Women L4 mobility score

[momstrong]

Has the mobility score for L4 always been 34, or was it recently raised? And what is the rationale for having it so much higher than the L5 mobility score?

I might have missed it somewhere in the thread, but where is this kind of information posted?

 

[John]

I don't think there are a lot of us who think that scoring out of and/or skipping levels is necessarily a bad or unsafe thing to do. (Short Stack skipped L3).

Please Excuse the novel ahead.

I can only speak for myself... I am totally fine with scoring out of levels. If the gymnast is proficient (as your daughter has proven to be), fantastic--more power to that gymnast. Everyone should be able to compete where they are challenged, yet also have some success.

I happen to be a supporter of the new mobility score of 34. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a gymnast to attain an average of 8.5 for each event during one meet through an entire season. Even if the gymnast scored a 7.75 on one event, a 34 is still attainable for a proficient gymnast. If a gymnast can't do that at least once throughout an entire season, she needs to continue uptraining, and compete at least one meet as a 4 the next season to show that she is proficient, then either move up to five, or attempt to score out of 5 and move up to 6, or even 7 if she is ready. (I don't feel that it would be necessary, or even right, for every gymnast who didn't achieve the mobility score to repeat an entire season of 4).

I think the concern many (including myself) have is that if the mobility score for L4 was too low, gymnasts who weren't truly proficient at L4 were able to easily achieve the mobility score, (a 7.75 on one event... fine. An average of 7.75 on all four events... not sure that shows proficency for such an important level) then that gymnast might be training/competing 5 before she is safely able to.

And I totally agree with you that the coaches who allow gymnasts to compete where it is unsafe for them should be taken to task, it is a subjective sport. And what one coach or judge might deem unsafe, another coach or judge may not.

Again, IMO, if the gymnast is truly proficient, the 34 should be no problem, and if the goal is to score out and move up, great!

I really do agree with you. I am playing devil's advocate but for a reason. That reason is simply keeping girls in the sport. A 33.85 should not keep a kid from optionals. Sometimes optionals is a child's only goal. Should that child successfully achieve her goal then possibly she could continue to grow and enjoy her gymnastics journey.


Link Removed
and
Link Removed

 

[LindyHopper]

A 33.85 should not keep a kid from optionals

But it doesn't keep her from optionals forever. It only keeps her from level 5, and only possibly for one more meet.

If the compulsory season is during winter/spring, and the gymnast got her highest score at State, and scored a 33.900, (which Short Stack actually scored at one of her L4 meets) I see no reason she can't train over the summer for L5 score out, L6, or L7. That gives the gymnast about 5 months to both gain the proficiency to get at least a 34 in L4 while still uptraining. Have her attend a mid-October meet to score out of 4, and possibly 5. Boom! She's an optional gymnast. Then she can start her traditional season in December or January as an optional gymnast, just as she would have if she had attained the mobility score by scoring a 34.1 at state. No time lost.

At least that's how I think a coach who coaches each gymnast as an individual could handle it.

I know a lot of gyms have policies, tradition, and culture that would not allow for the scenario as I present it, but USAG would allow it.

 

[John]

@LindyHopper good points. You mention policies and tradition as well as culture. I hope that my DD has begun to change the culture of her gym. As for level 4 and 5 mobility scores, I guess I do not like them, but I also do not like compulsory routines. Maybe these are just my problems. I would suggest compulsory skills needed in each routine and let a coach arrange them for each gymnast.

 

[raenndrops]

But it doesn't keep her from optionals forever. It only keeps her from level 5, and only possibly for one more meet.

If the compulsory season is during winter/spring, and the gymnast got her highest score at State, and scored a 33.900, (which Short Stack actually scored at one of her L4 meets) I see no reason she can't train over the summer for L5 score out, L6, or L7. That gives the gymnast about 5 months to both gain the proficiency to get at least a 34 in L4 while still uptraining. Have her attend a mid-October meet to score out of 4, and possibly 5. Boom! She's an optional gymnast. Then she can start her traditional season in December or January as an optional gymnast, just as she would have if she had attained the mobility score by scoring a 34.1 at state. No time lost.

At least that's how I think a coach who coaches each gymnast as an individual could handle it.

I know a lot of gyms have policies, tradition, and culture that would not allow for the scenario as I present it, but USAG would allow it.

I agree for the most part...
But 34 used to be our YMCA "Mandate" score (as long as they scored at least 8.0 in each event in the same meet)...
That meant that if you scored it 2x in Old L5/ Current L4, the next season you had to move up.
At 31-33.975, it was at coach's discretion (basically based on summer training and skills achieved).
If the coaches had to make them get the 34 the next year, they would again have to compete at least 2 meets because to move up mid-season, you have to make the score 2x per our zone rules.
And, we don't have the luxury to attend a meet out of the season, so even though our coach coaches each gymnast as an individual, it could slow or even stop a girl's progress... and does end up leading to girls transitioning to Xcel Gold - which isnt a big deal at our gym because team is team and they all practice the same hours at the same time.

Some girls can be ready to move up and still not able score a 34 at L4. Bent knees, flexed feet and other "piddly" things in addition to text errors that don't mean a girl is not ready / not safe to move up can keep a girl from scoring 34.

 

[3rd_time_around]

[QUOTE="
Some girls can be ready to move up and still not able score a 34 at L4. Bent knees, flexed feet and other "piddly" things in addition to text errors that don't mean a girl is not ready / not safe to move up can keep a girl from scoring 34.[/QUOTE]

But these aren't piddly things. Bent knees and arms are up to .3 EACH time. If they can't fix it in compulsories to the point that it is keeping them from scoring a 34.00, then they aren't ready. If text errors and knees, arms, and feet are costing them that many points, then they really are not ready for higher levels where these things are important. Round offs and back handsprings with bent knees and arms can lose a lot of points. Plus, the core skills need to be done properly so that the more advanced skills can be done properly. I don't think some bent knees/arms/flexed feet should hold back a gymnast, but if it is affecting their score that much, they aren't quite ready.

 

[2G1B]

[QUOTE="
Some girls can be ready to move up and still not able score a 34 at L4. Bent knees, flexed feet and other "piddly" things in addition to text errors that don't mean a girl is not ready / not safe to move up can keep a girl from scoring 34.

But these aren't piddly things. Bent knees and arms are up to .3 EACH time. If they can't fix it in compulsories to the point that it is keeping them from scoring a 34.00, then they aren't ready. If text errors and knees, arms, and feet are costing them that many points, then they really are not ready for higher levels where these things are important. Round offs and back handsprings with bent knees and arms can lose a lot of points. Plus, the core skills need to be done properly so that the more advanced skills can be done properly. I don't think some bent knees/arms/flexed feet should hold back a gymnast, but if it is affecting their score that much, they aren't quite ready.[/QUOTE]

I understand what you are saying; but there is more to it than that a kid can't straighten their legs. My kids all have knobby knees and legs that do not hyperextend no matter how hard they try. My DD still gets dinged in optionals for her knees not being straight; but she can work her routines to minimize how noticeable the issue is. She scores higher in optionals than she ever did in compulsories. I'm sure she isn't the only kid like this.

 

[raenndrops]

@GAgymmom
But bent knees and flexed feet arent "unsafe" or "scary" was my point. The tightness can come later. A gymnast shouldnt be stuck in compulsories for YEARS because their form isn't tight enough yet. Tightness can come in level 6, an OPTIONAL level where they can have their own music and own routines. They know their scores will reflect these issues. It's whatever! IF they have the actual skills to safely compete Level 4 and will have the skills to safely compete Level 5, they should be able to move up. JMO.

 

[mommyof1]

I understand what you are saying; but there is more to it than that a kid can't straighten their legs. My kids all have knobby knees and legs that do not hyperextend no matter how hard they try. My DD still gets dinged in optionals for her knees not being straight; but she can work her routines to minimize how noticeable the issue is. She scores higher in optionals than she ever did in compulsories. I'm sure she isn't the only kid like this.

I have one of these kids. The fronts of her knees aren't knobby, but when her legs are as straight as they go there is still an apparent angle behind the knee. She has learned how to keep her legs tight and they still don't look straight. In effect, her start value is lower than the start value of her teammates who are able to straighten or hyperextend their legs. She understands that this is the hand she's been dealt and she has to learn to live with it, but it's an additional source of frustration.

 

[TumbleTimes4]

I have one of these kids. The fronts of her knees aren't knobby, but when her legs are as straight as they go there is still an apparent angle behind the knee. She has learned how to keep her legs tight and they still don't look straight. In effect, her start value is lower than the start value of her teammates who are able to straighten or hyperextend their legs. She understands that this is the hand she's been dealt and she has to learn to live with it, but it's an additional source of frustration.

We are in the same boat: no matter how much she stretches or tightens, her legs will never be completely straight. She is also pigeon-toed, and the ortho said it’s the way she is made and there isn’t much we can do about it. It’s very noticeable on floor and beam. It sucks to be deducted for something you can’t control, but such is life.

 

[GYM0M]

IMO, a 32.00 AA does show proficiency and a 34 isn't necessary, but I think too many took loop holes with Xcel and the low mobility scores and safety has become an issue for a few of those gymnasts. Does it suck to have to deal with the consequences of a few too many bad decisions? Yep, but as such is life too.

 

[Pigeon]

I would suggest compulsory skills needed in each routine and let a coach arrange them for each gymnast.

Gah! I coach 20 level 4 girls...I couldn't imagine having to create (and remember) 20 different routines! Also, it's not only about the skills...it's about learning turn-out, proper posture, rhythm, timing to music, timing of swings, etc, etc, etc...

I do think that having these compulsory levels set up the way they are is one of the reasons the US is so strong in gymnastics, and that the top level 10 gymnasts could be international elite athletes in many other countries. A mobility score of 34 is reasonable for level 4. If your gym does a competition year at level 4, you probably have a number of meets to achieve that.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

@LindyHopper I also do not like compulsory routines. Maybe these are just my problems. I would suggest compulsory skills needed in each routine and let a coach arrange them for each gymnast.

Then it wouldn’t be compulsory.

And USAG has that. It’s called Xcel.

 

[raenndrops]

Then it wouldn’t be compulsory.

And USAG has that. It’s called Xcel.

Except that Xcel doesnt have required skills... there are a variety of skills to meet the SR.
Sounded like John meant the ROBHSBHS, FHS, BER... etc for L4 and the coach makes the skills into a routine.

But I dont like that idea either. I like the idea of Compulsories. I just think that if they aren't going to have mandate scores that require move up the next season, then they should have a more reasonable L4 minimum score (32). Even I think 31 was a little too low, lol.

 

[raenndrops]

Gah! I coach 20 level 4 girls...I couldn't imagine having to create (and remember) 20 different routines! Also, it's not only about the skills...it's about learning turn-out, proper posture, rhythm, timing to music, timing of swings, etc, etc, etc...

I do think that having these compulsory levels set up the way they are is one of the reasons the US is so strong in gymnastics, and that the top level 10 gymnasts could be international elite athletes in many other countries. A mobility score of 34 is reasonable for level 4. If your gym does a competition year at level 4, you probably have a number of meets to achieve that.

Each gym would probably come up with a single routine for all of their L4s since they would all be doing the same skills.

I agree that the set up of our compulsory levels is a good one... however, I think 32 would be a more reasonable minimum score for L4.
As I mentioned earlier, there are several things that are deductions that do not necessarily mean the gymnast would be unsafe or unprepared to compete at a higher level. (Bent knees... or the illusion of them due to structural issues, flexed feet, text errors - which don't exist once you get to Optionals, etc).

 

[3rd_time_around]

IMO, a 32.00 AA does show proficiency and a 34 isn't necessary, but I think too many took loop holes with Xcel and the low mobility scores and safety has become an issue for a few of those gymnasts. Does it suck to have to deal with the consequences of a few too many bad decisions? Yep, but as such is life too.

The old score was a 31.00.

 

[3rd_time_around]

Each gym would probably come up with a single routine for all of their L4s since they would all be doing the same skills.

But wouldn't this then be just like doing compulsories? Just a thought.

 

[GYM0M]

The old score was a 31.00.

Oh I know. I think a 31 is too low, but I feel like a 32 shows a decent amount of proficiency; however, I think that bc of the ‘few’, the whole system has to deal with the consequences. For example, it was explicitly expressed by USAG that Xcel was not to be used a compulsory bypass, but it still was. Then some adopted the no two states rule for JO and Xcel as a deterrent, but that didn’t work. So now, after all that, a score of 34 is required for mobility from L4. IMO a 32 demonstrates proficiency, but a 34 demands it....Maybe this will get the message through.

 

[raenndrops]

But wouldn't this then be just like doing compulsories? Just a thought.

Yes it would... but more like some gyms do with Xcel Bronze... so instead of 72 L3 musics a session, it would be a different music for each team and the judges wouldnt see the exact same routine from all 72. Some may put the ROBHS first, others the HS-BKO, still others the HS-FR... etc. There would be no TEXT ERRORS.
But like I said, I like how compulsories work... just not 34 required for L4.

 

[Aussie_coach]

Here in Australia up until 2 years ago kids had their own optional routines in the compulsory levels. They were still compulsory levels as the kids had to put in the same skills but their each had their own music and routines.

For example the level 4 floor routine had to have
Round off
Cartwheel cartwheel
Back extension roll to front support
A leap series with 2 split leaps
A jump full turn
A full turn on 1 foot

But any music, any order of skills, any dance etc.

Most gyms had individual routines for each gymnast, but some just made up one routine for everyone in the same level.