MAG What ages/ levels can go to state in your area?

[skschlag]

Seriously. I get that some states have a lot of boys, but really, have a qualifying score if needed. but do not limit them based on age.

 

[rosiekat]

Also next year they are separating state into north and south for ALL compulsory gymnasts levels 7 and below.

That's actually happening this year (2018), because we were surprised by it. We're north state, and it's going to be held literally about 2 miles down the road from where regionals will be. I'm like, seriously, if I have to travel and get a hotel room, can I please at least see a different part of the same town? (I won't fuss too much, it won't be a huge road trip or require plane travel, so I'll keep my mouth mostly shut, lol!)

 

[Madden3]

I think California is unique in that there us 2 seoerate governing bodies overseeing each “state” but some other states will hold 2 state competitions, is north state and south state. On the girls side, some levels go this in NorCal, is NirCal north state and NorCal south state. Crazy right?

Yes, this is hurting my brain.

 

[profmom]

Seriously. I get that some states have a lot of boys, but really, have a qualifying score if needed. but do not limit them based on age.

I want to like this 100 times!

Coaches should be able to decide if they want their guys doing L9 or JD. The whole POINT of JD is to create a stream for later starting guys, guys who have more trouble getting skills, and guys who do not want to commit 15+ hours a week to gymnastics. Forcing all the older L9s into JD actively undermines that agenda for both groups unless a coach opts to have two different JD programs. It also potentially makes the older JD cohort very weird, and I don't think just having JD1 and JD2 solves the problem.

I just looked it up and we had 24 older L9s at regionals last year. It would be a really bad thing for the sport if those guys were to get discouraged and leave gymnastics. Some of them might well move to L10 this year.

 

[sce]

I want to like this 100 times!

Coaches should be able to decide if they want their guys doing L9 or JD. The whole POINT of JD is to create a stream for later starting guys, guys who have more trouble getting skills, and guys who do not want to commit 15+ hours a week to gymnastics. Forcing all the older L9s into JD actively undermines that agenda for both groups unless a coach opts to have two different JD programs. It also potentially makes the older JD cohort very weird, and I don't think just having JD1 and JD2 solves the problem.

I just looked it up and we had 24 older L9s at regionals last year. It would be a really bad thing for the sport if those guys were to get discouraged and leave gymnastics. Some of them might well move to L10 this year.

I think the older kevel9 group in my state is my area is stalker this year than last year. It seems that more gyms used it with all the new age changes last season but this season it us jess common. Still no reason fur a stare to discourage it even more though.

 

[OwlGalLiz]

How many states split into 2 "states" for competing? I thought it was just California that did that.

Texas does too for states for Levels 4-7. North State and South State. 8-10 and JD are together at one time.

 

[jenjean70]

Seriously. I get that some states have a lot of boys, but really, have a qualifying score if needed. but do not limit them based on age.

I agree. I was really disappointed to see that.

 

[jenjean70]

I want to like this 100 times!

Coaches should be able to decide if they want their guys doing L9 or JD. The whole POINT of JD is to create a stream for later starting guys, guys who have more trouble getting skills, and guys who do not want to commit 15+ hours a week to gymnastics. Forcing all the older L9s into JD actively undermines that agenda for both groups unless a coach opts to have two different JD programs. It also potentially makes the older JD cohort very weird, and I don't think just having JD1 and JD2 solves the problem.

I just looked it up and we had 24 older L9s at regionals last year. It would be a really bad thing for the sport if those guys were to get discouraged and leave gymnastics. Some of them might well move to L10 this year.

I know...it makes me so sad. We loved the gymnast and the family who was being forced to do JD if he wanted to continue by our regions governing body. Instead of being able to do level 8 or 9 with his friends he quit gymnastics...it was probably going to happen anyway but it happened sooner than it otherwise would have happened.

 

[Madden3]

Wow that seems monumentally stupid of the region. Many kids would like to put in the hours and effort to be JO optionals even if they are not all that great and/or are aged out of nationals...and are MAG gyms really in a position to be turning those kids and their money away?

If JO is only for the really great kids, what is the point of JE? this just does not make sense. Is competitive gymnastics going to become a sport for elite athletes only? Someone please explain to me how the changes over the last few years are supposed to help MAG in the US because I simply do not get it.

 

[2G1B]

Wow that seems monumentally stupid of the region. Many kids would like to put in the hours and effort to be JO optionals even if they are not all that great and/or are aged out of nationals...and are MAG gyms really in a position to be turning those kids and their money away?

If JO is only for the really great kids, what is the point of JE? this just does not make sense. Is competitive gymnastics going to become a sport for elite athletes only? Someone please explain to me how the changes over the last few years are supposed to help MAG in the US because I simply do not get it.

I'm with you. I am still waiting to hear the reasoning for the upper age limit on optionals level boys. Yes, they gave JD as an option for the boys to move to the side; but IMO that doesn't cover it. And doing it at the same time that they made the majority of the boys a year older for their competitive ages, many actually a year older than their actual age... just crazy. JD should be there for boys who want to be done with compulsories; but aren't ready for L8+; but if a 5 year old wants to compete 8 they should be able to. It isn't like for the girls they put Xcel in place and then said that is the option for girls who aren't ready for certain higher levels if they don't hit those levels by a certain age. You can be 18 and a L7, we have that at my DD's gym. It just frustrates me that USAG put this in place, gave no real explanation of why, and left most of us totally baffled as I haven't seen anyone actually come up with a good explanation (and any explanations I have seen are all just speculation).

 

[skschlag]

LOL. Just a couple of things....a 5 yo should not compete L8...but a 15 yo should be able to Also, I think you can be 18 and L7 with MAG, but L8 is where they start with the up age limits....they can stay in compularies as long as they want.

I have some ideas on some of the reasons but not ure they make sense.

 

[Outlast]

What if they created a JD Regionals and Nationals to cover the older age groups for optionals?

 

[skschlag]

So, I think my biggest problem with this is that actually, USAG has listed who is supposed to go to waht post season. They have indicated states/regionals/nationals. I am not sure why your state is not followign this....

 

[sce]

So, I think my biggest problem with this is that actually, USAG has listed who is supposed to go to waht post season. They have indicated states/regionals/nationals. I am not sure why your state is not followign this....

I agree with this. I know the numbers are quite small in some places but they can be in a session with other ages or levels.

 

[2G1B]

LOL. Just a couple of things....a 5 yo should not compete L8...but a 15 yo should be able to Also, I think you can be 18 and L7 with MAG, but L8 is where they start with the up age limits....they can stay in compularies as long as they want.

I have some ideas on some of the reasons but not ure they make sense.

Haha. Oops, yes. I meant to type 15. And sorry, my example of L7 was based on it being the first required optional level for the girls, so I probably should have said an 18 yo can compete L8 on the girls' side. IMO this focusing on age just doesn't make sense for the boys. Sure, definitely have a minimum age; but stop with the max age.

 

[skschlag]

I agree. I have no idea why they have done this, but I wonder if it had to do with wanting more 17-18 yo L10 instead of 17-18 L8s at nationals. But now there are more 11-12 yo L8s than 17-18 L10s, so IMO it backfired...

 

[2G1B]

I agree. I have no idea why they have done this, but I wonder if it had to do with wanting more 17-18 yo L10 instead of 17-18 L8s at nationals. But now there are more 11-12 yo L8s than 17-18 L10s, so IMO it backfired...

But hasn't it always (or at least for ages) been that those kids weren't eligible for Nationals if they were out of age? I remember our coach deciding to have boys skip levels if older so that they would be eligible.

 

[2G1B]

What if they created a JD Regionals and Nationals to cover the older age groups for optionals?

Our region has JD going to regionals with the other optionals. I'm personally fine with them not doing Nationals, I really do think that should be for the absolute best kids. Girls' Xcel stops at regionals. It makes sense to me. The issue for me isn't that he can't go to Nationals, it is that USAG is forcing boys to a different track simply because of age.

 

[skschlag]

But hasn't it always (or at least for ages) been that those kids weren't eligible for Nationals if they were out of age? I remember our coach deciding to have boys skip levels if older so that they would be eligible.

no. D had an old coach taht only went to L8 and he went to nationals multiple times NOt sure when it ended. This guy is only like 23 or 24.

Our region has JD going to regionals with the other optionals. I'm personally fine with them not doing Nationals, I really do think that should be for the absolute best kids. Girls' Xcel stops at regionals. It makes sense to me. The issue for me isn't that he can't go to Nationals, it is that USAG is forcing boys to a different track simply because of age.

I agree wtih the nationals piece. I am still ambivalent about some of the other stuff. I think often times, kids (or parents) ust want to be a level to say they are that level. Not always, but sometimes. The goal should be progress. We have several JDs that are trying to get to 10 next year. It has been motivating for him, but I think it is the way our gym runs JD. Others have quit. But they were not dedicated to getting anywhere anyway. Our most talented boy is super happy to be able to do gymnastics 3-4 days a week, do well, and have fun with his friends. So, at our gym, it is used for many reasons.

 

[acam1103]

My son said he was told (by his coach) last week that the age groupings are changing for Future Stars (so he's an 8 again this year as an actual 8 year old having been an 8 last year as a 7-year old). Maybe they are realizing that making almost everyone a year older overnight has consequences so hopefully that will bleed into changes in JO regarding age limits as well?