Coaches Scoring rant

[aerialriver]

Can I also have the link please?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using ChalkBucket mobile app

 

[Faith]

it's fairly easy to find if you google for "7 year old level 6", then limit for videos within the last week.....

 

[mado4]

WOW..I don't know about the judging in the US but I saw A LOT more deductions than she got…but maybe they started scoring too high with other girls that weren't that good and had to give her less deductions….nahhh, maybe not..lame excuse

 

[Empowered]

The bar routine alone would score a 5-6 in the meet's my daughter has competed. She clearly has talent and I do understand coaches getting girls out of compulsories young... but one should at least be competent. My daughter was floored at how high they had to stack the mats for her to jump to the low bar, and I can't imagine with her size and clear lack of power based on what I saw on floor, that she was able to vault anything higher than an 8 and that is a VERY generous estimate!

I don't understand either.

 

[CoachGoofy]

I'm morbidly curious...I know the mobility scores for T&T are actually, you know, HARD in some cases (level 7-8 tumbling comes to mind, there's a girl in our state who is a strong tumbler who has been trying all season & coming up short). So I always wonder why the artistic ones seem to be...uh...not.

ETA Pretty sure I found it. Oy. THAT IS NOT A GLIDE KIP. And. er. Angle requirements on splits. Poor kid is gunna get slammed in optionals. She looks to have talent but really needs some detail work.

 

[gymdog]

Agreed, but what about the cast requirements for optionals? I could be wrong, but my understanding is that anything less than vertical receives a deduction. I know that the special requirement for new 6 is above horizontal, but when you read optional rules in the code, it says vertical.

I have a feeling level 6 bars will be "score higher" for the weaker bar kids than level 5. I don't have any concrete info to that effect, but for one, they'll be able to straddle up to handstand.

 

[twisting007bigflip]

I have a feeling level 6 bars will be "score higher" for the weaker bar kids than level 5. I don't have any concrete info to that effect, but for one, they'll be able to straddle up to handstand.

Yeah, but for level 5, a cast to just above horizontal with straight arms and a good shape will receive no deduction...for level 6 if they don't hit vertical, it's points off. So a kid who does the just above horizontal cast in level 5 gets no deduction, but the very same cast in level 6 is points off...

I was thinking at first when the new routines and code came out that the new 6 would be easier than compulsories, but now I'm not entirely convinced...

 

[bookworm]

I honestly don't even compete kids who can't score AT LEAST a 34 - and I don't mean a 34 based on whoever judged that "meet". I mean a legit 34.[/B] The kid needs to be proficient or they aren't competing.

Although I'm late to this party, allow me to politely disagree with this premise, and I base this on my own daughter whose highest compulsory score (levels 4, 5 and 6) was a 32.4, and she was "scored out" and moved on to optionals where she thrived...and as most of you on this board know, went on to be a successful Level 10 for many years (7) and is now on a full ride at a D1 school for gymnastics. I'm not saying that this will be the case with the girl on Youtube but if I had posted videos of my daughter in her compulsory years, you all would have been horrified...but her coaches saw something in her that made them want to move her out and up....so I guess I would reserve judgement on this little girl's future..

 

[twisting007bigflip]

Although I'm late to this party, allow me to politely disagree with this premise, and I base this on my own daughter whose highest compulsory score (levels 4, 5 and 6) was a 32.4, and she was "scored out" and moved on to optionals where she thrived...and as most of you on this board know, went on to be a successful Level 10 for many years (7) and is now on a full ride at a D1 school for gymnastics. I'm not saying that this will be the case with the girl on Youtube but if I had posted videos of my daughter in her compulsory years, you all would have been horrified...but her coaches saw something in her that made them want to move her out and up....so I guess I would reserve judgement on this little girl's future..

A 34 is an average 8.5 per event. I realize that lots of gyms don't hold kids until they can score, but, lets be honest. Compulsories are highly competitive. If you're scoring a 34, you're not winning...this past season (in my state), the 8 year old level 5 that won her age group did so with a 38.75 for first place. A kid who scored a flat 34.00 got 147th place. I am not personally ok with producing kids who get 147th place at state. It's just me. To each his/her own.

And my rant isn't directed toward the child in the video at all...or the coaches. It's at the judges. Like I said, why bother judging if you aren't going to take the deductions? The child clearly did not show proficiency to score out, but was handed the scores to do so. Actually. She wasn't really handed the 31. She was handed a ridiculous 34.5.

 

[twisting007bigflip]

A 34 is an average 8.5 per event. I realize that lots of gyms don't hold kids until they can score, but, lets be honest. Compulsories are highly competitive. If you're scoring a 34, you're not winning...this past season (in my state), the 8 year old level 5 that won her age group did so with a 38.75 for first place. A kid who scored a flat 34.00 got 147th place. I am not personally ok with producing kids who get 147th place at state. It's just me. To each his/her own.

And my rant isn't directed toward the child in the video at all...or the coaches. It's at the judges. Like I said, why bother judging if you aren't going to take the deductions? The child clearly did not show proficiency to score out, but was handed the scores to do so. Actually. She wasn't really handed the 31. She was handed a ridiculous 34.5.

I take that back...not 147th place. I don't know where I got that or what I was thinking. Something else, obviously. Regardless, at our level 5 state meet, there were more than 400 kids that scored over a 35. Yes, all ages included. But you get my point.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

Wow, can't wait to see her in optionals.... ughhhh...

 

[GymBeeMom]

I see exactly why they want to move her to optionals. She is young and capable of learning skills fast, and it appears she has a great body type for the sport. Soooo, I get that decision. BUT, as the OP said, EVERYONE has to earn a score to move out of a level, even the teeny weenies. Those judges did hand her the score, but it appears that is exactly why they were there (it did seem to be a quickie in-house move-up meet). At least that didn't hurt any other girls since it was not a competitive meet that would have knocked out another girl from her rightful placing. Bet this little girlie does great long-term...but agree that the judging wasn't exactly up to snuff.

 

[wandrewsjr]

Although I'm late to this party, allow me to politely disagree with this premise, and I base this on my own daughter whose highest compulsory score (levels 4, 5 and 6) was a 32.4, and she was "scored out" and moved on to optionals where she thrived...and as most of you on this board know, went on to be a successful Level 10 for many years (7) and is now on a full ride at a D1 school for gymnastics. I'm not saying that this will be the case with the girl on Youtube but if I had posted videos of my daughter in her compulsory years, you all would have been horrified...but her coaches saw something in her that made them want to move her out and up....so I guess I would reserve judgement on this little girl's future..

Agree, bookworm, have known many successful level 9/10's that didn't(or couldn't) get a 34 at level 6. In my state a 34 is considered a pretty good score at level 6, well beyond competent. A 36 will make you state champion in some age groups, a 35 will get you in the top 3 to 5 and a 34 will get you in the top half. I think there are many different issues going on in this thread - whether to speed kids through compulsories, what constitutes "competence" at a level, quality/consistency of judging - etc. But to answer the question about why not have a 34 Q score to pass through a level - for those of us that live in states where the judges(usually) consistently apply all applicable deductions, a 34 is a bar that would prevent many from moving on to optionals that will see success there.

 

[Deleted member 14190]

Although I'm late to this party, allow me to politely disagree with this premise, and I base this on my own daughter whose highest compulsory score (levels 4, 5 and 6) was a 32.4, and she was "scored out" and moved on to optionals where she thrived...and as most of you on this board know, went on to be a successful Level 10 for many years (7) and is now on a full ride at a D1 school for gymnastics. I'm not saying that this will be the case with the girl on Youtube but if I had posted videos of my daughter in her compulsory years, you all would have been horrified...but her coaches saw something in her that made them want to move her out and up....so I guess I would reserve judgement on this little girl's future..

==

That is awesome, but bent arm kips, zero shaping, zero technique, if not fixed will all lead to problems down the road for this kid on bars . I have no doubt that your daughters coaches did a better job at bringing her up, and hope that these coaches will back track a tad to teach her proper technique. It's one thing to score out, (do it all the time) but another to skip the fundamentals. Her floor will get better, beam can be fixed, but those bars! drives me crazy!

 

[twisting007bigflip]

Again, all I'm saying is "why bother judging if you aren't going to take the deductions."

It's great that kids can score out of compulsories and into optionals. I 100% agree with scoring out to do well in optionals. I was one of "those" kids myself. Showing my age here, but i scored out of compulsory level 7 and into level 8 at 9 years old. Yes...back when level 7 was compulsory.

BUT, I do not agree that kids should be given scores. Judges meed to be taking the deductions. The child we are talking about is not ready to be scored out. Period. She absolutely did not show the proficiency required to move forward. I'm not sure WHY she was allowed and I'm not sure why some people are ok with the fact that this happened like this. It's the very same as cheating on a final exam. Obviously, the judge came in for the one and only purpose of giving scores. I can only imagine the conversation when they called the judge to come in..."hey. Wanna come judge a score out meet? Yes? Great. All you need to do is just score them ridiculously high so that we can move them to optionals. Basically, we pay you to judge, and you lie about their scores. Deal?"

How fair is this to the rest of the kids who are working their butts off to get a real 31?? Plus, if this kid is talented enough (which she is obviously talented) that her coaches want her in optionals, why why why couldn't they wait until the kid is a little more solid in her basics? How long would that REALLY take? 6 months??

Bottom line = This should have been done fair and square. It wasn't.

 

[aerialriver]

Life isn't fair. I have heard with my own ears coaches asking judges to change scores so a kid could move up and they did! I also know to inquire it costs money. So they basically bought the score. How's that for fair? Everything in life has its honest people and its crooks.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using ChalkBucket mobile app

 

[Iwannabemargo]

Can I ask about your judges, I assume that they are (theorectically) impartial ? We have to make do with the coaches from the otherr competing clubs who have taken the judging exam - that is a whole other can of worms !

 

[gymdog]

Although I'm late to this party, allow me to politely disagree with this premise, and I base this on my own daughter whose highest compulsory score (levels 4, 5 and 6) was a 32.4, and she was "scored out" and moved on to optionals where she thrived...and as most of you on this board know, went on to be a successful Level 10 for many years (7) and is now on a full ride at a D1 school for gymnastics. I'm not saying that this will be the case with the girl on Youtube but if I had posted videos of my daughter in her compulsory years, you all would have been horrified...but her coaches saw something in her that made them want to move her out and up....so I guess I would reserve judgement on this little girl's future..

To be fair, you can't really compare the compulsory training and scoring of 10 years ago to today...it's a very different ballgame. But I also can tell what gym the child in question is at, and it makes me form my own opinions about the situation anyway. She obviously needs more work on fundamentals, but I think she can get that fine in the new level 6 so that in a vacuum doesn't mean anything to me. And the rest is mostly speculation.

 

[CoachGoofy]

Can I ask about your judges, I assume that they are (theorectically) impartial ? We have to make do with the coaches from the otherr competing clubs who have taken the judging exam - that is a whole other can of worms !

Many of our judges are coaches who took the exams *raises hand*.

Artistic I think is pickier than T&T as far as 'allowed to judge athletes from home club', but I could be totally wrong (hi, I was spotting kids from my team during open warmup and then back in my judging jacket half an hour later. It's what you have to do when you don't have enough judges).

And you are expected to be impartial.

And no, we don't change scores--unless we miscounted skills. Then we can change. Or if someone had DD calculated wrong. Otherwise, sorry. A parent of one of my athletes pitched a fit bc her kid missed Nationals by .1. We weren't going to protest it bc a) we couldn't and b) that day, she was just shy of good enough, & it's what you do that day that counts.

 

[Canadian_gym_mom]

Oh my gosh do NOT get me started on judges judging girls that they also coach in T&T!

And "expected to be impartial" is different than actually BEING impartial. the one consolation is that lowest score gets thrown out. It's interesting to watch blatant over scoring of a judge's own athletes.