WAG L4 mobility score

[raenndrops]

If the minimum is going to be 34, then they should be doing some sort of progression for the FHS vault at L4, like maybe a flatback vault over the table onto stacked mats. But I am just a mom, so what do I know...

I HATE that vault (Xcel Silver does it). They had to revamp the rules for the vault because some teams were originally using stacked mats LOWER than the top of the vault (sounded like a concussion waiting to happen to me). Now it is to be at or higher than the vault table.
A better progression would be FHS over stacked mats turned sideways ... which I think has been suggested as a possibility for the next cycle.

In our gym, if they haven't mastered the FHS by Level 6, they move on to 1/2 On-Repulsion Off or 1/2 On-1/2 Off.

 

[raenndrops]

I can see that some kids might struggle in level 4 then have a great summer of training and be ready to smash level 5. This is the first year the new score has been put into place, it'll be interesting to see the effect it has on girls trying to move up in compulsories.

We have a girl who struggled in Level 4 last season. She had a great summer. She has her BWO on beam. She has everything but a real clear hip circle. She is repeating Level 4 because we want her to have a successful season. So far, she still hasn't hit 34... but has placed as high as 2nd on bars.
She has 4-5 meets left. It will really stink if she can't move up to Level 5 for next year.

 

[John]

When I joined Chalkbucket it was to find out about scoring out of Level 4 and 5 as my DD was coming for USAIGC. I personally think any move up meet score goes against the coach gymnast relationship and the purpose of sports in general. Gymnastics is a journey between an athlete and a coach. Should the Gymnast struggle on a back extension roll and vault but excel on many other skills, should that gymnast's journey end? I believe a coach with good standing in the USAG should have the final decision on the level his or her athletes compete. The score is arbitrary and does not indicate the future ability or work ethic of a gymnast.

For the record, DD attended a summer meet and scored out of Level 4 and 5 within the same 3 hours. My point is not about my daughter but about the girls at the meet that were unsuccessful in their attempt to score out of whatever level they attempted. The drama and stress caused by the desire to meet a mandatory score in a beginning level of gymnastics seems unhealthy.

 

[mommyof1]

OP, do you generally live in a really low scoring area? Or maybe it’s just a low scoring meet?

I don't think we are in a low-scoring area. On the contrary, it is sometimes said that scores are inflated towards the end of the season and especially at states. Our girls have done two real meets so far. I looked back at the scores for the first meet and 2/3 of the L4s at that meet (as compared with only 1/2 the L4s at meet #2) achieved at least a 34, but the powerhouse gyms were all at meet #1 and mostly not at meet #2.

 

[mls529]

I am a little surprised that 34 sounds high to some. I guess it must really vary by region. We are region 5, in a highly populated state/city. My daughter was never a superstar - a middle of the road JO gymnast. She competed level 4 for 2 seasons, when our state qualifying score was 33. But even her first season she was able to score a 34 by the end of the season (although she stared with a 32 at her first meet). Her 2nd year she started in the 34s and made it to 36s. At her gym, the entire team of 12 level 4s made states the first except one girl. Same thing the 2nd year (11 girls made it except 1). All would still safely had the mobility, even with the 34 minimum. I am seriously not trying to be snarky, but there may be an issue if a lot of girls on a level 4 team aren't hitting 34 at least once by the end of season.

 

[mommyof1]

When I joined Chalkbucket it was to find out about scoring out of Level 4 and 5 as my DD was coming for USAIGC. I personally think any move up meet score goes against the coach gymnast relationship and the purpose of sports in general. Gymnastics is a journey between an athlete and a coach. Should the Gymnast struggle on a back extension roll and vault but excel on many other skills, should that gymnast's journey end? I believe a coach with good standing in the USAG should have the final decision on the level his or her athletes compete. The score is arbitrary and does not indicate the future ability or work ethic of a gymnast.

For the record, DD attended a summer meet and scored out of Level 4 and 5 within the same 3 hours. My point is not about my daughter but about the girls at the meet that were unsuccessful in their attempt to score out of whatever level they attempted. The drama and stress caused by the desire to meet a mandatory score in a beginning level of gymnastics seems unhealthy.

This is precisely my concern. I believe that the pressure to score a 34, which is an average of 8.5 on each event (when a 9 is often enough to score near the top of the age group) and requires hitting all 4 events in the same meet, is actually preventing my kid from realizing her potential to score a 34 or even a 35 without weird confidence-induced bobbles, and possibly even messing with her uptraining for L5/L6. With her it is all about confidence, and the unnecessary pressure is destructive to her confidence. Her coaches have been fantastic about reducing the pressure this year, but that arbitrary score is still hanging over her head (she doesn't know that the real move-up requirement is 36 or 37 or something else none of the parents has been able to decipher).

 

[raenndrops]

I am a little surprised that 34 sounds high to some. I guess it must really vary by region. We are region 5, in a highly populated state/city. My daughter was never a superstar - a middle of the road JO gymnast. She competed level 4 for 2 seasons, when our state qualifying score was 33. But even her first season she was able to score a 34 by the end of the season (although she stared with a 32 at her first meet). Her 2nd year she started in the 34s and made it to 36s. At her gym, the entire team of 12 level 4s made states the first except one girl. Same thing the 2nd year (11 girls made it except 1). All would still safely had the mobility, even with the 34 minimum. I am seriously not trying to be snarky, but there may be an issue if a lot of girls on a level 4 team aren't hitting 34 at least once by the end of season.

Last season, 1 of our L4s scored over 34.0 ... however, 4 gymnasts had the POTENTIAL (based on personal event bests) to score over 34.
All 7 made the old minimum and had potentials of at least 32.7.

This season, 4 moved up to L5 and 3 are repeating L4.
Those that moved up are all in the 31.0 to 33.3 range so far. The one at the low end was actually the 2nd highest scorer at L4 and had all her L5 skills without a spot first. She started stressing after the first meet when she had a "bad bars day" and let that affect the rest of the meet

The repeaters are in the 32.7 to 34.2 range. The 34 was in the 33 range last season though.
The repeaters are all stressing out... except the one that already hit 34.

 

[Amanda]

This might be a totally premature opinion (ask me again in a couple months!), but our gym is trying to score a couple older girls (including my daughter) out of Level 4 (and then Level 5). I think I'm thankful for the 34 in Level 4 as I would be afraid if she scores much lower, it wouldn't really be in her best interest to move up (still not sure it is). I know this is a different scenario than competing an entire season and needing the 34. I wonder if there would be a benefit in having a different score requirement for those trying to score out as opposed to competing an entire season?

 

[raenndrops]

This might be a totally premature opinion (ask me again in a couple months!), but our gym is trying to score a couple older girls (including my daughter) out of Level 4 (and then Level 5). I think I'm thankful for the 34 in Level 4 as I would be afraid if she scores much lower, it wouldn't really be in her best interest to move up (still not sure it is). I know this is a different scenario than competing an entire season and needing the 34. I wonder if there would be a benefit in having a different score requirement for those trying to score out as opposed to competing an entire season?

Different standards would be difficult. Who is to say what a "season" is?
Someone could SAY they are not just scoring out and make the season long score. Compete a couple meets and move up.

 

[fuzi]

From the coaches and judges perspective, I totally support the mobility score increase to 34.00. I'm hoping it will help prevent some of the truly terrifying gymnastics I've seen at level 5 meets. In level four, a gymnast needs to learn kips and casts with straight arms; a good tap swing shape; a FHS over the table; powerful front and back handsprings; and how to get upside down, stay lined up, and then land right side up on beam. If they can't do that yet with 8.5 proficiency, they need more time to master it before they compete flipping skills.

 

[gymnastmom05]

From the coaches and judges perspective, I totally support the mobility score increase to 34.00. I'm hoping it will help prevent some of the truly terrifying gymnastics I've seen at level 5 meets. In level four, a gymnast needs to learn kips and casts with straight arms; a good tap swing shape; a FHS over the table; powerful front and back handsprings; and how to get upside down, stay lined up, and then land right side up on beam. If they can't do that yet with 8.5 proficiency, they need more time to master it before they compete flipping skills.

I agree with what you are saying, but made me wonder in place of a AA score, why not put a minimum proficiency score on each event? All the events/skills seem to build each level, minus the vault. So, 8.5 for bars, beam and floor and maybe lower it for vault (which is the same forever anyway and they're doing a FHS one way or the other, no matter the level 4/5/6/or 7). Just a thought I had when reading your post.

 

[raenndrops]

I agree with what you are saying, but made me wonder in place of a AA score, why not put a minimum proficiency score on each event? All the events/skills seem to build each level, minus the vault. So, 8.5 for bars, beam and floor and maybe lower it for vault (which is the same forever anyway and they're doing a FHS one way or the other, no matter the level 4/5/6/or 7). Just a thought I had when reading your post.

Half of our L6 and L7 team do not compete FHS.

 

[gymnastmom05]

Half of our L6 and L7 team do not compete FHS.

Ok, normally, at least in our experience, FHS is standard. We went to one meet last year with ONE girl do what I think is called a half on/half off? I thought it looked cool. Didn't score well.

 

[fuzi]

I agree with what you are saying, but made me wonder in place of a AA score, why not put a minimum proficiency score on each event? All the events/skills seem to build each level, minus the vault. So, 8.5 for bars, beam and floor and maybe lower it for vault (which is the same forever anyway and they're doing a FHS one way or the other, no matter the level 4/5/6/or 7). Just a thought I had when reading your post.

That would make a lot of sense. I imagine it's just harder to track on the national level.

My gym actually requires a minimum score on each event to move up. Level 2 to 3 and 3 to 4 need to have scored at least a 9.0 on each event once. Level 4 to 5 and 5 to 6 need a 9.0 on 3 events with at least an 8.75 on the fourth event (which is usually vault or bars depending on the gymnast).

 

[Amanda]

Different standards would be difficult. Who is to say what a "season" is?
Someone could SAY they are not just scoring out and make the season long score. Compete a couple meets and move up.

Yes, I wondered about this. I almost included that logistically this might be challenging.

 

[mommyof1]

In our gym, if they haven't mastered the FHS by Level 6, they move on to 1/2 On-Repulsion Off or 1/2 On-1/2 Off.

I am curious--how can they do these vaults well if they haven't mastered the FHS? Is there something about the half-on part that is easier than the first half of the FHS for some kids?

 

[3rd_time_around]

So if a 34 is the true sign of minimal proficiency, then half the kids in our state are not minimally proficient a third of the way into the season? That seems odd to me.

I have seen tons of sub-8 scores on vault this year, which means that it will be vault that's holding most kids back even though they have three more levels to master the FHS vault. That doesn't seem quite right. If the minimum is going to be 34, then they should be doing some sort of progression for the FHS vault at L4, like maybe a flatback vault over the table onto stacked mats. But I am just a mom, so what do I know...

They do the FHS vault at level 3 to flatback onto stacked mats. That's why compulsories are important--the skills build on one another as the Levels go up. If vault is holding them back, then they are not ready. I'm not trying to be petty or mean spirited, I'm a realist. It is what it is. Vault is just one event, so if vault is holding them back from scoring a 34, its either a 6.00 vault or the other events are not ready either. 3 good events can carry a bad event. 34 is 8.5 average on each event.

 

[3rd_time_around]

I agree with what you are saying, but made me wonder in place of a AA score, why not put a minimum proficiency score on each event? All the events/skills seem to build each level, minus the vault. So, 8.5 for bars, beam and floor and maybe lower it for vault (which is the same forever anyway and they're doing a FHS one way or the other, no matter the level 4/5/6/or 7). Just a thought I had when reading your post.

This bolded statement is not true. Level 1 does a straight jump onto mats then handstand to flat back. Level 2 does a FHS onto stacked mats to flatback. Level 3 does a FHS onto the table to flatback on mats. Level 4 and 5 do FHS over the table onto their feet. Then they do FHS for a few years, because it needs to be mastered. The vault does build each level. The angle of repulsion gets added in. Deductions increase, expectations increase.

 

[3rd_time_around]

When I joined Chalkbucket it was to find out about scoring out of Level 4 and 5 as my DD was coming for USAIGC. I personally think any move up meet score goes against the coach gymnast relationship and the purpose of sports in general. Gymnastics is a journey between an athlete and a coach. Should the Gymnast struggle on a back extension roll and vault but excel on many other skills, should that gymnast's journey end? I believe a coach with good standing in the USAG should have the final decision on the level his or her athletes compete. The score is arbitrary and does not indicate the future ability or work ethic of a gymnast.

For the record, DD attended a summer meet and scored out of Level 4 and 5 within the same 3 hours. My point is not about my daughter but about the girls at the meet that were unsuccessful in their attempt to score out of whatever level they attempted. The drama and stress caused by the desire to meet a mandatory score in a beginning level of gymnastics seems unhealthy.

Because some coaches move their gymnasts up before they are ready either for bragging rights, pride, because the parent pushes for it, whatever. It happens and it is dangerous. If you ever watched a level 8 or 9 meet with girls who clearly are not ready for that level and should not be there, and you suffer about 30 mini heartattacks minimum during the meet, you would understand the reason for a minimum score.

 

[mommyof1]

Level 3 does a FHS onto the table to flatback on mats.

???? The L3 vault was a handstand flatback on a mat stack with no table the last I checked.