Parents Score needed to move up?

[balancedmom]

New coach implementing a policy that to move up, the girls need to get a 36 in their current level. My daughter may never move up based on this...other gyms similar? thanks

 

[2G1B]

our gym required two 36 AAs to move up. I'm not thrilled about it. Especially when you look at some recent meets - for level 4 only 3 out of 43 girls had 36 or higher AAs.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

yep, it's pretty common.

 

[gracyomalley]

DD gym does not have a required move up score (other than that required by USAG). Most girls move up most of the time if they are scoring 34 all arounds, are proficient at the present level skills, and have achieved safe control of the next levels skills with the likelihood of being able to qualify for state championships in the next level (ie have a satisfying safe season at the next level). However, there are some girls who do not move up with the above (DD was one - due to fear and only being 10 at level 7), and some who move up "below" those standards (say a 14 year old level 7 who still can't cast handstand but otherwise is ready for L8 and works hard, is safe, and wants it bad...). In our state 36s generally score in the top 3 at meets...so that would mean 3 girls per age group per level moving up IN THE ENTIRE STATE...doesn't sound like much fun!

However, I know there are many states where 37 and 38 scores are common...and I would expect that "our 34s" are their "36s"....not to say they are not "better " than us - they probably are! Just we are a small state and small region and the pool is such that our best kids are their mediocre ones with few exceptions. We do still send kids successfully to D1 scholarships and most of our girls who don't quit before L9 go to Nationals, so it can work this way!

 

[Azgymmiemom]

Our state scores pretty harsh, so 36 would be difficult for a lot of kids unless they spent a couple years at each level. Our gym requires a 34 to attend states and as a qualification to be considered to move up...but there are many other factors, too. Work ethic, attendance, if you are getting your skills for the next level, etc.

 

[gymdog]

36 used to be a really high score when I was a kid. Nobody got 37 unless they were amazing and 36 at the first meet was unheard of. Also nobody repeated level 3/then 4, but maybe that's a different story.

Nowadays I can't imagine moving any kid up that couldn't score a 36 at some point. But I don't believe in blanket policies, I'm just saying at this point with the scoring trends, 36 seems to indicate mastery, not that one is doing anything unusually amazing. Now in some meets where the judging is a bit lower 36 will win still. But we go to other meets where 9.7s on level 3 vault are 10th place...

 

[Deleted member 14190]

The 36 isn't that high, it really shows more of a mastery of that level as opposed to a score requirement. I don't think that is a bad requirement at all.
She will get a 36 because she has to.

 

[shelovestoflip]

Our gym doesn't have a blanket policy. They seem to look at whether the girls have the skills for the next level. My daughter scores low to mid 9s fairly consistently on 2 events....high 8s on one event and low 8s on another. Sometimes can eek out a 36 if the stars are aligned. But to not move her due to one event would be counterproductive. So, I think it needs to be on a gymnast by gymnast basis in some circumstances.

 

[kandkfunk]

Our gym requires 2 34s, but I don't really think it is set in stone. Our old coaches required 2 36s and almost nobody could meet those standards. However, they weren't sticklers about that rule or several of our girls would have never moved up (my DD included).

We just participated in a big meet in our state. Looking at just the level 3 scores, there were 36 kids who scored 36+ out of 179 athletes. If that ratio is consistent, it would be difficult for a lot of girls in our area to move up based on a requirement to score two 36+. I should say we are well into our Spring season here and most of the girls competing have at least a few meets under their belts if not an entire Fall season plus this partial Spring season.

If you have coaching that can consistently get the majority of your team to multiple 36+ scores and those scores are attainable in your area, then this shouldn't be an issue. Where the issue arises is when the coaches expect scores when they are not capable of training their athletes to actually earn those scores.

 

[wgymmom]

Our gym doesn't require anything more than the minimum USAG score, which causes its own level of consternation.

 

[gymdog]

Our gym requires 2 34s, but I don't really think it is set in stone. Our old coaches required 2 36s and almost nobody could meet those standards. However, they weren't sticklers about that rule or several of our girls would have never moved up (my DD included).

We just participated in a big meet in our state. Looking at just the level 3 scores, there were 36 kids who scored 36+ out of 179 athletes. If that ratio is consistent, it would be difficult for a lot of girls in our area to move up based on a requirement to score two 36+. I should say we are well into our Spring season here and most of the girls competing have at least a few meets under their belts if not an entire Fall season plus this partial Spring season.

If you have coaching that can consistently get the majority of your team to multiple 36+ scores and those scores are attainable in your area, then this shouldn't be an issue. Where the issue arises is when the coaches expect scores when they are not capable of training their athletes to actually earn those scores.

This is a balanced point. There are many factors . There is one state in my region where scores are much lower and the ratio would be more like you describe. But that is notable for a reason. In MOST states this is not the case anymore.

 

[SurpriseGymMom]

I'm not aware of any minimum score required by the gym, but we are in an area where hardly anyone would move up if a 36AA was required... I'm a newbie to meets, definitely, but so far the AA winners in both L4 and L5 have all had scores in the 34's, *maybe* low 35's.

 

[GYM0M]

Our gym has a policy for moving up.....if the coach says you're moving up, then you're moving up. If the coach says you're not, then you're not. I believe that our coaches genuinely take each and every gymnast into account before making their decisions. We have a girl on our team that did not qualify for L4 state, but moved up to L5 for invitationals. Another girl did qualify for L4 states, but as of right now, still competes L4. It really is case by case. In our state, a 38 or higher is needed to win state meets. At DD last meet, there were 50ish athletes competing L5, 17 scored 36 and above. A 37.5 was needed to win the AA.

 

[iwannacoach]

The 36 isn't that high, it really shows more of a mastery of that level as opposed to a score requirement. I don't think that is a bad requirement at all.
She will get a 36 because she has to.

See it, want it, need it, and get it. I won't suggest where to set the standard because I've never had one. I'm looking for any kid who works hard and shows growth with potential for more. My open ended criteria can't be applied equally to every child because some kids need the proof a 36.00 provides that they are "that good" before wrapping their minds around the next level up.

That said........ If I had to choose a number, and stick to it, I'd be at 36.00 to move through the compulsory levels, and drop that to a 35.00 to move beyond past L8.

 

[Canadian_gym_mom]

I am obviously not from the US, but my dd recently competed there for the first time and got a 35.5 or something at level 8 and is no where close to being ready to move to the next level. I think scores are a poor indicator of readiness to move forward. Ability to perform the required skills safely and correctly should be the key to moving up IMHO.

 

[gymgal]

I am obviously not from the US, but my dd recently competed there for the first time and got a 35.5 or something at level 8 and is no where close to being ready to move to the next level. I think scores are a poor indicator of readiness to move forward. Ability to perform the required skills safely and correctly should be the key to moving up IMHO.

Gyms who have these policies typically also have one regarding having most/all of the next level skills before moving up. They go hand in hand, particularly in the upper levels

 

[LizzieLac]

For our gym, it is really more about the skills of the next level and less about the scores in the current level. But, they really seem to go together. The kids who score 34-35 in a season (excluding levels 8-10 in this example) typically do not get the skills to move up in time for the next season. Scoring 35-36, most do. And scoring 36+, those kids often already have the skills even before the current season is over.

So, 36 isn't really arbitrary...

 

[Flipflopz]

Dd is moving to L 10 and that never would have happened if her gym had such a rule. She is 13. She might have scored a 36 in level 7 and 8. But other than that, she is great at learning needed skills and progressing. She was never the "top level 4 or 5, etc". She has lots of time now though to be a great level 10, and score high. She is a very hard worker and very driven. But tiny, and where that's great for some girls it's not so great for her.

 

[berrisweetness]

Our gym requires two 35aa, but there are a few girls that have not made that. We even have one that has made that but has NOT made state for the state we compete in so she will still be able to move to the next level. How crazy is that.