Parents Is Competitive Gymnastics different at each club?

[GymParent0]

I’m not an expert by any means either but my daughter did level 6 at age 10 (age 11 for competition purposes) and she was still on the younger side. There were some super strong girls doing 6 at age 12 and up too. I don’t think they need to rush to 6 at all. Ideally the girls are learning skills that are a higher level than what they’re competing. The only other real benefit I can think of is fear - they develop more fears as they get older.!

Our gym does 5. It’s true that many girls skip it but ours doesn’t. They believe that the skills in level 5 contribute to a stronger foundation. It was frustrating at times seeing lots of girls my daughter competed against in level 4, skip to 6 while she had to do 5, but doing 5 made her a very strong 6.

It's a shame that gymnastics in Canada is centralized by provincial organizations that have zero financial support but issue all credentials because this blanket approach doesn't yield returns like some of the Soviet, Romanian, Chinese models have. USA does so well because they imported all of those coaches, and have financial incentive to succeed. More high level athletes, more sponsorships, more credibility, more notoriety. Canada doesn't seem to care in most sports and it's truly a shame. This whole "FUNdamentals" is more like "DUMdamentals" because the kids spend 9,12,15 hours at a gym with what is honestly, limited ROI.

Gymnastics has so many girls quit for other sports because it doesn't provide a proper roadmap or path for success. Little boys can dream of NHL, go to camps, be coached by NHL coaches and be rated young as 7 years old for AAA. Gymnastics hides all of this and doesn't really support it's athletes to encourage University and Olympic participation.

 

[Dahlialover]

Okay, so at what age/level should a kid who is advancing levels with ease, be finding a gym to suit their goal of being 12 years old, level 9+?

My concern is that my kids gym doesn't turn out anyone at decent level, so if my kid does have that potential, she will be restricted to whatever it is her gym is capable of providing.

I find they don't inform me of a roadmap because of this "fun" element, but ultimately serious clubs will discuss those things and explain the roadmap IMO.

If your goal is for your child to reach level 9 or 10 by age 12, you should switch to a gym that has a proven record of doing that as soon as possible, ideally by age 6 or 7. Lower levels are coached differently when the long-term goal is to produce successful level 10s.

 

[Deleted member 30882]

If your goal is for your child to reach level 9 or 10 by age 12, you should switch to a gym that has a proven record of doing that as soon as possible, ideally by age 6 or 7. Lower levels are coached differently when the long-term goal is to produce successful level 10s.

If you're aiming for your child to reach level 9 or 10 by age 12, it's best to switch to a gym with a strong track record for that early on, ideally by age 6 or 7. Lower levels are coached differently when long-term goals include high-level success.

 

[Gregory356]

Hey, I totally get your frustrations.If the gym really doesn’t offer a path to higher levels (7+), it’s definitely worth considering a change, Younger years, coaches might not matter as much, but as they progress, experience becomes key, Your kid deserves the best possible growth, I know parents who went through something similar and saw huge improvements after switching gyms.Experienced coaches do make a difference!Sometimes it's worth the extra drive to ensure your child gets solid support and development

 

[GymParent0]

If your goal is for your child to reach level 9 or 10 by age 12, you should switch to a gym that has a proven record of doing that as soon as possible, ideally by age 6 or 7. Lower levels are coached differently when the long-term goal is to produce successful level 10s.

How many levels per year is considered normal or good progress at a gym with many level 10s? It seems non-sensical for 12-14 year olds to be level 7 or 8 because they inevitably phase out and could be using those years to transition into a sport where they'll actually continue and be fruitful for them beyond 16 years of age.

I'm not speaking of the kids who simply want to coach other tots, but the ones who want D1 schools or aspirations to compete at something they're passionate about, against the best.

If kids have 4 meets lets say in a season, shouldn't they be focusing 2 meets at one level, and 2 meets at their next level? Just logically speaking, that's how you prep yourself for a new season (I'm no gymnastics expert, which is why I'm curious)

 

[NutterButter]

It's typical for gyms to progress one level/year. A typical progression in the US would be for a kid to start competing L3 or L4 then move up one level per year. It's common to skip either L5 or L6. It's also not unusual to repeat L8 or L9. Reasons for repeating a level often have to do with readiness on an event (often bars) but sometimes a kid has a poorly timed injury causing them to miss a season. Puberty can also slow progression as they work through growth spurts but often kids just need more time to get their skills competition ready. (There's a big difference between having skills and having them be ready to compete).

I don't understand your comments about 12-14 year olds being 'pushed out of the sport'. Gymanstics is a tough sport with a high attrition rate but most kids who leave the sport are able to find success in other sports because they are so coordinated and in great physical shape. My daughter's entry L4 cohort had 15 kids. Only 4 remained in the sport through high school graduation.

Your question on meets and competing 2 levels in a year just doesn't happen much. Sometimes a kid will score out of a level at the first meet of the season or during a private in-house meet but this is generally an exception. The US has state competitions for each level. Additionally for higher levels state leads to regionals and/or nationals. There's a ton of incentive for kids to compete at the highest competition offered at their level - especially for levels 9 & 10.

Prep for the next level happens in earnest once the season ends but ideally kids are working on bits and pieces throughout the year. A lot of L10 skills take years to learn with a build up through strength, conditioning, drills, timers, etc. You don't just one day chuck new skills. Gymanstics is hard on the body too so ideally the gym is able to progress kids while also being mindful of wear n tear and burnout.

 

[Dahlialover]

How many levels per year is considered normal or good progress at a gym with many level 10s? It seems non-sensical for 12-14 year olds to be level 7 or 8 because they inevitably phase out and could be using those years to transition into a sport where they'll actually continue and be fruitful for them beyond 16 years of age.

I'm not speaking of the kids who simply want to coach other tots, but the ones who want D1 schools or aspirations to compete at something they're passionate about, against the best.

If kids have 4 meets lets say in a season, shouldn't they be focusing 2 meets at one level, and 2 meets at their next level? Just logically speaking, that's how you prep yourself for a new season (I'm no gymnastics expert, which is why I'm curious)

Kids who reach level 10 at age 12 get there by reaching level 7 by age 9 and then progressing one level per year from there.

There are a couple different paths though the lower levels but a common one is to skip levels 1-3, compete level 4 at age 7 , skip 5, compete level 6 at age 8, and there you are at level 7 at age 9.

You can’t rush the upper levels, so all the level skipping happens when kids are 6-8 years old. If you want your kid to be on this track then you gotta get on it when they are young by going to a gym that offers this kind of program.

 

[rocky]

Hello,

I've found that my child's gymnastics club lacks the competent staff to grow kids to level 6+ and strings people along for profit. For example, the coaches all haven't participated in further than level 6 gymnastics and lack the credentials to teach skills they themselves cannot do. Therefore I'm finding a dilemma in the process as the club seems to be operating more for revenue. The feedback given for advancing to competitive groupings 12-15 hours seems to be justified by who has paid more money, and duration at the club, instead of skillset or potential based assessments. Coaches can pick their favourite kids or families to get more 1 on 1 or be advanced with extra hours. Groups with vast ranges in skillset are made, where many kids cannot even complete Level 1 skills are in the same group as kids ready to complete level 3 or 4 skills. Initially I thought it was to give my kid more attention to correct fine details, but I'm quickly realizing it's quite possibly a club that has no idea what they are doing. Questions about the pathway are often met with non-answers and hostility, to the point where all parents have no idea what the plan is for their kid or what their goals are for the year. This kind of confuses me, because if they're working 9-12 hours per week, there becomes an inflection point where base level conditioning is maxed out and maybe it's time to move onto a gym that can provide a better pathway.

I'm finding that my kid (7 this year) is able to be corrected semi-okay at the Level 1, 2 range but for Level 3 Skills, I'm finding the gym isn't very good. The coaching levels are clearly obvious when you compare the ODP preparedness from some clubs such as “club x” who seem to have their stuff together, and other clubs who's kids last year couldn't even lift themselves over the bar. The kids from Burlington for example, appear to all have the little details corrected, even presenting with smile and the kids fully aware of their expectations to perfection in competition, where as our club, I wonder what actually goes on in terms of appropriate preparation. This opinion of mine can be validated when looking at the club rankings online for last years competitions at each level, where this club barely features at all for any level, and scoring extremely (bottom 10%) at the lower ranks level 3.


My question here is for the experienced parents:

At what age do kids outgrow young and inexperienced coaches with lower level experience?

Is there a greater experience to be had at the clubs turning out athletes in level 7,8,9,10 vs a club that taps out at 6? When does that experience matter?
Is it worth the extra drive to provide your kid an opportunity to reach their full potential?

Thank you for your replies and I'm not writing this to slight the club she's at, but to clearly identify how gymnastics operates. In my mind, a world class chess player doesn't become world class working with recreational players. Families pay good money but most importantly the kids invest a lot of their time. I'm trying to understand gymnastics and how to maximize my child's potential.

Please don't make unfounded accusation like stringing people along for profit. Clubs make profit from recreational programs, but pretty much always lose money on competitive programs. If a club is just there for the money they wouldn't even be running a competitive program. Certainly some clubs may not have coaches with the knowledge to develop gymnasts to higher levels, but in a competitive program they will not be making a profit out of it, they will just be doing their best. If that isn't enough for you, that is fine to move to somewhere that you think will do better, but don't start making false claims like that.

 

[Gymgirl84]

Any way I don't think making it to level 10 at 12 is necessary to be successful, even at the college stage. Making level 10 a couple of years later could be quite ok.
Gymastics is a technically complex sport, so acquiring skills can be a slow process, especially taking them up to competition standard. That's why most gymnasts can't do multiple levels a year, even though it is done at some levels like 4-5, 5-6 even 6-7. After that is harder.

 

[GymParent0]

Please don't make unfounded accusation like stringing people along for profit. Clubs make profit from recreational programs, but pretty much always lose money on competitive programs. If a club is just there for the money they wouldn't even be running a competitive program. Certainly some clubs may not have coaches with the knowledge to develop gymnasts to higher levels, but in a competitive program they will not be making a profit out of it, they will just be doing their best. If that isn't enough for you, that is fine to move to somewhere that you think will do better, but don't start making false claims like that.

Club A (Thinking of Progress) vs Club B (Thinking of Finances)

Club A: Group progressing 2 levels per season, second group progressing 1 level per season.
Club B: Group progressing 1 level per season, second group progressing 1 level per 2/3 seasons.


Club A has fewer Rec programs than Club B. Club A has national level coaches, Club B has say, trampoline coaches teaching comp artistic.

The only reason to continue offering competitive option for kids progressing 1 level every two or three seasons is because your club focuses on generating revenue by having 50 kids in a gym at once. I wouldn't say the club loses money by adding the weaker athletes into competitive programming, in fact the opposite. It's like having a hockey team with 18 kids instead of 16. You bring on the +2 kids to pay for an extra tournament. They usually get very few minutes in games, but they probably quit hockey within two years or back to recreational.

 

[GymParent0]

Any way I don't think making it to level 10 at 12 is necessary to be successful, even at the college stage. Making level 10 a couple of years later could be quite ok.
Gymastics is a technically complex sport, so acquiring skills can be a slow process, especially taking them up to competition standard. That's why most gymnasts can't do multiple levels a year, even though it is done at some levels like 4-5, 5-6 even 6-7. After that is harder.

For sure, ideally if you're a young level 6, you're going to have a bigger window of opportunity to reach level 10. I'm talking more like, 14 year olds being level 6 or 7, they will never reach level 10 and if they do, probably not get recruited. The 8,9,10 should have some extra time to reach, and of course injuries, etc can set athletes back a year. If it's factored into their development, they will more likely achieve lvl 10. If that makes sense?

 

[GymParent0]

Kids who reach level 10 at age 12 get there by reaching level 7 by age 9 and then progressing one level per year from there.

There are a couple different paths though the lower levels but a common one is to skip levels 1-3, compete level 4 at age 7 , skip 5, compete level 6 at age 8, and there you are at level 7 at age 9.

You can’t rush the upper levels, so all the level skipping happens when kids are 6-8 years old. If you want your kid to be on this track then you gotta get on it when they are young by going to a gym that offers this kind of program.

Thanks, that's really informative.

I'm not sure if Canadian gyms do this, they're not as motivated compared to US programs, to have results. All sports under certain age in Canada were recently put under an umbrella of "FUNdamentals" that focuses on not specializing kids at a young age. It's contrary to reality at the highest level which is going to hurt Canada in all sports, by specializing athletes 2-3 years later than other countries do.

I'll do my homework to find out which clubs would be willing to accelerate paths.

 

[GymParent0]

It's typical for gyms to progress one level/year. A typical progression in the US would be for a kid to start competing L3 or L4 then move up one level per year. It's common to skip either L5 or L6. It's also not unusual to repeat L8 or L9. Reasons for repeating a level often have to do with readiness on an event (often bars) but sometimes a kid has a poorly timed injury causing them to miss a season. Puberty can also slow progression as they work through growth spurts but often kids just need more time to get their skills competition ready. (There's a big difference between having skills and having them be ready to compete).

I don't understand your comments about 12-14 year olds being 'pushed out of the sport'. Gymanstics is a tough sport with a high attrition rate but most kids who leave the sport are able to find success in other sports because they are so coordinated and in great physical shape. My daughter's entry L4 cohort had 15 kids. Only 4 remained in the sport through high school graduation.

Your question on meets and competing 2 levels in a year just doesn't happen much. Sometimes a kid will score out of a level at the first meet of the season or during a private in-house meet but this is generally an exception. The US has state competitions for each level. Additionally for higher levels state leads to regionals and/or nationals. There's a ton of incentive for kids to compete at the highest competition offered at their level - especially for levels 9 & 10.

Prep for the next level happens in earnest once the season ends but ideally kids are working on bits and pieces throughout the year. A lot of L10 skills take years to learn with a build up through strength, conditioning, drills, timers, etc. You don't just one day chuck new skills. Gymanstics is hard on the body too so ideally the gym is able to progress kids while also being mindful of wear n tear and burnout.

Interesting to hear how US has such a national program for young kids. I meant that at 12-14 years of age, their prospects in gymnastics narrow and close if they are lower level and must transition to another sport. Hopefully they began learning a foundation in another sport prior to high school so that they can utilize the fantastic physical advantages.

 

[GymParent0]

If you're aiming for your child to reach level 9 or 10 by age 12, it's best to switch to a gym with a strong track record for that early on, ideally by age 6 or 7. Lower levels are coached differently when long-term goals include high-level success.

Correct me if I'm off on this, but it's fine to be a 14-16 year old at Level 10, but it seems important to be close to it while in high school to ensure that college eligibility remains an option?

 

[kecks]

Interesting to hear how US has such a national program for young kids. I meant that at 12-14 years of age, their prospects in gymnastics narrow and close if they are lower level and must transition to another sport. Hopefully they began learning a foundation in another sport prior to high school so that they can utilize the fantastic physical advantages.

Why would you have to "transition to another sport"? A sport is always worth doing even if you never make it to nationals or even get to be a professional athlete one day. It is about having a productive youth, getting movement skills for life, build friendships for life and get to know yourself very well. Sports is just a vehicle for becoming a better human being. And a very fun thing to do, that of course too. Signed a former elite athlete and now coach. Sports is the best not important thing in this world. Ever.

 

[NutterButter]

Interesting to hear how US has such a national program for young kids. I meant that at 12-14 years of age, their prospects in gymnastics narrow and close if they are lower level and must transition to another sport. Hopefully they began learning a foundation in another sport prior to high school so that they can utilize the fantastic physical advantages.

All of your posts truly demonstrate that you know very little about gymnastics (which you have admitted) but at the same time you have some incorrect assumptions about the sport that you seem reticent to abandon. Your comparisons of gymnastics to hockey is like comparing an apple to an orange.

I stand by my original advice to you - if you want to keep all opportunities open for your child, get them into a gym that has L10s. Do this soon because even at age 7, some gyms will consider her too old. The reality is that even if you do this your child still may not make it to L10 (through no fault of her own, it’s just the nature of the sport). There’s so much to be said for letting your child do the activities they enjoy even if they can’t be at the elite level of their activity so you have to decide how much of a barrier YOU will be in their progress

 

[Gymgirl84]

A lot of gymnasts enjoy competing and progressing even if at a slower pace. It is ok for some gyms to only put in squads the girls that sho level 9-10-elite potential, but other gyms might want to also give an opportunity to those that might cap at level 7.
I was a very late starter to gymnastics and I started when I was around 12, started competing at 15 and I'm so happy the club gave me that opportunity, even if I only reached a level 5 or the like (different country).

 

[GymParent0]

All of your posts truly demonstrate that you know very little about gymnastics (which you have admitted) but at the same time you have some incorrect assumptions about the sport that you seem reticent to abandon. Your comparisons of gymnastics to hockey is like comparing an apple to an orange.

I stand by my original advice to you - if you want to keep all opportunities open for your child, get them into a gym that has L10s. Do this soon because even at age 7, some gyms will consider her too old. The reality is that even if you do this your child still may not make it to L10 (through no fault of her own, it’s just the nature of the sport). There’s so much to be said for letting your child do the activities they enjoy even if they can’t be at the elite level of their activity so you have to decide how much of a barrier YOU will be in their progress

I don't disagree with you and appreciate the advice, I think it's the right advice. I was just bringing in my experience and knowledge of high level sports/professional (in several sports) just not gymnastics.

 

[CoachPow]

If you're only willing to have your seven-year-old coached by someone who has competed at the level you believe she is inevitably destined for, you're going to be fishing in a very small pool. And hey, Aimee Boorman never went above high school level as a gymnast, but seemed to be an OK coach. In fact the head coach of the Italian national team is a balding 68-year-old former rugby player who I very much doubt could stick a full-twisting double layout, yet his squad came home from Paris with a silver medal, so...

Twenty one years of coaching, played college football, and I couldn't do a cartwheel. Glad I haven't been judged on that scale!!

 

[GymParent0]

Twenty one years of coaching, played college football, and I couldn't do a cartwheel. Glad I haven't been judged on that scale!!

20 years ago you were a different caliber coach than today. Mistakes were most definitely made early on and there's nothing wrong with parents not wanting their kids to be those mistakes along a new coaches journey.

Level 1 coaches are also not level 4 coaches. You can't tell me that you walked into gymnastics with no experience and could teach someone to nationals, it's incredibly unlikely.