WAG Getting to NATs/NIT from regionals - rant

[raenndrops]

=
Yes, team awards for sure can be put off until the end of the meet. I think I read something in the post and thought it was addressing two subjects, which it wasn't. My mistake.

It's all good. I didn't mean to come across as snotty (which it sounded like when I re-read it because I forgot to put a at the end and when I realized it, it was too late. Happy Easter.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

It's all good. I didn't mean to come across as snotty (which it sounded like when I re-read it because I forgot to put a at the end and when I realized it, it was too late. Happy Easter.

==
no worries at all, it came across fine and made me read the original post again, in which I realized my mistake.

 

[HelenZ]

Nobody has posted in a while but I was going through the level 10 regional numbers and saw that my daughter competed in the group with the highest number of gymnasts, please correct me if I am wrong. Junior B, Region 7 had 39 gymnasts. There were supposed to be 43, but 4 did not show up. Region 2 had 3 Junior B gymnasts. A flat 37 did not get you into nationals. It is troubling and I hope somebody does have some information about changes being made. I actually did a gym mom thing and made an estimate of how many will be in her group based on current age groups, birthdays etc. and level 9's coming in, and Junior C level 10 looks to have at least 40+ next year. I guess we have to live with it, but wow, it is painful.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

Nobody has posted in a while but I was going through the level 10 regional numbers and saw that my daughter competed in the group with the highest number of gymnasts, please correct me if I am wrong. Junior B, Region 7 had 39 gymnasts. There were supposed to be 43, but 4 did not show up. Region 2 had 3 Junior B gymnasts. A flat 37 did not get you into nationals. It is troubling and I hope somebody does have some information about changes being made. I actually did a gym mom thing and made an estimate of how many will be in her group based on current age groups, birthdays etc. and level 9's coming in, and Junior C level 10 looks to have at least 40+ next year. I guess we have to live with it, but wow, it is painful.

No send in an email, you do have a voice and it will be heard. Then get all of your parents to do the same. Thus is everyone's opportunity to make something happen. The system will never be perfect but free rides??? Enough ...

 

[HelenZ]

I will do just that. I also think the age groups are out of whack. She has seen her teammates in much smaller age groups, with significantly lower scores, qualify to at least NIT. At first it didn't bother her but as we get closer, and everyone is preparing, she is a little sad. However, she believes in next year, but unfortunately if things don't change, the same situation could happen again and again, luckily she has no idea.

 

[Gymmonkeymomma]

Nobody has posted in a while but I was going through the level 10 regional numbers and saw that my daughter competed in the group with the highest number of gymnasts, please correct me if I am wrong. Junior B, Region 7 had 39 gymnasts. There were supposed to be 43, but 4 did not show up. Region 2 had 3 Junior B gymnasts. A flat 37 did not get you into nationals. It is troubling and I hope somebody does have some information about changes being made. I actually did a gym mom thing and made an estimate of how many will be in her group based on current age groups, birthdays etc. and level 9's coming in, and Junior C level 10 looks to have at least 40+ next year. I guess we have to live with it, but wow, it is painful.

I feel your pain. DD was Jr A and her teammate Jr B in Region 7. Several of the Jr B girls were in DD's age group at States, that is a very competitive group!

 

[Deleted member 14190]

The age groups will even out when the regions even out.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

NO it won't. ^^^^^^ i told you all this is a complicated matter. the ONLY way things even out is if one million of you get married and have children all born on the same day! then they ALL grow up in gymnastics at the SAME rate. THEN you would have even steven.

then Connie Maloney would NOT have to make 59586636597978576453 birth date cutoffs for the age groups.

come on coachp. that's wrong what you posted. and if you know Connie and how everything is done and what goes in to Nationals, then you wouldn't have said that.

i can only take so much...

 

[Deleted member D3987]

I will do just that. I also think the age groups are out of whack. She has seen her teammates in much smaller age groups, with significantly lower scores, qualify to at least NIT. At first it didn't bother her but as we get closer, and everyone is preparing, she is a little sad. However, she believes in next year, but unfortunately if things don't change, the same situation could happen again and again, luckily she has no idea.

the age groups ARE NOT out of whack. look, they are decided by birth dates. does everyone understand this!?

depending on when all these kids are born, you could have 200 hundred of them born on one day and 30 of them born 3 months later. divide 200 by 4 events and what do you get? now do the same with 30. now EXTRAPOLATE that.

maybe you all expect USA Gymnastics to set up a venue like Chicago Style with 10 sets of equipment to accommodate ALL those that compete at Level 10 and who achieve more than a 35.00 all around score.

 

[gracyomalley]

The only age thing that would even out if the regions even out is that then each region would be expected to have similar numbers in each age group - but there would still be some age groups with more kids in them and therefore more competitive to qualify in. The only way to change the fact that its harder for girls to win (or qualify, or whatever) at certain ages/levels would be to take ages out of it completely and have an open competition. Then the Jr Bs with the 37s that right now aren't qualifying may make it and the oldest SRs who barely make it in their last year competing/doing gymnastics and qualify with a 35 won't....Its true that smaller regions with fewer gyms who can train upper level girls often have older Level 10s if any....so in that sense there would be more space for the girls from the areas with great coaching and opportunities to get in at a younger age.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

Everyone already gets that Dunno..... The BASIC idea of this entire thread is to EVEN out the numbers from region to region. So,, last time I checked, if one region has 4 times the amount of kids than another, THAT MEANS those kids are 4 times less likely to make it to NAT/NIT/East/Westerns. It was never implied by me that they will somehow adjust the age groups region to region... What I said was if they even the population out, the age groups compared from region to region will be closer in numbers (hence it will even it's self out a bit on average). Obviously nothing can be done if 45 are in one age group and 10 in another age group all within the same region, if that region already has large numbers..... WE ALREADY GET THAT.... Again, if one region has 4x the numbers of another then the age groups will be stacked at one region EVERY YEAR compared to the other. This is NOT an even playing field by any stretch of the imagination.....
Your reasoning behind keeping the regions the same baffles me.... You say we should keep smaller regions the same because they don't have the same caliber or coaching, and they have to fly from Hawaii???? Seriously?
Using your own example I am giving you the following reply/question.... "Currently we have HUNDREDS of gyms in very large regions, that don't have high caliber coaches (say it isn't so!) and are out in the "sticks", not only do they have an impossible time getting coaches, but they must drive hours and hours do get to a meet (oh no!) .. And to top it off they go to big regional meets and get kicked around and you NEVER see them at Nat/west/east, right? .... Yet SOMEHOW in your mind, the people from smaller regions who suffer from the same problems that these clubs do should be given an advantage over these equal gyms in larger regions"?? If the lesser programs in large regions are not getting any advantages, then why should anyone else. Kids are kids, and they should be treated and given the same opportunity across the land,,, not just based on where they live or how far they drive or fly to a meet....
And your remark about everyone going to nationals with a 35, doesn't even merit a reply.....
What region are you from Dunno?

 

[Deleted member D3987]

The only age thing that would even out if the regions even out is that then each region would be expected to have similar numbers in each age group - but there would still be some age groups with more kids in them and therefore more competitive to qualify in. The only way to change the fact that its harder for girls to win (or qualify, or whatever) at certain ages/levels would be to take ages out of it completely and have an open competition. Then the Jr Bs with the 37s that right now aren't qualifying may make it and the oldest SRs who barely make it in their last year competing/doing gymnastics and qualify with a 35 won't....Its true that smaller regions with fewer gyms who can train upper level girls often have older Level 10s if any....so in that sense there would be more space for the girls from the areas with great coaching and opportunities to get in at a younger age.

and if it was "open" 30 states would never be represented.

 

[gracyomalley]

timed out....for the girls from those regions this would certainly seem more fair - just as it would seem more "fair" if my 9 year old boy could have competed with his 9 year old friends in the 7-8 year old age group because they turned 9 one month after him.....but wait, it was Fair for him to be in the older age group - because the same rules applied to all the kids with his birthday...he just had to suck it up! I do get it though, DD and youngest DS are usually in the most competitive age group due to relative youth and team mates often medal with lower scores due to their less comp. groups....its the way the cookie crumbles...

 

[Deleted member D3987]

Everyone already gets that Dunno..... The BASIC idea of this entire thread is to EVEN out the numbers from region to region. So,, last time I checked, if one region has 4 times the amount of kids than another, THAT MEANS those kids are 4 times less likely to make it to NAT/NIT/East/Westerns. It was never implied by me that they will somehow adjust the age groups region to region... What I said was if they even the population out, the age groups compared from region to region will be closer in numbers (hence it will even it's self out a bit on average). Obviously nothing can be done if 45 are in one age group and 10 in another age group all within the same region, if that region already has large numbers..... WE ALREADY GET THAT.... Again, if one region has 4x the numbers of another then the age groups will be stacked at one region EVERY YEAR compared to the other. This is NOT an even playing field by any stretch of the imagination.....
Your reasoning behind keeping the regions the same baffles me.... You say we should keep smaller regions the same because they don't have the same caliber or coaching, and they have to fly from Hawaii???? Seriously?
Using your own example I am giving you the following reply/question.... "Currently we have HUNDREDS of gyms in very large regions, that don't have high caliber coaches (say it isn't so!) and are out in the "sticks", not only do they have an impossible time getting coaches, but they must drive hours and hours do get to a meet (oh no!) .. And to top it off they go to big regional meets and get kicked around and you NEVER see them at Nat/west/east, right? .... Yet SOMEHOW in your mind, the people from smaller regions who suffer from the same problems that these clubs do should be given an advantage over these equal gyms in larger regions"?? If the lesser programs in large regions are not getting any advantages, then why should anyone else. Kids are kids, and they should be treated and given the same opportunity across the land,,, not just based on where they live or how far they drive or fly to a meet....
And your remark about everyone going to nationals with a 35, doesn't even merit a reply.....
What region are you from Dunno?

actually, it does. you don't get it. but you think you do. and obviously you don't know Connie or anyone else involved with the logistics of the National meet. now you're just being a big mouth with no substance. stop it! everyone knows who you are.

okay everyone, here is the solution. we need to have an eastern and western national qualifier similar to what some of the states know as a "sectional".

in this way, more kids would qualify. then, continue with the same format as we have now for Nationals and still have the NIT meet. but this would be adding yet another already long week to the schedule.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

Dunno, please refrain from name calling..... I simply used the very examples you supplied me with... your own words....
And yes I do know Connie,... She is a very nice and has done a wonderful job. I don't see any harm is asking the powers that be to consider a population adjustment or percentage adjustment.
What region are you from Dunno?

 

[gymdog]

Dunno, please refrain from name calling..... I simply used the very examples you supplied me with... your own words....
And yes I do know Connie,... She is a very nice and has done a wonderful job. I don't see any harm is asking the powers that be to consider a population adjustment or percentage adjustment.
What region are you from Dunno?

If you think he's from one of the easier regions, he's not...so I don't know where you're going with that but it's really not at all worth it whether he wants to disclose specifically in this thread or not (he has on probably hundreds of other posts so he isn't hiding it). His kids aren't getting the free ride by any means

 

[Gymkateer]

Dunno, please refrain from name calling.....

To be fair, if you hadn't started "yelling", dunno might not have called you a big mouth.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

To be fair, if you hadn't started "yelling", dunno might not have called you a big mouth.

==
It was sarcasm, and I guess I could of left the caps off, but still no need to name call.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

If you think he's from one of the easier regions, he's not...so I don't know where you're going with that but it's really not at all worth it whether he wants to disclose specifically in this thread or not (he has on probably hundreds of other posts so he isn't hiding it). His kids aren't getting the free ride by any means

==
Yes that is what I was trying to find out, because he specifically brought up region 2, so naturally to me it sounded like it could be his region. I guess I just don't see legitimate reasons (in my mind) why shifting the regions around would not be beneficial. We really are overloaded out here, and I notice a few other regions are as well....

 

[Deleted member D3987]

listen folks, there are approx 1,000-1200 bonified level 10's. only 448 (if they all have the minimum qualifying score) that will be at nationals.

the total of level 10's come from the majority in 12 states. it doesn't matter what is done. you still only have that many 10's and that many states that have them.

when i say bonified, that means solid level 10's capable of going 36 or more even with a fall. not the tweeners or 2 eventers.

sometime this week, i'll see the entire national roster and that will give me a better and more informed idea. but i don't expect to change much from past years.

and coachp brings up Hawaii. only a couple of gyms there. Joe Rapp being the main thrust of anything that has ever been level 10. doesn't matter if you change percentages, birth dates, regions, etc; if there is only Joe and a couple others and they only have a couple level 10's, does everyone understand that it doesn't matter? if their kids are bonified, they'll make it no matter what region they're in. if they're borderline, they won't make it no matter where they are. and they must achieve a minimum qualifying score. geesh...this means that there are MORE kids that don't meet the minimum qualifying score that do. and the ones that do? the all around scores are above 36.80 and a lot of them had falls. they are NOT being over scored. these athletes are really, really good!

why is this so difficult to understand? or am i an imbecile who can't plausibly explain the problem/issue?