WAG Numbers of L9 and 10s moving from Regionals to Nationals.....something seems crazy!

[bogwoppit]

So your solution to the larger regions not qualifying kids in their own regions is to take away spots from the smaller regions, where their scores might be lower because the judging is tougher? I don't think you can compare regional scores , judged by different panels, like this.

I have wondered about this for a few years. SO the last three years I have stalked the NATs scores from the lower scoring regions, honestly at NATs they do not score any better than in their own regions.

 

[bookworm]

I have wondered about this for a few years. SO the last three years I have stalked the NATs scores from the lower scoring regions, honestly at NATs they do not score any better than in their own regions.

I don't think that is true for the whole regional group...smaller regions do have girls that score well....do they dominate and win the team titles? No, but if you truly want to have a "Nationals" meet, then all regions should be represented. Girls scoring near the top in the weaker regions do do well at JOs while the lower scoring girls tend not to, which would be expected.

 

[bogwoppit]

I don't think that is true for the whole regional group...smaller regions do have girls that score well....do they dominate and win the team titles? No, but if you truly want to have a "Nationals" meet, then all regions should be represented. Girls scoring near the top in the weaker regions do do well at JOs while the lower scoring girls tend not to, which would be expected.

I agree that all regions should be represented, but proportionally. Girls with 37.5AA should not be sitting at home when kids with a 35 AA are going, no matter where they live.

Yes, there are some strong girls in the smaller regions, but I do not think it is due to harsher judging that girls are going with 35.5AA scores, that is just what they are capable off, and the NATs results prove it.

Do remember that I am just looking at pure stats, I have no dog in the race, nor did I ever.

 

[wandrewsjr]

Yep. Just looked up last year's regional #s for Region 8 out of curiosity- Last year there were 310 at L10 and 328 at L9, not counting the scratches. Ridiculously there was a L9 age group that did not get filled because of needing a 35 to get to regionals- even though they only need a 34 to get to nationals. But, because Region 8 is so unfairly large, they decided to raise the score to fit all the girls in the weekend without having to do a Thursday session.

The past 25 years have seen a shift in the population of the US south. Florida has increased by almost 8 million people, North Carolina by 4 million, Georgia by 4 million, Texas by 10 million, Arizona by 3 million, California by 10 million. Region 8 has likely seen the most dramatic increase since the Regions were originally drawn. The Northeast and Great Lakes have not seen the same population increases as the South and West. The Regions should be redrawn to reflect this shift in population since they where originally conceived.

 

[skschlag]

I think the hard part is doing the regions to be more reflective of population, while also making the geographically reasonable for travel. I know this is a big reason the boys added a 9th region, and we are way smaller than WAG.

 

[wandrewsjr]

I think the hard part is doing the regions to be more reflective of population, while also making the geographically reasonable for travel. I know this is a big reason the boys added a 9th region, and we are way smaller than WAG.

Wyoming is currently in the same Region as Texas. We couldn't do any worse than that!

 

[wandrewsjr]

Regions 2, 4 and 6 can add a border state or two from 1,3,5,7. This would open up room in 3,5 and/or 7 to absorb a state or two from Region 8. It could be done without changing the geography too much. They drew the lines in the first place right? Doesn't seem like an overly monumental task to do it again.

 

[tomtnt]

can the two coaches in this thread work with their respective regions to make make this happen? If it comes from the parents, it just sounds like parents complaining that their kids didn't make nationals.. This comes up every single year and nothing every changes. (well, barely anything change - they did make minor tweaks to how they assign the unfilled spots, raised the minimum score)

Someone draft a letter we can send to our regional rep/USAG... maybe a change.org petition?

 

[Flyaway]

Slight tangent: is there a difference between being a "smaller" region and a "weaker" region? Because I've seen those words used interchangeably. If not, what is the correlation between the two? Lack of population means quality coaches don't flock to the region? I mean, people skirt around it but it seems like region 2 is considered the weakest region. But also the smallest. Did one cause the other?So which came first? The chicken or the egg? [emoji12]. Just things I ponder...

 

[chalkbowl]

So your solution to the larger regions not qualifying kids in their own regions is to take away spots from the smaller regions, where their scores might be lower because the judging is tougher? I don't think you can compare regional scores , judged by different panels, like this.

I merely took an idea that was mentioned earlier in the thread (rearranging regions) and put some numbers behind it. I did say it's mostly theoretical since scores can't be compared from region to region. I am a coach in Region 6 so rearranging regions is something that would directly affect my own athletes.

 

[skschlag]

Wyoming is currently in the same Region as Texas. We couldn't do any worse than that!

true story...

 

[gymgal]

So your solution to the larger regions not qualifying kids in their own regions is to take away spots from the smaller regions, where their scores might be lower because the judging is tougher? I don't think you can compare regional scores , judged by different panels, like this.

no. The solution is to redraw the regions so there are no large/small or strong/weak regions. Redrawing will even it all out and doesn't cause one region to be less represented than another. Now, states may be underrepresented, but that is already happening. MS, AL, LA, SC, TN are all underrepresented as R8 national qualifiers. Most of the qualifiers come from 3 of the 8 states. And that will likely happen with some states in a new R2 and R6.

 

[gymgal]

I don't think that is true for the whole regional group...smaller regions do have girls that score well....do they dominate and win the team titles? No, but if you truly want to have a "Nationals" meet, then all regions should be represented.

that is why redrawing the map makes sense, to give those smaller regions more gymnasts to be more competitive at nationals. The only true argument against this comes from folks in the smaller regions who don't want to give up their spots, because they know moving other states into their region means it will be a lot harder to qualify. But that is no different than weaker states in other regions. Literally 5 states in R8 have virtually no shot of being represented at nationals due to the powerhouses and other high quality gyms in 3 states in the region. It stinks, but that is the reality for most of the other regions. The smaller regions should not be any different.

And I am not talking specifically about bookworm here. I know her girls were competitive at the national level, but the majority coming from the smallest regions are not.

 

[tomtnt]

and lets be honest - we aren't talking about the top girls in the smaller regions - those girls will still likely qualify whether you redraw the boundaries or change the number of available spots. The top girls will still be going to Nationals to represent their regions.. we are talking about girls whether girls barely squeaking in with 35s are more deserving to go than girls scoring 37s in the larger region. One of the toughest thing about qualifying for nationals at a tougher region is that the gymnast goes into the meet knowing they have to hit 4/4 to have a chance of making it - the ability to perform under pressure... this pressure doesn't exist when you are in a region with less than 7 competitors.

 

[3rd_time_around]

I noticed that a Region 8 girl is getting one of those spots too.

Several Region 8 girls are filling empty spots.

 

[bookworm]

I just want to put this out there on behalf of the girls who did qualify from "weaker and smaller" regions and didn't have the megacores of the "stronger and bigger" regions...you played by the rules in place in April 2017 and you deserve your spot. The fact that you are from a less populated region isn't your fault....and you should go to JOs and enjoy the whole experience of being there and competing and have a fabulous time.

I think sometimes we forget that there are actual gymnasts and families attached to the tags given to these girls....can we be disappointed some girls/friends/fellow competitors don't make it because of the rules in place ? Sure...but I don't think what shaming girls that made it uplifts that cause...

 

[bogwoppit]

I just want to put this out there on behalf of the girls who did qualify from "weaker and smaller" regions and didn't have the megacores of the "stronger and bigger" regions...you played by the rules in place in April 2017 and you deserve your spot. The fact that you are from a less populated region isn't your fault....and you should go to JOs and enjoy the whole experience of being there and competing and have a fabulous time.

I think sometimes we forget that there are actual gymnasts and families attached to the tags given to these girls....can we be disappointed some girls/friends/fellow competitors don't make it because of the rules in place ? Sure...but I don't think what shaming girls that made it uplifts that cause...

I hardly think it is shaming. No names are mentioned. It is just the way it is. I think any parent who's child stays home with a much higher score has to be heartbroken for their child. When NATs results comes out and they see the inequity of the system it has to sting. But to not discuss the ways changes could be implemented to balance things out more fairly is just silly. We are not snowflakes, and neither are the gymnasts.

If girls get to go with much lower scores, then yes, of course they should go and have fun and enjoy their NATs experience. They are not to blame for the system. They are not to blame for their location.

 

[lovofu]

Another point to ponder...if you live in South Dakota or any other "smaller, weaker gym state" and you have coaching that is not up to par or ONE choice of gym within 100 miles you do the best you can with what you have. In the "larger, stronger gym states" you can move to a new gym, coaches are attracted to living in Texas or Florida while Boise might not appeal. Just because labels are applied without specific names, it still stings that my DD might be considered "lucky" to qualify....she works her butt off just like most girls.

 

[bookworm]

Another point to ponder...if you live in South Dakota or any other "smaller, weaker gym state" and you have coaching that is not up to par or ONE choice of gym within 100 miles you do the best you can with what you have. In the "larger, stronger gym states" you can move to a new gym, coaches are attracted to living in Texas or Florida while Boise might not appeal. Just because labels are applied without specific names, it still stings that my DD might be considered "lucky" to qualify....she works her butt off just like most girls.

And this is exactly my point in the post above....

 

[GymDad9.9]

I really don't see where you think this "hate" is coming from. Folks here are discussing and trying to solve an equity issue in number of gymnasts competing in the various regions to create a level playing field so that each Region has pretty much the same number of gymnasts in Level 9 and 10 to field the most competitive and fairest selected team for each Region. That's all.

Quite frankly, if I could, I would leave my larger, stronger gym state in a New York minute for a top gym in Des Moines, not because I could game the system but because I believe I could have a better quality of life plus have the confidence my daughter would be getting better coaching. Life is about sacrifices, gymnastics is about sacrifices, all gymnasts at this level of training work their butts off, and if there is a simple way to provide a more equitable path to Nationals, Easterns and Westerns, for all gymnasts, regardless of where their families live, I'm for it.