Parents Is success in level 6 a good predictor of success in optionals?

[littlegirlsdream]

The discussion started by Beamer on tough scoring in level 6 lead me to wonder, Do you find that the gymnasts that score well as level 6s go on to have more success in the optional years? It seems that my DD at this point has as many 7 skills as she does 6 and to about the same level of, or lack there of, perfection. She doesn't score that well as a 6 (not terrible but not great). However, some of the others kids that do score very well as 6s, don't have a single level 7 skill. So what lends it self to more success as an optional and do the scores of compulsory predict a gymnasts future success?

 

[my4buffaloes]

My dd is a level 7, but this is her 6th year competing. Honestly to me, it appears to change each year. Kids grow at different times - height and in gymnastics ability. It seems each year holds something completely different for her team. So success at one level doesn't automatically mean success at future levels. That being said some of the girls that struggled most at L6 are totally rocking L7. You just never know.

 

[gymmomtoo]

Honestly, I don't know--our level 6s don't typically do fantastic--this year they've done pretty well, but who know what will happen next year! My own daughters had not-great level 6 years, but both did great in level 7 (so at least I can attest the opposite can be true!).

 

[GymBee97]

really the only thing I can see as an indicator is a kids desire to try hard and work the skills if they do that they usually will do well but really there are so many factors involved that its hard to say.

Growth spurts, puberty, Hormones, school social life, friends outside of gym can all be a factor.

 

[beamer]

I have seen many posts over the years -- many on this site -- about success in compulsories not being a predictor of success at optionals.

Having watched the sport for 6 years, however, I have no illusions that DD will suddenly begin scoring 37s at meets as an optional. The girls who do this -- as one poster on the other thread noted -- tend to do this all the way through the levels. I am just hoping that scoring could be a little less discouraging when DD has routines that play to her strengths, not highlight her weaknesses (if I had a dime for every deduction for the back extension roll on floor, usually performed right in front of the judges' table...).

At a meet we recently attended, there was an L7 session going on next to our L6 session. As I glanced back and forth, it seemed like the contrast was stark: a sea of tiny uber-performers (L6) vs. a group of young women with a wide range of skills, body types, ages (L7). I'm sure it was just the mirage of a CGM lost in the desert of L6...

 

[iwannacoach]

Life at level six can hint at, but not predict, a kids future at L7.

A first year kid who's not repeated L5 prior to L6 competing comfortably is a good indicator....depending on how comfortably is framed. Comfortable means going into meets with no drama, beyond a small case of the jitters, planning on hitting each skill and believing there's's a chance to go fall free.

Scoring has little to do with it if the team as a group consistently spends a bit of practice time on each event working on L7 skills, but I suppose you could consider scores in the 34.00 AA range as reasonable.

 

[bookworm]

The discussion started by Beamer on tough scoring in level 6 lead me to wonder, Do you find that the gymnasts that score well as level 6s go on to have more success in the optional years? It seems that my DD at this point has as many 7 skills as she does 6 and to about the same level of, or lack there of, perfection. She doesn't score that well as a 6 (not terrible but not great). However, some of the others kids that do score very well as 6s, don't have a single level 7 skill. So what lends it self to more success as an optional and do the scores of compulsory predict a gymnasts future success?

I don't think it's predictive at all, at least for my daughter...her highest compulsory score EVER (in levels 4,5 or 6) was a 32.3...and she went on to be a great optional, Level 10 for 7 years; JOs every yr, won there and went onto college on a full ride so....I wouldn't worry about level 6

 

[gymgal]

I don't think it's predictive at all, at least for my daughter...her highest compulsory score EVER (in levels 4,5 or 6) was a 32.3...and she went on to be a great optional, Level 10 for 7 years; JOs every yr, won there and went onto college on a full ride so....I wouldn't worry about level 6

Did she spend a full year at each of the compulsory levels? I knew you dd had competed many yrs in 10 but didn't realize it was 7. That's amazing!

 

[bookworm]

Did she spend a full year at each of the compulsory levels? I knew you dd had competed many yrs in 10 but didn't realize it was 7. That's amazing!

No she didn't do a full year at each level...she did 3 meets at Level 5, 1 meet at Level 6 and one meet at Level 7 and then did a full season of Level 8 and 9, and then moved on to Level 10..

 

[Quadqueen]

I don't think it's predictive at all, at least for my daughter...her highest compulsory score EVER (in levels 4,5 or 6) was a 32.3...and she went on to be a great optional, Level 10 for 7 years; JOs every yr, won there and went onto college on a full ride so....I wouldn't worry about level 6

I LOVE this, but I think it's interesting too....your DD would never have moved up at our gym with those scores!! Shows what they know, right?!

 

[JBS]

Level 6 is a junk level. Many top scoring L6's never make it to L7. Many top scoring optionals only did one meet of L6 for mobility.

 

[gardenia01]

I have seen many posts over the years -- many on this site -- about success in compulsories not being a predictor of success at optionals.

Having watched the sport for 6 years, however, I have no illusions that DD will suddenly begin scoring 37s at meets as an optional. The girls who do this -- as one poster on the other thread noted -- tend to do this all the way through the levels. I am just hoping that scoring could be a little less discouraging when DD has routines that play to her strengths, not highlight her weaknesses (if I had a dime for every deduction for the back extension roll on floor, usually performed right in front of the judges' table...).

At a meet we recently attended, there was an L7 session going on next to our L6 session. As I glanced back and forth, it seemed like the contrast was stark: a sea of tiny uber-performers (L6) vs. a group of young women with a wide range of skills, body types, ages (L7). I'm sure it was just the mirage of a CGM lost in the desert of L6...

My dd never scored above a 36 in Levels 4-6. Mostly she was in the 35s. In Level 7, she scored a 37 plus at nearly every meet. At least around here, Level 7 scoring tends to be on the high side and our gym insists on free hip to hs and giants at Level 7, which resulted in very high bars scoring. This year at level 8, the vault is killing her scores but she still has managed a few mid 36s. I would also say that at Levels 7 and 8, from my experience, there are a load of teeny tiny girls in the youngest age group who are amazing. It is by far the most competitive age group.

 

[bookworm]

I LOVE this, but I think it's interesting too....your DD would never have moved up at our gym with those scores!! Shows what they know, right?!

Well her scores were lower too because her first gym was a rec gym so she moved right along when we moved her to a better gym...she came to the new gym as a "Level 5" and they had her working strap bar by the end of the second week for giants so I knew something was up......the coaches there evidently saw something that made them think she'd succeed and moved her along...I was kind of skeptical when they talked about her doing 1 meet at 6 and then 1 at 7 "and move her right to Level 8" because I didn't think she'd get the mobility score at Level 7...but she did , and the rest , as they say, is history...

 

[sportsmommy]

Its interesting that this thread is on here right now. I have been wondering the opposite. My dd was a very good level 4. She then had a very rough first year of 5. She is now in her second year of 5. Her scores have been in the high 8's so far rxcept for vault, which is a lower 8. We were just told that her coach plans on doing just one meet as a 6 and competing level 7(the new 6 i guess) next season. The coaches have always said she will be a good optional gymnast because what she does well she does very well. What she doesnt do well she struggles with a lot. She has a lot of work ahead of her. She isnt doing the bwo or beam dismount yet and i know the vault is going to be an issue. She is very determined and super excited. I hope it goes well for her.
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk 2

 

[mariposa]

I don't think that success or lack there of at the compulsory level can predict how a kid will do in optionals. For one, depends on the goals of the gym and the kid. If you have a talented kid that you want to get to optionals fast, why work on all the little details that go into good scores at the compulsory level. If you have a kid that maybe isn't good at the things that are in the compulsory routines, they might not score as well as they will when they can gear routines towards their strengths. And you can't predict from one level to the next how a kid will do, between growth spurts, fear issues and injuries, you just never know. And what works for one kid, won't work for another. Some kids will go quickly through the levels, some will be more slow and steady. There is no right or wrong. And certainly no way to predict success.

 

[EastCoastGymMom]

I've always wondered how these two types of gymnasts compare once they get to the upper levels of optionals.....

Gymnast #1 who starts team when she's got all her Level 4 skills strongly and does one year at each compulsory level (4-6) with high all around scores VS. Gymnast #2 who is pushed quickly into competing at a young age, flies through the compulsory levels with lower all around scores or scoring out, but gets to optional levels quickly. Will Gymnast #2 always have an advantage because she has more years of experience in optionals, or can Gymnast #1 eventually catch up?

Hope this makes sense!

 

[gymmomtoo]

I've always wondered how these two types of gymnasts compare once they get to the upper levels of optionals.....

Gymnast #1 who starts team when she's got all her Level 4 skills strongly and does one year at each compulsory level (4-6) with high all around scores VS. Gymnast #2 who is pushed quickly into competing at a young age, flies through the compulsory levels with lower all around scores or scoring out, but gets to optional levels quickly. Will Gymnast #2 always have an advantage because she has more years of experience in optionals, or can Gymnast #1 eventually catch up?

Hope this makes sense!

Of course--hard work can always pay off in the end--if the stars align and the injury demons stay away

 

[gymgal]

I LOVE this, but I think it's interesting too....your DD would never have moved up at our gym with those scores!! Shows what they know, right?!

When you are moving up quickly, you are learning the routines just enough to pass out. You're not worried about all the details - just the skills and enough details to get that mobility score. But you are right - so many gyms place such a high regard on getting a 36 before moving up. Especially when you are talking about all the little details in the compulsory routines that don't matter in optionals. I can understand a 34 if you are competing the whole season. But a 36 is just unattainable for a lot of compulsory gymnasts.

 

[LizzieLac]

I've always wondered how these two types of gymnasts compare once they get to the upper levels of optionals.....

Gymnast #1 who starts team when she's got all her Level 4 skills strongly and does one year at each compulsory level (4-6) with high all around scores VS. Gymnast #2 who is pushed quickly into competing at a young age, flies through the compulsory levels with lower all around scores or scoring out, but gets to optional levels quickly. Will Gymnast #2 always have an advantage because she has more years of experience in optionals, or can Gymnast #1 eventually catch up?

Hope this makes sense!

It depends - I don't think there is one answer. However, I have seen kids get pushed the compulsories to get to level 7 fast. Some of them have really sacrificed form in place of tricks. Even though they can do BWO-BWOSO on beam, their legs are always bent and they looks sloppy.

The compulsories are there for a reason. It is just that some gyms place TOO MUCH emphasis on scoring well at those levels that the kids drag on through them for years (and may end quitting becasue of it). And other gyms don't value levels 4-6 enough and those kids suffer on form (or quit becuase the pace is too fast for them).

Needs to be a happy medium, IMO.

 

[gardenia01]

I've always wondered how these two types of gymnasts compare once they get to the upper levels of optionals.....

Gymnast #1 who starts team when she's got all her Level 4 skills strongly and does one year at each compulsory level (4-6) with high all around scores VS. Gymnast #2 who is pushed quickly into competing at a young age, flies through the compulsory levels with lower all around scores or scoring out, but gets to optional levels quickly. Will Gymnast #2 always have an advantage because she has more years of experience in optionals, or can Gymnast #1 eventually catch up?

Hope this makes sense!

I would say absolutely Gymnast #1 can catch up. As others have mentioned, there is so much that one cannot predict. Gymnast #2 may get injured, develop fears, get stuck with some skill, or repeat a level for another reason. Meanwhile, Gymnast #1 moves along steadily. In my experience, if a gymnast has the ability and can stay relatively injury free, she will catch up at some point - even if that point is Level 10. (I'm leaving elite out of this as that is another situation entirely and not one I have experience with)