TO COMPETE OR NOT COMPETE... missing skills

[emacmommy]

This is a thread similar to Level 5 Bar Deduction Question in Technical Talk. The general issue of the thread was gathering opinions as to compete as a Level 5 knowing a gymnast could not successfully complete kips or not, and what would be the deductions.

I also am facing this question with a few in my own gym trying to make the jump from L4 to L5, and L5 to L6. My own opinion. Okay. I'm a firm believer that each child progresses at their own rate, academically, physically, emotionally, mentally; all those equal up to gymnastically. However, I'm also a believer that gymnasts need to have a chance at successfully completing 90% of skills necessary for the level they are competing at, with safety being a huge factor as well if they are to attempt that.

This equals in my mind as a Level 5 they must have at least one kip and the chance they will make the other, be capable of making squat on, even if not consistent, they must have little fear of the vault, be able to get feet on cartwheel on beam enough times to complete a "make 10 cartwheels assignment", and complete two BHS without me having to flinch cause I think they are going to land on their head on the second BHS. Similar with L6, must clear hip without touching and flyaway without scaring the b-jesus out of me, but I will stand there for confidence for my mental gymnasts, BWO on beam consistently, and the kicker on floor, RO-BHS-Tuck consistently and strong enough to complete it at the end of a floor routine.

We, all the team coaching staff here, have been challenged more this year than any other year with girls who, given those rather loosely worded requirements, are not ready to compete the next level up, yet feel they shouldn't have to repeat a level. They are opting out of competing all together to wait until they have the next level skills before they compete. A couple of girls have walked already and chosen to do middle school sports, and we are only talking about repeating for a second season.

Do we stick to our guns and keep losing gymnasts, or do I conform more to my "each child is is an individual and decide who does what individually". My own daughter is in this boat. I've kept her a Level 4 for the third year, since she has neither of her kips. They are literally the only thing she is missing and she's not very close to them. She's placing well in L4, 2nd AA in the last two meets with a fall on bars in both meets. She doesn't seem to be bothered being held back, but I wish it would motivate her some to want to work those kips more. I have another who has no kips, no squat on, and BHS's like a frog, scored a 36.00 AA at the end of last year as L4, is not doing well at all as a L4 in the first two meets this year (thank you to our inconsistent judges in our state), but is on the verge of refusing to compete L4 at all until she is ready for L5. I have other gymnasts in a similar boat as her that are going with the policy and not questioning (to my knowledge) where she is placed (she just won her L4 age group ahead of my daughter). I have a wanna be L6 who missed 3/4 of the summer due to vacations, not very close to doing a safe RO-BHS-TUCK by herself, but does have all else reasonalby well. She also refuses to compete L5 a second year. Her training mate missed most of the summer to injury and is happy to compete L5 until ready for L6 (only missing BWO now).

WE DO TRAIN UP DAILY trying to push on to bigger and better and the repeaters have been told that if they can prove they can get the skills and be competitive with their peers in the rest of the state we will move them mid-season... something we've never told them we would do before. We dedicate not meet weekend friday practices to ONLY level up work, and when they finish routine assignments the other days of the week, as long as there wasn't some big issue to fix at their current level, we work up skills too.

fishchimes had a very valid point from a gymmie's point of view (see Technical Talk thread). However, can you imagine having to explain to my daughter (or my other gymnasts), why she is repeating a Level 4 for a third season while working/striving for Level 5 skills, while another girls only has to train up skills until she has them, with no regard to the fact that gymnastics is a sport with a competition season. You train hard during the summer to advance and then there comes a point to show off whatever you have.

What is everyone else's opinions, as my scenario building was quite wordy. Stick with policy for all, be adaptive and basically let the child/parents call the shots based on their opinions, compete gymnasts anyways that don't hold up to our standards of needing certain skills to compete?

Side note: We will have a second season league (prep) optional program for the first year in our state that is specifically designed (in my eyes, and since I'm the Commitee Chair) to keep compulsory gymnasts interested in extended seasons to help with retainment, but it's not in practice until Jan, after our Dec Compulsory Championship.

Phew. Kudos for those that read this whole post.

 

[coachinkal]

We have an optional program which is great for gymnasts who are missing skills to compete at the next level.

The optional program has far more choice of what skills to include so this can be a real selling point.

I have a couple of gymnasts who struggled this year because they moved up and did not want to repeat or go optional. All the coaches were undecided whether to hold them back or not. We decided to let them move up but they did not do well at competition. They told us at the start of the season that they didn't care if they did not do well at comp they just wanted to move up.

This year I have decided along with a couple of other coaches and their parents that they will be competing optional. This will enable them extra time to perfect their L4 skills while upskilling the level 5 skills. L4 had a bonus on each apparatus. They did not have any of these bonuses. This is also an indication that they are not ready to move on.

I intend to include them with the L5's for some of the training sessions each week to enable them to be uptrained. I am hoping this will be the selling point. They also play soccer and this has reduced their training time over the last couple of years. This has impacted on their progression. I will also be pointing out this fact.

I am unsure how they will take this decision. I will be relaying it to them after the break. I am not looking forward to this!

 

[Aussie_coach]

The step from level 4-5 is a big one getting over the vault table, glide kip, long kip, squat on, cartwheel on beam etc. These skills can totally stump girls and sometimes stump them for a long time.

I would not move up kids who are not ready to compete safely and successfully. If the kids are just landing the skills or just making them some of the time then they are far from ready to compete them. A gymnast needs to have the skill easily, safely and be able to do it pretty much every time with minimal deductions. I don't know what the comp standard is in the US but this is the expectation in Australia.

Staying in the same level maybe no fun but neither is coming last in every comp or even worse hurting themselves doing skills they aren't ready for.

I would be careful moving up a kid if they are missing even one skill, I have seen kids move up before they had all skills because there was just one to go, with the coach saying "you'll get it soon". Gymnasts have then not got it soon and begun to dread that apparatus this often spreads and soon dreading the apparatus so much we lose them from gymnastics entirely.

A kip is a big skill to be missing, its not just one skill in the bar routine its two. That is major deductions.

You could consider having two level 4 groups for example. Like a level 4 and a level 4 Advanced, or level 4 Gold. Or something that sounds very special for the repeaters. They could maybe go in an extra comp or two or train an extra day each week where they focus on just level 5 skills.

You could do as coachinkal suggests and give them a special training regime. perhaps half of their training with the level 4's, as they have competed this level before they don't need as much time on the level 4 routines and half their training time with the level 5's.

You could even have a group that don't compete for the season but uptrain skills and work on conditioning. It should be made to be quite exciting to be in this group where you get to do lots of new skills and drills and don't have to do routines.

 

[LizzieLac]

At our gym, if you do not reasonably have the next level skills you do not compete that level. We do not tend to scratch events. So, that leaves a dilemma of skipping competition for a while and just training, or repeating a level. I don't know what happens in each instance of this, but it seems to depend on how far the gymnast is from getting the skill. Our gym will also let a gymnast move up in course of year, if the skills are there and they eached the required score.

Level 4 to 5 is the exception since no mobility score is required. So here again it depends on the gymmie and situation. In my DDs case, she has all of the level 5 skills except the kip, but our coaches will not scratch her in bars to compete the other 3 events. They prefer to have good well-rounded gymnasts and if that means waiting or repeating, then that is what they will do. We were at first going to skip the first couple of meets and compete level 5 when she gets her kip.

However, coach suggested we compete level 4 for half of the year, continue to uptrain for level 5 as needed, and move up at some point when she is ready. I am sure she will have good AA scores as a level 4 this year, but since no mobility score is needed for level 5 it is up to her, her coach and me. I will say this about my DD - she loves to compete and missing the first few meets probably would have bummed her out. And, I do think the training she is doing for those level 4 skills (and yes, she stills works on ROBHSBHS) will still help her with level 5.

It look me a while to understand and accept all of this, but I have come to agree that it doesn't make sense for her to compete level 5 and scratch bars. I just don't think of all of the scenarios that would benefit her. In the course of her career as a gymnast, waiting, holding back or repeating can be helpful. As long as the kids still uptrain. My DD works out on her own every week specifically on her kip (and bars generally). She wanted to do the extra work (and yes I encouraged her) but it was her decision and it has helped. She has gotten much closer recently and believe it or not her confidence in bars is improving because she can feel she is close.

Sorry for the long reply - but that is our current situation. I hope to be telling you in a few weeks that she truly has her kip, but even if I do that won't mean she is immediately ready to jump into a level 5 meet. It will probably still be a few months before that happens.

 

[fishchimes]

I think that whether they should compete or not depends on the personality of the gymnast.
Some may be disappointed by low scores, but still happy that they got to go to the meet. Others will never feel good about competing if they don't at least stand a chance at getting an 8 or 9. Some will prefer to throw all their routines no matter what, and others will prefer scratching to low scores or possible "embarrassment". And of course, there a zillion shades of gray.

Safety can also be an issue for certain skills.

 

[bookworm]

I am glad to see some rational heads prevail in this thread...in the other thread in Technical talk , the prevailing view there was that the kid should do Level 5 missing as one poster said here not 1 but 2 kips and basically the whole routine and that seemed ridiculous to me...she's not a 5 yet without kips. I'm also glad that SAFETY is mentioned in the moving up...if a kid is doing the BHS such that the coach is cringing, she's not SAFE to compete them.

I think that the OP should stick to her original game plan and require certain things for certain levels...what you are asking for is not outrageous, it's the bare minimum for the level, period. In our old gym, they used to have set requirements for moving up and the team looked good but then people started pressuring them to move kids that weren't ready to be moved and were lacking skills in a level and as the saying goes, it all went to heck in a handbasket!! and the team looks woeful now because they're AREN'T any real rules for moving, now it's more like "you'll hurt her feelings if she doesn't move up" ...but I agree with another poster who said what good does it do to move up, be lousy and finish in the bottom of the pile?

I guess it depends on what kind of team you want...do you want a team that performs well, safe and is ready to move to the next level or do you want a team where everyone is doing the level they want but not the level they should be? You really can't build on basics if you are missing them to begin with and just moving up a level is not progress to me if you do not have the skills. You see these type of kids at meets and your heart breaks for them as they look awful ...I know you said some won't compete but to me if you move up a level you shoudl be ready to compete it and if not , you stay back at the level you have the skills at. Competing is not optional in our gym, if you are level 5 , you compete ALL the Level 5 meets, period. Bottom line OP, I would stick to my guns...

 

[MaryA]

As a parent, to the coaches, I just have to say BE CONSISTANT. If a rule applies to one child, it applies to all. One of the things I find most maddening about the gym my dd attends is that the parents who make a stink get their way. It builds resentment in the parents (those of us NOT making a stink) and among the gymnasts.

Emacmommy, I think that holding your own daughter back goes a long way to show the others (gymnasts and parents) that the rules you made apply to everyone!

 

[bookworm]

MaryA- you are so right..as long as she is consistent , there shouldn't be any issues. Like I said before, our old gym used to be consistent but once you start to waver and make exceptions to the requirements, you're sunk. In the past , it was not the parent who decided who moved , it was a coaching decision based on their expertise in that area and that's what it should be...if the parent doesn't like it and they leave , so what? Do you want to water down your program for this? To me this hurts the gymnast s who DO achieve what they are supposed because people will start to look at your program differently ...like "oh they used to be a good program but now...."

 

[Mariainlv]

Bookworm, I whole heartedly disagree.

Yesterday J competed L5. Placed 2nd on vault, 2nd on beam and 3rd floor. Yup, no kip in sight. She would be bored to tears by L4. I think it has to be a kid by kid basis. Half her L5 team is not competing/scratching certain events. She knows her bars are bad and until that comes, no AA.

EmacMommy: Off topic but something I wanted to add. As far as keeping kids engaged with more meets, I think its a fine balance. Right now in NV her L5 team has 14 (14!) meets scheduled. The new HC posed this question? With a fall and spring season with states after the spring season, when do I focus on skills with these kids. Something to think about when extending the season.

 

[fishchimes]

Yep, Miss Irrational Head-- that's my name, don't wear it out.

fishchimes had a very valid point from a gymmie's point of view (see Technical Talk thread). However, can you imagine having to explain to my daughter (or my other gymnasts), why she is repeating a Level 4 for a third season while working/striving for Level 5 skills, while another girls only has to train up skills until she has them, with no regard to the fact that gymnastics is a sport with a competition season.

I'm not really sure where I said anything about that in my technical talk posts...

And yes, rules should definitely be consistent, though there should be a little bit of wiggle room for certain cases- for example, I do not think it would be a good idea to hold a 12 year old back in level 4 for a second year unless she was really struggling.

 

[bookworm]

Bookworm, I whole heartedly disagree.

Yesterday J competed L5. Placed 2nd on vault, 2nd on beam and 3rd floor. Yup, no kip in sight. She would be bored to tears by L4. I think it has to be a kid by kid basis. Half her L5 team is not competing/scratching certain events. She knows her bars are bad and until that comes, no AA.

EmacMommy: Off topic but something I wanted to add. As far as keeping kids engaged with more meets, I think its a fine balance. Right now in NV her L5 team has 14 (14!) meets scheduled. The new HC posed this question? With a fall and spring season with states after the spring season, when do I focus on skills with these kids. Something to think about when extending the season.

And sorry to disagree with you Mariainlv, but this is an example of exactly what i am talking about...your gym does not have the requirements written in stone for the level at this point so girls utilize this wavering by the gym to "move up" when they don't have all the skills of the next level. I don't think that sitting out an event is the solution..and OP I still stick by my original answer, stick to your guns.

 

[Ingwe]

I think that the OP should stick to her original game plan and require certain things for certain levels...what you are asking for is not outrageous, it's the bare minimum for the level, period.

I agree with this as well. I don't think it's too much to ask that the gymnast have the skills needed in order to move up.

I can speak as a parent of a gymnast who is going to be repeating L7 due to not having the L8 vault. (Yurchenko in our case) She had a successful 1st year (scoring in the mid 36's by the end of the season, made Regionals etc) but the rules at our gym are, you have to skills for the next level or you don't move.

As far as being bored doing L7 again, I don't think that has to be true. She has set goals for herself (such as 37 AA, making the Regional State Team as opposed to the All Stars like last season) She will continue working on that vault and hopefully by this time next year she will finally be flipping it.

I think the gym has to be consistent with their rules so as to avoid any confusion or controversy. If the parents don't like the policy then they can leave. I would rather see a team that is competitive then one that has a bunch of girls on the floor who can't even do the skills required for that level.

 

[LizzieLac]

Bookworm, I whole heartedly disagree.

Yesterday J competed L5. Placed 2nd on vault, 2nd on beam and 3rd floor. Yup, no kip in sight. She would be bored to tears by L4. I think it has to be a kid by kid basis. Half her L5 team is not competing/scratching certain events. She knows her bars are bad and until that comes, no AA. QUOTE]

I agree that if the level 4s who are missing 1-2 skills DID NOT UPTRAIN and work on level 5 skills they might be bored. To me, that is the key. I had the same concern - my DD has the flatback vault down, for instance. Already did it for a whole year and never scored less than 8.6. If she were doing that in practice every day, she would be bored. But they are also working on the fronthandspring vault, doing a lot of excellent drills, and conditioning. I can see her form improving on most things.

The point about it depends on the gymmie is sooo true. My DD would feel awkward going to a meet and scratching on an event. To her that would be an announcement that she is not good on bars and she doesn't like not having an AA score. For her, the split season is a good approach.

 

[bookworm]

I agree with this as well. I don't think it's too much to ask that the gymnast have the skills needed in order to move up.

I can speak as a parent of a gymnast who is going to be repeating L7 due to not having the L8 vault. (Yurchenko in our case) She had a successful 1st year (scoring in the mid 36's by the end of the season, made Regionals etc) but the rules at our gym are, you have to skills for the next level or you don't move.

As far as being bored doing L7 again, I don't think that has to be true. She has set goals for herself (such as 37 AA, making the Regional State Team as opposed to the All Stars like last season) She will continue working on that vault and hopefully by this time next year she will finally be flipping it.

I think the gym has to be consistent with their rules so as to avoid any confusion or controversy. If the parents don't like the policy then they can leave. I would rather see a team that is competitive then one that has a bunch of girls on the floor who can't even do the skills required for that level.[/QUOTE]


Well said Morgan'smom because that says it all...you either have the skills for the next level and you move up or if you do not have them, you do not.

I totally agree with your last paragraph because I'd rather see them competitive than looking awful just because they were allowed to move up.

 

[Shelovesthebars]

I wouldn't want my daughter competing a level that she doesn't have the skills for. However I do like the idea of second year girls being able to uptrain on specific skills that they may need to go on and the option to move mid season if those skills are being done consistently.
That being said, our gym had some girls who scored very well as level 4's but where not allowed to move on because they didn't have kips. Some of these are tops girls. I wouldn't take it personally if my daughter had to repeat a level. I would want her to have the skills she needed.
One other point with my dd is that she would be one to get bored repeating a level so having the opportunity to uptrain the next level at least a coulple times a month would be key to keeping her in the sport.

 

[gymnut1]

I don't have a problem with kids not competing certain events in a meet. I think we should all be keeping long term goals in our mind - the long term goal for all should be to keep children in sport for longer. Very rigid rules can lose children from the sport all together.

But I hate to see girls compete events they are not ready for. I would rather they do the pieces they are ready for. That way the girls look and feel good. The gym looks good, the coaches look good. How can that be a bad idea. Having high standards does not mean you have to have rules set in stone. I would rather see a girl with massive fear issues on beam compete the other 3 pieces confidently. Keeping her to the level below serves no purpose.

However I appreciate the reasons people have given for keeping to their word. I think that is very important for a gym to have open criteria and rules.

 

[bogwoppit]

Yesterday J competed L5. Placed 2nd on vault, 2nd on beam and 3rd floor. Yup, no kip in sight. She would be bored to tears by L4. I think it has to be a kid by kid basis. Half her L5 team is not competing/scratching certain events. She knows her bars are bad and until that comes, no AA.

.

I thought J was trying to score out of L5 yesterday to go to L6 when you move. L5 bars is HARD, L6 bars are notorious for their difficulty.

My DD had to wait a year extra to go up as she didn't have her kips (it took her two years to get them consistently) she finally made it this year. I am happy the coach made her wait until she could do AA.

 

[emacmommy]

I love hearing all of your opinions. I do enjoy hearing opposing views to gain a better understanding of why we seem to be butting heads with so many gymmies this year. Thank you to all those who are sharing their opinions!

fishchimes, just to clear up, I wasn't specifically quoting you rather mentioning your post about treating each gymmie independently, and then carrying forward with my own thought that making exceptions to certain policy creates havoc explaining to all the girls why so and so is allowed to only train until she has the skills vs. competing and up training at the same time. No harm no foul, thank you for sharing your point of views.

Mariainlv, we've always continued a 2nd compulsory season into April after our state meet in December. While it has no championship to end the season with, we've always used it as a midseason moveup or to continue improving our compulsory athletes. In essence between September - April we offer 16 meets for our compulsory gymnasts. It is highly encouraged to attend all, but we expect everyone to opt out of one - three throughout the season, depending on family commitments/finances. Even though our meets are small, no one town in Wyoming has two programs in one city and most cities are at least two hours away from each other. Our state meet is going to be a six hour drive through the worst stretch of I-80 in the middle of December. Ugh.

This is only my fourth season at this particular gym. Before I came the long term coach was near burn out handling the entire program by herself. There was an extreme lack of motivation to put forth exhausting effort to get quality results from gym families and gymnasts. We've refined a lot of policy in the last few years to try and regain a sense of quality gymnastics, including parent participation/responsiblity (i.e. buckling down on the free loaders regardless of talent, etc.), we've set a minimum requirement to qualify for state championship meets as a motivator (score driven & placement amongst their age group peers), we communicate clearly we do not use score requirements as a mobility indicator, we have spoken at times that we do consider skill progression/ability/safety when placing our athletes. This last summer we basically told girls we were taking away the Level labels and at the beginning of each practice session we placed them in groups in accordance to the skills we were working for that day. Mid August when it was time to start visiting routines again, it became clear which gymnast was where based on the skills achieved.

Before I arrived, I believe, mobility was based on scoring out of a level. I don't think the families we are having issues with were even in team at that time... pretty sure. Last year showed the fruits of our efforts consistently placing top three in our lower level compulsories with expectations that as long as we can keep the girls in the gym, we will continue our success as the girls advance through to optionals.

Now WE HAVE made exceptions to Level placement as girls get older. We have a fourteen year old Level 5, who did two years as a L3 and two years as a Level 4, who is also missing skills, but all our L4's training at the time were between 6yrs & 11 yrs. She felt horribly out of place so we moved her to an age appropriate training group and competed her L5 last year scratching bars. This season she is playing H.S. volleyball and tumbling 2 hrs per week, but will be back to train to be one of our first League Optional gymmies. I recently posted about our 16 yr old L8 who is an extremely talented and clean gymnast, with some unreasonable fears with flyaways and BHS on beam. She walked away last year, as we insisted she had to get over these fears, and did the last year of H.S. gymnastics in our state but also struggled there. She came back at the end of this summer and we are working around these fears no focusing on front flyaway skills and using front walkover front handspring on beam.

We aren't unflexible with our policies, however these are girls with extenuating circumstances. The girls we are butting heads with right now don't really have extenuating circumstances other than they don't want to repeat a level. I am sticking to my guns, but right now the parents are just playing us by not signing up for meets. So, in essence the girls are getting their way and I have them just going through the sloppy motions of a routine assignment so they can work their level up skills. The girls playing this card have been adamantly told by me, that I WILL NOT lesson plan for those who think they are exceptions to the rule. They have to train as if they are in a competition season just like everyone else, work the routine and consistency assignments before they can work the skills they need next, just like everyone else.

Am I hammering in a screw? Part of where my own doubt lays is the fact that in essence, as much as I am passionate about this sport that I've spent my whole life involved in, it really is a business. We are a small market community, and when I lose girls it hurts. I start to question if it is worth sticking to the guns. I beleive there is high merit for a quality competitive program, but not all are able to fit that mold. Part of why I became the proponent for alternatives. I also coach the Performance Squad which has a couple of team members and a few that came in from rec but wouldn't be able to cut it on team. We do community performances, between awards performances, participate in the state parade, etc. Very low key and fun. I'm the committee chair for the state League Optional program. I do feel that gymnasts and the gym life should be for all, not just for the talented.

Ah, keep the opinions coming. I thrive on input. "Johny-Five want input!"

 

[bookworm]

1.
Before I arrived, I believe, mobility was based on scoring out of a level. I don't think the families we are having issues with were even in team at that time... pretty sure. Last year showed the fruits of our efforts consistently placing top three in our lower level compulsories with expectations that as long as we can keep the girls in the gym, we will continue our success as the girls advance through to optionals.

2.
We aren't unflexible with our policies, however these are girls with extenuating circumstances. The girls we are butting heads with right now don't really have extenuating circumstances other than they don't want to repeat a level. I am sticking to my guns, but right now the parents are just playing us by not signing up for meets. So, in essence the girls are getting their way and I have them just going through the sloppy motions of a routine assignment so they can work their level up skills. The girls playing this card have been adamantly told by me, that I WILL NOT lesson plan for those who think they are exceptions to the rule. They have to train as if they are in a competition season just like everyone else, work the routine and consistency assignments before they can work the skills they need next, just like everyone else.


3.
Am I hammering in a screw? Part of where my own doubt lays is the fact that in essence, as much as I am passionate about this sport that I've spent my whole life involved in, it really is a business. We are a small market community, and when I lose girls it hurts. I start to question if it is worth sticking to the guns. I beleive there is high merit for a quality competitive program, but not all are able to fit that mold. Part of why I became the proponent for alternatives. I also coach the Performance Squad which has a couple of team members and a few that came in from rec but wouldn't be able to cut it on team. We do community performances, between awards performances, participate in the state parade, etc. Very low key and fun. I'm the committee chair for the state League Optional program. I do feel that gymnasts and the gym life should be for all, not just for the talented.

Ah, keep the opinions coming. I thrive on input. "Johny-Five want input!" [/QUOTE]

Just to touch on a few points you have made:

1. You've seen the fruits of your labor in that the compulsories have placed well...i think if you waver on moving up without the requirements , you will start to lose the credibility you have gained with these results.

2. the parents are not signing them up for meets...in any gym my daughter has been in the meets were REQUIRED and you could not opt out without a very good reason (i.e injury) ...if you are on a competitive team, you need to compete, period. Could you require your competitive gymnasts to compete in a minimum number of meets in all events? This might discourage the desire to "move up" if they knew that competition at the new level was an expectation. Moving up never came up for people who did not meet the requirements and they were posted in the gym and the waiting room so it was no secret.

3. You're correct , it is a business and you need to have gymnasts of all types not just the uber talented so could you have maybe an A and a B team type of approach...A team, no questions asked , you have all the requirements and compete all the meets and the B team would be more of a rec type approach, you could do this level with the majority of the skills and would compete in a different tier of meets that wasn't so competitive that way you wouldn't be diminishing the achievements of the girls that have all their skills for a level and would still give a home to those still working on the skills.

 

[gymdog]

Honestly, I find having standards holds me to an accountability standard too. I'm not knocking anyone but I just have a hard time fathoming smaller kids at a L6/7 skill level that can't kip at all. I decided after some issues last year that I was going to lay practically a plan of attack to get these kids kipping ASAP. I now have first year (!) level 4s kipping already, because I make time to work with each kid individually in conditioning doing just kip drills. Truly, i didn't foresee that...I expected it would help the process but I didn't think that it would truly make as much difference as it has. And these are kids truly at about a L4/early 5ish skill level overall. To have kids training L6/7 with no kips makes no sense to me.

When I was training L7, I had proficient kips and casts, but that was it. No swing training. I went a rec gym for a looooong time and learned kips myself but never learned tap swings and never figured it out. Through L6 no one really noticed or bothered to teach me due to lax coaching, but I had much stronger skills on the other events and very good strength. I got moved up to L7, got a new coach who wasn't going to take "just doesn't quite have it" for an answer - I was on bars literally three times some practices - whenever it was open, I was over there, doing giants and flyaways. My hands would be bleeding. But that was the best coaching I ever had in my life and honestly some of the best I've seen period. I was doing cast handstand free hip handstand giants and double back flyaways in months (again, could barely figure out tap swings). I went from never getting higher than 7s in L6 bars to winning L8 states with a 9.65. It wasn't a miracle. Someone just bothered to look beyond the fact that I could struggle enough to keep my head over water but had never truly learned certain things and made sure I did.

To make a long story short I think some flexibility is okay, but if you don't make certain commitments, that kind of thinking and accountability kind of becomes pervasive in your training model.