Individual event specialization now allowed/practical in women's USAG L7-10

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

ChalkBucket may earn a commission through product links on the site.

Geoffrey Taucer

Staff member
Gold Membership
Coach
Gymnast
Joined
Jan 21, 2007
Messages
4,872
Reaction score
6,137
Link Removed

Recommendation that the Mobility Score for an Individual Event Specialist at Level 7, 8, and 9 be 8.5
per event, effective August 1, 2010
Motion: L. Reid
Second: J. Geddert
PASSED

This is brand new, right? If so, this is huge.
 
Great idea, maybe it will alolow more girls to progress thorugh the levels and stay in the sport despite blocks or injuries.
 
Gymnasts have been able to specialize on events for a few years, but there was never a mobility score that wasn't tied to AA. Basically, for a specialist to move up, she needed an AA score, which defeated the purpose of specialization.
 
There were event specialists at this year's states and regionals...mostly in vault and beam...one girl "specialized" in every event but bars. The specialist cannot qualify to JO Nationals at all but they can qualify to the NIT Meet.

I have mixed feelings on the whole issue because there have been times when a girl has not qualified for Nationals because she had a lousy event at regionals (usually beam) but if her teammate decides to do only the one or two events at Regionals and gets at least a 9 ( I believe that's the score to go to the NIT) on her two events ( or even one event...they qualify on INDIVIDUAL events so if Susie is specializing in 2 events and bombs one, she can still move on ), she does move on. It seems to penalize the All Arounder with this type of a system. And from what I've seen of the specialists, they have not been all that spectacular on the event they do but they don't have the score of the event they are awful on dragging them down...and they manage to get the 8.5 ... The specialist does have to declare herself as such early in the season so it's not a meet to meet thing.

I think the score of 8.5 is too low for a mobility score for a specialist..to me if you're specializing, you should be getting in the 9s.
 
Leaving out the issue of regionals/nationals qualification (which isn't addressed here), I think this is absolutely fantastic news. I've long thought it stupid for USAG to effectively block specialists at the JO levels when so many elites and college gymnasts are specialists.
 
Last edited:
The ability to specialize isn't completely new, although I didn't realize you could do it in L7 before (I've never seen that - only at 9 and 10). Previously you could specialize and there was a score to qualify to states, regionals, etc, although for example to qualify to level 9 or 10 regionals here you need a 34 (8.5. average) but to qualify as a specialist the score is higher than 8.5. To clarify the 8.5 in the previous post is a mobility score (to move to another level) not the qualification score to qualify to regionals.

I am not sure what we do for level 8 regionals here or if it's even possible since we do qualification to regionals by placement (it's all divided into teams in all age groups, no individuals). Maybe you need to place in your event and then you just compete as an individual. But I don't know anyone who has done it in level 8, so I've never seen it. I do know level 9s and 10s who specialized, but none of them made it past regionals.

I can see the potential for issues but honestly the way it's played out I haven't been unhappy with it. In my state we haven't seen it that much though, and the girls I know who have used it have mostly been juniors and seniors in high school and at the end of the line, so to speak, and most have been seriously injured prior to the season they used it.

Edit: so I just tried to look it up and I think in my state/region (7) it only is at level 9 and 10 for regionals because of the qualification system we use for level 8 regionals. Not absolutely positive but I've definitely only seen it with 9s and 10s anyway. For comparison to qualify to state as a 9 or 10 you need a 32 AA, and 8.5 IES (.5 higher than the AA event average, pretty significant). Petition score at 8.75. Regionals AA qualifying score is a 34 (8.5 average) and IES score is a 9.0 (.5 higher) with petitioning at 9.25.
 
Last edited:
The ability to specialize isn't completely new, although I didn't realize you could do it in L7 before (I've never seen that - only at 9 and 10). Previously you could specialize and there was a score to qualify to states, regionals, etc, although for example to qualify to level 9 or 10 regionals here you need a 34 (8.5. average) but to qualify as a specialist the score is higher than 8.5. To clarify the 8.5 in the previous post is a mobility score (to move to another level) not the qualification score to qualify to regionals.

I am not sure what we do for level 8 regionals here or if it's even possible since we do qualification to regionals by placement (it's all divided into teams in all age groups, no individuals). Maybe you need to place in your event and then you just compete as an individual. But I don't know anyone who has done it in level 8, so I've never seen it. I do know level 9s and 10s who specialized, but none of them made it past regionals.

I can see the potential for issues but honestly the way it's played out I haven't been unhappy with it. In my state we haven't seen it that much though, and the girls I know who have used it have mostly been juniors and seniors in high school and at the end of the line, so to speak, and most have been seriously injured prior to the season they used it.

Edit: so I just tried to look it up and I think in my state/region (7) it only is at level 9 and 10 for regionals because of the qualification system we use for level 8 regionals. Not absolutely positive but I've definitely only seen it with 9s and 10s anyway. For comparison to qualify to state as a 9 or 10 you need a 32 AA, and 8.5 IES (.5 higher than the AA event average, pretty significant). Petition score at 8.75. Regionals AA qualifying score is a 34 (8.5 average) and IES score is a 9.0 (.5 higher) with petitioning at 9.25.

What I'm looking at is not so much regional qualification (which isn't mentioned in this anyway), but level mobility. The prior lack of individual even mobility scores meant that specialist at any level below 10 were effectively stuck at that level.
 
Last edited:
I see the advantage to allowing specialists at 9 and 10. I'm not sure about allowing it at 7 and 8 though. At that age, I think the girls should still be pushed to work through their weak events. I think if my dd knew about this, she'd want to drop floor just because she sometimes gets tumbling blocks. In the long run, though, if she did that, I think she'd regret it.
 
What I'm looking at is not so much regional qualification (which isn't mentioned in this anyway), but level mobility. The prior lack of individual even mobility scores meant that specialist at any level below 10 were effectively stuck at that level.

I agree, I was addressing some of the concerns mentioned, because the qualification score is higher than the AA average. Overall I think the ideal thing is to do the AA. The instances I have seen it used have not been really as a strategy to get into higher competition but more due to injury and moving on the college gymnastics and dropping that event soon anyway. I am not sure my state even allows it at L7 and 8 for states...it might be on a statewide basis as to whether state meets need to include the IES competition, in R7 there isn't really a way to work it into the regionals qualification process at L8 since that doesn't go by a score. But other sanctioned meets include it, obviously. For some reason I had thought it was possible to petition (your RTC or something) to move to another level, but again I've only known older girls who are already at L10 or maybe L9 to do it. Either way I'm not sure I'm really concerned because as I understand it it's not like you can get your 8.5 through one event, go to L10, and then compete other events in L10 if you improve them...you would need to get the AA score (or IES on other events) for that. So if you have an athlete that is able to qualify through the AA system that is going to be your obvious choice.

What would be interesting to me would be to have (maybe just at L10) ability to specialize at levels per event so a girl could compete L10 on her best event but also do L9 in the other events. This I think could help transition to the goal of NCAA because it would allow harder competition on events the girl is qualified for, while still being able to improve and compete events that are "pretty close" but need more improvement to L10/NCAA level. I'm not completely clear on whether the mobility system would allow this...i.e. to compete as an event specialist but in two different levels. I am thinking this is one of the reasons for previously not having a mobility system. Now you could get your score on one of two or three events and move up in that one, but you'd still be at another level in the other two. This doesn't bother me personally, in fact I find it interesting.
 
Can some please explain to me how this would be a negative thing in L7 & L8? From what I can see I think there are some situations where this will help to keep gymnast in the sport. I don't think anyone is plotting to take anything away from AA gymnasts. I see event specialist as a way to make things more fair & keep all gymnasts progressing where they can. Yes, AA is the ultimate goal, but if that is not an option for a particular gymnast(even after already repeating levels) is better that she keep repeating the same level forever? Or should she go to prep opt or maybe just quit altogether? I think being able to continue to progress, in JO, in the events where she is able makes perfect sense.

To me this program sounds like a good option, for girls that may have limited options. Isn't progressing & getting new skills the goal for gymnasts? I would think that a program that promotes progression would be welcomed by all. What am I missing here?
 
Can some please explain to me how this would be a negative thing in L7 & L8? From what I can see I think there are some situations where this will help to keep gymnast in the sport. I don't think anyone is plotting to take anything away from AA gymnasts. I see event specialist as a way to make things more fair & keep all gymnasts progressing where they can. Yes, AA is the ultimate goal, but if that is not an option for a particular gymnast(even after already repeating levels) is better that she keep repeating the same level forever? Or should she go to prep opt or maybe just quit altogether? I think being able to continue to progress, in JO, in the events where she is able makes perfect sense.

To me this program sounds like a good option, for girls that may have limited options. Isn't progressing & getting new skills the goal for gymnasts? I would think that a program that promotes progression would be welcomed by all. What am I missing here?

everyone has really good points on this. personally i think the big thing that would make it okay for levels 7 and 8 would be an age limit. i did levels 7 and 8 in late elementary school, and a lot of other girls do too. i do not think that is a good age to specialize. i think that could be when people abuse the system to move up levels even if a specific event of theirs isn't quite up to par for AA> on the other hand there's a lot of level 7 and 8 girls in high school, who are older, who might be injured, or might just struggle with certain events but want to stay with gymnastics. i think this works best for them.
 
Can some please explain to me how this would be a negative thing in L7 & L8? From what I can see I think there are some situations where this will help to keep gymnast in the sport. I don't think anyone is plotting to take anything away from AA gymnasts. I see event specialist as a way to make things more fair & keep all gymnasts progressing where they can. Yes, AA is the ultimate goal, but if that is not an option for a particular gymnast(even after already repeating levels) is better that she keep repeating the same level forever? Or should she go to prep opt or maybe just quit altogether? I think being able to continue to progress, in JO, in the events where she is able makes perfect sense.

To me this program sounds like a good option, for girls that may have limited options. Isn't progressing & getting new skills the goal for gymnasts? I would think that a program that promotes progression would be welcomed by all. What am I missing here?

It doesn't really bother me either way, although I would be surprised if a girl who was good enough to have success even on an individual event in a level higher than 7, couldn't get the mobility score in the AA to move up. Even from 8-9 too. I guess there could be fear issues at play or maybe serious injury (as in the cases I've seen, but those were 9s and 10s). But I admit I wouldn't have really thought of it for level 7s.

It seems to me that it would be more likely to be used in situations that are not really the kid repeating the level and still can't make the score, because in that case it seems less likely they could really become a standout on any individual event in level 9 or 10. Maybe in some cases, you could have a really good vaulter and tumbler but bars and beam are just not coming along at all and that kills the AA so much they can't even get the 8.5. But even that seems a little less likely to me. I don't think the program has been utilized to its full potential yet so I admit I probably can't really make projections like that. It may be possible but just hasn't been a recognized option to train like that yet.
 
I think its wonderful news and I wish we had a similar option here in Australia. I don't think it would encourage kids to give up on their weak apparatus too early on, I am sure very few coaches would allow a child to specialize just because she is weak on an event.

But there are a number of reasons why specializing would be necessary to keep a girl in the sport. Such as injury, lack of training time, morbid fear and so on.
 
I've said many times how much I WISH this option had been available in the olden days.
I'd have progressed on for sure on my strong events. And it would have been incentive rather than disincentive for me to try to "catch up" my weak apparatus later on over time.
I think (from experience) a lot of girls quit when they feel they aren't progressing any more. Going up a level (even in one apparatus) would (in my mind at least) do more for one's sense of progression than improving scores/etc.
To be fair though, all-around competitors should automatically be declared specialists in all 4 events for the purpose of qualifying to the next round of competition (states>nationals).
 
To be fair though, all-around competitors should automatically be declared specialists in all 4 events for the purpose of qualifying to the next round of competition (states>nationals).
I don't think this would be fair for an AA gymnast when it comes to placement and ranking. There are many advantages for a gymnast to train and compete in only selected event(s). When competing together, I think some sort of handicap system should be used. Otherwise you will have proportionally more specialists moving onto the next round.

Also, I like the age limit requirement idea for the entry optional levels. In fact, maybe other criteria should be considered, such as the number of repeated years and the length of leave due to injury. Or maybe, a specialist must specialize in say 2 or 3 events. That way, the specialist path will not become a loop hole for one to move quickly to L9/10.

Without a restriction, as already pointed out, everyone who is not completely happy with all 4 events will jump on the band wagon to become a specialist. Why wouldn't she? Eventually, only those who aspire to be top ranking AA athletes will put in the extra effort to pursue the AA path.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against allowing for specialists. I just think it should be thought out more before it is pushed out to the community.
 
This sounds like a similar concept to what the Australia's state stream (where i live anyway) you compete whatever apparatus you want you can go and compete just bars if you want to, you can compete all but floor if you wanted to but of course you are illegible for all around. You can only place on the events you score on.

This is where i like prefer Australia's system it allows more flexibility and you can adjust for your child's needs. The other thing i prefer about in Australia's system is the fact that you are out of compulsories by level four where you get your own music. I think its quite unfair to have all the same music and routine means that it disadvantages certain kids.
 
The state system only exists in some states in Australia, we don't have anything like that that is everywhere.
 
The state system only exists in some states in Australia, we don't have anything like that that is everywhere.
Oh ok, i don't know too much about it but i was generally referring to where i live
 
Without a restriction, as already pointed out, everyone who is not completely happy with all 4 events will jump on the band wagon to become a specialist. Why wouldn't she? Eventually, only those who aspire to be top ranking AA athletes will put in the extra effort to pursue the AA path.

I see no problem with this.

Besides, the men's side has allowed specialization for ages (and has never had mobility scores at all), and competitions are still dominated by all-arounders. I suspect that with women, who only have four events (three of which are floor), specialization will be even less common than with men.
 
What would be interesting to me would be to have (maybe just at L10) ability to specialize at levels per event so a girl could compete L10 on her best event but also do L9 in the other events.

Yes!

And with some thought planning could work at lower levels as well. This approach really serves the athlete instead of the system.
 

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

College Gym News

The Hardest Skills: McKayla Maroney

3 Skills that FIG Would Ban at First Sight

Back