TOPs B camp moved discussion from TOPs camp thread

[bookworm]

I, too, am aware of the same as you are. That the A team does not have replacement/alternates.

Also, in response to a post about gyms telling parents the scores, etc......a gym or two I know of I heard by parents that they never gave out their kids TOPS scores...? And also that one same gym is the one who also never told the parent her child was an alternate. The B kids were announced at the gym, and then suddenly her DD was made mention of it a week or two later that "she also made the B team". Which is fine and dandy but they kept it from her that her child was an alternate and acted like she made B team. So all this time her name wasn't mentioned and hought she didn't make it to camp. All the camp B qualifier names were posted in gym. Not her name. And so mother couldn't understand why her kid's name wasn't announced when the others were. I guess in hindsite it was cuz they got some declines then that's when they told her that she made it. Just tell her she's an alternate...tell the truth like what's the big deal, ya know? Like why the gym try to act like she made B when everyone was mentioned and her poor DD was mentioned as an after-thought a couple wks. later. My point i'm trying to make is the honesty of the gym, that's all. If your kid is an alternate...that's wonderful. Tell them that. Instead of lying about it when people knew what was up when the child "suddenly made B camp" 2 wks. after everyone else. That's all. Gyms should all give out the kids TOPS scores, that's all. So if you see your kid just missed it by a hair, well then you know to be on your toes that the wonderful possibility of an invite can come up should there be a decline, etc. Our gyms give out their scores, btw.

Ok Pure Talent, time to give it a rest ...we all know that any kid not "named to the B Team right off the bat is alternate" and therefore should know their place in the gymnastic world of TOPS, but this really isn't playing nice in the sand box...

Mods, I vote that this thread should be closed if this is how this is going to continue...

 

[ginnymac]

I agree bookworm. Nothing of value can be added at this point, imo...

 

[coachmolly]

I am just opening this thread for the first time because I didn't expect it to be such a hot topic. I don't have any experience with TOPs testing, but am not opposed to it. I think the camps, both A and B, can be great experiences for the athletes who, without a doubt, deserve to be there and should enjoy the experience and their success, and also a great opportunity for their coaches to learn from some of the best. And beyond getting their names out there to the powers that be, it's a chance for the girls to meet others their age who are passionate about gymnastics, train where some of their heroes have trained, and get to learn all kinds of cool new things. So A team, B team, alternate, whatever- it's a great experience.
When it comes to "filling" the B camp, go for it! If some qualified girls don't want to/can't attend, why not take the girl next in line? They have the facilities and staff, might as well extend the opportunity to all girls willing, able, and qualified to go. And ANYONE who qualified to National testing deserves to be at camp.
I would have a problem if they had to stretch beyond National testing qualifiers to fill the B camp. I wouldn't feel right about sending a kid who went to regional testing and did 1 chin-up, couldn't get their butt off the ground on a press, and complained the whole way through. Both because there would certainly be more qualified kids, and also because it would put that kid in a position to feel terrible as she struggled through the camp. But I think by qualifying to national testing, these kids have already proven they can hold their own and deserve the recognition.

 

[nevertooold]

I can see from a parents point of view, that some parents might want to know if their child was an alternate. Some parents might use that information in their decision making process about whether or not sending their daughter to camp was the right choice for their family at that time.

And in the situation where a gym purposefully misled a parent with the intent of gaining an opportunity for their coach to attend camp, knowing that perhaps that information might influence the parents decision to not send their child, well that is an ethical issue.

So, puretalent, you had me at the beginning.

Albeit there is just something quite unsavory about a parent with an obviously successful child being THAT concerned about whether or not other gyms spell it out for the alternates in a way that 'puts them in their place'.

But what really made me post is this comment "like why the gym trying to act like she made B"...

Well firstly, BECAUSE SHE DID! She made the B camp. How else could you describe it? She's invited and allowed to participate, so she made it.
Maybe the gym doesn't talk about alternates bc the poor little Suzies are exposed to CGM's willing to belittle even the most talented children in their own gym. Maybe they don't want to burden the child with have to hear flak from the ones who "really made it", bout how she didn't make it. Maybe they do it bc they know it drives the CGM's over the edge at the thought of a lessor gymnast being allowed to think she belonged in their child's midst!!!

 

[gymmomntc2e6]

Love ^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[notjustgym]

But what really made me post is this comment "like why the gym trying to act like she made B"...

Well firstly, BECAUSE SHE DID! She made the B camp. How else could you describe it? She's invited and allowed to participate, so she made it.

EXACTLY!!!! Thank you Nevertooold!

 

[thnkGd4kds]

Yes, yes, yes!

Yes, round and round we go....

THERE IS NO "like she made the B team"/camp. SHE DID! The powers that be clearly state in the parents' meeting that this is an invitation, even after some decline and others are invited; therefore, there is NO lie in the fact that these girls, like the others, were invited to B camp and made the B camp! The way that those who are in charge and others in the know phrase this is EXACTLY the same; they do not differentiate between these two. Ever. THEY say "this girl made B camp."

Yes, I think we've figured out that the only reason this argument is being stated is that "someone" wants to put others in their supposed, totally imagined place. That's wrong on all levels.

As far as the parents go that PT was talking about, they could have found out this information if they just had asked. It's no secret, and it's not difficult. So, in no way were they lied to; their daughter DID score an invitation, and they COULD have found out scores.

 

[justanothergymmom]

How is the cut-off score determined? Do they take a certain percentage (or number) of all those kids that tested and take only the top X percent or number (thereby determing the cut-off score at whichever child fell above that line?) Doesn't the cut-off score change each year so in a sense it is an arbitrary number? Were the cut-offs this year higher or lower than last year?

 

[PureTalent]

I can see from a parents point of view, that some parents might want to know if their child was an alternate. Some parents might use that information in their decision making process about whether or not sending their daughter to camp was the right choice for their family at that time.

And in the situation where a gym purposefully misled a parent with the intent of gaining an opportunity for their coach to attend camp, knowing that perhaps that information might influence the parents decision to not send their child, well that is an ethical issue.

Yes, thank you!!! Couldn't have said it perfectly myself!

 

[PureTalent]

How is the cut-off score determined? Do they take a certain percentage (or number) of all those kids that tested and take only the top X percent or number (thereby determing the cut-off score at whichever child fell above that line?) Doesn't the cut-off score change each year so in a sense it is an arbitrary number? Were the cut-offs this year higher or lower than last year?

I believe it does change year to year, depending on the total # of kids, etc. Someone correct me if I'm wrong....? As for the cut off comparisons from last year to this year, good question....i read it somewhere but can't remember. lol

 

[gymjourneymom]

Puretalent, I find it interesting you only replied to part of nevertooold's post.

 

[PureTalent]

Puretalent, I find it interesting you only replied to part of nevertooold's post.

Sorry, That's fine and that's ok. Didn't feel like going around and around.

It caught my eye and just wanted to quote it. Too beat.... just came home from cleaning the gym for 3 hrs. lol

 

[flippin out]

Oy-Vey !!

 

[SkiBumGymMom]

I might have missed some details here but... wow. And people think gym in the 90s was crazier than it is today. I have to strongly disagree if we start looking at this TOPs business! My DD went to national testing in the late 90s, before it was at the Ranch. Our gym didn't have a separate TOPs program or training. She also didn't make the A or B camps... but still turned out to be a successful L 10 and college gymnast. :shrugs:

I don't know how to ask this without sounding snarky, so please know that's not my intention. Also please correct me if I'm wrong on this first part but I get the idea that one of the concerns parents who want to be told if their daughter is "only" an alternate to the B camp is that USAG is just bringing up girls to fill a quota for the benefit of A campers, and therefore they're kind of "wasting" their money just to send their DDs to B camp to just sustain the A camp. Putting aside the whole idea that you're still getting the 100% experience, not some haphazard "alternate" experience that's not the same as the other girls, but... isn't that what TOPs is??? Not so much in terms of a money maker for the USAG structure but with gyms charging money to do conditioning they should be doing anyway? I mean I guess I would understand not wanting to spend any more money after paying a bazillion dollars on top of regular tuition for TOPs training and hours all season, then testing, then national testing, and for all the coaches and travel, etc. etc. But to me, after all that, money to actual attend B camp seems somewhat trivial.

But that's just my opinion and since I'm a gym geezer mom, now grandma, I could be way off!

 

[PureTalent]

My DD went to national testing in the late 90s, before it was at the Ranch. Our gym didn't have a separate TOPs program or training.

That's interesting. Where did they have the national testing back then? Was it at the same place every year or did it change? (I love to hear how things use to be back then.... )

**Sorry mods, if this is off-topic. If it is then please state so and disregard my post.

 

[SkiBumGymMom]

That's interesting. Where did they have the national testing back then? Was it at the same place every year or did it change? (I love to hear how things use to be back then.... )

**Sorry mods, if this is off-topic. If it is then please state so and disregard my post.

No problem. I'm pretty hazy about it because I really didn't know what TOPs even was at the time, since we were still new to the gymnastics world and my DD went with her coach because of financial straits. (That and it gets lost with all the other meets and trips around the US since then... and all the cheques I've had to write!) I think it was in Oklahoma? Somewhere in the southern midwest, not too far from us. I just remember DD getting pretty bummed out testing the following year was at the Ranch. Someone like dunno might be able to help you out more here! I'm showing my age, not just with my kids but with my memory!

 

[bflipngym]

Coterpandguidegirlisn't that what TOPs is??? Not so much in terms of a money maker for the USAG structure but with gyms charging money to do conditioning they should be doing anyway? I mean I guess I would understand not wanting to spend any more money after paying a bazillion dollars on top of regular tuition for TOPs training and hours all season, then testing, then national testing, and for all the coaches and travel, etc. etc. But to me, after all that, money to actual attend B camp seems somewhat trivial."

I'm way off topic here, but I find this interesting . I had same concerns with my sons future stars program. which is basically the TOPS for boys. I debated with myself for awhile on if I should let him join it since boys grow into the sport much later than girls. They get stronger and better later in their teen years, and future stars is only from ages 8 to 13. I figured whats the hurry, its way to young to pick out who might be the best later on , and burn them out now in the hopes of getting a head start. I worried about the extra hours, money and possible burnout, before he even hits the age of getting strong and peaking in his late teens on into his twenties. Shouldn't the coaches train and condition each gymnast, no matter if their a future star, tops or team gymnast, the same. sure some might be better than others.... but that will also change from year to year. some will quit, some will get injured , some will move on to other sports and a few will survive in the sport and continue to compete. some wll be great , some good, and others will be average. thats just the way it is . There are many factors that go into gymnastics , not just talent.

so to make a long story short, my son isn't in future stars anymore. I fiigure if he is as good as the coaches think he might be, then he will get great in his own time. and when the time comes when he gets older (hes only 7) and wants to push himself further , he can train and conditon harder ( with the coach , that is what i'm paying him for)

 

[coachmolly]

No problem. I'm pretty hazy about it because I really didn't know what TOPs even was at the time, since we were still new to the gymnastics world and my DD went with her coach because of financial straits. (That and it gets lost with all the other meets and trips around the US since then... and all the cheques I've had to write!) I think it was in Oklahoma? Somewhere in the southern midwest, not too far from us. I just remember DD getting pretty bummed out testing the following year was at the Ranch. Someone like dunno might be able to help you out more here! I'm showing my age, not just with my kids but with my memory!

Pretty sure it was at Tulsa World of Gymnastics in Oklahoma. Not sure what their ties are to everything, but they held TOPs camp for a long time and I think even held a few elite meets/camps there.
And TOPs has definitely become more drama-packed in recent years. While I'm sure there were some nutty gyms in the early years, I think it was mostly about doing the conditioning as part of your program, not in addition to it. The gyms used the conditioning and skills to help develop a solid foundation and if it led their kids to make the team, great. If not, at least they knew the kids had the basic strength and foundation skills to progress. It was less about hand-picking the kids who looked super talented when they were 6 and training them specifically for TOPs.

 

[coachmolly]

Shouldn't the coaches train and condition each gymnast, no matter if their a future star, tops or team gymnast, the same. sure some might be better than others.... but that will also change from year to year. some will quit, some will get injured , some will move on to other sports and a few will survive in the sport and continue to compete. some wll be great , some good, and others will be average. thats just the way it is . There are many factors that go into gymnastics , not just talent.

THIS. If you're going to do TOPs, do the conditioning with ALL of the kids. Help them all build a foundation of strength and give them the tools to succeed. Some will win immediately, others will catch on later, and some who make the camps and are deemed "ultra-talented" will burn out long before they reach optionals. Don't throw a kid out just because they can't do 10 presses and 20 perfect leg-lifts by the time they're 6.

 

[bogwoppit]

This is when I have a problem with TOPs ^^^^ All gyms should train it for all team girls, if they are going to do it. Girls who are that good will make the team without having endless extra hours. Girls who make it on extended training hours are just loading their chances, it doesn't make them more talented, just over worked. You know like winning L4 states because you train 20 hours a week!

We have a member on here who lived in Japan with her DD, they moved back to the USA and her DD tested TOPs, without all the mega hours some gyms are demanding, she made A team no problems. Now that is a talented kid.

When gyms are having selected kids train extra hours for TOPs training, they are making buckets of money off parents dreams and their kids are just doing way to much. We all know TOPs success is not indicator of future success in the sport. We also know that too many hours is detrimental to a childs health and well being. They also create this, unecessary, illusion of elitism. That causes some ugly feelings to be expressed publically by people who have no sensitivity filter.