Anon Why is this a thing? (leotard required)

[Anonymous Post]

Before I start- I am not trying to hate on leotards. I have other things to do than to rant about certain pieces of fabric. Also, people can and should wear whatever they want without being shamed for it, if its a bikini or a burka. . This question just comes from genuine curiosity.


The gym I go to now is only recreational and I have been considering to compete for a few months now. So my mom and I went to our local competitive gym to ask about Xcel silver tryouts. They said they were in May and in April I could come and take a test and if I passed I was welcome to come try out in May. We asked a few more questions and I asked if there were any dress code rules when taking the test or trying out. She told me the gym had a strict leotard-only policy and you could only wear shorts over in very certain circumstance, and leggings were not allowed in any situation.

There went the chance of ever competing.

I never even wear Bermuda shorts, let alone a leotard. I had one question: WHY?

The lady at the desk responded with, “We want to see the complete form of the gymnast and leggings could distract from that-“

Um. No.
Maybe a leotard bedazzled with rhinestones and beads would, but a solid pair of navy blue leggings are not going to blind any coaches. I understand not allowing baggy shorts or sweatpants but leggings!? That are literally form fitting to legs! Even unitards weren’t allowed. My mother and I left disappointed since they were very firm on the leotard-only rule.

does anyone know why they would do this? I don’t get it. At all. Why is this a thing? Why can’t we decide to wear something over what is basically a bathing suit?!? Some people are ok with showing their entire legs and that’s fine. But what about the people who aren’t?

there aren’t any other gyms in my area that compete so I guess I can’t now. I would really like to know why some places enforce rules like that.

 

[Anonymous Post]

Our gym allows leggings and athletic burkas for religious reasons. If it's a religious issue, I'd present it to the gym as one. USAG does allow shorts, tights, and unitards as appropriate meet attire.

 

[TheXcelMom]

I would really like to know why some places enforce rules like that.

At our last gym the girls had to wear leos, but could wear tight shorts for practice...all for the same reason. Form visibility.
However, the boys could wear baggy gym shorts and t-shirts and that was fine.
I'm mad thinking about it.
The USAG now allows shorts at competition, so if the gym doesn't, they are behind on USAG rules. Maybe try mentioning that? You don't have to give up right away! Give it another shot. Write a letter or something. Give a reason why you need to wear shorts.

 

[JPC13]

A Leo with shorts is pretty standard. Form fitting, but not revealing, clothes are required to see form and I wouldn’t want to spot someone with loose clothes that might get snagged or tied up in something. Both the gymnast and the coach could get hurt.

 

[Anonymous Post]

Unfortunately this is a very common rule across a lot of gyms. It has more to do with tradition than avoiding distractions. If I were you I would try to talk to the gym and claim religious reasons. The previous post mentioned presenting the issue to the gym as a religious issue if it is one, but in all honestly I believe you should claim it as a religious choice even if it is more a personal one because both are very valid reasons for wanting to dress more modestly. Especially since all USAG competitions allow for leggings to be warn in competition underneath a leotard, I find no logical reason for gyms to ban it. If this gym will not budge with their policy then I would suggest looking to see if there are any other gyms in the area.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

Our gym allows leggings and athletic burkas for religious reasons. If it's a religious issue, I'd present it to the gym as one. USAG does allow shorts, tights, and unitards as appropriate meet attire.

USAG may allow it but gyms make their own rules

 

[Aussie_coach]

I’m a gym owner and I do require leotards but the gymnasts can wear shorts over the go as long as they are skin tight. Most younger kids usually prefer the leotard o its own and older kids prefer the shorts in general.

The main benefit to no shorts, that I can see was to help gymnasts get comfortable with it. When I was a gymnast you were only allowed to wear leotards at competitions, no shorts. Kids who always trained in shorts, found it hard at competitions. They were uncomfortable and struggled to perform to their potential. Many would pull the leotard down constantly. But, of course, this is no longer relavant with the change in rules allowing shorts in competitions.

Having said that, I have NEVER seen a gymnast wear shorts in a competition, so I’m guessing most gyms around here don’t allow it.

Part of it could be the traditionalism. Seeing just the leotard is something most coaches and gym owners would have grown up seeing. It becomes a subconscious mental image of what a gymnast should look like and it’s hard to undo. They may consider it part of the discipline of the sport, the way a student in a ballet class must wear pink tights, a plain leotard and hair in a bun.

Of course, gymnastics is different, as a leotard without tights it’s far more revealing. But a life time if looking at things a certain way, creates mental habits that are hard to change.

 

[JessSyd]

Having said that, I have NEVER seen a gymnast wear shorts in a competition, so I’m guessing most gyms around here don’t allow it.

That’s so interesting. Each gym handles the rule change differently here. We have one local gym that fully embraced shorts and hasn’t had a girl compete without shorts since the change - even at States and national clubs. Other gyms still seem to be insisting on no shorts for competition, and some clearly just let the gymnasts choose.

My daughter’s gym has run a sort of middle line. The coach explained to them that right now, with the change so new, some judges could subconsciously prefer a ‘no shorts‘ look, so she advised them to go without for important competitions. (Interestingly, scores didn’t seem to reflect this). So they went without for state trials and the like. But for other competitions, like state clubs, the girls all wore shorts. By the end of the competition season last year, it stopped looking odd and you’d have to really think about it to notice which clubs were in shorts and which weren’t.

 

[AmiaRay]

Unfortunately this is a very common rule across a lot of gyms. It has more to do with tradition than avoiding distractions. If I were you I would try to talk to the gym and claim religious reasons. The previous post mentioned presenting the issue to the gym as a religious issue if it is one, but in all honestly I believe you should claim it as a religious choice even if it is more a personal one because both are very valid reasons for wanting to dress more modestly. Especially since all USAG competitions allow for leggings to be warn in competition underneath a leotard, I find no logical reason for gyms to ban it. If this gym will not budge with their policy then I would suggest looking to see if there are any other gyms in the area.

My gym does enforce this. The girls are allowed to wear leos and gymnastics shorts. It’s for a few reasons:

Mindset (like a school uniform)
Form (so that we can see it, yes, I disagree that it doesn’t apply to boys)
And safety. (It makes spotting easier)

We have a few exceptions:

When the heater broke
Medical reasons (a rash or something like that)
And religious reasons.

 

[evla]

We're in Australia but at our gym the girls can basically wear whatever they are comfortable in within reason. My girls wear leotards or sports bras (eg. the nike ones that don't look like actual bras) with fitted shorts but some girls wear tank tops or tops over, some wear leggings in winter. The coaches have said they prefer no loose tops but they don't push it, I think it's that 10-13 type age that cover up more which is probably just development and being self conscious. The higher level girls are usually then back to leotards/sports bras again.

At comps our gym still wear just leotards with no shorts but if the whole team wanted shorts, then the gym has said it's possible, as long as everyone agrees. My girls prefer to compete without shorts though. I recently watched our level 8 state trials and there's a definite mix of no shorts & shorts at competitions now so it's not unusual to see it anymore.

 

[Anonymous (a63d)]

That’s so interesting. Each gym handles the rule change differently here. We have one local gym that fully embraced shorts and hasn’t had a girl compete without shorts since the change - even at States and national clubs. Other gyms still seem to be insisting on no shorts for competition, and some clearly just let the gymnasts choose.

My daughter’s gym has run a sort of middle line. The coach explained to them that right now, with the change so new, some judges could subconsciously prefer a ‘no shorts‘ look, so she advised them to go without for important competitions. (Interestingly, scores didn’t seem to reflect this). So they went without for state trials and the like. But for other competitions, like state clubs, the girls all wore shorts. By the end of the competition season last year, it stopped looking odd and you’d have to really think about it to notice which clubs were in shorts and which weren’t.

I promise you, judges don’t care about the shorts or the tights. If they do, they shouldn’t be judging. We do care if the Leo is cut so high that everything is showing, but shorts don’t interfere with judging.

 

[Geoffrey Taucer]

For some reason, judges and coaches have no problem assessing leg and toe form in male athletes wearing long pants (not even skin tight leggings) in competition, but it's apparently not possible to accurately assess a female athlete's form unless she's within rounding error of being naked.

Go figure

 

[gymgal]

For some reason, judges and coaches have no problem assessing leg and toe form in male athletes wearing long pants (not even skin tight leggings) in competition, but it's apparently not possible to accurately assess a female athlete's form unless she's within rounding error of being naked.

Go figure

Are toe and leg form as big a deal (deduction wise) in men's scoring?

 

[Tulip811]

A Leo with shorts is pretty standard. Form fitting, but not revealing, clothes are required to see form and I wouldn’t want to spot someone with loose clothes that might get snagged or tied up in something. Both the gymnast and the coach could get hurt.

How is it that this is danger for girls but not boys? I just don't understand at all. Not holding you responsible. But I just find this line of thinking very problematic.

 

[Aussie_coach]

Are toe and leg form as big a deal (deduction wise) in men's scoring?

Yes, it is the same deductions for MAG if feet are unpointed.

Our boys are also required to wear leotards to training, not just the girls. But of course they wear them with the boys shorts or longs.

 

[Geoffrey Taucer]

Are toe and leg form as big a deal (deduction wise) in men's scoring?

Numerically, they're a bigger deal on the men's side than on the women's in USAG. Last I checked the code (which was admittedly a code or two ago, so anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), the women's deductions are .1/.2/.3 for small/medium/large knee bends; for boys, they're .1/.3/.5

 

[Aussie_coach]

To clarify I am referring to the FIG code of points deductions, which we use in Australia and internationally. The USA has a different system.

 

[Anonymous (21de)]

USAG may allow it but gyms make their own rules

This is absolutely correct, but in some states there are separate religious freedom laws that would require the gym to accommodate a sincerely-held religious belief that would not otherwise burden the business. If the gym resisted, though, you'd have to sue to enforce it. Given USAG's position allowing it, pointing out the USAG rule in conjunction with the state religious freedom law (meaning, it's hard to argue it would burden the gym to allow leggings if USAG allows it), might get you an exemption if this is stemming from a religious belief and not just general discomfort.

 

[Anonymous (0e82)]

Numerically, they're a bigger deal on the men's side than on the women's in USAG. Last I checked the code (which was admittedly a code or two ago, so anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), the women's deductions are .1/.2/.3 for small/medium/large knee bends; for boys, they're .1/.3/.5

Yes. I believe that is correct. And the pants/shorts do not seem to be a barrier to seeing them.

 

[gymgal]

Numerically, they're a bigger deal on the men's side than on the women's in USAG. Last I checked the code (which was admittedly a code or two ago, so anybody feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), the women's deductions are .1/.2/.3 for small/medium/large knee bends; for boys, they're .1/.3/.5

I meant more in the way of whether those deductions are taken as often for boys/men as they are in women's gymnastics. Or is the deduction used less often because it is more difficult to see the form errors. How does a judge know that the knees are bent slightly in pants vs it being clear as day with bare legs. Toe points I get.

one a related note though, Does US Men's use FIG scoring and is that the same as women's fig? Ex. are their falls worth a full point deduction vs in DP women's where they are .5?