Thought provoking article

[Mariainlv]

Link Removed

Synopsis: They don't really lead to higher level skills. Interesting!

Thoughts, comments on the article?

 

[Granny Smith]

Compulsory & Optional gymnastics are different animals. A good compulsory gymnast does not always translate to a good optional. Just to add a child can have a so-so compulsory career and excel at optionals.

I do believe that compulsory is where you learn & should master your basics. Strong basics and strong conditioned bodies lead to easily learned higher level skills.

I really disagree with the first paragraph of the article. The skills you learn in compulsory on bars do translate to the higher levels. Now I'm not talking under L4 and honestly even L4 bars are useless, but L5 & L6 bars are very important and I think it is clear to see when you watch the higher levels. L5 is the kip, the squat on and the tap swing for dismount - all used in higher levels. L6 also has the flyaway & the clear hip. All of these skills are the basic foundation of the higher levels.

Without a great tap swing, you will not have beautiful giants, you will have archy backs and no flow, you can see a struggling giant and I would bet that you would see at least a handful of struggling giants in the higher levels at a meet - hopefully not too many, but you always see it. Without a good tap swing you will not have a good dismount.

Now I just focused on 1 part of what the guy wrote, the rest of what he said is personal preference. If you don't want to do USAG compuslories, then go the route of USAIGC. If you don't want to do any compulsories and only focus on optionals, then go find a gym that works that way (I think you will have a hard time finding.)

Our country is results based, we want to see results for hard work and our spent money. I think that is even more evident by the fact that now they have L1, L2 & L3 and are actually competing them, giving awards, charging you to come see your child compete and you have to pay to register to get a number to go to these competitions, besides buying a comp leo to wear. It's what the majority of people seem to want, it seems to be mainstream these days. At this rate, we will probably have some type of pre-team competition in due time, because we can't go lower that L1.

USAG is basically a league, just like AAU, USAIGC and the likes. You can criticize it, but if you don't like it, don't use it. It's just one way to obtain your goals.

You can have some guy write an article about how compulsories are not necessary and list all of his gymnastics accomplishments, but it's not rocket science to figure that out. The thing is that USAG is probably the biggest system in our country so it's used by the most people and is the most common means of meeting those goals, but no one will argue that it is the only way.

 

[MdGymMom01]

I agree that the basics skills are needed to become a strong optional gymnast. The league that my dd does just changed some rules for this season and now the entire league is OPTIONALS. There is no more Level 4. The league starts at Level A and runs through Level E with varying and cumulating skills throughout. Its great because beginning gymnasts can have the creativity and freedom to have their own routines and music. It is a very nice option to the traditional USAG format.

 

[ek2]

Compulsory & Optional gymnastics are different animals. A good compulsory gymnast does not always translate to a good optional. Just to add a child can have a so-so compulsory career and excel at optionals.

I do believe that compulsory is where you learn & should master your basics. Strong basics and strong conditioned bodies lead to easily learned higher level skills.

I really disagree with the first paragraph of the article. The skills you learn in compulsory on bars do translate to the higher levels. Now I'm not talking under L4 and honestly even L4 bars are useless, but L5 & L6 bars are very important and I think it is clear to see when you watch the higher levels. L5 is the kip, the squat on and the tap swing for dismount - all used in higher levels. L6 also has the flyaway & the clear hip. All of these skills are the basic foundation of the higher levels.

Without a great tap swing, you will not have beautiful giants, you will have archy backs and no flow, you can see a struggling giant and I would bet that you would see at least a handful of struggling giants in the higher levels at a meet - hopefully not too many, but you always see it. Without a good tap swing you will not have a good dismount.

Now I just focused on 1 part of what the guy wrote, the rest of what he said is personal preference. If you don't want to do USAG compuslories, then go the route of USAIGC. If you don't want to do any compulsories and only focus on optionals, then go find a gym that works that way (I think you will have a hard time finding.)

Our country is results based, we want to see results for hard work and our spent money. I think that is even more evident by the fact that now they have L1, L2 & L3 and are actually competing them, giving awards, charging you to come see your child compete and you have to pay to register to get a number to go to these competitions, besides buying a comp leo to wear. It's what the majority of people seem to want, it seems to be mainstream these days. At this rate, we will probably have some type of pre-team competition in due time, because we can't go lower that L1.

USAG is basically a league, just like AAU, USAIGC and the likes. You can criticize it, but if you don't like it, don't use it. It's just one way to obtain your goals.

You can have some guy write an article about how compulsories are not necessary and list all of his gymnastics accomplishments, but it's not rocket science to figure that out. The thing is that USAG is probably the biggest system in our country so it's used by the most people and is the most common means of meeting those goals, but no one will argue that it is the only way.

Totally agree with what you said. Especially bars. Tap swings, kip and flyaway are crucial to learn correctly. My dd learned her kip (the wrong way) and spent an additional six months getting it corrected. Much better to learn it the correct way, even if you get the skill later.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

howard is a good guy. he's just a bit misguided on this one.

 

[Megley]

I'm not sure that its the skills that are what is taking up time. It's more that learning the routines takes time. I think most of the skills are pretty progressive, with the possible exception fo the mill circle in Level 4 and the Level 4 vault maybe. I'm just trying to think about the Level 4 routines - even there it is a lot of handstand work, leaps and turns, round off and back handsprings. It's perfecting the routines that eats up practice time.

This article also seems to assume that a gymnast needs to progress all the way to Level 10 in order to be an elite when that isn't necessarily the case - as was highlighted in another thread here. Seems like many kids step off onto the elite path or begin to do both elite and jo at around Level 9. Many kids do both TOPs and compulory levels. Older kids who are talented often skip levels too - even optional levels - so it's not a death knell to begin at a later age and compete compulsories.

That said, I have mixed feelings about compulsories. On the one hand, learning and perfecting those routines does take a lot of time that could be spent on basic form and skills. On the other hand, kids like to compete and if they were training nothing but basics and skills and not getting to show those skills off, many would quit. As Grannysmith says, though, it is the system we have and we seem to have been pretty successful with it. I'd be willing to bet that most elite gymnasts competed at least some compulsory levels.

 

[Mariainlv]

I have no idea if the writer is spot on, or off in left field. His basic premise, I think, is a little off. Maybe his phrasing? I think there are many kids who will never make it past compulsaries so there has to be a place for them right?

Perhaps is he had said "what is the place of compulsaries in a gymnast on an advanced path"

Just my thoughts.

 

[bogwoppit]

Maybe he should clarify and just say that good basics are the most important foundation for any gymnast on any path. That is clearly the case.

More interesting, to me of course, would be to find out why so many gymmies quit before they even reach optionals in the USAG system. Boredom perhaps, those routines drive me mental and I have never seen them at a meet.

MarianinLV, I know your DD has very good basics and very nice form, but many gyms are churning out girls who are clearly not ready for more advanced skills, despite having a ton of obvious talent. It is hard to move far past L7 when you can't even do a round off properly.

I think there are places for girls who will not make it past L6, the question is how do you get them there?

Good discussion by the way. In Canada our whole system is optional and we do have an elite path that is totally separate, however this clearly isn't working for us!!! Is that because we have too few gyms, too few gymnasts and they all live to far away from each other to get a system working well? WHo knows, but the optionals for all system is way more fun than the USAG one.

 

[Linsul]

I think regardless of training methodology, everything boils down to the selection process. An honest evaluation of what a gyms goals and capabilities are, staff and facility-wise. I absolutely agree that this sport is for everyone, anybody who enjoys it has their place.

I know of a great many gyms that only do compulsory gymnastics, and they typically have great relationships with the local gyms who offer optional level competition. That's where some of their athletes will end up after all. I think those programs are fantastic, and that they offer an introduction to the sport that's thorough, with less or zero pressure to get to L7 yesterday. Some kids just want to do what they're comfortable with VERY well, compulsories are an outlet for that. On the flipside, there are girls who aspire to optional or elite levels. I've seen them split the groups up based on those goals. When everyone is on board, it works and all are happy. When the gym loses sight of their groups goals, or caves into emotional pleas to put a kid in 'that other group training xxx' is where things go bad from what I've seen.

I think this article really speaks to gyms that offer compulsory through elite levels in one location. Again, I think it boils down to adhering to a standard when selecting athletes. I'm at a very competitive gym. Space and staff dictate that we can't have a huge compulsory program. All our compulsories need to be on the same page as far as desire to progress beyond compulsories. Our focus on compulsories as a whole is to build fundamentals. We rely on it for competitive experience, and as one factor of how our athletes are doing overall. Our methods and what we value are very similar to this article. Our athletes that are trained from the ground up spend 4-6 months in a developmental program learning fundamentals on both their good and 'bad' side, conditioning, stretching, dance, and gym vocabulary. If they don't meet the 'pre team' standard for strength, flexibility, or with a huge desire to continue on after that, then we don't move them up to pre team. All of this is up front with them and the parents of course before they join the developmental group.

Pre team is where they learn the big bulk of their compulsory skills, and are shown very basic drills for skills they'll be uptraining at a later time. Levels 4 and 5 they are putting what they know together for routines, cleaning up dance, etc. They keep doing their uptraining drills, and attempt harder skills the coaches deem them ready and safe to try. We have had some athletes repeat their level, usually younger ones that we don't want to overwhelm or that have time to clean up the details, or get more confident about competing.

So from the start love of the sport, strength, and flexibility are our prime standards. Not having to beg/plead/hope for results in those areas allows for a lot more time spent on skills and routines. If we wavered in those standards, things would fall apart fast. Having a group with comparable and solid fundamentals, strength, and flexibility makes for efficient coaching. When there are difficulties in learning a skill, it's easier to trouble shoot from that standpoint. Generally it's a communication or fear issue, or the athlete has just decided that level isn't right for her and we can proceed accordingly with minimal lost time; or division of a team into a bunch of groups that need to put more time into basics before continuing on.