TOPs B camp moved discussion from TOPs camp thread

[Muddlethru]

Wait... if the average elite girls are training the same and/or less hours... but all these "aspiring" elites are training double the hours at half the age.... why does that meant the sport is evolving and it's harder to become an elite athlete? These tiny little girls putting in these hours aren't the elite ones yet. I think it's more a symptom of how overly competitive parents are getting with their kids in recent years. But that doesn't mean it will correlate to success in gymnastics. Quantity does not equal quality with this sport. In 10 years if every girl at the Olympics trained 40 hours a week at age 8 at level 7 and were all on TOPs "A" team every year.... well then I'll come and eat my words.

Coterpandguidegirl, I agree with you as far the overzealous competitive parents. As my previous post state "I hope these produces better gymnasts and not merely "upping" each other on who spends the most hours in the gym or for the gym to generate more income". But the sport is indeed evolving. It has to. Becoming a team member is harder. They keep cutting the numbers and making the skills harder. In TOPS alone, in 2005, about 71 made A team. Last year and this year, that number is down to around 55. In addition the required abilities test is different. In 2001, they did pull ups and push ups as part of the abilities test, no cast to handstand. You can also check the average scores of each test. There were significantly lower 5 to 10 years ago. Even Shawn Johnson commented on an interview that her hardest skills in 2008 are now being used as warm up by the young athletes around here.

Didn't they also cut the nimber of gymnasts we sent to World's and the Olympics? If they have not cut thr numbers in a decade, then I stand corrected. I just want to make it clear, I am not complaining or saying anything is wrong, just that that is what I've personally observed.

 

[bookworm]

----do these hours then include the Tops training? Cause to me (and I also am in a very competitive Region) would consider 25hr/wk school and 35-40hrs/week summer to be extreme hours esp. at this level. I don't know any gym within a 3 hour radius (this include a major Elite gym) that does those kind of hours for a kid that will be competing L6-7. ESPECIALLY the 35-40 hours in the summer part. I've never heard of that at L6.

Wait... if the average elite girls are training the same and/or less hours... but all these "aspiring" elites are training double the hours at half the age.... why does that meant the sport is evolving and it's harder to become an elite athlete? These tiny little girls putting in these hours aren't the elite ones yet.

This is what I meant by the number of hours for the Level 6/7 were insane and the body would never last all those years!!If you're only "aspiring" and doing 35-40 hours, what the heck will happen if she actually qualifies to elite. You wonder if child labor laws will ever apply to situations like this because a parent couldn't make their child "work" that many hours but they can "work out" without an issue...

 

[Muddlethru]

If a Level 6/7 has to practice 35-40 hrs per week to be "that good or that competitive" then are they really that "talented"? To me talent is a natural and raw ability. If any kid is training 35-40 hours per week, then I would hope that at least 8-10 of those hours are ballet and dance training to help produce a more well-balanced athlete.

I think they are really talented. These 9 and 10 yo are doing L9, L10 skills at the national testing. You have to be talented to even do those skills well at 15. TOPs stands for talent opportunity program. How does one decipher who are the truly talented ones? Their basis I would guess is who does the skill the best. And to do a skill flawlesly, one needs more practice, more hours, more repetitions. Lastly, a gymnast can make up lack of talent with practice. As the old saying goes, hardwork will beat talent anytime. The girls that made the A team and B camp put in more hours than my daughter. Hence, they worked harder and deserve to be there. Just wished my daughter got to sneak in, even as an alternate. There was a high acceptance rate this year. I don't think they'll be going down the list.

 

[SkiBumGymMom]

Wait... if the average elite girls are training the same and/or less hours... but all these "aspiring" elites are training double the hours at half the age.... why does that meant the sport is evolving and it's harder to become an elite athlete? These tiny little girls putting in these hours aren't the elite ones yet. I think it's more a symptom of how overly competitive parents are getting with their kids in recent years. But that doesn't mean it will correlate to success in gymnastics. Quantity does not equal quality with this sport. In 10 years if every girl at the Olympics trained 40 hours a week at age 8 at level 7 and were all on TOPs "A" team every year.... well then I'll come and eat my words.

Coterpandguidegirl, I agree with you as far the overzealous competitive parents. As my previous post state "I hope these produces better gymnasts and not merely "upping" each other on who spends the most hours in the gym or for the gym to generate more income". But the sport is indeed evolving. It has to. Becoming a team member is harder. They keep cutting the numbers and making the skills harder. In TOPS alone, in 2005, about 71 made A team. Last year and this year, that number is down to around 55. In addition the required abilities test is different. In 2001, they did pull ups and push ups as part of the abilities test, no cast to handstand. You can also check the average scores of each test. There were significantly lower 5 to 10 years ago. Even Shawn Johnson commented on an interview that her hardest skills in 2008 are now being used as warm up by the young athletes around here.

Didn't they also cut the nimber of gymnasts we sent to World's and the Olympics? If they have not cut thr numbers in a decade, then I stand corrected. I just want to make it clear, I am not complaining or saying anything is wrong, just that that is whatI've personally observed.

I think there's two issues at play here: the code change that's hurt the majority of elite female gymnasts from around the world, and overzealous American parents. Yes there's one girl less sent to the Olympics this cycle than last and yes the skills are evolving. I agree with you on that side of the issue. However my response is... so what? Should parents parent differently because the 1 in a million shot to make the Olympics just became 1 in 1.5 million? We've seen the results in a short time with the harder skills on some of the older girls, it's almost impossible for any country to field a healthy lineup for worlds. Imagine what the juniors will be like when they're seniors with this sort of stress on them. And it makes me sick to think that these same standards are being put on grade schoolers. If the discussion becomes one of "Do what we need to do to win number one," we may as well set up state schools like China and ship our girls away because frankly I don't see the difference if this rhetoric becomes some sort of justification. My daughter had the chance to test elite and I didn't let her for our entire family's overall well being, so these choices aren't hard to me. People might think I'm crazy for that, but I've been called far worse for far less. Gymnastics has brought amazing things to my daughter and to my family, things I would never change. But in the end of the day it's a sport and my child is my child.

I hate to come across so blunt but it really makes me sick to see parents pushing what I believe is tantamount to child abuse on their little girls over a sport. The icing on the whole cake is that this overzealous behaviour with the extra gym hours and leaving regular school in 2nd grade solely for gymnastics and programs like TOPs that aren't even necessary for elite and expensive privates has generally been proven counterproductive.

 

[thnkGd4kds]

4theloveofsports, I agree that, although scores of course fluctuate year by year, they do seem to be on an upward trend. For example, scores that my DD got last year and the year before at Nationals would've landed her in the A camp had she been just a year older; she attended B camp (after the initial invitations went out). There may be a few reasons for this upward trend, none of which I know enough about to anything other than speculate: judging differences (although the judges seem to have been the same for the last few years), number of hours many of these little gymmies are training, an increased pool of testing girls, coaches becoming more aware of what the judges are looking for... In any case, it may not be the increased hours alone.

I also questioned the wisdom of 8 year-olds attending this camp, but it seemed to go fine last year according to my DD and to the couple parents I know who had 8 yos there. Still, I'm not sure I would've wanted my DD to attend at 8, but she didn't even test that year (her gym doesn't start testing until 9), and I was glad for that. Maybe I'm over-protective or erroneously believe that it's too much pressure at that age, so please, readers, don't be offended if you have an 8 yo who is testing nationally. Plus, as I said previously in another thread (one that's called, "Dare I ask..." or something like that), parents can turn loony around TOPs time. It can really bring out the CGM even if there wasn't one in that parent previously. Do 8 yos really need to deal with that? No child, even an adult child, should have to deal with that! And, how young are "we" going to go with this?

It does seem that coaches--and parents, sometimes--are pushing many of these girls to practice more and more hours, and, as I said before, I'm glad my DD didn't practice that much at that age. (She is 11 now, 12 in a few months, and just bumped up her practice time to 25 hours a week for level 9, which is the same that the L10s and junior elites at her gym practice. No one practices more, and I do not want her to practice any more hours per week. I personally think it ultimately begins to be counter-productive. She is homeschooled, but she always has been, along with all of my children, for educational and philosophical reasons. That we homeschool just happens to mesh well with her gym now.) And, how about all the parents who regularly schedule privates on top of their DD's normal, long hours? I wonder where this craziness will go...

I don't think, however, it's the TOPs program per se that is to blame for this craziness. I saw great benefits for it for our daughter, for example, and I think I managed to stay pretty grounded through the whole experience and personally know others who did, too. I believe it's our culture, and that our culture as a whole will soon deeply regret all of the pressure many adults have placed on "our" children by the adults' attempts to live through their children or attain an inflated sense of ego through their children's accomplishments.

 

[Tumblequeensmom]

And just to add... gymnastics cannot continue to "evolve." The human body is what it is... the skills right now are probably at the upper limit of what the body can tolerate. Trying to further increase difficulty will result in more injuries and dare I say it, even death! Physical forces are at play, and unfortunately, there is a limit to the amount of pounding all those bones and joints can take before they suffer sometimes permanent injuries.

As ThnkGd4kids states:

I don't think, however, it's the TOPs program per se that is to blame for this craziness. I saw great benefits for it for our daughter, for example, and I think I managed to stay pretty grounded through the whole experience and personally know others who did, too. I believe it's our culture, and that our culture as a whole will soon deeply regret all of the pressure many adults have placed on "our" children by the adults' attempts to live through their children or attain an inflated sense of ego through their children's accomplishments.


I definitely believe it is parental pressure that is driving all of these crazy, insane hours. Just visit some of the old threads here on CB... the competitiveness of parents is evident in many of the posts.... my DD is "only" (however many years young) training xyz hours. Then there are the posts about how "Susie" is training xyz (i.e. CRAZY) hours. There is even competitiveness over how "small" a child is.

For what purpose? What happens to that child when you, as the parent, have given everything over to this sport, and they end up quitting at 12 or 13? Sooner or later gymnastics ends for all the girls/boys. Yet, from a very young age, that is all they've known.

 

[UnoMas]

This thread is really interesting. The thing that came into my mind as I was reading all this and thinking about my experiences with TOPs and TOPs parents at our old gym is this: How do things progress from a 3 yr old taking her first preschool gymnastics class to a 5,6, or 7 year old training 20 plus hours a week to get ready for TOPs testing, uptraining, or focusing on "elite dreams"? (and yes, we did have 6 and 7's training over 20 hrs at our old gym).

I went with my friend to her 3 year old daughter's first preschool gym class yesterday. The joy and delight in this little girl's eyes in her pretty new leo, running all around the gym...seriously, how does it go in that other direction so quickly? I know it doesn't go there for everyone, obviously, but I have seen it go that way FAST for more than a couple kids. Being homeschooled in kindergarten and first grade so they can train more hours. To me, this cannot be a good choice. Even if these children are somehow destined for greatness...HOW can this be a good choice?

But it does all boil down to parents of very young kids being told that they are training for this special "TOPs" program...the road to the Olympics. If you're told that, why wouldn't you believe it? Or go for it? Or pay whatever money they are telling you to pay? Now thankfully all gyms who do TOPs are not like this, but some are.

Sigh, I don't know. It just all makes me sad. Gymnastics is supposed to be a sport for fun and fitness. To see it get so insanely off track at such a young age is just so seriously messed up, in my very humble opinion. Sorry if this is off-topic...sometimes it is hard to tell what is off topic and what isn't when the thread is 11 pages long!

 

[JessLW]

I think madigym makes a good point. It is easy to point fingers at crazy parents, but the crazy behavior is obviously being encouraged by certain gyms and certain coaches. Like she says, if you're told your child is super talented and has all this potential, you would probably believe it. Especially if you haven't been around gymnastics that much, it is probably very easy to buy right into the idea that you can pick out future elites at the age of 6. I think most people already have some preconceived notions that gymnastics is a sport that you have to be young to be good at, the younger the better, and no one wants it to be "too late" for their child or to deprive their child of some special chance. I think it is probably fairly easy to get caught up in the hype from the start, whereas parents of kids who progress through the levels with no particular expectations but nonetheless find themselves with a preteen level 9-10 might not be wearing such rose colored glasses when it comes to elite dreams.

I'm an American but I live in a country that of course has a very controversial system but sometimes I think it is not so different afterall in some regards. When you're told your child is one of the few, one of the chosen, well, that's a powerful thing and some parents are willing to make tremendous sacrifices to that end.

 

[MdGymMom01]

Madigym00--I totally agree with you!! It seems like this sport is become so wrapped up in the "skills" and upping the difficulty that the artistry is getting lost. While watching the Worlds television broadcast a few weeks ago, one of the commentators made a comment about how the Russians do a lot a ballet training along with the gymnastics and how evident it is in their performances. There is definitely a big difference between these gymnasts and the Americans--while the Americans are throwing huge skills and packing so much difficulty into the routines, it almost is boring to watch. While the Russians (an other European gymnasts) may lack some of the difficulty in tumbling and skills, they make up for it in their dance and overall presentation--it's very breathtaking to watch! I would LOVE to see gymnastics get back to its' "artistic" roots. Afterall, it is still called "Artistic Gymnastics".

 

[coachmolly]

I attended 3 gyms during my years in gymnastics, the final gym only for a few months but it was far and away the best of the 3. They were the only gym that used the TOPs program. It was done as part of the warm-ups among ALL girls- age eligible for testing or not. Girls warmed-up/stretched and completed a set number of chin-ups, presses, and leg lifts. Each month these skills were tested and girls who could not do the required number were assigned extra work to be completed during down times in practice in the form of rope climbs, v-ups, or similar work. This was not done to prepare athletes for TOPs testing, but to ensure basic strength for skill progression. Some girls tested for TOPs on the regional level, most did not qualify to testing, but all were strong. The gym doesn't have elites, but does reasonably well at the optional levels. Unfortunately most of their most talented girls leave the sport before level 8, but I attribute that more to the fact that it's in a wealthy suburb of a big city where nearly all of the girls are enrolled in prestigious private schools where lacrosse reigns supreme and ultimately wins over gymnastics, but that's a totally different topic. Regardless, ALL girls are given the same expectations and opportunities to succeed, and the most talented easily set themselves apart while practicing the same number of hours. I'm not sure if this is how the gym still operates, but I imagine it's very much similar.
As far as ridiculous hours, that has been happening for years in this sport and it's not solely happening within TOPs gyms. I remember reading a "Faces in the Gym" piece from USAG magazine 9 or 10 years ago where I WOGA level 6/7 claimed to train 35 hours/week. Big name gyms do it, no-name gyms do it, it happens if you get the right crazy parents and coaches working together. It's not right, but hey, coaches aren't paid a ton so if they have the chance to get more hours in an almost private lesson type setting- they just might take it. Or, some less than ethical coaches have the same stars in their eyes as pushy parents and want to see their gym name represented on the national team. I trained at a gym that was like that and it was a miserable experience for any of the kids who weren't hand picked to succeed. And from those experiences, I have a TON of negative feelings towards gyms who group girls into talented and less-talented groups. It's not fair, ethical, or productive. If a kid makes it to the team levels, they clearly have some degree of talent and ALL kids deserve the same opportunities to grow and progress.
I think the whole concept of TOPs has changed with all of the TOPs specific training going on. Like others have mentioned, is a kid who trains TOPs conditioning and skills 25 hours a week really more talented than a kid who does TOPs as their regular conditioning at practice for 45 minutes/3-4 days a week? Probably not.

 

[Tumblequeensmom]

I think madigym makes a good point. It is easy to point fingers at crazy parents, but the crazy behavior is obviously being encouraged by certain gyms and certain coaches. Like she says, if you're told your child is super talented and has all this potential, you would probably believe it. Especially if you haven't been around gymnastics that much, it is probably very easy to buy right into the idea that you can pick out future elites at the age of 6. I think most people already have some preconceived notions that gymnastics is a sport that you have to be young to be good at, the younger the better, and no one wants it to be "too late" for their child or to deprive their child of some special chance. I think it is probably fairly easy to get caught up in the hype from the start, whereas parents of kids who progress through the levels with no particular expectations but nonetheless find themselves with a preteen level 9-10 might not be wearing such rose colored glasses when it comes to elite dreams.

Great point!!!!

 

[MaryA]

Even though I really have nothing to say about Tops, I had to check out this thread because it has gotten so long. Just a funny, slightly OT aside... I found my dd watching gymnastics videos on YouTube last night. She came across one of a 5-year-old working on giants. The video said that she was practicing 18 hours a week and couldn't wait until she was old enough to compete level 4. I commented that 18 hours a week was insane for a 5-year-old and my daughter disagreed with me! Now, she is coming from a place of being the oldest on her level 6 team (a positively ancient 10-years-old) and wishing that she had gotten an"earlier and better" start to gymnastics, but still... I am afraid that I may be raising the next generation of CGM!

 

[gymnut1]

Now that is scary!!!!lol

 

[Muddlethru]

I agree with the great majority of the posters. The longer amd longer hours, the younger and younger gymnasts, more and more difficult skills, more and more money out our pockets, crazier and crazier parents, greedier and greedier gyms (qualification: the previous statements probably apply to a smaller minority--mostly on the elite level). But what is the alternative? In order to be in the cutting edge, we must push the envelope. I am neither advocating nor not advocating the longer hours, pushing harder and harder skills, training at age 1! How does one regulate hours, skills, etc. We may incorporate more artistry. Though putting more emphasis on artistry can be just another addend and may in no way limit the gymnastics part. In addition, how can we just stay stagnant?

Also we've forgotten the role the masses, the audience, spectators role in gymnastics. They only know what they see during the olympics. Gymnastics may be like everything else--the idea is to give the audience what they want--higher tumbling, daring stunts and skills, the more out of the ordinary, the better. And don't you think the gasps and applause gymnasts and coaches get feeds into their desire to even surprise and amaze the audience, judges, fellow gymnasts. It seems to me it is the society as a whole, starting with the family unit, that may drive sports to such competitiveness. I don't think pulling back is the answer because we will fall off the charts. Do we have an alternative? If so, what? I am personally stumped.

 

[coachmolly]

Even though I really have nothing to say about Tops, I had to check out this thread because it has gotten so long. Just a funny, slightly OT aside... I found my dd watching gymnastics videos on YouTube last night. She came across one of a 5-year-old working on giants. The video said that she was practicing 18 hours a week and couldn't wait until she was old enough to compete level 4. I commented that 18 hours a week was insane for a 5-year-old and my daughter disagreed with me! Now, she is coming from a place of being the oldest on her level 6 team (a positively ancient 10-years-old) and wishing that she had gotten an"earlier and better" start to gymnastics, but still... I am afraid that I may be raising the next generation of CGM!

No worries, MaryA! I would have said the same thing at your DDs age, and at 10 I was an excessively ancient level 4! I think you get a new perspective when you see that gymnastics isn't everything, even if you wish you had gotten the chance to go more hours as a youngster. Of course there are the exceptions, but I think most kids who live and breathe the sport dream of going more hours if it means being more advanced.