Parents TOPs testing .. how's it going?

[HoldThePhone]

Oh...yes DIC...I thought you were meaning that making A or B camps wasn't score based or something.

 

[gym-mom622]

Maybe this will help even though it's from 2015.

I agree there are talented girls from other states..I didn't imply that there aren't. That's why I don't think it's literally the top 100 scores. Can you for instance find where it states that it's done by scores only? I can't ..

 

[Flicfliclay]

At National testing some girls are invited to DIC simply for looking very strong on bars even if they don't test well in other areas. I like many of you am confused why someone would believe other factors than scores determine who goes to national testing. Kinda sad when adults question the process when it doesn't fit their desired results. With all the conspiracies in the world I highly doubt there is one for determining which girls ages 8-10 get invited to test for gymnastics.....

I don't question because of desired results.. I've heard rumors and was curious, so I looked online at the usag TOPs website and found nothing.. I'm genuinely happy for all girls that made it as well as the girls that worked their butts off to test..

 

[GymGirtz]

Off topic, but how did everyone get their username changed from their actual name? Somewhere in my account settings?

 

[Flicfliclay]

Maybe this will help even though it's from 2015.

Thank you!

 

[Mrs. Puma]

Off topic, but how did everyone get their username changed from their actual name? Somewhere in my account settings?

I believe only an admin can change it. I'd pm @bogwoppit

 

[GymGirtz]

I believe only an admin can change it. I'd pm @bogwoppit

Thanks!!

 

[z2akids]

I agree there are talented girls from other states..I didn't imply that there aren't. That's why I don't think it's literally the top 100 scores. Can you for instance find where it states that it's done by scores only? I can't ..

Actually, stating that only California and Texas girls would be in the top 100 based on scores seems a pretty clear implication that they have the 100 most talented gymnasts at each age group.

I have no bone in this discussion, DD is 12 and her gym doesn't participate in the TOPS program.

Congrats to all the girls who tested. I am certain they all worked hard and had a great deal of courage. Best of luck to all moving on to the next steps.

 

[GYM0M]

The type of 'calculations' insinuated by weighting the amount of testers in each state would be ridiculously difficult, & quite frankly, no one has time for that.... As far as selections to Camps, esp. TOPS A&B, I've never heard of a girl that received the qualifying cut off score being excluded from the camps. Are mistakes made? Of course, but if score were entered incorrectly, those girls are always included. Now, that being said, are there some girls that are given the 'benefit of the doubt' after a bad test? Probably. I'm pretty sure they even said that in the parent meeting. Is the system 100% accurate and fair? No, bc you have numerous state managers scoring state testing & there will be individual variations among them. Some coach bias? Eh, I don't want to assume, but it's not unheard of or completely far-fetched. As far as DIC is concerned, girls are chosen for various reasons, not just bars, but I admit I don't know the reasons, but I can assure you it's more than bars, from personal experience. And the girls selected for DIC, forfeit their spot on TOPS A/B.....not really a big deal if slated to make TOPS B, but if TOPS A, it's about a $600 difference. Good news is that if selections go as they did last year, each girl has over a 50% chance of making a team.

 

[caligymdad]

The type of 'calculations' insinuated by weighting the amount of testers in each state would be ridiculously difficult, & quite frankly, no one has time for that.... As far as selections to Camps, esp. TOPS A&B, I've never heard of a girl that received the qualifying cut off score being excluded from the camps. Are mistakes made? Of course, but if score were entered incorrectly, those girls are always included. Now, that being said, are there some girls that are given the 'benefit of the doubt' after a bad test? Probably. I'm pretty sure they even said that in the parent meeting. Is the system 100% accurate and fair? No, bc you have numerous state managers scoring state testing & there will be individual variations among them. Some coach bias? Eh, I don't want to assume, but it's not unheard of or completely far-fetched. As far as DIC is concerned, girls are chosen for various reasons, not just bars, but I admit I don't know the reasons, but I can assure you it's more than bars, from personal experience. And the girls selected for DIC, forfeit their spot on TOPS A/B.....not really a big deal if slated to make TOPS B, but if TOPS A, it's about a $600 difference. Good news is that if selections go as they did last year, each girl has over a 50% chance of making a team.

I didn't mean to imply it was only bats. Just spoke of a situation I saw occur last year where I girl was invited because her bar routine was so strong.

 

[gymbeam]

Are scores ever made public? Seems like they would be, just like scores in a meet.

 

[GYM0M]

Are scores ever made public? Seems like they would be, just like scores in a meet.

Not to my knowledge, but then again neither are the physical abilities testing that are held at every single camp at the Ranch. I think the reasons the scores aren't published is to maintain the program's integrity, not so that they can pick who they want to and discard others. Are there some additional considerations that come into play at National Testing? Of course, but I'm not convinced it's a conspiracy.

 

[gymbeam]

I was just asking because I'm curious to see the range of scores.

I also agree there is no conspiracy.

We aren't in California or Texas but we can totally hang with them!

 

[rbearclaw]

just got the same :

The cutoff score for each age division:
7 Year Olds 41.80 Diamond Team Members
8 Year Olds 69.00
9 Year Olds 80.00
10 Year Olds 83.00

So, basically, the cutoff scores were just about the same as last year. Crazy, since so much changed for each age group! Shows that these amazing kids adapt to whatever is thrown at them, and step up to the plate! Our kids are awesome!

 

[Flicfliclay]

Actually, stating that only California and Texas girls would be in the top 100 based on scores seems a pretty clear implication that they have the 100 most talented gymnasts at each age group.

I have no bone in this discussion, DD is 12 and her gym doesn't participate in the TOPS program.

Congrats to all the girls who tested. I am certain they all worked hard and had a great deal of courage. Best of luck to all moving on to the next steps.

Actually No I didn't... As i stated I heard this rumor and decided hey I am going to prove that rumor to be wrong... so I looked myself on the tops website to see where it stated the rules for state testing and how the selection is made. I found nothing... Also, saying that Texas and California would be the ones representing is only and ONLY because they have the MOST gymnast in the country. meaning they have a much larger pool to have girls make it. Just so you know I am not from California or Texas either... And I have met some amazing people that daughter did make the TOPS national testing and I am beyond happy that their child made it and it being well deserved. My post was merely based on a rumor.. PERIOD... Do I think that the USGA should make the TOPS testing less secretive and more open YES. Could they hold qualifiers just like they do for HOPES and have the same judges judge all the girls that want to test YES... Do I think they should post the scores just like they do for a regular sanctioned meet? YES... We should not have to be playing who knows what when it has to do with these type of things. Did you not see the tons and tons of posts about when maybe the list might come out? She said. He said.. was all it was.. So basically it was just to open up a discussion to see what others thought about the RUMOR... Not to offend anyone or to say that their daughters didn't kick butt and do amazing to get to national testing.

 

[GYM0M]

Could they hold qualifiers just like they do for HOPES and have the same judges judge all the girls that want to test YES... Do I think they should post the scores just like they do for a regular sanctioned meet? YES.......Not to offend anyone or to say that their daughters didn't kick butt and do amazing to get to national testing.

I didn't get the feel that you were upset with the girls that qualified, but more with the program in general. It's not a perfect system. There are some missing links on the USAG website. If you read the TOPS overview, it references a general information tab that is not there. Why it's not held like a qualifier...simply that's not how the program is designed nor is it in the program's nature. Did you happen to notice the # of qualifiers vs the # of state tests? Attending a qualifier is much more expensive. The TOPS program is designed to identify gymnasts with some degree of elite potential that do not have the access to elite gym programs AND to educate coaches that no to little experience coaching/cultivating/grooming elite gymnasts. If it was a program that required lots of expensive travel for younger gymnasts, it would be limited to children that had parents with that kind of disposable income, defeating its purpose. As to the scores, I'm not sure it's anyone's business what Suzy from Sacramento scored in relation to Suzy from St. Louis. The scores should be provided to your coach & I cannot find a policy that states that the coach cannot give you your child's scores. I do feel like every parent is entitled to their child's scores, just not the scores of everyone else's child, though I can see the argument.

 

[GYM0M]

I will add that I don't have a dog in the fight anymore. I only try to defend the program bc of what I have seen it do for my DD's gym and her coaches. There's no way my DD, her coaches, or her gym sisters would be where they are today without the program. I know it has its flaws, but it is still better than nothing.

 

[mom2lingling]

Question for those who have attended the National Testing in the past. What should we expect?

Children stay with the parents I assume in nearby hotel. Looks like the testing lasts 2 days. Do you know before you leave the outcome for Team A or B or DIC?

How long is the parents meeting and what do they cover?

Thanks in advance for the info

 

[Flicfliclay]

I didn't get the feel that you were upset with the girls that qualified, but more with the program in general. It's not a perfect system. There are some missing links on the USAG website. If you read the TOPS overview, it references a general information tab that is not there. Why it's not held like a qualifier...simply that's not how the program is designed nor is it in the program's nature. Did you happen to notice the # of qualifiers vs the # of state tests? Attending a qualifier is much more expensive. The TOPS program is designed to identify gymnasts with some degree of elite potential that do not have the access to elite gym programs AND to educate coaches that no to little experience coaching/cultivating/grooming elite gymnasts. If it was a program that required lots of expensive travel for younger gymnasts, it would be limited to children that had parents with that kind of disposable income, defeating its purpose. As to the scores, I'm not sure it's anyone's business what Suzy from Sacramento scored in relation to Suzy from St. Louis. The scores should be provided to your coach & I cannot find a policy that states that the coach cannot give you your child's scores. I do feel like every parent is entitled to their child's scores, just not the scores of everyone else's child, though I can see the argument.

Exactly, there is missing information.. meaning no information on how the qualifications are made. That should not be the case, but it is and it just gets minds spinning. They really shouldn't have to have a second guess, because i believe years ago that information was on the site? I do know what the TOPS program is designed for and I think that is a wonderful thing. I do think the only way to get fair judging to happen is to run it more like a qualifier. Yes, it might be more expensive, but they could set it up like State.. then Regionals and take the top #'s out of those regional spots. Just my idea of how they can make it more of a clear cut and easier format..As far as scoring, i really don't see it as being any different than me being able to look up anyones score at any given meet on several sites? Right? Honestly this is just a discussion and I rather enjoy reading other ideas. Its what makes us have a better understanding of what is going on. Either way like i said this is all based on a rumor i heard and tried to disprove. Just because I wanted to say it was a clear cut.. but it is not.. LOL

 

[HoldThePhone]

I just don't think TOPS is a big enough deal to make it like a qualifier. The training for TOPS is great, don't get me wrong, but in the long run it doesn't mean anything. This is said as a parent who has a child that was pretty successful in TOPS. TOPS doesn't offer really anything exclusive that you can't accomplish without it, except for being named to a team. You can be invited to camps without it, you can do Hopes, you can become an elite. It just seems silly to think that it needs to somehow be made more fair across the board. I think they actually do a pretty decent job of trying to standardize scoring from test to test. That said, just like at meets judges are somewhat subjective. If you have a really talented kid, even in a harder to test state, you should be fine. National Testing will then make all teating "equal".

I'd say it's about as clear cut as it can get or needs to be. After all scores are submitted the top 100 make it...they don't pick and choose who should make it below that point.