MAG more optional confusion

[jenjean70]

That was true this year. But next quad I do not think 10 yo can do level 8 at all. If 11 yo do level 8, they can only do it as JE. They cannot do JO level 8; you have to be 12 for that

@krc do 11 yo have to qualify to do JE level 8 like 10 yo used to have to? Or do they just have to do JE if they are 11 and L8?

Oh wow- that's crazy. Our coaches told us that they changed the age so that we could compete with the world and that after the next quad it will move up to a January birthday which would affect my son in four years (he's a July birthday so he's almost 11).....but I don't see how limiting the age at which a kid can compete a certain level helps us compete with the world...I agree with the others- I am so confused!

 

[skschlag]

Oh wow- that's crazy. Our coaches told us that they changed the age so that we could compete with the world and that after the next quad it will move up to a January birthday which would affect my son in four years (he's a July birthday so he's almost 11).....but I don't see how limiting the age at which a kid can compete a certain level helps us compete with the world...I agree with the others- I am so confused!

What do you mean...move up to January?

 

[jenjean70]

What do you mean...move up to January?

I was told that in four years the new age would be January....right now it is May 2017 but in four years it will jump to January. So let's pretend they were moving it to January now- the age you will be in 2017 (Jan-Dec) is the age you would compete because the upper level international and many national competitions happen in the summer and fall. That would make my son compete as a 12 year old even though he would be 11 the entire season. From what our coaches told us this will happen in four years when my son would presumably be a 14 year old level 9 but would have to compete as a 15 year old level 10 to stay "in age"....

 

[skschlag]

Oh I hope not. That would eliminate an entire group of seniors from their last year of competition. Including my ds...who would lose that entire year That would be really sad for all of those seniors who turn 19 in 2021. I really hope that don't do that to them...I guess I can't worry about it now.

 

[wandrewsjr]

This is all very fascinating stuff. So with girls, those on track to try to go elite (tops, hopes, junior and senior elite) compete the age they will be on Dec 31st of that year, like they would internationally with FIG. JO and Xcel you essentially compete the age you are at the meet(no age max, just the bare minimum age requirements) Are the boys trying to go in this direction? The JE boys will compete under FIG age while the JO and JD boys will compete more like girls JO and Xcel?

 

[krc]

@krc do 11 yo have to qualify to do JE level 8 like 10 yo used to have to? Or do they just have to do JE if they are 11 and L8?

As of right now, there is no criteria or pre-qualifying in order to compete 11yo JE L8. In theory, you could compete as a JE L8 all season, and then drop back to L7 at the State Championship. Because of this current "loophole" I expect restrictions will be added, i.e. qualify to FS nationals as an 11yo. Stay tuned for the first update

January 1st age? It has been proposed before. FIG is actually a Dec 31 date (looking backward) Highly unlikely this will happen. FIG meets happen in the fall while Junior meets are primarily in the winter/spring. This would put our juniors in the position of competing significantly below their actual age. And imagine FS and early season meets which actually occur in the previous calendar year. Not an impossible scenario, but would entail a serious re-vamp of our 16-18yo system (at least on the JE side)

KRC

 

[Madden3]

Ok I cannot figure something out.
Let's say the date WAS January 1st. Or December 31st. Either is roughly a midseason date here in US. Yes?
Are you saying it would be the age the boy would be midseason that determines competition age for that season, or the age the child would be on Jan 1st/Dec 31 of the following season?
I am trying to figure out how a (hypothetical) January 1st age cut off date for 2016-2017 season would make Jenjean70s son compete as a 12 year old when he is turning 11 this month. (Happy Birthday btw.)
Thanks.

 

[2G1B]

Ok I cannot figure something out.
Let's say the date WAS January 1st. Or December 31st. Either is roughly a midseason date here in US. Yes?
Are you saying it would be the age the boy would be midseason that determines competition age for that season, or the age the child would be on Jan 1st/Dec 31 of the following season?
I am trying to figure out how a (hypothetical) January 1st age cut off date for 2016-2017 season would make Jenjean70s son compete as a 12 year old when he is turning 11 this month. (Happy Birthday btw.)
Thanks.

I'm wondering the same thing. Under the old, September 1, cutoff, my son competed as an 11 yo this last season. That was his actual age all season as his bday is the very end of May. So next year he will compete as a 13 yo despite being 12 all season. If we change again to a December 31 or January 1 cutoff, would that bring him back to competing his actual age? Or would it be onefof those dates of the next season and it would just be way more kids competing as a year older than they actually are?

 

[skschlag]

Ugh. Not even going to think about this possibility. It would really eliminate a sr. class of boys. So I am just going to think of this quad.....

 

[jenjean70]

Ok I cannot figure something out.
Let's say the date WAS January 1st. Or December 31st. Either is roughly a midseason date here in US. Yes?
Are you saying it would be the age the boy would be midseason that determines competition age for that season, or the age the child would be on Jan 1st/Dec 31 of the following season?
I am trying to figure out how a (hypothetical) January 1st age cut off date for 2016-2017 season would make Jenjean70s son compete as a 12 year old when he is turning 11 this month. (Happy Birthday btw.)
Thanks.

From what I understand when our coach was explaining it to me is that it would move to a "calendar year" system...meaning that we usually compete in the winter/spring - January starts a new calendar year (2017)- In 2017 he will turn 12 (even though he won't turn 12 until two months after nationals)- in the calendar year he still turns 12 therefore he would compete 12. I was happy with the change this year because Nate will compete against kids "his age" not older this coming season (even though it will make him "older") but his coach said that it's this way for now but it will change again in four years and move to the calendar year and it will affect him then. We'll see where he is in four years- hopefully it won't affect him too much.

 

[jenjean70]

I'm wondering the same thing. Under the old, September 1, cutoff, my son competed as an 11 yo this last season. That was his actual age all season as his bday is the very end of May. So next year he will compete as a 13 yo despite being 12 all season. If we change again to a December 31 or January 1 cutoff, would that bring him back to competing his actual age? Or would it be onefof those dates of the next season and it would just be way more kids competing as a year older than they actually are?

Yes. More kids would be competing the age they "will be" not the age they actually ARE. That will be hardest ( I would think) for the December birthdays who would be the VERY YOUNGEST age group....not turning the "age" for 7 months AFTER the competition season....but from what I understand we are behind what the rest of the world does and are trying to slowly catch up.

 

[jenjean70]

This is all very fascinating stuff. So with girls, those on track to try to go elite (tops, hopes, junior and senior elite) compete the age they will be on Dec 31st of that year, like they would internationally with FIG. JO and Xcel you essentially compete the age you are at the meet(no age max, just the bare minimum age requirements) Are the boys trying to go in this direction? The JE boys will compete under FIG age while the JO and JD boys will compete more like girls JO and Xcel?

Maybe- I know they are looking to be more "in sync" with world competition ages but I'm not really familiar with the girls side other than that they break them into very small age ranges during competition season because there are millions of them.

 

[skschlag]

So in that system, kiddos that are 18 their senior year, turning 19 that year after they graduate (which is a LOT), would not be able to compete their senior year. That would take D, and a lot of his friends that he competes against, out of competition for their senior year. I just can't imagine they would do that.

I really don't think any of this puts us behind on the international stage. We still compete the FIG rules and ages in the fall, so our junior system should not affect that at all. Boys are either ready to compete or not, and those that are get the training they need. They are 2 different seasons. Internationally, boys don't compete as much as our boys do. I would hate to see this. While we might need to work on our training, the ages are not the issue internationally. Especially since many competing internationally are in their late teens to early-mid 20s!!! Our JO ranges ar enot going to affect that.

 

[jenjean70]

So in that system, kiddos that are 18 their senior year, turning 19 that year after they graduate (which is a LOT), would not be able to compete their senior year. That would take D, and a lot of his friends that he competes against, out of competition for their senior year. I just can't imagine they would do that.

I really don't think any of this puts us behind on the international stage. We still compete the FIG rules and ages in the fall, so our junior system should not affect that at all. Boys are either ready to compete or not, and those that are get the training they need. They are 2 different seasons. Internationally, boys don't compete as much as our boys do. I would hate to see this. While we might need to work on our training, the ages are not the issue internationally. Especially since many competing internationally are in their late teens to early-mid 20s!!! Our JO ranges ar enot going to affect that.

I agree- It doesn't make sense. Hopefully they will work out the kinks before that happens. We'll see what these four years bring!

 

[skschlag]

Sigh. I kinda wish that D didn't have another change to go through! But he does. One more. This is the 2nd he has done. The first one affected him quite a bit. THis one, not so much. I would hate a change that takes away his last year of competition...especially with college as a goal.

Ok. Forgetting this conversation now...can't stress over it for 4 years.

 

[gracyomalley]

well, DS the younger would lose his senior year if that change occurs...as will all kids in many states....but I highly doubt he'd still be in gym by then anyway....

Perhaps they will grandfather the seniors in similar to the plans for this cycle?

I can sort of understand getting ages in line with international gymnastics, although the number of JO athletes that this is a relevant goal for is vanishingly small...at least I can see the logic now.

Would be very simple for JO to adopt the new cut off, but eliminate the maximum ages for levels - then none would be excluded (limit JO to high school kids rather than age, or set maximum at 19 so as to allow seniors but limit "red-shirting" if people are concerned (for some reason) about that) but the very very small percentage of kids shooting for elite/international gym would be used to the FIG ages and compete the same category JO and JE....

I'd say this won't apply to most of our kids, truthfully, but 2 years ago my oldest was a L5 and now he could be a L10...so I guess you never know what a kid might do... I won't completely count my younger one out. I just hate to see the "average" JO kid suffer for the rare elite kid...seems there could be compromises that will work well for both and strengthen the overall program, not just the top tier.

In any case, 4 years IS a long time...

 

[sce]

Final clinic was last weekend, any more clarification or understanding out there? One of our coaches said that JD only had ages listed. To define it, no level name. But that leaves the question for the younger JD, is it pommelless? Also, they explained it in a way that made it sound less like xcel and more about getting older boys in a place where they are competing appropriate to their age. At least afterwards they explained it to my ds in a way where he is comfortable with it, as the best option for him.

 

[skschlag]

I think it is like xcel in that it gives the older boys a route to stay in the sport. However, I think it does better at keeping them with their same-age peers in theory. Time will tell!!

 

[profmom]

I can answer one of your questions: yes, younger JD has the pommel-less horse. It's one of the things our coach does not like about JD, because it's hard to put together a good routine with no pommels for guys who are newer to gym.

I'm glad your DS sees it as a viable option, Sce.

 

[sce]

Oh, one more thing our coaches were told about the age changes and age caps. Yes, some kids have to deal wit a big jump due to the age changes, but everyone across the country is in the same boat. So true, yet not at all helpful really.