The US Gymnastics Gap w/ Women vs Men.....compared to USA Swimming

[Faith]

In the US, college sports are the primary path to professional sports for men in multiple sports, most notably football and basketball. .

There is no "professional sport" when it comes to gymnastics though? Unless you move to circus or similar the fact is you do not get paid for competing in gymnastics, like you do for playing football.

So college will get you 4 years of trying to complete your degree while competing college, rather than focussing on elite competition. With no paid gymnastics job at the end of it.

 

[skschlag]

There is no "professional sport" when it comes to gymnastics though? Unless you move to circus or similar the fact is you do not get paid for competing in gymnastics, like you do for playing football.

So college will get you 4 years of trying to complete your degree while competing college, rather than focussing on elite competition. With no paid gymnastics job at the end of it.

THis is true. Since the women peak younger, they are pulled from JO clubs. The men peak later, and if there are no programs after JO, then there is nothing for them to do to continue training unless they are on a college team or the national team.

 

[MILgymFAM]

Why is the men's program set up to age guys out? In terms of peaking they are closer to T&T than wag and I know many T&Ters who continue to compete JO into college and beyond. It seems the system should be set up to keep them going after high school in clubs, even without college teams- and as far as I know there is no T&T in college at all, right?

 

[skschlag]

As of right now, they age out after graduation or after they compete at the competitive age of 18. NOt sure why.

 

[MILgymFAM]

As of right now, they age out after graduation or after they compete at the competitive age of 18. NOt sure why.

That's my point- it seems both counterproductive and counterintuitive to have such policies in a sport that needs them to keep going past that point. Neither WAG nor T&T have such rules.

 

[skschlag]

I agree. SO maybe, instead of focusing on college, USAG needs to change some rules to allow an open division for past 18, and clubs need to have the option for men to continue.

 

[profmom]

Does this require a rules change? There is an open division possibility for guys; I think it's just underutilized. Some meets allow them to compete alongside L10 (West Point, Houston National Invitational to name only two). I think the only difference is that women do not age out of JO competition, though they can compete open as well. I can certainly see the wisdom in not allowing a 24 year old open guy to compete alongside a young 17 year old JO L10.

 

[skschlag]

There is, but I don' tthink it is emphasized, and most gyms don't have a work out for them. Or maybe boys just don't know it.

 

[profmom]

There is, but I don' tthink it is emphasized, and most gyms don't have a work out for them. Or maybe boys just don't know it.

I think very few gyms encourage guys to stay after JO, and most guys go on to college anyway . . . where there is no program to support them. That's part of why I like the Southern California/New York Alliance model.

 

[Sasha]

Yeah, even though we are a big country in land and population, quality boys programs are few and far between (compared to girls), so can really only pull from a fraction of the country.

The college thing is huge. In the USA a 4-year college education is expected for just about every kid doing even close to average of better in school. And gymnasts tend to be high achievers. The vast majority of gymnasts will attend university right after high school. With so few mens college gym programs, motivation to stay in the sport is difficult except for the few at the top of the podium at age 16 or so who will get into these few remaining college programs, and we all known it take years more to really develop in MAG post puberty. The top 16 year old level 10 may not be the top 23 year old in prime olympic shape, but these are the ones going into NCAA. That video of Kohei as a junior on Youtube shows a gymnast who is decent but not anything spectacular. In the US, Kohei might have been overlooked as a junior and not made NCAA, and never continued in gymnastics. Imagine that!

The pathway to World/Olympic level gym in the US has a huge roadblock at age 18, even for the relatively few boys who do happen to live near a quality gym, do overcome the stigma, and do develop the passion.

I'll add that I think the men we do have are amazing, and performed well in Rio. 5th place team, 2 men in the top 15 AA in the world is super, and all 5 making a final as individuals. Hitting 6 for 6 is definitely different than 4 for 4. And the US ladies are not going up against a Kohei, Deng, Whitlock, and Vernaiev from other countries. Mustafina and Chunsong are lovely, but have gaps in their repertoire. The US women simply aren't facing the high caliber of world-level competition right now as the US men.

 

[MILgymFAM]

The US women simply aren't facing the high caliber of world-level competition right now as the US men.

Part of that is because the US women ARE that high caliber world competition that other countries just can't meet. They won by eight points. Yes, that says their competition can't touch them, but I don't think that says as much about the competition as it does about how truly amazing they are.

 

[Sasha]

Part of that is because the US women ARE that high caliber world competition that other countries just can't meet. They won by eight points. Yes, that says their competition can't touch them, but I don't think that says as much about the competition as it does about how truly amazing they are.

The US women are definitely amazing! Not taking that away from them. I do believe US does a better job of crafting world-class women gymnasts than men.

I still maintain that the caliber of mens competition from other countries is higher right now than the caliber from womens. Take the US men and women out of the equation, and the men of the world are pushing the difficulty and consistent execution in their events higher than the women. The womens AA was arguably not a spectacle of amazing gymnastics pushed to the limits. Lots of gaps and misses, lots of inexperienced athletes making mistakes. The mens was superb. Of course as the sports have different events, it is impossible to compare apples to apples, and opinions here will fairly differ, but removing US from the picture, I don't think we have seen this high of quality mens gymnastics in a while, and I'm not sure I would say that as much for the women.

 

[2G1B]

I agree that the aging out is something that needs to be looked at. I seem to remember when stuff came up about the age bump that at first the solution for kids who would now be considered 19 their senior year (despite actually being 18) was that they could do elite; but not all of these kids ARE elite. So that wasn't really a solution at all. I believe that they have now added in the petition to allow a senior to compete as JO 18 year olds I guess.

But, I think that MAG is doing a few other disservices to themselves with age group things. Like putting an upper cap on how old you can be to compete L8 and L9. WHY??? Honestly, I thought it silly to not allow boys to make it to nationals unless "in age"; but now to not even allow them to compete those levels out of age seems crazy (with "in age" for L8 being no older than 14 to compete, when with the new age groups a lot of "14 year olds" will actually be 13 year olds, so even crazier). The girls don't do this. And girls peak younger. I just don't understand the reasoning for the boys at all. And I think that it is going to potentially lead to losing boys because they get rushed before ready or they get stuck at 7 because they aren't ready for 9.

 

[Sasha]

I agree that the aging out is something that needs to be looked at. I seem to remember when stuff came up about the age bump that at first the solution for kids who would now be considered 19 their senior year (despite actually being 18) was that they could do elite; but not all of these kids ARE elite. So that wasn't really a solution at all. I believe that they have now added in the petition to allow a senior to compete as JO 18 year olds I guess.

But, I think that MAG is doing a few other disservices to themselves with age group things. Like putting an upper cap on how old you can be to compete L8 and L9. WHY??? Honestly, I thought it silly to not allow boys to make it to nationals unless "in age"; but now to not even allow them to compete those levels out of age seems crazy (with "in age" for L8 being no older than 14 to compete, when with the new age groups a lot of "14 year olds" will actually be 13 year olds, so even crazier). The girls don't do this. And girls peak younger. I just don't understand the reasoning for the boys at all. And I think that it is going to potentially lead to losing boys because they get rushed before ready or they get stuck at 7 because they aren't ready for 9.

Per the age 19 thing, I read a document from our region at least that noted that competition-age-19 year olds may compete if still in high school - no mention that they must compete as elite. (Perhaps a MAG authority here can confirm that?)

I agree the whole age limits are... limiting. The message being "you are too old to be considered good - might as well give up now". What a way to motivate youngsters who aren't peaking early enough, and deter slightly older starters from even beginning

 

[2G1B]

Yeah, I think that that got clarified (the 18/19; but still in high school thing) before they officially rolled it out. Many of us over in the MAGs group were complaining about it last year and then I seem to remember KRC saying it had been fixed to handle the kids still in high school; but I do remember at first the solution was "oh, they can still compete. Just in elite." Someone saw that that was NOT the proper solution; but it kind of baffled me that it was not realized as an issue in the original brain storming meeting.

 

[gymdog]

I think it should be allowed if someone wants to, why not, but is pretty besides the point for the national team. Athletes with Olympic potential would be on the national team radar by 18, not starting to compete level 10. But they should allow whatever encourages participation. In women's JO, participation past age 18/senior year of high school is statistically very rare. So I don't think it will make any impact on the national team but hey, I'm all in favor of leaving options open for individuals.

Men past 18 still train at clubs and with private coaches of course (although it seems to me like most of the guys who arent in NCAA or not any more are at USOTC) but they are in NCAA off season or training elite.

I also think it's harder to be a men's all arounder simply because they have more variation across their events. Women's all arounders are typically good tumblers who can stay on the bar enough to get a decent score (see Simone and Aly). Occasionally you get someone who is a pretty good tumbler and also has notable bars (Gabby in prime when she could put an amanar to her feet). Simone's bars are good enough for me to comfortably say she is the best in history.

Now what if Simone had to do three more events that are more like bars than they are like tumbling. And they each have different swing techniques. I believe she would still be a top all arounder because I think she could get pretty good, but would not be as dominant. Kohei and Sam both remind me of this. Kohei is great at acrobatic gymnastics, but it is possible for people to put more pressure on him in men's all around.

But yet the guys who have swing technique and a light body structure still have to do vault and floor. And they have to do rings where their light body structure isn't traditionally an advantage (some of them make it work).

I will definitely prefer the men's competition more under 4 up 3 count (which like in qualifications was a lot more exciting).

 

[LindyHopper]

And once you get to the national team level, as gymdog pointed out, you are often talking about men, not teenagers. Not kids who are still in high school or barely out. You have to figure out how to balance their time training with the lives that they might have outside of the gym. It is tougher to do with someone in their 20s than with teen agers.

So true, look at Alex... married with a child of his own AND a career as a realtor (I don't know why that surprised me so much).

 

[profmom]

I also remind people that things can change in this sport -- look at Great Britain's swift rise. But the other thing that would be good about having more strong college programs is that it would open up the door to keep later bloomers working away, the guys who look pretty good at 17 or 18 but aren't quite national team material because they just haven't had their man strength for all that long. It's not necessarily the guy who is on the Future Stars national team and in the top ten for L8 and L9 JE who's going to make the best gymnast at age 23-24.

But still! The US has some great guys now and some great guys waiting in the wings. We left Donnell Whittenburg at home, and we never really had much of a conversation about Sean Melton, Yul Moldauer, Marvin Kimble, Akash Modi, and a bunch of other really terrific guys who just couldn't break into the very top ranks yet. I do think that more emphasis on swing and less on strength at the OTC would help a bit, as would more sports psychology and more mock meets. But I'm not ready to count the US out for 2020 in Tokyo -- or even for 2017 Worlds. If they can just hit when it counts. That, to me, is the key. Find out what the heck Chris Brooks has been eating for breakfast for the last year, and impose it as the official diet for the men's team!

 

[Sasha]

Find out what the heck Chris Brooks has been eating for breakfast for the last year, and impose it as the official diet for the men's team!

Soooo happy for Chris hitting 6 for 6 in his AA!!! A lifetime accomplishment. Watching his face, and even thinking about it as I type, makes me tear up.

(*note to NBC if you are reading this - the fact that I am emotionally invested in the athlete's story does NOT imply I don't care about seeing as many routines and scores as possible. That is all.)