Women Not sandbagging, but...

[spider_monkey]

At my daughter's recent level 6 state meet, the winner of her age group scored mid-38's doing pretty much all level 7 routines. The same gym also had several other girls score in the upper 38's and even low 39's, also competing routines that would score well in level 7. We are talking beam series with flight, giants, clear hip handstands, three tumbling passes with layouts and fhs/ft in their floor routines. After a quick search, it's clear that these girls are NOT level 6 repeats, just amazingly talented and obviously well-trained. However...what do others think about this? Girls who are clearly ready for the next level, competing below their obvious current ability?

*disclaimer- my dd didn't even end up competing at state due to injury, so I'm not bitter, just genuinely curious! We live many hours away from these gyms and those gymnasts clearly train many, many more hours than gyms in my area, so this is a different world than what I'm used to.

 

[raenndrops]

There are some gyms that compete at a 75% skill level. Meaning that they have skills that are even higher, but although they could compete the higher level, they compete lower. That way, they can focus more on uptraining.
There are other gyms that want gymnasts to compete maximum skills for each level, so they will compete L7ish routines at L6. The next year, they will be competing L7 routines that max out with the allowable 1 C dance on Beam and Floor and allowable Cs on Bars.

 

[3rd_time_around]

At my daughter's recent level 6 state meet, the winner of her age group scored mid-38's doing pretty much all level 7 routines. The same gym also had several other girls score in the upper 38's and even low 39's, also competing routines that would score well in level 7. We are talking beam series with flight, giants, clear hip handstands, three tumbling passes with layouts and fhs/ft in their floor routines. After a quick search, it's clear that these girls are NOT level 6 repeats, just amazingly talented and obviously well-trained. However...what do others think about this? Girls who are clearly ready for the next level, competing below their obvious current ability?

*disclaimer- my dd didn't even end up competing at state due to injury, so I'm not bitter, just genuinely curious! We live many hours away from these gyms and those gymnasts clearly train many, many more hours than gyms in my area, so this is a different world than what I'm used to.

Well, all these skills are acceptable at level 6, they are the high end of the requirements. I do understand what you mean though, because there’s a team that is competing level 5s that have clear hip to handstand, stalder to handstand, cast to handstand, and layout flyaways. They are clearly ready to compete Level 7, but they are competing level 5. All their skills are acceptable and allowed, it’s just not what most all other 5s are doing. I personally would have a hard time paying for my daughter to compete at a lower level than she was able to.

 

[Star078]

I worry this will be us this year. My daughter is level 6 but is well and trully ready for 7 but where we are the level 7 season is finishing and the level 6 season is just begining. It was obvious from a few months ago she was ready to compete level 7 but it was too late for states so our only option if she wants to compete is to do level 6. Im hoping she will get to do level 8 next year rather than 7 or both in the one year.

 

[gymmom21]

It's also possible that they weren't doing these things at the beginning of the season but have improved and added skills as the season has progressed. Most teams do not move girls up mid season.

 

[tpMom]

My daughter's coach likes everyone to have most of the skills needed for the next level before they compete at any optional level (so 6s have most of their level 7 skills and so on.) He says it's an insurance policy in case they suddenly "get mental ", i.e. have a bad day, develop a block or whatever. It's definitely not sandbagging, they aren't being held back for scoring purposes, it's just a mental strategy and it works well.

For instance, my DD typically competed a bhsblo and fhs front pike on floor. At one meet she had just had an uncharacteristic fall on beam and was pretty upset, so he changed her passes to a fhs front tuck and a bhsbt. It worked really well for her and helped her keep a decent score despite being flustered.

She also finished State competing a free hip to handstand and cast handstand layout flyaway, but when she started the season her free hip was just barely above horizontal and she didn't even have a flyaway out of a horizontal cast.

She had planned to compete 7 but was injured in August and out of the gym for 6 weeks. Her coach decided to have her compete 6 and by the time she really had all of her level 7 skills back she was four or five meets into the season. It definitely wasn't sandbagging, it was just how the season worked out for her. I think some gyms just place a high priority on up training. Unless they are having girls repeat levels specifically for medals I think it shouldn't be thought of as sandbagging (and sometimes not even then, because we can't know if the girl on the top of the podium is coming back from injury or a rough year and just needed some success to start progressing again. )

 

[sce]

The purpose of level 6 was for girls not ready for level 7. I don't even know why you'd do 6 and 7 if they have teh skills for level 7, skip level 6. I know of a gymnast that started the season at level 6, then one level 7 meet and then finished the seasona tlvel 6. She won states. Seemed like the goal was to win. she then moved on to level 8.

Scoring in the 39s is insane

 

[Deleted member 14190]

At my daughter's recent level 6 state meet, the winner of her age group scored mid-38's doing pretty much all level 7 routines. The same gym also had several other girls score in the upper 38's and even low 39's, also competing routines that would score well in level 7. We are talking beam series with flight, giants, clear hip handstands, three tumbling passes with layouts and fhs/ft in their floor routines. After a quick search, it's clear that these girls are NOT level 6 repeats, just amazingly talented and obviously well-trained. However...what do others think about this? Girls who are clearly ready for the next level, competing below their obvious current ability?

*disclaimer- my dd didn't even end up competing at state due to injury, so I'm not bitter, just genuinely curious! We live many hours away from these gyms and those gymnasts clearly train many, many more hours than gyms in my area, so this is a different world than what I'm used to.

Level 6 is for kids who can't do 7 and don't want to repeat 5... unless your "that" gym. It equivalent to showing up with level 5's at a meet and having them warm up with giants..... how absurd !!! not when you think about it.

 

[LJL07]

Were they young? FWIW, my daughter “trained” for 7 all summer and was just turning 8. We left an unfortunate gym situation (too long to get into), and we made the decision to have her do level 6 due to the pressure from the other gym and giving her some time to get comfortable with the vault. We didn’t want her going from 4 to 7 and then flipping a vault the next year. She did well on 6, and her routines were really level 7 with giants on bars etc. We went to a couple of meets with a few very strong homeschooling gyms with some of the skills you described and crazy high scores, but I also noticed that the girls were pretty young. So that may have something to do with it. I would agree that a 12 year old with maxed out level 6 skills should move up to 7 though.

 

[LJL07]

The purpose of level 6 was for girls not ready for level 7. I don't even know why you'd do 6 and 7 if they have teh skills for level 7, skip level 6. I know of a gymnast that started the season at level 6, then one level 7 meet and then finished the seasona tlvel 6. She won states. Seemed like the goal was to win. she then moved on to level 8.

Scoring in the 39s is insane

39s are absurd. We were at a gym like that for a while. The girls with the 39s needed to move up but the gym liked to brag about the 39s. Ironically, the 39 scorers are no longer doing gymnastics. When the kids get used to those high scores, some of them freak out when they get to level 8/9/10 where no one is getting 39s. It’s just too hard.

 

[reluctant]

At my daughter's recent level 6 state meet, the winner of her age group scored mid-38's doing pretty much all level 7 routines. The same gym also had several other girls score in the upper 38's and even low 39's, also competing routines that would score well in level 7. We are talking beam series with flight, giants, clear hip handstands, three tumbling passes with layouts and fhs/ft in their floor routines. After a quick search, it's clear that these girls are NOT level 6 repeats, just amazingly talented and obviously well-trained. However...what do others think about this? Girls who are clearly ready for the next level, competing below their obvious current ability?

*disclaimer- my dd didn't even end up competing at state due to injury, so I'm not bitter, just genuinely curious! We live many hours away from these gyms and those gymnasts clearly train many, many more hours than gyms in my area, so this is a different world than what I'm used to.

But aren't they also opening themselves up for deductions by performing those skills? It doesn't bug me unless they competed 6 the year before.

 

[LJL07]

But aren't they also opening themselves up for deductions by performing those skills? It doesn't bug me unless they competed 6 the year before.

Yes! Typically at the meets we attended, the routines with minimum difficulty that were extremely clean scored best

 

[Musicmama]

Most of our L6 girls (all competed L5 last year) competed a higher difficulty than the minimum requirements on floor and beam this year, but didn't yet have the L7 skills on bars so skipping L6 wasn't an option. They know that they get no bonus points for doing the more difficult routines and that they probably score lower sometimes because of having more difficult routines (definitely no 38s or 39s!).

But they got to practice those skills for next year while competing at a level in which they had all the skills for all the events.

 

[SpunkyGymMom]

My daughter was training L7 prior to the season but competed L6 this year because her bars were not ready (and still aren’t). She competed her L7 beam and floor routines all year, though. After an okay year at L5, L6 seemed like the right call, and she was scoring in the 35s at the early meets. She steadily improved through the season and did well at states with a high 37 (there were no 38s in our state, so 39s sound insane to me). I think if you saw her beam or floor independently, you might question why she wasn’t competing L7.

This thread made me wonder - what do your gyms do with girls like mine that are lacking skills in one event? Move up and take the deductions? Or compete the level at which they have all the required skills?

 

[sce]

My daughter was training L7 prior to the season but competed L6 this year because her bars were not ready (and still aren’t). She competed her L7 beam and floor routines all year, though. After an okay year at L5, L6 seemed like the right call, and she was scoring in the 35s at the early meets. She steadily improved through the season and did well at states with a high 37 (there were no 38s in our state, so 39s sound insane to me). I think if you saw her beam or floor independently, you might question why she wasn’t competing L7.

This thread made me wonder - what do your gyms do with girls like mine that are lacking skills in one event? Move up and take the deductions? Or compete the level at which they have all the required skills?

A lot of why USAG creatd this optional level 6 is that a lot of girls were in the position of not having all the sklls for level 7. They were ready to be done with compulsories though, so gyms were using Xcel in between. So what your daughter did was exactly as it should be.

 

[mls529]

Any kid who can score a high 38 or 39 is a really good gymnast. If I told my DD to go and compete level 3 right now (she is a Platinum, former JO), there is probably no way she could score a 39. 4 basically flawless events? She would have a bent leg somewhere, a flexed foot, a small bounce on a dismount, even on skills that are now very easy for her. So these situations are sometimes not about sandbagging, and more about just really talented kids. There are many other threads about talented kids getting pushed too fast and too hard, and ultimately burning out. So, to the OP, I guess it doesn't bother me at all to see girls competing higher level skills really, really clean to score high and win. It is so much easier to win by doing minimalist routines very clean, so when girls are competing harder skills equally as clean, I say they deserve that podium spot!

 

[LJL07]

My daughter was training L7 prior to the season but competed L6 this year because her bars were not ready (and still aren’t). She competed her L7 beam and floor routines all year, though. After an okay year at L5, L6 seemed like the right call, and she was scoring in the 35s at the early meets. She steadily improved through the season and did well at states with a high 37 (there were no 38s in our state, so 39s sound insane to me). I think if you saw her beam or floor independently, you might question why she wasn’t competing L7.

This thread made me wonder - what do your gyms do with girls like mine that are lacking skills in one event? Move up and take the deductions? Or compete the level at which they have all the required skills?

Totally off topic, but that goofy vault change definitely made scores everywhere trend lower overall than in years past. I didn’t even see 38s at any of our meets. The reasoning for the vault change is sound, but the scoring was extremely inconsistent.

 

[LJL07]

Any kid who can score a high 38 or 39 is a really good gymnast. If I told my DD to go and compete level 3 right now (she is a Platinum, former JO), there is probably no way she could score a 39. 4 basically flawless events? She would have a bent leg somewhere, a flexed foot, a small bounce on a dismount, even on skills that are now very easy for her. So these situations are sometimes not about sandbagging, and more about just really talented kids. There are many other threads about talented kids getting pushed too fast and too hard, and ultimately burning out. So, to the OP, I guess it doesn't bother me at all to see girls competing higher level skills really, really clean to score high and win. It is so much easier to win by doing minimalist routines very clean, so when girls are competing harder skills equally as clean, I say they deserve that podium spot!

Eh. You could also have an incredibly nutty coach who demands privates and incessant repetition, crazy high hours, and lots of screaming. That will produce 38s and 39s at the compulsory level and lower optional levels. That approach appears to stop working after about level 8. It gets hard and screaming and tantruming kids into doing stuff doesn’t work so well anymore.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

If they are competing all L7 requirements in all 4 events and scoring that high. It’s sandbagging.

If they are competing partial L7 skills. Then it’s gyms perogative.

Our gym would make that decision based a few factors, including the gymnast. Some would do 5, then 6 then 7. Some scoreout of 5 then do 6, then 7. Some spent more time at 7.

Personally, when mine was in compulsories they tended to hold her back to where she would be most successful. She scored very high and was flat out missing whatever was required for the next level.

Now, in optionals at L8, the philosophy has shifted. Our kids will be 2 year 8s. But they have been upgrading their skills as they get them.

 

[3rd_time_around]

This is our stats’s Level 6 state meet results. The top scores are impressive, but yes, the vault scores max out under 9.5.