WAG Should I be concerned about gym's lower meet scores?

[Sasha]

Hi community,

My dd isn't competing yet, but I've been perusing online meet scores in general for local gyms (scores from the past few years), and I notice that the gym we are at isn't one of the top-scoring gyms when you look at all athletes' 'personal bests' in all the levels.

I've noticed other local gyms consistently have many many 38s and 37s from their top performers, while our gym's top performers score in the 35s and 36s, with the very rare 37. These scores are consistent from levels (old) 3 through (current) 10, so it appears not to be just a matter of philosophy - i.e., moving gymnasts faster through low levels with adequate scores instead of pursuing perfection in the lower levels. At least that's my interpretation.

Our gym isn't any 'smaller' than competing gyms, though it is a little newer than some of the others (about 3-4 years old I think). The head coaches are experienced (not new college students, for example) with newer young coaches supporting.

Should I be concerned? Or is this normal for a 'newish' gym? Or are 36s good enough? Or what am I not considering?

My dd isn't a phenom, but has talent (learns skills faster than peers, though not always 'pretty') and a great work ethic, so I want to make sure I'm setting her up for any successes she wants to pursue, such as college gymnastics someday if she continues in the sport. She is 7 1/2 and on pre-team. And if gymnastics turns out to be more temporary for her, then of course I'd want her to have the best training and chance for success at meets while she enjoys that competitive experience (she is competitive, though not in a bad way).

Thanks for any thoughts

 

[raenndrops]

How many of those other gyms are keeping girls at a level for more years than necessary? That would be my first question. I know of more than one gym that has really high personal bests at every level because the girls tend to repeat more than necessary.
Were you able to compare their scores at the same meets? Different meets = different judges = different scores for the same routines. Some of those personal bests might have been at an "easy" scoring meet. All of the gyms that went to that meet and did what the judges wanted would score better....
Every judge has "that one thing" that they look for while also looking for everything else. If the other gyms are giving it to that judge, they will score higher. We had a judge on beam once that was all about the high releve. One girl had a very wobbly routine, but had a really high releve (and high arch that accentuated it)... she scored better than a gymnast that was more solid, but her releve wasn't nearly as high. This was in old L4. Everything was identical EXCEPT the wobbles and the releve. The wobbly one scored a 9.0 and the solid one scored an 8.6 - craziness!

 

[LizzieLac]

If the gym you are at has only had a competitve team for 3 or 4 years, I don't think you really have enough data to go on. In many ways, you aren't comparing apples to apples. Gyms that have been a round for a while have had kids in their team theoretically for many years (if they are bringing them throught the JO program). And, gyms that have been around for a while are more likely to have kids coming to them because they are established. My point is that it sounds like your team and coaches are just new to being in the JO program and it seems logical to me that for that reason they might not have the big scores.

 

[Becauseisaid]

How many of those other gyms are keeping girls at a level for more years than necessary?

This was my first thought as well. Yes, the gymnasts are doing well, but is it at the cost of moving ahead at the pace they deserve? Like Raenndrops, we have several gyms in the area that require gymnasts to achieve a specific (very high) score before moving them to the next level.

You should also keep in mind that gymnastics is more than a meet score. If your gymmie doesn't like or trust her coach, then she won't work to the best of her potential no matter how good the gym appears from the outside. Does the gym stress SAFE gymnastics or is it all about throwing the skill at the expense of hurt gymnasts? How do the coaches treat the gymnasts?

The only way to truly know the best fit is to test drive the gym.

 

[Gymdad2]

IMHO it is far too soon to be looking at scores and trying to project the future. This is time for your dd to have fun with this sport. Only some of the beginners at your dd's age will become optionals, a few of them make L10 and a few 10's do college. Maybe your dd is one who will, or maybe she is a soccer player or a dancer or maybe something else. Now is the time for her to explore the world and time for you to relax and enjoy her childhood and to support her as she learns and grows. There is plenty of time to look to her future once she knows what direction she wants to go and grow in. Good luck to both of you.

 

[gymdog]

If your gym has level 10s getting 36s, then the coaches know what they're doing.

 

[Muddlethru]

I disagree with gymdad2 though. We've switched gyms. I hang onto my daughter's first gym because I was not sure how far she would go. Well, she developed some bad habits from the not so good gym. Switching gyms later was traumatic for her. If you can get to a good gym off the bat, the better. Your daughter will establish friendships, get the proper training and you won't need to be questioning every move the coaches make. As far as scores, gyms can only work with the talent that comes in the door. Team scores in my opinion are not the best gauge of how good a gym is.

 

[Sasha]

Thanks for the different perspectives. And I want to clarify that in no way do I expect her to achieve college level gymnastics (or even reach optionals!). But as a parent, it's my duty and gift to provide the best opportunities within my means to nurture her growth and happiness, and remove barriers to her potential (whatever that may be or not be). So that's why I'm trying to understand if some of the J/O scoring deficits I'm noticing compared to nearby gyms is actually an indicator of quality of the gym, or if this should not be considered a quality differentiator.

To answer some questions...

I feel pretty confident saying the other gyms aren't holding girls back to sweep the awards stands. Their gymnasts are comparable ages and don't seem to be systematically repeating levels (by perusing recent years' meet scores). I could be wrong, but it doesn't look like the case.

The other gyms routinely get higher scores across levels and across different meets, so it's not just one high-scoring meet skewing the Personal Best data. Again, the top scoring girls from other gyms are achieving 37s and 38s routinely at meets, while our top girls are achieving 35s and 36s (rare 37) at these same meets, and other meets.

It sounds like the gym being relatively new could be a factor from your comments. We like the gym facility, coaches, and other kids on the team. Being a curious person, though, I would like to understand the reason why our gym isn't getting the same high scores (across levels and meets) as other gyms.

I really don't know what to make of it, and how much to make of it, if that makes sense

Thanks again!

 

[Quadqueen]

I think 36s are very respectable scores. We don't see 38s here...rarely 37s. Now, at our old gym, it wasn't uncommon to see many of our optionals scoring 31s, 32s and 33s. That, I would be concerned about.

 

[Bajanswife]

Are we talking compulsory levels here? To score consistent 37s and 38s you have to be spot on in text, form and skills. Some gyms are very meticulous in teaching the text, some are very meticulous in not accepting anything less than perfect (or near perfect) form, some are both. Some practice longer hours so that they can take all the time they need to achieve near perfection.

When evaluating a new gymnast for team, there are differences in how a gym will place them in the beginning - some gyms will keep them low and only move them up a level when they are close to perfect, some gyms will challenge them early on with a higher level and thus sacrifice a few tenths of their potential score in competition (with an end goal to get them to optionals faster, for example). It all depends on the gym's philosophy.

These factors all influence the competition results at the compulsory levels. It's not necessarily only "better coaching" or "better facility" that achieves better results, though sometimes it does boil down to that.

 

[iwannacoach]

Hi community,

My dd isn't competing yet, but I've been perusing online meet scores in general for local gyms (scores from the past few years), and I notice that the gym we are at isn't one of the top-scoring gyms when you look at all athletes' 'personal bests' in all the levels.

I've noticed other local gyms consistently have many many 38s and 37s .....our gym's top performers score in the 35s and 36s, with the very rare 37.

Our gym isn't any 'smaller' than competing gyms, though it is a little newer than some of the others (about 3-4 years old I think).
Thanks for any thoughts

Sounds like a pretty good newer gym. The kids at level 9 and 10 had to have left one of the other gym clubs in the area, so your gym has a disadvantage in two respects. They haven't had enough time to move kids, they've taught the basics to, through the compulsory and beginning optional levels, so they may be moving them a little faster with more up training ( a good thing) and less polishing of the text for compulsory routine.

The other thing to consider is their current crop of L8, L9, and L10 gymnasts. Given the amount of time it takes to get a kid to level 8, the scores you're seeing are the result of a mix of things like.........

Kids leaving the other local gyms because they didn't like where the fell in the pecking order, didn't feel they were getting enough help, or had parents that didn't believe in their child's coaches. So what you're seeing, in a sense, is a variety of self defined outcasts that may not be any better of at the other gyms you've mentioned.

 

[Sasha]

Sounds like a pretty good newer gym. The kids at level 9 and 10 had to have left one of the other gym clubs in the area, so your gym has a disadvantage in two respects. They haven't had enough time to move kids, they've taught the basics to, through the compulsory and beginning optional levels, so they may be moving them a little faster with more up training ( a good thing) and less polishing of the text for compulsory routine.

The other thing to consider is their current crop of L8, L9, and L10 gymnasts. Given the amount of time it takes to get a kid to level 8, the scores you're seeing are the result of a mix of things like.........

Kids leaving the other local gyms because they didn't like where the fell in the pecking order, didn't feel they were getting enough help, or had parents that didn't believe in their child's coaches. So what you're seeing, in a sense, is a variety of self defined outcasts that may not be any better of at the other gyms you've mentioned.

These considerations seem logical - thanks for that additional perspective that I hadn't really thought about. I can see there are a few really talented girls in the lower levels (3-5) that will probably start to really shine for this (our) gym as they advance. Perhaps then the meet scores gap will start to close...

Are we talking compulsory levels here? To score consistent 37s and 38s you have to be spot on in text, form and skills. Some gyms are very meticulous in teaching the text, some are very meticulous in not accepting anything less than perfect (or near perfect) form, some are both. Some practice longer hours so that they can take all the time they need to achieve near perfection.

These factors all influence the competition results at the compulsory levels. It's not necessarily only "better coaching" or "better facility" that achieves better results, though sometimes it does boil down to that.

And I would judge that our gym isn't so perfection-seeking on the dance-y elements perhaps. They do have ballet sessions integrated, but I don't see a lot of super-miniscule perfecting of all that connecting stuff. Perhaps that is making the biggest difference in scores, though I have not actually gone to a meet.

For optionals, perhaps it's just that our program is newer, and the factors iwannacoach suggested are possibly at play.

And it seems like 36s are respectable scores from most of the other comments, so I'm feeling more like this score discrepancy isn't necessarily a negative reflection of the 'quality' of our current gym (which sounds like good news to me!), or at least not enough to trump other factors important in choosing a gym.

Thanks again for everyone's help interpreting and weighing these factors. So nice to have honest opinions!