentality of majority of the coaches.

 

[profmom]

What does it mean to be serious about competing and winning? One of the most successful athletes on DS's L6 team is a huge goofball who doesn't care much whether he wins or not. He's always just happy to be out there doing his thing. So is he a success or failure by your standards?

I think you are confusing correlation (successfully placing athletes at Level X become successfully placing athletes at Level X+1) with causation (successful placement at Level X causes successful placement at Level X+1).