Women Funny story from my daughter's meet

[cbone]

Our gym does very well. Our Level 4 team almost always wins state and our Level 5 team is competetive, too. Every other level is up there toward the top, as well. Because of that, there are a lot of rumors that start. My favorite is that our gym "destroys the girls' souls". There's the typical "your girls are pushed too hard", too. They condition and they condition HARD, but it has them competition ready. I've learned to take the rumors in stride. My experience has been nothing but positive. One rumor absolutely cracked me up this weekend.

My wife saw a patient from work at the meet and they started talking. This woman's granddaughter went to another gym that was competing at the meet. She asked my wife, "Are you happy where you are? I hear they treat their children terribly. Worst of all, they hold their kids back so that they can win team titles. I would never want to be somewhere where children are held back to stroke the gym owners' egos."

To the outside observer, that really isn't funny. Here's why it's humorous- our 11-member team has 3 repeaters (who all repeated because they did not, and still do not, have their kip). Literally, every single member of her granddaughter's team was a repeater. EVERY SINGLE ONE! I just had to shake my head.

 

[gymgal]

When you're in a good gym, you will always have naysayers from other gyms. Just ignore.

However, just to clarify, "holding a child back" doesn't always equate to having her repeat a level. Many many gyms hold their girls back from competing until they basically are ready for the next level - in other words, the girls really are ready to compete 5 competently but are competing 4 for the first time to get the super high scores. We have a couple of these gyms in our area and it can be frustrating. But hey, it is what it is... I'm just glad I have a dd who focuses more on skill development than medals.

Not saying your gym is like this. From what you have posted, it sounds like they are doing typical uptraining.

Sent from my ADR6400L using ChalkBucket mobile app

 

[cbone]

I would think that the parents wouldn't stand for that (or the kids for that matter). Medals are awesome, but getting a new skill is awesome-er. My daughter was a little bummed that they were going back to Level 4 routines and stepping away from the uptraining. As it is, I already feel the tick-tock. My daughter's 7. She will "repeat" 4 next year. Assuming that she advances a level per year (which is NOT a safe assumption given increasing difficulty, injuries, fear and a myriad of things I'm not even aware of at this point in the journey), she will be a 14-year-old Level 10 at best. Why would you want to hold back a year for a title when you're ready to move up?!?

 

[Committed]

People want an excuse about why their darling child didn't win. I must say, I've heard this complaint about another gym, and we haven't even competed yet!!!!! Typical trash talk, I'm guessing.

 

[Gymmommy71]

When you're in a good gym, you will always have naysayers from other gyms. Just ignore.

However, just to clarify, "holding a child back" doesn't always equate to having her repeat a level. Many many gyms hold their girls back from competing until they basically are ready for the next level - in other words, the girls really are ready to compete 5 competently but are competing 4 for the first time to get the super high scores. We have a couple of these gyms in our area and it can be frustrating. But hey, it is what it is... I'm just glad I have a dd who focuses more on skill development than medals.

Not saying your gym is like this. From what you have posted, it sounds like they are doing typical uptraining.

Sent from my ADR6400L using ChalkBucket mobile app

I agree about holding back not necessarily meaning making people repeat a level...there are a few gyms around me who will have many, many girls compete a level lower than their potential (especially at the younger ages)... Like I know of one that wants them able to get a 36 at a level *before* they'll compete it...and often that means a girl who, for example, *could* be getting 34's in L7, is at a L6, or maybe even L5, meet getting 37's and 38's. Like its kind of not fair for my DD to have to go against a girl who has been doing cast handstands and giants for over a year on L6 bars (even if it is only that girl's first year competing L6).

 

[DisMom]

Both my daughter and I would have a hard time if she was competing at a level lower than her ability just so she could get 37s and 38s. I find that unnecessary...if they have the skills and can compete clean routines at a certain level, then that is where they should compete.

I was speaking with an elite coach over the summer and he said something that really stuck with me. "Compulsories are just pit stops on the way to Optionals." His philosophy is that he doesn't care what a gymnast scores in any of the compulsory levels as long as (again) they have all of the skills at that level and are competing clean routines. He is much more focused on things like strength (condition, condition, condition!) and form. It's all just about learning good habits for when you get to Optionals.

He puts girls on the National team with some regularity, so he is definitely a well-known and well-respected coach. And he told me that he has never had a girl win an AA State Champion title in a compulsory level who went on to make the National Team. I thought that was an interesting statistic.

No clue as to whether or not this is a common philosophy among elite coaches, but I found it a very interesting way to look at things.

 

[Jenny]

I would think that the parents wouldn't stand for that (or the kids for that matter). Medals are awesome, but getting a new skill is awesome-er. My daughter was a little bummed that they were going back to Level 4 routines and stepping away from the uptraining. As it is, I already feel the tick-tock. My daughter's 7. She will "repeat" 4 next year. Assuming that she advances a level per year (which is NOT a safe assumption given increasing difficulty, injuries, fear and a myriad of things I'm not even aware of at this point in the journey), she will be a 14-year-old Level 10 at best. Why would you want to hold back a year for a title when you're ready to move up?!?

Sadly most children will not make it out of compulsories - another reason I think to move up when ready and not hold back. However I would rather see kids competing a level 'below' their capabilities than above. I would love to see a system where optional skills (B and above maybe) had to be ratified in the gym somehow by a judge before you were allowed to compete them.

However your OP is just typical of people seeing and believing what they want rather than what is actually there. It is laughable really - all you can do is shake your head.

 

[emorymom]

Just to pipe in again, there are gyms that hold them back prior to starting competition, so you wouldn't expect that they would have to repeat L4. If a highly selective gym's L3s go 9 hours a week, are mostly 9 years old and routinely sweep meets, you would expect that when they are 10 years old doing L4 12 hours a week, not many will need to repeat to go to L5.

 

[profmom]

There are many ways of defurring the feline that work. One model is to work very hard on compulsories and use them as an opportunity to build good form, a very strong work ethic, and commitment to gymnastics through many hours in the gym, which is compatible with having both strong compulsory teams and quick move ups. That's the girls' team in our state that wins the L4, L5, and often L6 champion banners. (They also do very well in the upper levels, albeit with significantly smaller teams.) Another model is to spend time perfecting at the compulsory level and having the gymnasts repeat the levels until they are flawless. That's the boys' team in our state that wins L4 and L5. Some of their 5s are literally shaving. (They only have a tiny handful of optionals.)

The girls in my kids' gym do not compete L4; the boys do. For L4 boys and L5 girls, the time commitment is relatively low for a strong program -- our 5-6 girls go, I think, 12 hours a week, and our 4 boys only go 5-6 hours and the 5s have but 12 hours a week. Yes, they work the routines, but they spend a lot of time conditioning, working on form, and uptraining except when a meet is right around the corner. They move up quickly (both boys and girls), even if they aren't posting high scores. Some of the gymnasts do very well in compulsories in this system. Some do OK, but are not regularly scoring above 35. Some, like my DD, never hit 35.

Then when they hit optionals, they decide whether or not to commit fully to the sport and start doing a lot more hours and a lot more days . . . and presto, the optionals start bringing home first the third and second place banners, and then contending for the champion banners. DD's AA score at her first meet at L7, where she competed a bars routine that was a work in progress and nowhere close to a 10 SV, was higher than her AA score at either her first meet at L5 or L6. It's working for her, and DS, who competed one year at L4 and is now in his first year at L5, is happy in this system because he can play baseball in the spring if he wants to. (He did last year, he may not this year.)

In general, my feeling is that as long as you understand and are on board with how your gym does things, and you like how things look at the end of the road (assuming your child will get there), it's all good.

 

[wallinbl]

Why would you want to hold back a year for a title when you're ready to move up?!?

A lot of these gyms are still training them on the new skills, so they're not being "held back" in terms of skill progression, they're just competing below their level. I could easily point you towards a dozen girls from the December level 5 state meet that are going to compete level 7 this weekend. They've been training level 7 for a year now, and they went to the last few level 5 meets as "competition practice". They have no real answer for why level 6 meets wouldn't be better "competition practice" for their level 7's (they don't ever go to a level 6 meet - they do that in house after level 5 state and before January).

That's just how some gyms around here do it. It's also not uncommon to see several of the top scoring girls from level 4 state (December) putting up 36's and 37's in level 5 meets 4 weeks later in January. So, their skills aren't being held back, but they're not likely being competed at the appropriate level.

I used to not believe this stuff, but we personally know families whose daughters are doing this stuff.

 

[Seeker]

No clue as to whether or not this is a common philosophy among elite coaches, but I found it a very interesting way to look at things.

Our coach seems to feel this way too...focus is on conditioning, learning proper technique, form, etc. and not so focused on "State" at level 4, 5, etc. (we're not even going this year...). Once you get to optionals, then it's 'game on'.

 

[Gymmommy71]

They have no real answer for why level 6 meets wouldn't be better "competition practice" for their level 7's (they don't ever go to a level 6 meet - they do that in house after level 5 state and before January).

Hmmm...I'm wondering if the L6 wouldn't be as good competition practice for them because of the stringent scoring in L6 . I know the team I'm talking about w/ the "must be able to get a 36 or you don't compete" does a lot less L6-ing because it's much harder to get a 36 in L6 than it is L5 or L7......

 

[gymmomtoo]

I was speaking with an elite coach over the summer and he said something that really stuck with me. "Compulsories are just pit stops on the way to Optionals." His philosophy is that he doesn't care what a gymnast scores in any of the compulsory levels as long as (again) they have all of the skills at that level and are competing clean routines. He is much more focused on things like strength (condition, condition, condition!) and form. It's all just about learning good habits for when you get to Optionals.

This is the philosophy of our coach as well and I love it.