WAG When can you not go back a level?

[Deleted member 14190]

Whatever your coaches think best for your child. We are all individuals.

 

[nyc gym mom]

Hi proud gym mom... I will chime in with my limited experience of gymnastics. I actually replied in your first email about should she move up and I was in support of repeating due to my daugters current experience (hard to look through someone else's lense). My daughter like yours did extemly well old level 4... (State champ and won every single meet AA old level 4). She hit new level 4, and she just did not have that confidence. I am not talking about the clanging of all the metals but just the ease of perfecting her skills. Fortunatley one of her coaches that was with her at another gym... guided me and convinced the other coaches to let her stay back. Fast forward and she looks amazing at New Level 4 (repeat) and will go to early states. 2nd and 3rd meet she scored over 37... it is about perfecting the skills or so I am told. Like the others have said, I do not think she can go go back, howerver... allow her the time to perfect the basics. Many say level 6 is easier than 5 but as my daugthers Russina coach has coached me... if they don't have the basics... much above 7 is hard to obtain. My daugther sounds like yours.. not naturally talented. Several girls moved up that never scored higher than her last year (parental influence I think). Sadly they look like a hot mess. So glad my girl took the path less popular ... Since your daughter has already started 5 and the rules do not allow her to go back unless you petition ... set her up or her coach for repeating 5, feeling confident and then moving on. We also have on a level 5 doing that right now. Good luck and enjoy the ride and be her biggest fan not coach

 

[flippin out]

If you have serious concerns, talk to her coaches. But....if new level 5 is scored anything like old Level 6, it's a very tough level. They were extra picky and stingy the year that my dad did 6 (she won States that year with a low 36, and we saw a lot of meets where 1st on bars was a low 8).

Anyway, I'd assume that the coaches put her in that level because they believe that that is where she should be competing, and she already brought her scores up 2 Pts. (---And I think that that back extension cost her more than .3, when she repositioned her hand they may have taken credit for the skill away. If you reposition your hand in a back walkover the skill is changed to a tinsica and therefore you did not compete the required skill of a back walkover.....very costly (the kid I saw do it, it cost her 1.5---missing required skill and then deduction on top of it for what she did do). Not saying that that is what happened in your dd's case...but it is something to consider

 

[2G1B]

In our area it seems that the majority if gyms have decided to not even do a full season at level 5. Last year and this year, for those that do, the scoring is low.

For my dd who just finished level 4, her coach wants her to do a meet as level 5 in March and then just not look back. As long as she scores out at that meet, she is on to optionals. For my dd, she does have issues like knobby knees and a propensity for getting text error deductions. Her coach thinks that she will do much better at optionals.

So i guess I'm saying that if she is able to do level 5 safely I just don't see a point in moving down to 4 just to win.

 

[Midwestmommy]

I took at look at the MN and IA girls state compusory meet results since they were just last weekend. Based on that you sure wouldn't want to be aiming for a 37 or 38 to move up, at least in MN. Don't have time to look at more states...

If I added correctly:

Minnesota:

Level 5 - Out of 212 , 6 gymnasts scored over 37, none scored 38 or over.
Level 4 - Out of 295 , 1 gymnast scored over 37, none scored 38 or over
Level 3 - Out of of 278, 15 scored in the 37s and 2 scored 38 or over


Iowa (where scoring appears to be more generous and possibly more "sandbagging" at 3&4 too). I know they have Chows and a couple of others, but MN has TCT and lots of gyms with high quality programs, particulary for compulsory. In my humble opinion, looking at Level 3 scores, just no way is it an apples to apples comparison state to state.

Level 5 - Out of 80 3 gymasts scored in 37s, 1 scored in 38s
Level 4 - Out of 160, 10 scored over 37, none scored 38 or over
Leve 3 - Out of 176, 30 scored in the 37s and 13 scored in the 38s

 

[Midwestmommy]

Or, put another way, percentage of girls at state scoring over 37:

Minnesota
Level 5 - 2.8%
Level 4 - 0.3%
Leve 3 - 6.1%

Iowa
Level 5 - 5.0%
Level 4 - 6.25%
Level 3 - 24.4%

 

[Ginger]

Sorry for OT, but @Midwestmommy - please are there results from IA compulsory states 2014 somewhere? They are not posted at Mymeetscores yet and I don't see them at Meetscoresonline either. Thanks!

 

[Midwestmommy]

http://www.triadgymnastics.com/news-and-events/2014-meet-results

 

[Sasha]

Or, put another way, percentage of girls at state scoring over 37:

Minnesota
Level 5 - 2.8%
Level 4 - 0.3%
Leve 3 - 6.1%

Iowa
Level 5 - 5.0%
Level 4 - 6.25%
Level 3 - 24.4%

I love these comparisons from State to State. Really shows the scoring trend differences. A 9.0 routine in one state is another state's 9.7 routine.

For fun, I looked at a State that I have noticed tends to score higher when I see videos of routines - Virginia, and one that scores lower on routines - California (Northern).

I just looked at the 2014 Level 3 Virginia State Championship, and here was the breakdown:

Total gymnasts: 606
Scoring 39 or above: 6 (1%)
Scoring 38 or above: 95 (16%)
Scoring 37 or above: 242 (40%)
Scoring 36 or above: 394 (65%)
Leaving only 35% of gymnasts scoring below a 36.

Moral of story: A gymnast scoring in the 37's is essentially "mid pack". You need at least a 38 to stand out, and a 39 to impress.

And here is the 2014 Northern California (North) State Championship breakdown:
Total gymnasts: 426
Scoring 39 or above: 0 (0.0%)
Scoring 38 or above: 1 (o.2%)
Scoring 37 or above: 47 (11%)
Scoring 36 or above: 187 (44%)
Leaving 56% of gymnasts scoring below a 36.

Moral of story: 37's are typically top 10% or better - very proud! Only a repeater or prodigy ever gets a 38 unless it happens to be an overly generous meet.

Of course this examined only 1 State meet and 1 level from each area, so there may be more to the story, but it's an interesting comparison nonetheless. If I had tons of time if would be fun to look across more states and more levels to see these trends. Too bad a site like MMS that has SO much data doesn't do any analysis like this. Frequently people ask if different areas tend to score higher or lower, and it's so hard to have any perspective without crunching a lot of numbers.

Please no hate from Virginia or NorCal people! This was just one analysis and I know scores can vary from meet to meet within a State

 

[gymdog]

Nope, that's absolutely right. Although I think midwest's point was more like mine, it's not necessary to repeat just to score a 38. However it's true that an unbelievable percentage will score 38s at state, much less 37 or 36.

 

[proud-gym-mom]

Or, put another way, percentage of girls at state scoring over 37:

Minnesota
Level 5 - 2.8%
Level 4 - 0.3%
Leve 3 - 6.1%

Iowa
Level 5 - 5.0%
Level 4 - 6.25%
Level 3 - 24.4%

Wow! That really gives some more perspective. Maybe if I get some time I'll take a look at our state. That's a really good idea and I imagine you can set your expectations pretty well from what happened the prior year. Thanks!

 

[proud-gym-mom]

I love these comparisons from State to State. Really shows the scoring trend differences. A 9.0 routine in one state is another state's 9.7 routine.

For fun, I looked at a State that I have noticed tends to score higher when I see videos of routines - Virginia, and one that scores lower on routines - California (Northern).

I just looked at the 2014 Level 3 Virginia State Championship, and here was the breakdown:

Total gymnasts: 606
Scoring 39 or above: 6 (1%)
Scoring 38 or above: 95 (16%)
Scoring 37 or above: 242 (40%)
Scoring 36 or above: 394 (65%)
Leaving only 35% of gymnasts scoring below a 36.

Moral of story: A gymnast scoring in the 37's is essentially "mid pack". You need at least a 38 to stand out, and a 39 to impress.

And here is the 2014 Northern California (North) State Championship breakdown:
Total gymnasts: 426
Scoring 39 or above: 0 (0.0%)
Scoring 38 or above: 1 (o.2%)
Scoring 37 or above: 47 (11%)
Scoring 36 or above: 187 (44%)
Leaving 56% of gymnasts scoring below a 36.

Moral of story: 37's are typically top 10% or better - very proud! Only a repeater or prodigy ever gets a 38 unless it happens to be an overly generous meet.

Of course this examined only 1 State meet and 1 level from each area, so there may be more to the story, but it's an interesting comparison nonetheless. If I had tons of time if would be fun to look across more states and more levels to see these trends. Too bad a site like MMS that has SO much data doesn't do any analysis like this. Frequently people ask if different areas tend to score higher or lower, and it's so hard to have any perspective without crunching a lot of numbers.

Please no hate from Virginia or NorCal people! This was just one analysis and I know scores can vary from meet to meet within a State

Wow! So we are in VA… no wonder I feel like you've got to have a min of a 37 to even be competitive! So what gives ? Do we score easier in VA? I don't think that our gymnasts are substantially better here than other states, we have some big gyms but not really Olympic level gyms (at least I don't think so). gymdog, what do you think? why are the scores so much higher in VA?

 

[gymdog]

Wow! So we are in VA… no wonder I feel like you've got to have a min of a 37 to even be competitive! So what gives ? Do we score easier in VA? I don't think that our gymnasts are substantially better here than other states, we have some big gyms but not really Olympic level gyms (at least I don't think so). gymdog, what do you think? why are the scores so much higher in VA?

Somewhere in between. Typically very competitive areas in gymnastics follow a few trends, areas that have dense population and thriving economy. Parts of VA have the perfect storm for gymnastics teams to get huge and they have. We have parts of this state where there are 4 or so gyms in a five mile radius. Not to mention a 10-30 mile radius you could literally have a dozen. So there are a million kids, as I mentioned in another post on this thread, our compulsory state numbers have been growing out of control. Although now the Xcel numbers are growing out of control, so a little of the compulsory numbers have bled into that and slowed the incredible growth we were seeing for awhile in old level 4. Speaking of Xcel registered athletes nationally, 16% of them come from one state: Virginia. That's insane.

So of course the potential is there to have a lot of good kids which pushes the scores up.

But yes, they have to be willing to give 9.9s and we seem to have been willing to go there the last four seasons or so. I do think some of these routines are really good but I'm not really sure about some of the scores I've seen. Also, I have a problem with the clustering of scores (not enough separation between competent routines and great routines).

Also, we have developed a culture of repeating where by this point, in the 2015 season, there are kids repeating that we're first place AA at states last year and scored above 37 and even 38. That is their coach's right of course, and I'm not sure where I stand on that debate, except to say that I personally have never had a child score that high that was not capable physically of moving up in some capacity. But of course, I don't know the true story so I will just say that's certainly a factor here.