Holding kids back a level to win?

[skschlag]

I know this may not be a popular thought, and only really applies in the US, but I guess at the lower levels (4,5) it really shouldn't matter. These levels are about perfecting the basics, learning skills, etc. Scores and places shouldn't be a focus. As they get older, I can see it being an issue if someone is being held back to win. I am sure there are people in the state that thing my son was being held back to win. But it had nothing to do with that. We don't know what the thought process of the coach is, what the gymnast wants, or what the philosophy of the gym is.

My son's coach always tells the boys "don't let scores and places ruin a perfectly good gymnatics meet." At these levels, it should be about improvement, learning new things, etc. Not so much about what place you are. I don't really know how the levels work in other countries though.

 

[Quadqueen]

My dd had her first competitive season this past fall as a level 4. She did exceptionally well with scores and placements. She is spending this spring season as a 4 again. At her first "spring" meet a couple weeks ago I had a parent from another club ask me why she was repeating, and that it didn't seem fair because her dd is always competing against mine. This parent was not being catty, just genuinely curious. I explained that the coaches though dd could benefit from a couple more months at level 4 and left it at that.


Behind the scenes, it turns out dd was wanted by level 5 coach to move up a few months ago, but current coach was concerned about shoulder flexibility and getting into wrong tumbling habits, (which could potentially lead to injury,) if it wasn't addressed prior to moving up. It didn't matter her AA scores are high and that she "has" the necessary skills. Coach made a gymnast specific decision based on safety. People don't always know what the background is, especially if things appear a certain way.

interesting....we compete fall and spring, and that is all considered one "season"....they don't do move ups at our gym typically till the summer, and the girls stay in that level ALL YEAR (fall and spring). Competing fall and spring at the same level is the norm around here...not considered "repeating" a level.

 

[funflips]

I have heard of gyms that do not attend state meets at the compulsory levels because of that very reason. The teams that win generally have kids who have competed that level two or three years. They could do well at the next level up. I think these gyms want to keep the focus on learning and progressing instead of how they would place at state.

I know of one gym that had several kids repeat a level so they could "take State" the next year, and they did. But where is the glory in that, really?

Level 5 in our state has three levels, divided by how they score at sectionals. So depending on where you fall, you could place first in the lowest division, or last in the middle division, according to how things get split up. This does help get the kids who are repeating in a different group than the others. It also allows them to give out more awards (level 5 is a big group). But where you fall into the various groups determines how you place, almost as much as how you perform.

 

[CoachTodd]

Is there not rules in place that you also can only train "X" number of hours that is equivalent to the group you are with? In our gym the provincial girls only train 12 - 16 hours a week where the national girls all train near or about 25hours.

I guess there would be no way to know or enforce such a rule and you have to go with the honour system.

I am glad that I have tried to teach my DD that in the end she only has to compete against herself and have fun. I can't imagine any sense of accomplishment in being on a podium when you have not competed against your peers.

There are not rules in place that I know of to prevent a kid with level 10 skills from competing level 4. The only thing out there is if you have already competed at a higher level. There are not mandatory move up scores in USAG at least.

 

[All Chalked Up]

I know in the US people do that with lower levels, and it's got to be annoying. But in my level, if you get top 6 in Provincials you get to go to Atlantics (a huge meet with many Provinces). These gyms are holding the kids backs so they can go to Atlantics and the gym can say "we have gymnasts who placed top 6 in Provincials, moved on to Atlantics & won..." etc.

I'm not complaining about girls repeating levels if they don't have skills to go up to the next one- I'm repeating since I'm not quite there for the next level- but these girls could go TWO levels up easily. It makes me angry since it's really not fair. I could go to Atlantics (well, I still could even with these circumstances but have a lesser chance) if the girls were in levels that they should be competing.

Sorry for the confusing posts, I can't get my thoughts together when I'm mad.

 

[Esoteric]

interesting....we compete fall and spring, and that is all considered one "season"....they don't do move ups at our gym typically till the summer, and the girls stay in that level ALL YEAR (fall and spring). Competing fall and spring at the same level is the norm around here...not considered "repeating" a level.

Actually, our gym considers that normal as well, however, if a compulsory gymnast is ready to move "mid-season" they move her. We had several 5's go to 6 and a half dozen 6 girls go to 7. There were a couple 4's that probably "should" have gone, including dd, but they each had a particular circumstance that prevented them from doing so. As it ended up, 2 girls went- one was older at 13 and went due to that and not necessarily for skill reasons- she is enjoying this level since there are girls closer to her age and she is not with 7-9 year olds and she participates for the joy of the sport not for potential awards. The other girls that went I am not sure why. She does NOT have the skills and it was apparent after her 1st level 5 meet that she is not where she belongs. She was our youngest level 4 and did very well at that level. Hopefully she will progress and keep positive. Our compulsory girls do not compete at Spring States- so plenty of other gyms have a great shot at placements. It is true, though that our gymmies dominate the podium for their age divisions at meets. I attribute this more to training and less to holding kiddos back, though. Most gyms around here do move the kiddos out of 4 quickly and the first meets of 2012 have been filled with inexperienced 6-7 year olds. I would say that at dd's last meet at least half of the competitors were having their first level 4 competition.

 

[beamer]

Your dd's situation is different. She is not repeating a level. She is spending the whole year in level 4, as expected for most L4s. Very few gymnasts compete different levels in the same competition year. The OP's complaint is about gymnasts who repeat a full year of a particular level just to get high scores.

Exactly. I should have clarified that.

I would be willing to hazard a guess that the average gymnast who is scoring 36s in a single competitive year is probably not missing too many skills for the next level. However, if L4 36-Susie has not got her kip, she can work on this at L5 during the next competitive year and either scratch bars (or beam, or whatever event has a major missing skill) and/or compete the apparatus and get low scores like the rest of the mere mortals.

Gyms do this (move gymnasts up with missing skills) all the time with low-scoring gymnasts who, for one reason or another repeat levels for two years or more; most gyms understand that kids need the motivation and reward of progression, even if the talent is moderate. So why do some gyms not move the high-scoring ones who are missing skills? To win meets of course.

As for Esoteric's scenario, gymgal's point is correct. I am not referring to scoring out of a level within a competitive year, but having a high-scoring gymnast repeat the level in a subsequent year. In Esoteric's case, her daughter is apparently regularly scoring 37s at L4. If, next fall (or whenever her new competitive year begins), Esoteric's daughter is competing L4 (shoulder flexibility issues notwithstanding), that is definitely an illustration of sandbagging!

 

[gympunkin]

Here in Southern California, the rule at the compulsory level is if you score a 37 at states and then repeat a level, your score does not count toward the team total at any sanctioned meet that second year. This is meant to discourage "sandbagging." The girl's score does count individually. So she can still win first place at a meet.

This past year, there were at least 3 girls on teams that my daughter competed against who were repeaters who had scored 37 the previous year. (I became aware of this because at some meets their names were followed by the number 37.) I would be surprised if there weren't more. I don't know why they repeated. I do know this. Our states are in November. At least two of the girls who repeated level 5 at states scored out of level 6 at a meet two months after states with very high scores, then competed level 7 at a following meet and again got very high scores.

To me, this just shows the limited effectiveness of trying to make rules to prevent sandbagging. As long as parents and/or coaches are determined to rack up the wins, it will continue. As someone else posted, these gyms will just hold gymnasts back from starting to compete until they are beyond the starting skill level.

At my daughter's gym, they really try to focus on each girl improving her skills, not on scores. I do this with my daughter too. This helps. But at the end of the meet, it can still be hard to watch the repeat 37's get the first place medals again (and I say this as someone whose daughter would not be close to placing even if there were no repeaters).

 

[2gymmies]

So my dd has scored 2 37's at Level 4 and may or may not move up to Level 5 next season, but the reasoning behind that is she just turned 7 and is extremely tiny - they are unsure about having a bar setting and a vault setting that she can safely and competently compete. So should she have to sit out until she grows? I hope for her boredom that they can manage to get her to level 5, but not at the risk of her safety, especially at her age. She is currently 40 inches and 35 pounds. Can you imagine her getting over the vault table? IMHO, there is just so much grey area...

 

[beamer]

So my dd has scored 2 37's at Level 4 and may or may not move up to Level 5 next season, but the reasoning behind that is she just turned 7 and is extremely tiny - they are unsure about having a bar setting and a vault setting that she can safely and competently compete. So should she have to sit out until she grows? I hope for her boredom that they can manage to get her to level 5, but not at the risk of her safety, especially at her age. She is currently 40 inches and 35 pounds. Can you imagine her getting over the vault table? IMHO, there is just so much grey area...

In my ambitious plan to single-handedly solve all of USAG's sandbagging problems, I must admit I did not think of this stature/size scenario.

On that one, I must cop to being stumped! And I should probably admit, as many of the posters on this thread have noted, that there really is no easy solution to this problem.

Probably explains why there is a minimum and no maximum!

 

[COOLGYMMOM]

There are two gyms in my area that like to hold girls back a level (especially for level 4). Gym A has their younger girls only compete in invitationals for the first year, so those girls will still be novice for the next year to compete in the States and get very high AA scores (I mean 38+). Gym B has all their girls to compete in invitationals and the States. But they hold back those who compete the 1st year. Those girls won't be novice for their second year. But they still score 38+ and beat everyone at meets.

 

[All Chalked Up]

There are two gyms in my area that like to hold girls back a level (especially for level 4). Gym A has their younger girls only compete in invitationals for the first year, so those girls will still be novice for the next year to compete in the States and get very high AA scores (I mean 38+). Gym B has all their girls to compete in invitationals and the States. But they hold back those who compete the 1st year. Those girls won't be novice for their second year. But they still score 38+ and beat everyone at meets.

Basically our situation, competition-wise.

 

[SignHere]

I have been struggling with this myself ... My own DD is a "victim" of repeaters on her own team. She is currently a 1st year level5 and competing with several second year level 5s in her own age group who could have moved up, but whose parents elected to have them repeat. Now they are scoring 37's. So my DD doesn't have much of a chance of ever getting on the podium with her 35's. So how does she measure success? Does she measure it by getting new skills, moving up through the levels quickly, and doing her best at meets? Or by winning? Or by striving for Perfection, which will likely require repeating levels, because you cannot perfect skills in 1 year?

 

[skschlag]

Again, at this level, success should be based on having fun, learning skills, perfecting old ones, and being consistent. We were just as excited last night when our DS finally stuck a vault as we were with his place. He is a repeater, so I get frustrated when people talk about holding him back to win. Not at all why it was done!! It was done to get his basics down so that as he advances he isn't missing things that he needs. Some of these skills do take longer than 1 year, and for some kids they will take 6 months, and for other 2 years.

Again...as my son repeats from his coach "Dont' let scores and places ruin a perfectly good gymnastics meet!" Another one that he repeats a lot is that you can't control how other gymnasts do, or what the judges score, you can only control what you do when you compete....so make it your best!

 

[Galadriel]

like those sayings a lot
just sent them to dd who is away competing (tomorrow ) youngest competed today and some girls she said were disappointed so she might share these with them or their mums!

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

 

[3rd_time_around]

I don't think anyone is saying all repeaters are there just to win. But there are gyms that do hold girls back in order to dominate and use the state titles and individual titles in their advertising and bragging rights. A level 4 came to our gym at age 9. She had been on level 3 for 3 years at the gym she left. She was scoring 37 and 38 regularly. Her mom told us that at the old gym the practice was to keep back 6 girls each year to make sure they always win (compulsory levels). I've noticed that their gymnasts burn out, get bored, go elsewhere, or quit because they are so old in their levels.

I watches one of their 13 yr old level 6s, extremely talented and tiny--perfect for gymnastics--win every event and AA at every meet her 3rd year of lvl 6. Great! But she disappeared and never saw her compete 7. She was too old to go far! That is the problem with that philosophy--it ruins the gymnast's chances or discourages them. I would not pay for my dd to keep repeating when she is obviously ready to move up, what a waste.

Our team girls rarely repeat at compulsory levels, and they have been tearing up at the meets this year. Our level 5s are undefeated, with two girls regularly scoring 37s in this their first year. One first year level 2 has scored a 38! It is also training and choosing the right girls in the first place. But I'm with OP, it is soooooo frustrating competing against those gyms.

 

[SheCanFly]

Wouldn't it be interesting if usage implemented a policy that if you get a certain score for events and combined with all around that you were required to move up? I don't know this is realistic if a kid can't get their up skills but it does give those who truly sandbag (I've never known a gym to actually do this) motivation to challenge those high scoring kids.

Just a hypothetical what if.....

 

[Pickle's Mom]

I can't imagine the gymnasts and the parents putting up with staying down two levels for long. Can you imagine the poor coaches? "When will my Susie move up?"

I think if most gymnasts were given an option to either stay down a level and place higher or move up and be in the middle of the pack, they would choose to move up. At least I know that Pickle would. And if Gym A isn't going to move her up, even though she has all the skills and the desire, it's possible she would want to move to Gym B.

Certatinly gyms have different philosophies. I remember being at an L5 competition where there were girls from gym 1 who couldn't even do a ROBHS in their floor routine and then girls from gym 2 who were doing back tucks during warm up. It would be great if there were more consistency between these philosophies, but it's also good that there are different gyms that cater to different types of kids. If Pickle had been held back for three years at L4, she almost certainly would have quit, even if she did win states. If she had been sent out onto the floor before having all her skills, she probably would have broken down crying during the meet.

She's definitly aware that some gyms have consistently higher scores and place higher on the podium, but I don't think it bugs her that much.

 

[Faith]

Wouldn't it be interesting if usage implemented a policy that if you get a certain score for events and combined with all around that you were required to move up? I don't know this is realistic if a kid can't get their up skills but it does give those who truly sandbag (I've never known a gym to actually do this) motivation to challenge those high scoring kids.

Just a hypothetical what if.....

It works this way here for local competitions, - there is a "score out" mark for each level, where you must move up if you score above. For elite track gymnasts it goes by age, although for the higher levels you must achieve a qualifying score to move up (if you don't reach it you can repeat once, or move off the elite path).

Surely age has a lot to do with it too? It's a big difference holding a 5 year old level 3 back, or a 9 year old level 7? So if you're a gym with a good few talented gymnasts you may hold some back to perfect and mature, while up training in the gym.

 

[sophgymnast]

I know what you mean, it's very frustrating! I've been watching this one club who keeps some of their gymnasts in the same level for well over 2 years. And those gymnasts could go AT LEAST 2 levels ahead than what they are. They always win, and get the highest scores. Although competing shouldn't be about winning all the time, but your personal best, it sure is ridiculous that the gymnasts who work their butt off to compete in the most maximum level possible for them, get the lower scores because of other gymnasts that should be a higher level. I know that it's not the gymnasts fault, it's primarily their coaches. But I guess there's not much we can do about it. I'm not downing the clubs who DO hold back, because I can understand why they would. It's just not fair though-But on the other hand, life isn't fair all the time either.