What criteria to move from L5 to L6?

[UnoMas]

Hi wise coaches,

I wanted to get your opinion on what criteria you think a gymnast needs to meet in order to move from L5 to L6.

Is it a certain score at a L5 meet or meets?
Or would it be a certain number (or all) of the L6 skills?

I would love as many opinions as I can get on this, so please post! (thanks!)

 

[Ingwe]

I can speak for our Gym's policy which goes for movement between all Levels.

The girls must be scoring in the mid 35's on up and must be able to do the skills for the next level.

My opinion is probably jaded right now because my DD did Level 7 last year and scored in the 36's BUT will be doing Level 7 again because she is not doing the L8 vault yet. I don't think she needs to do 7 again but at the same time she hasn't got the vault yet so she is sort of in limbo.

 

[bookworm]

You definitely need a mobility score (which I believe is 32 or 31) and depending on your gym, you would need all of your level 6 skills to be successful....BWO on beam; Back tuck on the floor; flyaway off the bars are three that I can think of...without the level 6 skills, I don't know why you would move them.

 

[nevertooold]

Needs to have all the level 6 skills. After that we take all of the following into account and make each decision individually:

- Successful season at Level 5
- Likelihood of advancing to Level 7 next season
- Age
- Is majority of her group moving up
- What is the perceived projected path for the her for the next 3-4yrs
- What does she want to do
- Personality, as in does her expectation for herself match reality, or will she be disappointed by her results in level 6

 

[BlairBob]

ROBHS-BT as well FHSstep-outFHS. Punch Front - not terribly difficult or shouldn't be.

BWO or back ext roll. I prefer the BWO but if she has tight shoulders or any back problems, the BWO is not a good idea. Train the BHS and don't risk screwing up her back.

Surviveable bars. More importantly, the flyaway.

If this was a girl who had the ability to have a very great dominant season in L5 and was not quite ready with her L6 skills, I would have her repeat L5 and uptrain most of the time with less focus on L5 routines especially if she was a 2nd year L5. Let her have a good medal season and focus on up training.

If this was a girl who probably wasn't going to be much cleaner as a L5 than a L6, bored to death of L5 and really wasn't going to be going to high level gymnastics; I'd probably let her compete L6 so long as she knew what to expect. As well, this keeps her on team versus quitting.

 

[LizzieLac]

If this was a girl who had the ability to have a very great dominant season in L5 and was not quite ready with her L6 skills, I would have her repeat L5 and uptrain most of the time with less focus on L5 routines especially if she was a 2nd year L5. Let her have a good medal season and focus on up training.

If this was a girl who probably wasn't going to be much cleaner as a L5 than a L6, bored to death of L5 and really wasn't going to be going to high level gymnastics; I'd probably let her compete L6 so long as she knew what to expect. As well, this keeps her on team versus quitting.

This sounds to me like the girl "with more potential" gets helpd back, but the one with less gets moved ahead. Am I interpreting this incorrectly?

 

[UnoMas]

Thanks for all the great responses. I love seeing all the differing opinions...most of which are different from our gym's philosophy. I am really enjoying reading all the thoughts. Keep them coming!

 

[Trixiebelle]

I'm curious about this as well. DD has all the level 6 skills needed but has only just moved to level 5 this season. She is very anxious to "skip a level" even though she she knows she has to compete at L5 at least one meet and her coach wants to see 36's.

I'm not going to push the issue until we see how the first two meets go.

For what it is worth, DD is aiming to make a college team (in 7 years!).

 

[Short Balding Guy]

Our gym implements a "mastery" approach to USG Levels. Under the premise that USG Compulsories are well thought out, skills progressive, dance progressive, physical and mental skills progressive, an athlete steeds themselves well prepared by "mastering" the current level prior to moving on. (I am of the belief that the USG Program is exceptionally strong in pedagogic skill build (L4-6) and well crafted to deliver Intermediate athletes to Level 7.)

I have found that the National USG score requirement has been too low to work in our gym situation (Level 4-6). Like a couple of other respondents, our gym asks that the athlete demonstrate consistent 34's or higher in order to move from L5-6. Lower scores require a meeting to consider (athlete/parent/coach). Not all athletes and situations are the same. But this general rule has worked over time for our situation.

Mastering a skill/level (as I have explained above), asks the athlete to consistently do the skill at the practice, as well as perform the skill in meet situations. They are not the same. Requisite strength and technique is required to compete the skill and receive nearly full value. Performance compromise of the well thought out skills asked of USG athletes at the novice levels (4-6) places the athlete at a future disadvantage as well as requiring more risk adverse coaching. I see it as a very important metrics for our gymnastic athletes.

This said, not all skills have the same value, or can be effectively used by a given optional athlete. For an athlete accelerating their level progression due to age/outside situations/different goals the "mastery" approach has some flexibility in our gym.

Not all situations, or gym situations are the same. Movement requirments are tactics to be used by the different gyms. I see very few that are applied wrong - mostly different. We base our tactic, "mastery" to be in step with our team mission.

Best wishes to L5's and their parents, Short Balding Guy-

 

[nevertooold]

This sounds to me like the girl "with more potential" gets helpd back, but the one with less gets moved ahead. Am I interpreting this incorrectly?

Each girls gets placed according to what benefits them in a combination of short term and long term.

It benefits a talented girl to learn to fix the little details and to learn how to win. It does not benefit her to be moved to a level she where she can just get by, go to meets and not place and feel that she is "not good" and quit.

It benefits a kid who will not likely place in either level to move up if she can do so safely. (many times this type of move up occurs after a 2nd yr already) Some girls cannot score well due to their natural body shapes just not looking as straight, clean or pleasing to the judges eye. Most kids will not stay in this sport doing 3 yrs at the same level and if we believe kids benefit by what team gymnastics offers then we move this kid up and keep her in the sport.

 

[LizzieLac]

Each girls gets placed according to what benefits them in a combination of short term and long term.

It benefits a talented girl to learn to fix the little details and to learn how to win. It does not benefit her to be moved to a level she where she can just get by, go to meets and not place and feel that she is "not good" and quit.

It benefits a kid who will not likely place in either level to move up if she can do so safely. (many times this type of move up occurs after a 2nd yr already) Some girls cannot score well due to their natural body shapes just not looking as straight, clean or pleasing to the judges eye. Most kids will not stay in this sport doing 3 yrs at the same level and if we believe kids benefit by what team gymnastics offers then we move this kid up and keep her in the sport.

I guess I understand the thinking described above, but I think this can also work against keeping kids in the sport and keeping them motivated/less frustrated.

Advancement, rightly or wrongly, becomes a focus for gymmies and parents. In the gym, everyone looks to see who gets moved up and who doesn't. The WHY or the benfits are very often not understood. So the kids feel like "less of a gymnast" as compared to their friends who got moved up. And, this is why parents start comparing their kids to someone else's.

Overall, the USAG system seems to inadvertently emphasize "getting to the next level." The fact that advancement may be slowed to perfect skills or form performance or actually BENEFIT the gymnast is lost.

 

[nevertooold]

I guess I understand the thinking described above, but I think this can also work against keeping kids in the sport and keeping them motivated/less frustrated.

Advancement, rightly or wrongly, becomes a focus for gymmies and parents. In the gym, everyone looks to see who gets moved up and who doesn't. The WHY or the benfits are very often not understood. So the kids feel like "less of a gymnast" as compared to their friends who got moved up. And, this is why parents start comparing their kids to someone else's.

Overall, the USAG system seems to inadvertently emphasize "getting to the next level." The fact that advancement may be slowed to perfect skills or form performance or actually BENEFIT the gymnast is lost.

I agree and it is the gym's responsibility to communicate to parents what their plan for their child is.

And it is the parent's responsibility to trust that the gym has their child's best interest at heart and will develop their child's gymnastics potential in a manner that is most beneficial to their individual and unique child.

It is the responsibility of gyms and parents alike to de-emphasize "LEVEL" and emphasize, fun, form, friendships, lifelong learning, lifelong fitness, and being proud of where you are instead of sad for where you're not.

The biggest issues seem to come from gyms that do not uptrain (why there are gyms that do no uptraining during the season I do not know)

In gyms where uptraining is just part of the program there seems to be less worry over what level the girls are competing.