What do you think about age limits?

[NGL780309]

I hesitate to ask this question since young gymnasts doing harder than average skills for their age seems to be a sensitive subject, but I think it makes for a good discussion.

What do you think of age limits? I know they were put in place to keep really young kids from doing things that aren't healthy for their bodies. I completely get that and respect that. But does it really stop gymnasts from training at whatever skill level they are at regardless of age? Spend 5 minutes on youtube and you'll know the answer to that one !

For an elite gymnast they must be 16 by the end of the year to compete as a senior. In JO you must be that age by the meet or the state meet correct? If being of age in that year is sufficient for FIG, why not JO? Does it really make a huge difference if a L5 gymnast turns 7 in September or December? Will their coach really say I'm going to hold gymnast A back skillwise because her birthday is in December, but gymnast B can progress because she was born in September? Of course not.

I have mixed feelings about the 16 year age limit for Senior Elite. On one hand I like it because we have seen an increase in older gymnasts competing and gymnasts sticking around longer. I'm not sure if I believe that's a direct result of the age limit or if gymnasts like Khorkina and Chuso just started a trend and it became more acceptable for them to continue competing. While I think that's really great I disagree with the age limit because it hasn't changed anything. I don't think it keeps 13, 14 and 15 year olds from training senior level skills. I don't think it keeps coaches from pushing the young ones at all. If anything you have younger gymnasts doing harder skills than you did under the old age limit because of the current code of points. For example I think we have more or an equal number of juniors than seniors doing the Amanar on vault.

Thoughts on the JO and/or FIG age limits?

 

[bogwoppit]

I don't have an issue with the JO age linits, they seem sensible enough. I know in Canada and the UK kids cannot begin to compete until they are 8, in fact turning 9 in Canada. Though in Canada they can begin to compete at about L7 when they are 9 if they are ready, therefore all these skills are being trained well before that age isf the child is capable.

Search youtube for Shallon Ollsen, she is a BC gymnast,just turned 10 and is whipping off full twisting yurchenkos (though I think that may just be a bit too much)


I guess USAG tried to come up with a system that is easily applied across the board, and from what I understand kids can score out of levels if they are proficient, but that's a whole other story. If there are 9 year old level 8's then kids are not being held back by the JO system.



As to FIG, I think 16 is a bit too old, gym is very hard on the body and we see many juinors pulling of bigger scores than the over 16 crowd. I would happily return to the 14 year old limit.

We all know that some skills are contraindicated for preschoolers, so that is a no brainer.

The skills I see preschoolers pulling off on youtube that give me the heebeegeebees are ones that are in home gyms. Seeing a six year old doing giants on a home bar in a basement makes me cringe at the possiblities. However someones kid doing handstands on a beam really doesn't bother me.

 

[Shelovesthebars]

Actually 3 juniors competed Amanars at Cover Girl Classic so it may be even more than Seniors. You have a very good point when you mention the code of points and gymnasts at younger ages training harder skills than in the past. Is it really true? If it is, then it defeats the purpose of the age restriction in a sense.
On the other hand, the age restriction didn't hurt Nastia as she was 19 in her first Olympics. Sacramone looks great for 22 so she still has some great gymnastics left to show us.

 

[bogwoppit]

Just to add, when I say that I think 16 years is too old, I didn't mean too old to compete, I meant too old as a starting age for Int Senior Elite.

Does anyone know when any age linits were first established for the Olympic gymnastics?

 

[Pineapple_Lump]

The skills I see preschoolers pulling off on youtube that give me the heebeegeebees are ones that are in home gyms. Seeing a six year old doing giants on a home bar in a basement makes me cringe at the possiblities. However someones kid doing handstands on a beam really doesn't bother me.

Unfortunately it happens in gyms too...
YouTube - "Shortcake's" Back Handsprings

On the topic though, from what I have read, many nations would prefer a lower age limit.

 

[NGL780309]

Actually 3 juniors competed Amanars at Cover Girl Classic so it may be even more than Seniors. You have a very good point when you mention the code of points and gymnasts at younger ages training harder skills than in the past. Is it really true? If it is, then it defeats the purpose of the age restriction in a sense.
On the other hand, the age restriction didn't hurt Nastia as she was 19 in her first Olympics. Sacramone looks great for 22 so she still has some great gymnastics left to show us.

I think the age limit did hurt Nastia. She, in my opinion, would very much have been on that 2004 team. She could have been a 2 time Olympian or 3 time if she makes it to London. She could have competed in another world championships too. She would without a doubt in my mind be the most decorated American gymnast rather than being tied with Miller as far as medal count.

I don't think the age limit had any effect on Alicia at all. She was exactly 16 for the 2004 trials. It's not like she was 15 and missed an opportunity there.

And it's absolutely true that juniors are training harder skills than ever.

 

[NGL780309]

I don't have an issue with the JO age linits, they seem sensible enough. I know in Canada and the UK kids cannot begin to compete until they are 8, in fact turning 9 in Canada. Though in Canada they can begin to compete at about L7 when they are 9 if they are ready, therefore all these skills are being trained well before that age isf the child is capable.

Search youtube for Shallon Ollsen, she is a BC gymnast,just turned 10 and is whipping off full twisting yurchenkos (though I think that may just be a bit too much)


I guess USAG tried to come up with a system that is easily applied across the board, and from what I understand kids can score out of levels if they are proficient, but that's a whole other story. If there are 9 year old level 8's then kids are not being held back by the JO system.



As to FIG, I think 16 is a bit too old, gym is very hard on the body and we see many juinors pulling of bigger scores than the over 16 crowd. I would happily return to the 14 year old limit.

We all know that some skills are contraindicated for preschoolers, so that is a no brainer.

The skills I see preschoolers pulling off on youtube that give me the heebeegeebees are ones that are in home gyms. Seeing a six year old doing giants on a home bar in a basement makes me cringe at the possiblities. However someones kid doing handstands on a beam really doesn't bother me.

I definitely don't think kids are being held back by the JO age limits. I'm just not positive they are needed because if their purpose is to stop little kids from doing too difficult of skills it's not working. I don't want to go to a L5 meet and see a 3 year old competing, but the chances any 3 year old would have those skills is slim. You might have a 6 year old though. If that 6 year old is talented enough and will end up waiting until she's 7 and scoring out of L5, L6 and competing L7, then the age limit was pointless. She was obviously training anyway so why not let her compete L5 at age 6. It might actually slow her down to compete because she'll work on perfecting routines rather than just training skills. These lower levels are mostly money makers anyway, so why the age limit?

The old age limit was actually 15, not 14. You saw 14 year olds competing because you only had to be 15 by the end of the year. You might have even seen a 13 year old at Worlds the year prior to the Olympics because if you were age eligible to compete in an Olympics you were age eligible to help your team qualify to the Olympics.

There is a 10 year old girl at DD's gym who does a full twisting yurchenko too. She did Hopes last year, but had an untimely injury this year. Not a serious one, but just bad timing. Her mom decided it wasn't worth rushing her back in time to compete and risking further injury.

 

[Shelovesthebars]

I am all for lowering the age limit for elite and the olympics. JO seems reasonable to me but I am in agreement that there are 6 year olds out there that would do ok competing level 5.

 

[NGL780309]

Unfortunately it happens in gyms too...
YouTube - "Shortcake's" Back Handsprings

On the topic though, from what I have read, many nations would prefer a lower age limit.

When I see stuff like this I think, "What is the purpose of a 2 or 3 year old doing a BHS besides the parents having something to brag about?"

 

[sportyspice]

I don't understand why parents would want their children to stress their bodies with double twisting yurchenkos at 10 years of age? Firstly, they are still growing and growth plates are vulnerable to injury, secondly they probably have another 5 or 6 years of competing this vault, isn't that boring? and thirdly, has anyone heard of stress fractures/overuse injuries?

I believe that having the current age limit promotes longevity in the sport as it means that gymnasts are more mature and able to understand what their bodies are telling them and counteract pressure from parents and coaches in making decisions (its truly an informed adult decision at that point as to what sacrifices they wish to make for the sport).

 

[Bobby]

...I believe that having the current age limit promotes longevity in the sport as it means that gymnasts are more mature and able to understand what their bodies are telling them and counteract pressure from parents and coaches in making decisions (its truly an informed adult decision at that point as to what sacrifices they wish to make for the sport).

Do you mean they are better able to make an informed decision at age 16 to compete - or to decide a few years prior (to 16) to actively train to physically prepare themselves to be ready for the year they were 16? Gymnastics is a marathon (I'm plaguarizing a phrase ) so there's quite a long slog between 'deciding to pursue' and 'achieving' top-level results.

 

[gymnut1]

I personally would love to see a return to the age 14 limit for seniors.

But long term I would love to have no age limit but a code that produced and favoured mature artistic gymnasts which if that makes sense. I want to see Victoria Komova competing senior but I don't want to see tricksters. Until that is a possibility 16 is OK but 14 is better.

As for the JO limits the ages look quite reasonable. Most children will progress through the levels nicely and the top kids will be set at the right level for college in plenty of time. So for most children they work well.

After all elites can test at any age. If a child is that amazing they could just compete a few meets at level 5 or so (just for the competition experience - think Nastia did that) and then test elite at 9. They don't even need to do levels. They could train for elite from the beginning and do TOPS from 7 then straight into elite at 9 or 10. So if your child is a child prodegy the age requirements shouldn't hamper you either as there can be a different route for you. Not sure if any gyms do that but it could be done.

Our age groupings in the uk go on the year of birth like for internationals. So if you turn 8 in December or January you compete at an 8 year old all year. The only exception in our region is that children have to be 6 on the day to compete at all. I think regions do vary but at our nation wide levels start the year children turn 8 so older than USAG.

 

[Aussie_coach]

I personally think they should raise the FIG age limit from 16 to 18, many will think I am crazy but the current system is encouraging coaches to implement very unhealthy coaching practices. In order to get their kids international in the year they turn 16 they have them training well above recommended hours while they are going through puberty. Severe long term damage occurs when a child is going through puberty and training 36 hours a week in gymnastics at the same time.

There is a reason why so many gymnasts bodies are old and broken down by 18 or 19, and that is because they were required to train too much too young. A women should not peak in her strength at 15, this should happen in her 20's. But our current system encourages us to churn them out at 15 so they can retire by 20.

 

[Granny Smith]

Like others have said, if a young child is "that" talented, in JO they can wait until the minimum age and they test out of levels and push through. This is not the norm and is really done sparingly (I do not mean skipping 1 level which is fairly common.)

The one thing that has entered my mind and I could definitely see a thread coming on the board if there was no age requirements (because you already see these posts) is:

"Why does my 5 yr old have to compete with 9 yr old or even 10 or 11 yr olds at meets." To have that really talented child who is able to compete where most kids their age are not capable there is no one for them to compete against and they fall into the lowest age group and then the parents complain that their youngen has to compete with girls 3/4 or 5 yrs older then them. All of a sudden the really talented 5 yr old isn't placing, doesn't have the same maturity (hard to believe that I'm using this word with kids these ages) to do the same quality dance on the floor or beam and they are so small doing the vault and can't get the same "umph" that the girl who is 10 or 20#s heavier can off the board.

So, yes the 5 yr old is talented enough to compete, but are they talented enough to get on the podium? I know the podium is not the end all, be all, but to a 5 yr old to walk away with empty hands can be crushing. If the child is that talented, wait until the age requirement, train them up if possible or the parent/coach chooses to and then test them out. Skill is important in this sport, but you can not believe how important confidence is. Confidence is what will take the child to the next level, you can really see the difference out at a competition the girls who have confidence and the girls who are scrapping by. Of course, this is JMHO....

 

[bogwoppit]

Aussie, I totally get where you are coming from. When the FIG brought in the 16 limit I thought it would stop the coaching techniques like those, but it seems nothing has changed and coaches are getting their kids to peak ridiculously young when they could be paced better.

I remember talking to Gymnut about the UK system where kids just are beginning shapes and swings on bars when kids in the US are competing. Great gymnasts are still produced.

If the coaching changed and gymnasts were trained in a progressive way to be turning Elite at 16 and not at 12/13 I could see 18 would be a great thing. But when we have young children turning Elite so young and then staying Elite for years until they can compete Internationallly, how can we expect them to stay healthy?

I know there are many kids out there, all over the world, that are capable of advanced skills, the question is not so much should they do them, but how to pace them gently so they still have the pleasure, passion and, most important of all, the health to be able to compete when they reach 16?

In Canada we have not been succesful at getting girls to Senior International, we have many stand out juniors and then they mostly seem to stop due to injury. Our Provincial system is not conducive to development, even though there is a national system in place it doesn't seem to be managable enough to work. Ontario opted out of the system and has created a 10 level system, this seems to be working much better and some wonderful gymnasts are coming out of there. There are no age limits on it, however they do not begin to compete until age 9 , but then they can start at L7 if they are ready.

I do not see the need to be competing earlier and earlier, it is a huge cash grab for clubs in the US, many charging entry fees to parents and families to see their own kids competing. Training for years before competing is the norm in many countries, I am glad we had to wait until they were 8/9 as that way I spent less money!!!! (cha-ching!)

 

[bogwoppit]

Great topic by the way. I have been searching google today to try to find out when age limits were very first place on competing at the O's. Haven't found it yet!!!

 

[NGL780309]

I don't understand why parents would want their children to stress their bodies with double twisting yurchenkos at 10 years of age? Firstly, they are still growing and growth plates are vulnerable to injury, secondly they probably have another 5 or 6 years of competing this vault, isn't that boring? and thirdly, has anyone heard of stress fractures/overuse injuries?

I believe that having the current age limit promotes longevity in the sport as it means that gymnasts are more mature and able to understand what their bodies are telling them and counteract pressure from parents and coaches in making decisions (its truly an informed adult decision at that point as to what sacrifices they wish to make for the sport).

How though? Girls under the age of 16 are still training 40 hours a week and doing more difficult skills than before. The only difference from when it was 15 is that some girls have to wait to make their senior debut. They just hang out in the junior ranks and they still compete internationally. It really hasn't changed anything.

 

[NGL780309]

Like others have said, if a young child is "that" talented, in JO they can wait until the minimum age and they test out of levels and push through. This is not the norm and is really done sparingly (I do not mean skipping 1 level which is fairly common.)

The one thing that has entered my mind and I could definitely see a thread coming on the board if there was no age requirements (because you already see these posts) is:

"Why does my 5 yr old have to compete with 9 yr old or even 10 or 11 yr olds at meets." To have that really talented child who is able to compete where most kids their age are not capable there is no one for them to compete against and they fall into the lowest age group and then the parents complain that their youngen has to compete with girls 3/4 or 5 yrs older then them. All of a sudden the really talented 5 yr old isn't placing, doesn't have the same maturity (hard to believe that I'm using this word with kids these ages) to do the same quality dance on the floor or beam and they are so small doing the vault and can't get the same "umph" that the girl who is 10 or 20#s heavier can off the board.

So, yes the 5 yr old is talented enough to compete, but are they talented enough to get on the podium? I know the podium is not the end all, be all, but to a 5 yr old to walk away with empty hands can be crushing. If the child is that talented, wait until the age requirement, train them up if possible or the parent/coach chooses to and then test them out. Skill is important in this sport, but you can not believe how important confidence is. Confidence is what will take the child to the next level, you can really see the difference out at a competition the girls who have confidence and the girls who are scrapping by. Of course, this is JMHO....

I understand that a talented kid can just train and when they are a certain age test out of levels. The point I've been trying to make is that the age limits were made to protect kids and what's the point if it doesn't prevent kids from training difficult skills? You might as well let a 6yo compete L5 if they are ready. I think it would actually slow them down training increasingly difficult skills because competing routines takes time to perfect. If they are ready to compete L5, but can't because they are too young they will probably just start training L6 and L7 skills because they don't have to spend the time on the routines.

I know this isn't the case, but I would hope parents wouldn't focus on whether their child places. I know most of you know this, but when you have a gymnast competing it's not about where they place. It's always about their individual accomplishments at that time, "Oh they made their vault, or they didn't fall on beam etc." Placement is just the afterthought. At least that's the way I see it.

 

[NGL780309]

I personally think they should raise the FIG age limit from 16 to 18, many will think I am crazy but the current system is encouraging coaches to implement very unhealthy coaching practices. In order to get their kids international in the year they turn 16 they have them training well above recommended hours while they are going through puberty. Severe long term damage occurs when a child is going through puberty and training 36 hours a week in gymnastics at the same time.

There is a reason why so many gymnasts bodies are old and broken down by 18 or 19, and that is because they were required to train too much too young. A women should not peak in her strength at 15, this should happen in her 20's. But our current system encourages us to churn them out at 15 so they can retire by 20.

I don't completely agree, but changing it from 15 to 16 didn't accomplish anything so I'd rather it be 18 if there's going to be an age limit. I think that might slow kids down and the coaches wouldn't feel the need to have them test elite at 12 or 13. At the same time it would really be a problem here in the US because 18 is the age girls are going to college. I think we'd see more kids go to college and forget about elite.

 

[NGL780309]

I personally would love to see a return to the age 14 limit for seniors.

But long term I would love to have no age limit but a code that produced and favoured mature artistic gymnasts which if that makes sense. I want to see Victoria Komova competing senior but I don't want to see tricksters. Until that is a possibility 16 is OK but 14 is better.

As for the JO limits the ages look quite reasonable. Most children will progress through the levels nicely and the top kids will be set at the right level for college in plenty of time. So for most children they work well.

After all elites can test at any age. If a child is that amazing they could just compete a few meets at level 5 or so (just for the competition experience - think Nastia did that) and then test elite at 9. They don't even need to do levels. They could train for elite from the beginning and do TOPS from 7 then straight into elite at 9 or 10. So if your child is a child prodegy the age requirements shouldn't hamper you either as there can be a different route for you. Not sure if any gyms do that but it could be done.

Our age groupings in the uk go on the year of birth like for internationals. So if you turn 8 in December or January you compete at an 8 year old all year. The only exception in our region is that children have to be 6 on the day to compete at all. I think regions do vary but at our nation wide levels start the year children turn 8 so older than USAG.

Again the age limit was 15 before, not 16.