Anon What makes a successful compulsory program?

[Anonymous (938b)]

My daughter’s gym is not a destination gym like TCT or WCC, but it is getting to be nationally known and has regular Nastia Liukin qualifiers, national team members, elites, etc. As a parent who’s been there for a while now, I’m realizing that the compulsory program is a total mess.

They do a great job with 2-3 girls every year who walk in out of nowhere, skip rec or preteam and are sent straight to team. But those are the kinds of talents who would be fast tracked or elite-pathed at any gym in the country.

They also do a great job with girls who come in after level 3 or 4 from other gyms with mediocre scores and polish them up for solid optionals careers. Recently, though, the vast majority of optionals girls come from other gyms.

I’m noticing that the homegrown kids who come from preteam to level 3/4 consistently repeat 3 and/or 4. They struggle to acquire skills in time for the season, and there isn’t uptraining for repeat seasons so little progress is made along the way during year 2 en route to the next level.

Each year the coaches try to correct what they’re doing based on the previous year’s pace and results and it only seems to make things worse, not better. It seems like flexibility of thinking and group size are issues. I notice that the coaches get locked into one set of ways to teach or drill new skills for the season and that groups are too big to catch problems and adjust drills and progressions when they’re not working.

What’s an actual good compulsory program? One that moves the majority of athletes forward? One focused on creating the best possible optionals? One focused on absolute perfection of shapes over skills?

It’s too late for my daughter to switch, but I’m curious what we should have been looking for when she was younger.

 

[Anonymous (c3f4)]

I’d say in most cases compulsories should be moving up and not repeating. At my old gym they had a pretty strong compulsory team. Now this wasn’t a large gym but they focused on drills, routines basics and shapes for the higher level skills. And frequently we had stations on low beams, single bar, vault trainer etc. to work towards the next level up at least half the time I’d say. This seemed to work and only girls struggling to master level four didn’t move up to Level 6 the next year. Overall what I’ve found is normally you have the skills for the level you’re competing at least 6 months before comp season starts is helpful. Without drilling these skills during the season it’s not possible and definitely I’ve seen teammates who haven’t done as well because they got skills last minute. Having time to get in numbers and consistent routines leads to success and more confidence long term.

 

[Anonymous (938b)]

Thanks. I think that timing of move-ups and space constraints in the next level may be what’s contributing to the problem. Girls are not moving up to the next level until June, two months after compulsory states, because the focus turns to optionals and nationals. March-June is not uptraining but a lot of filler time and dance/basics while coaches are on the road for regionals and optionals and compulsory coaches fill in and combine groups. That leaves compulsories with only 6 months of training and new skill acquisition before the first meet of the season, not 6 months of having the skill. 2-3 of those months are spent teaching routines more than teaching skills. 25% of girls usually break through and don’t repeat. They are the ones naturally gifted enough to get skills on literally day 1 in June and so they benefit from the time spent on choreography and dance. The other 75% don’t get skills until the season starts (or later), and they end up repeating.

 

[JBS]

What’s an actual good compulsory program? One that moves the majority of athletes forward? One focused on creating the best possible optionals?

For this… the absolute #1 thing would be initial athlete selection.

One focused on absolute perfection of shapes over skills?

I would state that this is not the best way to upper level optionals. I would say that both shapes and skills are equally important. It’s actually just the “absolute perfection” phrase that bothers me there.

It’s like our local high school. 91% or a 104% are both a 4.0. The extra credit to get the 104% takes perfection plus an extra several hours of homework. Some students drive themselves nuts to get the 104% only to find out that someone else is two assignments ahead by doing less work and still getting the same 4.0.

“Absolute perfection” is sometimes the slower path.

 

[Anonymous (469a)]

Like has been said many times here being good at compulsory levels doesn't guaranty a good gymnast at the optional levels, but you can win a lot of trophies with strict move up requirements.

Fast tracking girls into level 6 also has its flaws as they often don't have a lot of polish or just get stuck/retire at 6/7 as they aren't ready mentally and physically for the really difficult skills especially on bars and beam.

I guess a good compulsory program is somewhere in the middle where they aren't so worried about polish that it stops progress but do have a focus on fundamental shapes and skills. They won't win as many trophies like that but will end up with better upper level gymnasts.

 

[Anonymous (c3f4)]

Thanks. I think that timing of move-ups and space constraints in the next level may be what’s contributing to the problem. Girls are not moving up to the next level until June, two months after compulsory states, because the focus turns to optionals and nationals. March-June is not uptraining but a lot of filler time and dance/basics while coaches are on the road for regionals and optionals and compulsory coaches fill in and combine groups. That leaves compulsories with only 6 months of training and new skill acquisition before the first meet of the season, not 6 months of having the skill. 2-3 of those months are spent teaching routines more than teaching skills. 25% of girls usually break through and don’t repeat. They are the ones naturally gifted enough to get skills on literally day 1 in June and so they benefit from the time spent on choreography and dance. The other 75% don’t get skills until the season starts (or later), and they end up repeating.

I’m in NY so it’s easier for compulsories to uptrain when everyone’s season is from December-May (optional send in April/May, compulsories in May) so everyone starts up training at the end of May. The weird different start times for compulsory versus optional never has made sense to me in other states. It’s hard for a gym to be in upgrade mode but also routine focused especially if coaches are the same for compulsory and optional it’s bound to happen that they’d be fixated on the optionals.

 

[estamey21]

Along the theme of “initial athlete selection,” I would add that the quantity of gymnasts matter as well. Ignoring everything except for statistical probabilities, you need to start with a very large group of athletes with potential (however you define “potential”) so that you can increase your chances of retaining talent as athletes naturally drop out of the program.

A good program will also be strategic about clustering athletes with similar abilities together. An economically viable compulsory program usually has large class sizes, but you can still design a semi-personalized curriculum if your class is reasonably homogeneous.