M
Megley
I'm not sure if this is the correct board, but as this question is sort of addressed to coaches, I'll ask it here. I am pretty new to the world of gymnastics but I've been doing some online looking and have joined some message boards and groups and asked a couple of questions and am running into what seems to be a difference in coaching philosophy. Do you think that a child should spend at least one or two years at each level or is it better to get a child into optionals as quickly as possible? One school of thought seems to be that there is no rush, you can't compete internationally until you are 16 anyway so why move up quickly to optionals. The other school of thought seems to be that you should get the gymnasts to optionals quickly so that they learn the skills before they grow and learn fear. Assume you found a child age 5 or 6 who had tons of talent and drive. She clearly has the ability to learn fast. Would you have her compete each level or would you train her up to optional level as quickly as possible? What would be your reasons for picking either option?
To personalize this a bit, we have a few gyms in my area. Some of them operate along the lines of the former model. They concentrate heavily on Level 4-6 compulsory gymnastics and have teams that compete srtrongly there. They have optional gymnasts, but the numbers are much lower and they don't compete as strongly in optionals. Most of the girls are approaching puberty by the time they get into optionals. We have one gym that doesn't stress compulsories at all and tries to get talented kids into optionals as fast as possible. As a result, this gym doesn't have strong compulsory teams but they compete well at the optional level and have produced a few elites. This latter gym offers home schooling.
Any thoughts on which is the more desirable approach? Or am I opening a huge can of worms here!? This question is limited to girls. I think boys progress more slowly anyway, largely as a result of their slower physical development.
To personalize this a bit, we have a few gyms in my area. Some of them operate along the lines of the former model. They concentrate heavily on Level 4-6 compulsory gymnastics and have teams that compete srtrongly there. They have optional gymnasts, but the numbers are much lower and they don't compete as strongly in optionals. Most of the girls are approaching puberty by the time they get into optionals. We have one gym that doesn't stress compulsories at all and tries to get talented kids into optionals as fast as possible. As a result, this gym doesn't have strong compulsory teams but they compete well at the optional level and have produced a few elites. This latter gym offers home schooling.
Any thoughts on which is the more desirable approach? Or am I opening a huge can of worms here!? This question is limited to girls. I think boys progress more slowly anyway, largely as a result of their slower physical development.