WAG Rationale behind competing level 2

[Muddlethru]

In my opinion, they compete L1 and L2 for the parents. It gives the parents something tangible to see for their money (like recitals or gym showcases etc.,). One can argue, it gives the kids early exposure to competing and makes them more comfortable competing later on. But I really think, it is to please their patrons./customers. Who does not want to watch their little kids perform?

 

[LJL07]

In my opinion, they compete L1 and L2 for the parents. It gives the parents something tangible to see for their money (like recitals or gym showcases etc.,). One can argue, it gives the kids early exposure to competing and makes them more comfortable competing later on. But I really think, it is to please their patrons./customers. Who does not want to watch their little kids perform?

Someone should let our area gyms know this because they take these levels very seriously. Too seriously if you ask me...

 

[Amusibus]

If what we are paying to compete in these l2 meets is "less expensive," then we will surely go broke by level 5. It's roughly a $90 meet fee per meet for level 2.

Our gym does compete all levels. The meet fees for levels 1&2 are lower, but these levels do all "local" meets, meaning day trips, no more than 2.5 hours away. This year as a level 2 my daughter's meet fees are 38$ for most meets, with 2 being more expensive (around 75$). All levels are "team" and meets are once a month from October thru April. Level 2 at my gym is ages 7&8 mostly. At competitions I have seen kids up to about age 10 or 11 though.

 

[Natasha]

In my opinion, they compete L1 and L2 for the parents. It gives the parents something tangible to see for their money (like recitals or gym showcases etc.,). One can argue, it gives the kids early exposure to competing and makes them more comfortable competing later on. But I really think, it is to please their patrons./customers. Who does not want to watch their little kids perform?

I agree. I think the "PR" response is that it is to get them comfortable competing, but really it is for the parents or, at some gyms for the older rec level kids to experience competing. I don't buy into the whole "give 4 and 5 year olds experience competing" as really, that should be the whole point of all of compulsory levels- to get experience competing and refine skills.

 

[Amusibus]

Our gym has a seperate "track" for levels 1-3, that is more relaxed/fewer hours than JO. It seems akin to xcel, but isn't xcel as they use the JO compulsory routines. After level 3 they can choose xcel or JO for level 4 and up.

 

[LJL07]

Our gym does compete all levels. The meet fees for levels 1&2 are lower, but these levels do all "local" meets, meaning day trips, no more than 2.5 hours away. This year as a level 2 my daughter's meet fees are 38$ for most meets, with 2 being more expensive (around 75$). All levels are "team" and meets are once a month from October thru April. Level 2 at my gym is ages 7&8 mostly. At competitions I have seen kids up to about age 10 or 11 though.

$38 is so much better than what we are paying for our level 2 meets. Ours average out to about $90 per meet. When you add up 8 meets, that's over $700 just for the meet fees for level 2! Not including coaches' fees, USAG registration, state registration, and our leotards/warm ups. I am literally sweating over here thinking about my youngest starting up with this in the next year or so...

 

[mommyof1]

Yes - this! At DS's gym, the boys program has 3 years of pre-team with no competition. Those boys train 6/9/12 hours and don't compete until the 4th year. I can see why many of them leave for other sports, it is difficult for a 6/7 year old to see the point in all the training if they don't get to compete.

My 7-year-old would rather have it that way--she keeps wanting more hours in the gym but views the fact that she will soon have to start competing as a necessary evil. She loves gymnastics and the idea of being part of a team, but not "people looking at me while I'm doing my routines."

 

[MAcastsalot]

I think it all depends on the personality of the gymnast. For some kids, competing isn't really intimidating at all, and they will do fine whether they start at level 1 or level 4. For others, they need that gradual introduction to the competitive world. I, personally, find it better to start earlier (age 5 or 6) before they have other fears or get too concerned about how they look in front of other people. It is pretty typical for gyms around here to start at level 1 or 2, although some don't start until 3 or 4. Most gyms that do compete levels 1&2 do very few meets, and the parents/kids can choose how many meets they wish to attend. The fees are still typically $90-$100. I would be completely ok with my daughter waiting to do meets (having to pay $140 and try to keep my toddler still is not my idea of a good time), but she is extremely excited about her first meet season, as are most of her teammates.

 

[gracyomalley]

No one in our area competes before L3 and many wait until L4. I've been to a couple of "big" meets in our region that did have L2 included. If think back to when DD was at that "level" gymnastically, and age 5, I probably would have had her compete if that was "what was done" - but I firmly believe it would have been a waste of time and money! However, every meet here is a 3 hour drive over mountain passes in the winter....puts a perspective on it. I do wish a bit that she had been on a team that polished more in the lower levels WHILE up training for the higher - as her first team was very much a up train in summer only and compete at the highest level you can team - great for her the couple of years she whizzed through compulsories as the skills were fairly easy if you have good fundamentals, but tough now as an upper level optional. All that is to say that competing non-required lower levels would be fun for many little (and bigger who started late) girls but needs to include training for 1-2 levels ahead to be worthwhile long term...IMHO

 

[wnl256]

In my opinion, they compete L1 and L2 for the parents. It gives the parents something tangible to see for their money (like recitals or gym showcases etc.,). One can argue, it gives the kids early exposure to competing and makes them more comfortable competing later on. But I really think, it is to please their patrons./customers. Who does not want to watch their little kids perform?

It also gets the parents acclimated to the phrase "no flash photography!"

 

[Sasha]

There are so many tradeoffs here, that I don't think there's an ideal answer for every gym or every kid.

That said, my personal opinion (colored by the lens of my own DDs experience of course) is that...

Competing L1/L2 (and even L3) is most beneficial when:

• the season is super-duper short and you never stop up-training just to polish minutia of routines
• the child is either an older starter or 'slow and steady' learner who wouldn't likely be able to get the required skills for L3/4 and would find competing now better than being 'stuck on preteam' another season.
  
• the child has a particularly strong anxiety about competing (more than normal) and early exposure to the process can help
• the child /child's family isn't yet sure about gymnastics commitment, so this lets them 'try the whole experience out'
• the gym is super-selective about who makes L4 team and above, so this lets more girls compete who wouldn't otherwise be able to (basically like Xcel in principle, but still 'on the JO track', at least for now).

Competing L1/L2 (and even L3) is more of a waste of time when:

• uptraining stops for months to polish tiny dance details and skills you'll never see again (i.e., mill circle, leg cut, fall-flat-vault...) - especially if the child isn't on the super young side
• the child is quick to learn compulsory level skills and is old enough to be skipped ahead to L3/4 as their 'intro' competition level with time spent on uptraining instead of competing lower levels

For my own DD, only the final 2 bullet points apply, so I know what kind of gym fits her best. Obviously regions differ and not everyone has a choice, but ideally my DD would have just started at L4 and focused on training and not competing until then.

Just my own personal viewpoint!

 

[stxrdusty]

We have a group of 5-7 year olds that we're going to try to compete at level 2. My understanding behind it is that HC wants to keep the girls interested in gymnastics and get them used to learning routines and competing at a young age so that if and when they get to higher compulsory levels and optionals they'll be comfortable. Technically the youngest we have on our competitive team right now is in 5th grade (levels 3, 4, and 7) I believe so in 9 years my gym won't have a team anymore so HC is trying to build a new team with the little ones. That being said, most of my gyms level 2s do not compete.

 

[OrangeArt]

My daughter competed level 2 last year, however they only went to maybe a third of the meets the rest of the team competed in. So in the end it wasn't too expensive, especially considering she can still fit her leo for this year.

I do think it was meant as a sort of pre_team experience...