MAG Thoughts on Divisions 1/2

[skschlag]

I guess the difference is coach/philosophy. We have boys in D2/JD that are where they want to be. They want to do other things, and gym, they want to be a part of the team and compete and be somewhat successful. We also have boys in D2/JD that are working on their requirements to move to D1 or L9/10. The coach has a plan for all of them that is specific to their goals.

 

[profmom]

I think that boys' coaches are less likely to place an athlete in a rigid track from day one than girls' coaches. At our gym, the compulsory levels work out together -- there's no difference between D1 and D2 and kids move up to D1 whenever they are ready (ready being defined as having most bonuses on most events). We have two JD tracks, one of which is for guys who want lower hours and have no plans to move to JO, and the other for guys who are thinking they might want to back to JO at some point. I'm sure the program director would be fine with a JD guy working out JO hours even if he did not plan on ever competing JO. The skills are the skills. The only real difference is that in the longer practice times available to the JO guys, they are working intentionally toward acquiring skills that will fulfill group requirements. And the JD1/JD2 distinction tracks what they can do, not what their aspirations are. A handful of guys just moved over to JD1 after working hard to eliminate empty swings in their routines.

 

[acam1103]

The fluidity between divisions is one thing that seemed to have really changed at our gym the second year. Last year the boys were pretty much D1 or D2 for the whole year and there was little uptraining. This year the D2 boys are working bonuses as they are ready and many have moved to D1 during the season. That's a definite improvement IMO.

 

[Cheryl]

Having JD has been really great for my son. I can't speak to the Div1/2, but it did seem a bit awkward when part of the team had to go to different meet times than their same level team mates. It also didn't seem necessary in Level 6/7. Most of the boys could do at least one bonus on a couple events, so their scores were kept lower than they should have been.

JD has been great for us. My son never even took a gymnastics lesson until he was 8, and didn't begin competing until he was a level 4 - 9 year old. He always did well in Division 1, but because he was born in May, once the new age rules cut off went into effect, he would have had to go from Level 6 to Level 8 and compete as a 13 year old, even though he won't be 13 until after the season ends. He wasn't ready to go from 6 to 8, and he had "aged out" of Level 7, so he is spending a year in JD. Now that we are at the end of the season, he is doing mostly Level 8 skills on 3 events, and Level 7 skills on the rest. Next year, he will go back to JO as either 8 or 9.

It seems a shame that they have made the age groups so strict, and penalize boys who either start late or need to repeat a level for a couple years. A 12 year old shouldn't be told he is "too old" to compete at a skill appropriate level. Boys develop so much later than girls and grow for longer. The current age/level system makes it much more difficult for older starters, or kids who need to repeat levels to stay in the sport. Even though JD is a good start, it does have kids of varying skill levels lumped together. It can be frustrating for kids doing much more difficult skills to lose to kids doing a handspring/back tuck.

 

[raenndrops]

when a meet comes up the D1s (usually 12-14 of the 17 guys on the team) go to one session and there are only 1-3 at the D2 session. I know some teams are small and always have only 1-3 boys but since they are with the "big team" at practice they experience it as a pretty negative thing to be separated during meets. The coaches and parents, from what I have seen, don't make D2 "less than" but even the younger boys interpret it that way and consider themselves not part of the "real" team.

Just tell them that is it an awards group thing. They know that there are different groups for awards, that is how they were separated for the meet.
On the girls' side, we have had meets where the Level 3s were split into different sessions (based on age) and we will have actually had 2 meets where the L4s were split up - in 1 meet, we had 1 L4 compete in the L3 session and in the other meet, that same L4 will be competing with the Xcel Gold team.

 

[sce]

Having JD has been really great for my son. I can't speak to the Div1/2, but it did seem a bit awkward when part of the team had to go to different meet times than their same level team mates. It also didn't seem necessary in Level 6/7. Most of the boys could do at least one bonus on a couple events, so their scores were kept lower than they should have been.

JD has been great for us. My son never even took a gymnastics lesson until he was 8, and didn't begin competing until he was a level 4 - 9 year old. He always did well in Division 1, but because he was born in May, once the new age rules cut off went into effect, he would have had to go from Level 6 to Level 8 and compete as a 13 year old, even though he won't be 13 until after the season ends. He wasn't ready to go from 6 to 8, and he had "aged out" of Level 7, so he is spending a year in JD. Now that we are at the end of the season, he is doing mostly Level 8 skills on 3 events, and Level 7 skills on the rest. Next year, he will go back to JO as either 8 or 9.

It seems a shame that they have made the age groups so strict, and penalize boys who either start late or need to repeat a level for a couple years. A 12 year old shouldn't be told he is "too old" to compete at a skill appropriate level. Boys develop so much later than girls and grow for longer. The current age/level system makes it much more difficult for older starters, or kids who need to repeat levels to stay in the sport. Even though JD is a good start, it does have kids of varying skill levels lumped together. It can be frustrating for kids doing much more difficult skills to lose to kids doing a handspring/back tuck.

I;m glad JD jas been good for your son, but your story confuses me a bit, as there is no age limit for level 7. As well, the Div 1/2 came about with the new rules, so previuosly he was not div 1, as it did not exist before 2 years ago. I do agree with you that the upper age limits have been too restrictive

 

[Cheryl]

I;m glad JD jas been good for your son, but your story confuses me a bit, as there is no age limit for level 7. As well, the Div 1/2 came about with the new rules, so previuosly he was not div 1, as it did not exist before 2 years ago. I do agree with you that the upper age limits have been too restrictive

Sorry, I’m also confused about all this as well. Prior to him being in Level 6 last year, there was no Div 1 or 2, so they all competed together. I was told that although he could compete at Level 7, he would be considered “out of age” group if he went to Level 8 as a 15 year old, even though he would only be 14. I don’t really understand the details, but the coach thought it would be better for him to do JD this year and work on getting to a Level 8 routine by the end of this season, rather than do Level 7. I think it was also to get him used to optionals rather than compulsory.

There is so much I don’t understand about this sport. One of the most confusing things is if they are all doing the same compulsory routines, or similar point value scores, there is such an emphasis on age grouping. If a 9 year old can do the same skills as a 15 year old, they should both be able to compete at the same level.

 

[profmom]

Cheryl, our program director would have done the same thing with your son. He doesn't like to compete guys in out-of-age levels, and he thinks that by around age 12, guys should be doing optional routines. Before the whole divisions and JD stuff was introduced, he once had an athlete come to his program from Texas, a later starter like your guy. Very sweet kid, but pretty weak and a little soft around the middle. He asked him what his coaches had planned for him for the following year when he'd be competing as a 13 year old. The kid sheepishly replied that the plan had been for another year at L5. The program director glared at him and said, "you're nearly shaving! You're an optional!" And an optional he made him, a quite credible one by the time he left us at age 16 or 17 when his family moved again.

The age thing for boys' gym is interesting. On the one hand, it seems designed to discourage the little hotshots from overdoing and overtraining before their bodies can handle the stresses, so boys are prohibited from moving up to L10 when clearly there a few 10-11 year olds out there who could be competitive with L10 guys. At the same time, they have a national-eligible band so that coaches don't hold back their guys to get them to nationals. I don't think the idea of limiting training is really working that well. I do wonder what happens to the guys who are training tons of hours pre-puberty and how many of them see that pay off in terms of being able to build on that and be really successful optionals after puberty. I do occasionally see situations where a guy who was an OK middle of the pack L10 guy suddenly starts leapfrogging the competition in his junior or senior year. The problem is that for some, I'd guess by the time that happens, it's too late for them to get noticed.

 

[acam1103]

Cheryl, our program director would have done the same thing with your son. He doesn't like to compete guys in out-of-age levels, and he thinks that by around age 12, guys should be doing optional routines. Before the whole divisions and JD stuff was introduced, he once had an athlete come to his program from Texas, a later starter like your guy. Very sweet kid, but pretty weak and a little soft around the middle. He asked him what his coaches had planned for him for the following year when he'd be competing as a 13 year old. The kid sheepishly replied that the plan had been for another year at L5. The program director glared at him and said, "you're nearly shaving! You're an optional!" And an optional he made him, a quite credible one by the time he left us at age 16 or 17 when his family moved again.
.

This makes me sad for my oldest who may repeat 5 next year as a 12 year old

 

[profmom]

Bring him to us! (Seriously, I wish you could. Our coaches are great with later bloomers.) I guess though that the key is if his coaches are respecting his progress and enabling him to feel good about where he is.

 

[Madden3]

Sorry, I’m also confused about all this as well. Prior to him being in Level 6 last year, there was no Div 1 or 2, so they all competed together. I was told that although he could compete at Level 7, he would be considered “out of age” group if he went to Level 8 as a 15 year old, even though he would only be 14.

Under the new rules, 15 year olds cannot compete Level 8. Age ceilings in the optional levels were new last year as well (Right? Someone correct me if I am getting mixed up- there were so many changes last year.)
14 year olds are allowed to compete Level 8. But anyone turning 15 before May 31 of the current competition season (even though that is long after most kids have stopped competing) would be considered 15, not 14 for that season. I was also very confused by this change, my younger son is a late May b-day so he 'lost' a year like your son.

JD and the optional age ceilings are related. What I do not understand is which came first... Did they want to have age ceilings in optionals, and so JD was invented as a place for the many kids who would not fit under those ceilings? Or did they come up with the idea of JD as an alternate track to JO, and then to make JD viable, did they put age ceilings in place?

The fluidity between divisions is one thing that seemed to have really changed at our gym the second year. Last year the boys were pretty much D1 or D2 for the whole year and there was little uptraining. This year the D2 boys are working bonuses as they are ready and many have moved to D1 during the season. That's a definite improvement IMO.

I agree, fluidity between the divisions and continuing to work bonuses makes sense. Of course this also might lead to D2 basically becoming a ghost town after a few meets.

Separate sessions for the different divisions of the same Level? I have never seen this...but only have one year of experience with divisions. Is that only for 4s and 5s? I cannot see how the numbers would support separate sessions for D2 above 5.

 

[Madden3]

This makes me sad for my oldest who may repeat 5 next year as a 12 year old

When my oldest son was a Level 5, (so before the changes) one of his teammates was 15. IIRC this boy had left gymnastics for some time and come back, and while he was very good on floor and vault, he could not do many of the 6 elements on the other events. So he competed as a 5. And he was great- a great kid, a great influence, with a great attitude. This was a particularly "old" kid for this level, but before JD we routinely saw boys around 12 or 13 on our team and at meets competing as 4s and 5s. I get it that JD is intended to serve such kids, but my experience at our gym has shown me that those kids could be served just fine in JO if the gym made room for them and appreciated them. And in my experience, most of these "older" kids made great teammates and competitors. Because usually, they really wanted to be there. There are plenty of Level 5s who are total goof offs so a mature and dedicated presence is an asset.

 

[Sasha]

When my oldest son was a Level 5, (so before the changes) one of his teammates was 15. IIRC this boy had left gymnastics for some time and come back, and while he was very good on floor and vault, he could not do many of the 6 elements on the other events. So he competed as a 5. And he was great- a great kid, a great influence, with a great attitude. This was a particularly "old" kid for this level, but before JD we routinely saw boys around 12 or 13 on our team and at meets competing as 4s and 5s. I get it that JD is intended to serve such kids, but my experience at our gym has shown me that those kids could be served just fine in JO if the gym made room for them and appreciated them. And in my experience, most of these "older" kids made great teammates and competitors. Because usually, they really wanted to be there. There are plenty of Level 5s who are total goof offs so a mature and dedicated presence is an asset.

This is all true. However, on the flip side, many 13-17 year olds would rather work out and compete with other 13-17 year olds, rather than be the odd duck hanging with the 8-10 year olds if given the opportunity

 

[Madden3]

Right. Before the changes the coaching staff at my kid's gym usually did have the compulsory teens practice or at least spend a large part of practice with the optionals. It is really no different than now- the JDs practice overlaps with the optional practice. I realize it sounds like I was saying the older boys practiced entirely with the younger boys to be their spirit guide or whatever, that gave the wrong impression. Sorry.

 

[momto2js]

We have a very young team, generally. Our coach is a "put them where they will be successful" type of coach and up trains in practice a lot. My son is 11 and this is his 6th season. Level 4x 2, Level 5x3 and level 6x1. He is too much bulldog and not enough ballerina We have several level 6 boys that are 11-13 and the plan for them is to go JD for 2-3 years until they can be successful 9's and 10's. My son can not wait. He is so ready to start training double backs and be able to add them in to competition when they are ready. He can't wait to put his full in on floor. I think in our state, more coaches are going to use JD as a parking spot for kids that need more time to physically mature.

I don't have an answer for compulsory awards. They take way to long!! Perhaps we need to more to a more swimming like approach where medals are labeled and put in a box for coaches to distribute at the next practice.

 

[J&A's mom]

I didn't read every post, so I am sorry if I am repeating something that has been discussed.

What if a gymnast....clear throat-mine.....that is only missing one element on one event and in all others he is medal worthy? Would the all or none coaches put him in JD? He is doing great all all other events and may go to nationals if he goes six for six. Probably won't make day 2 of nationals without the element, but I would say he is worthy of being in Level 9.


Anyway, I think JD is awesome. It has helped our boys that are catching up or can't be at the gym as much as the other boys.

I don't think D2 is necessary at L7. Those boys could be in JD. In fact, one of the coaches at a neighboring gym just moved all of the L7D2s over to JD. I saw them compete as the JD's were with us at state. Seems to be a perfect place for them!

I also do like the D2 for L4 and L5. Not sure about L6.

 

[rosiekat]

I also do like the D2 for L4 and L5. Not sure about L6.

Now that we're at the tail end of the season, I am going to reference my previous post about wishing some of our guys had done D2. I think they'd be feeling a lot better about themselves and gymnastics if they had. (Yes, insert all the thoughts about hindsight, armchair coaching, etc. ) There were almost no L6D2 kids at our state meet, probably because, you know Texas lol. Go big or go home, I guess, and that's a shame. The worst kid out there is still pretty danged amazing, I think we just get so used to seeing kids do these phenomenally athletic things that we become almost jaded!

 

[Madden3]

Woot! I am back. Could not get onto CB for a couple weeks due to some website snafu. I missed CB!

Anyway, rosiekat, our team had a similar experience last year with the level 6 boys, many who competed D1 would have done far better as D2 and missed going to states due to this. My own son competed D2 and placed very well (and in fact he scored well enough to qualify for D1 states but remained a D2 all season.) And I know some parents were not happy that their kids placed poorly as D1s when they presumably would have done better as D2s.

But those boys are all Level 7s this season, and while our coach tried to have some compete as 7 D2s, it became clear after a couple meets that there were not enough in the state competing in D2 for it to make sense to continue with D2 7s. So as far as I know* they have all been competing as D1s for the last several meets, and letting the chips fall where they may- which is how it always was anyway, before divisions- boys who could not do many bonuses placed lower.

Not sure what the lesson here is, except the obvious that no matter what division a gymnast competes at a lower level, eventually those divisions either merge or the lower scoring kids go to JO optionals or JD and let the chips fall where they may. So, if kids are looking to place well as ultimate goal, then divisions make sense. If the ultimate goal is having the challenge and fun of competing while focusing on personal improvement more than placement, I still do not see the point of divisions for any level.

One concern I have is what happens to kids who are D2 when D2 is no longer an option. In my son and his teammates case, they had competed for 2-3 seasons without divisions so in effect not having divisions again this year was not such a big deal. But for newbies coming up, it might be a rude awakening if they compete div 2 for 4&5 and possibly 6, and then not for 6 or 7.

As far as D2 7s being JD as suggested above, correct me if I am wrong but I think JD is only for 12 and over so many L7s would be too young. We do have a JD team but that is mostly older boys who started gymnastics training at a later age than our current 7s, most of whom started competing around age 7 as 4s and were 10 or 11 this year.

*The reason I am not sure is that my son who would have been level 7 this season sustained a shoulder injury at the very beginning of the season and has been out of the gym entirely since January.

 

[skschlag]

JD is now 11 and up. So I think it does become more of an option then. Plus as the d2s move up, l7d2 might become more of a real level.

 

[Cheryl]

Our JD team is mostly boys who were Level 6 last year and are 11 and 12 years old. My son is one who did well in Level 6D1 , but because of his May bday has to compete as a 13 year old. The coach decided to put them in JD so they could start working on their optionals skills. Although at the beginning of the season, my son had solid Level6-1 skills, he could not have competed at Level 8. Now by season end, his routine is practically the same as a Level 8 routine, so it allowed the boys to do optionals at their own pace on each event. Coach thought this was a better option for this group than doing Level 7 compulsory.