WAG Does anyone remember ?

[Seeker]

I guess I’d be curious to look and see if these regions with spots to give in certain age groups have an over-abundance of athletes in the bordering groups. I’m not sure that having each current region create 12 equal age groups would solve the issue as the regions with sparse level 10’s are still likely to struggle to fill their quotas with gymnasts who can achieve the minimum score. Maybe it would smooth out okay, but I’d like to look at the raw data.

 

[gymgal]

He is talking about instead of USAG setting age groups, each region divides their own kids into 12 equal age groups (JR A-F and SR A-F), then the same as now, 7 in each age group to Nationals. There would be a slight difference in months when the kids got to Nationals (JR D in one Region may be 15.5-15.75, in another may be 14.75-15, say) but at least there wouldn't be 37 in one age group and 10 in another in a Region. At least everyone in each Region would have an equal shot at one of those 84 Nationals spots.

I am all for this option because it will help to even out the divisions in some regions, but it still doesn't give the gymnasts an "equal shot". Things will never be equal. Case in point - for one age division in our region, you needed to have a 37.5 to qualify and another was 37.3ish vs several other divisions where mid 36s qualified. They all had similar number of gymnasts in the divisions but this one division was just stacked with stellar gymnasts. And the highest scoring division wasn't the oldest, as would be expected. It was a group of juniors.

 

[flippingtogether]

Redraw the regions and there will be no more empty spots and everyone benefits

So I am still trying to figure out why the bigger regions aren't LOUDLY clamoring for this.....and why it seems like nothing sane will be done to fix the current broken system??
Is the only noise to fix the system being made here....meaning in reality nothing will actually be done to fix it??
(and thank you Coach P for all your insight!)

 

[wandrewsjr]

I am all for this option because it will help to even out the divisions in some regions, but it still doesn't give the gymnasts an "equal shot". Things will never be equal. Case in point - for one age division in our region, you needed to have a 37.5 to qualify and another was 37.3ish vs several other divisions where mid 36s qualified. They all had similar number of gymnasts in the divisions but this one division was just stacked with stellar gymnasts. And the highest scoring division wasn't the oldest, as would be expected. It was a group of juniors.

Of course nothing in gymnastics will ever be equal. But at least each gymnast in a Region would have to finish ahead the same number of kids, instead of one gymnast only having to finish ahead of 3 and another from the same Region having finish ahead 30.

 

[justanothergymmom]

Of course nothing in gymnastics will ever be equal. But at least each gymnast in a Region would have to finish ahead the same number of kids, instead of one gymnast only having to finish ahead of 3 and another from the same Region having finish ahead 30.

Yes! Exactly! It doesn't have to be equal, but when one age division is almost FOUR TIMES as large as another in the same region, how is that fair?

 

[Deleted member 14190]

Your voices are very strong , please send emails demanding change . The regions
Must be redrawn, and each region pies its own kids. We are working on it on our end. But without you we have little to stand on.

 

[phenom_dad]

He is talking about instead of USAG setting age groups, each region divides their own kids into 12 equal age groups (JR A-F and SR A-F), then the same as now, 7 in each age group to Nationals. There would be a slight difference in months when the kids got to Nationals (JR D in one Region may be 15.5-15.75, in another may be 14.75-15, say) but at least there wouldn't be 37 in one age group and 10 in another in a Region. At least everyone in each Region would have an equal shot at one of those 84 Nationals spots.

My concern would be the "width" of the age groups meaning there could be wide gaps between the youngest and oldest competitors in said age group. To me that is unfair

 

[Deleted member 14190]

My concern would be the "width" of the age groups meaning there could be wide gaps between the youngest and oldest competitors in said age group. To me that is unfair

There are 12 age groups and basically 10 year old to 18 year olds . So I don't see that as an issue

 

[tomtnt]

I remember someone once mentioned than Norcal did not want to switch to R2 as part of some proposed remapping.

I can only guess, as with most things, it either comes down to $$$ or bragging rights. The bigger regions will have the most fundings for things like training camps. More gymnasts = more $$ for the clubs hosting invitationals etc. larger pool of potential elite gymnasts etc

The power regions also have the prestige of having more of the top gymnasts. They are able to attract more collegiate recruiters to meets. Regionals were all held same weekend but I noticed many college coaches were in attendance here at R1 regionals.

I mean, why doesn’t an SEC school or a PAC-12 school want to move to a weaker conference?

I definitely agree that both remapping and redistribution of spots should be pursued but I suspect the barriers are bigger than any of us can imagine

So I am still trying to figure out why the bigger regions aren't LOUDLY clamoring for this.....and why it seems like nothing sane will be done to fix the current broken system??
Is the only noise to fix the system being made here....meaning in reality nothing will actually be done to fix it??
(and thank you Coach P for all your insight!)

 

[Texastwister]

The point of nationals is to compete with kids across the country in your age group, so having each region pie their own divisions would not work. Regions should be reorganized but for some reason they don’t want too. This comes up every year and pretty much doesn’t change. The changing of qualifying scores has helped give out more spots to regions with more kids.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

The point of nationals is to compete with kids across the country in your age group, so having each region pie their own divisions would not work. Regions should be reorganized but for some reason they don’t want too. This comes up every year and pretty much doesn’t change. The changing of qualifying scores has helped give out more spots to regions with more kids.

12 divisions divided into 8 years is going to be within a half year of each other , maybe a year tops . That is totally acceptable and insures the greatest probability for qualifying. You pay money to an organization and you pay money to enter this qualfying event, your kid should have close to the same odds of qualifying as the next.

 

[Texastwister]

12 divisions divided into 8 years is going to be within a half year of each other , maybe a year tops . That is totally acceptable and insures the greatest probability for qualifying. You pay money to an organization and you pay money to enter this qualfying event, your kid should have close to the same odds of qualifying as the next.

But you would have kids older in some age groups and younger in others. No meet is run that way. I completely agree redistributing the regions would fix the problem, but that argument has been going on for years with no change.

 

[John]

If my math is correct 670 something gymnasts make it to Nationals. 84 from each age division?

I have been trying to determine, in my own head, what is fair. In a perfect world judging across the nation would be equal and if that were the case I could see the top 84 scores across the nation making it to nationals. I do not believe judging is equal so I would love to hear others thoughts on a fair selection process. I will write that email to express my concern when I know what I am asking for is fair.

 

[MILgymFAM]

But you would have kids older in some age groups and younger in others. No meet is run that way. I completely agree redistributing the regions would fix the problem, but that argument has been going on for years with no change.

I’ve no horse in this race, but I’m curious- everyone always says that judging is consistent across age groups. If this is the case, why would it matter if the age groups change slightly? Why have age groups at all? Why not give the same proportional number of slots to each region, based on percentage of overall competitors, and have them compete without age designation at all. If it’s top 75 girls from one region and top 84 from another (made up numbers), then isn’t that as fair as it gets? You’re either the best of the best, or you’re not.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

But you would have kids older in some age groups and younger in others. No meet is run that way. I completely agree redistributing the regions would fix the problem, but that argument has been going on for years with no change.

It is very normal for an L10 athlete to compete against kids a half year to a whole year her age. Look at your own state age divisions. Regionals has 12 divisions , your own state meet probably had 6 -8 . So your statement is mathematically incorrect.

 

[raenndrops]

But you would have kids older in some age groups and younger in others. No meet is run that way.

As a 10 year old, my YG regularly competed against 16-18 year olds (unless there were enough to break it into 2 age groups in which she competed against girls up to 13 years old). As a 13 year old this year, she is again competing against 18 year olds on a regular basis.

So yes, SOME meets are run that way.

And we are talking about Level 10s in the case of Nationals... that can handle it. Even a 2 year difference in age (which would be extremely unlikely in one of the 12 age groups) wouldn't be completely terrible.

 

[Flyaway]

I remember someone once mentioned than Norcal did not want to switch to R2 as part of some proposed remapping.

I can only guess, as with most things, it either comes down to $$$ or bragging rights. The bigger regions will have the most fundings for things like training camps. More gymnasts = more $$ for the clubs hosting invitationals etc. larger pool of potential elite gymnasts etc

The power regions also have the prestige of having more of the top gymnasts. They are able to attract more collegiate recruiters to meets. Regionals were all held same weekend but I noticed many college coaches were in attendance here at R1 regionals.

I mean, why doesn’t an SEC school or a PAC-12 school want to move to a weaker conference?

I definitely agree that both remapping and redistribution of spots should be pursued but I suspect the barriers are bigger than any of us can imagine

I think this is a huge part of the issue. And I get it. However, the only way that some of these smaller regions are going to ever be competitive or even (IMO) survive is for the lines to be redrawn. It's not going to get better as is. My dd competes in R2 and although she is not anywhere close to L9 or L10, being in a smaller region trickles down even to the lowly compulsory level. Many many gyms in our area are dropping JO altogether and switching to Xcel. There are too many rural areas that just don't have the populations or money to support JO programs. So what do you think is going to happen in 3 years, 5 years, 7 years? We already know the attrition rate for gymnasts is high. As more gyms drop JO, that means fewer L9's and L10's than what R2 has even now. I feel like some of our more sparsely populated areas are in big trouble unless region lines are redrawn.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

I think this is a huge part of the issue. And I get it. However, the only way that some of these smaller regions are going to ever be competitive or even (IMO) survive is for the lines to be redrawn. It's not going to get better as is. My dd competes in R2 and although she is not anywhere close to L9 or L10, being in a smaller region trickles down even to the lowly compulsory level. Many many gyms in our area are dropping JO altogether and switching to Xcel. There are too many rural areas that just don't have the populations or money to support JO programs. So what do you think is going to happen in 3 years, 5 years, 7 years? We already know the attrition rate for gymnasts is high. As more gyms drop JO, that means fewer L9's and L10's than what R2 has even now. I feel like some of our more sparsely populated areas are in big trouble unless region lines are redrawn.

Agreed Competition breeds advancement.

 

[Texastwister]

It is very normal for an L10 athlete to compete against kids a half year to a whole year her age. Look at your own state age divisions. Regionals has 12 divisions , your own state meet probably had 6 -8 . So your statement is mathematically incorrect.

If every region broke up their own age group then took the top 7 and entered into that same age group at national , you would have division above you with younger kids and below you with older kids. Unless after regionals you divided the age groups again. Our gym goes to very big meets and My 11 yr old never competed against a 16 yr old. So must be small meets when that happens

 

[Deleted member 14190]

If every region broke up their own age group then took the top 7 and entered into that same age group at national , you would have division above you with younger kids and below you with older kids. Unless after regionals you divided the age groups again. Our gym goes to very big meets and My 11 yr old never competed against a 16 yr old. So must be small meets when that happens

Yes but when you have approx 200 athletes in each region then divide them into 12 divisions , ranging from 10 year old to 18, that's 12 divisions divided over 9 years. So the age difference range at most will be a year on average. Obviously if a 9 year old L10 is competing they will have a bigger age range but they are already doing that in the current age divisions. In fact they will actually have kids closer to their age with that system. Example , last year I had two girls same age with birthdays 2 weeks apart compete in separate divisions at regionals , this year they were in the same division. So what you are concerned about already occurres. You have to look at the big picture , would you rather you daughter compete against 37 athletes at regionals or 16.