WAG What is the average age for reaching lvl 10?

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

level 10 age

I agree that level 10 gymnastics is way up there! I was just wondering, of current level 10s, what is the most common age they reached level 10...
My dd who is a college gymnast reached level 10 when she was 10. Most of her current teammates reached level 10 when they were 11 or 12.
 
I would say the AVERAGE age is...early teens. Many girls go 10 earlier, later, or never at all. Have her consider going elite. Maybe the Olympics are in her future.
 
yep, sure that's why there were so many 10-12 year olds at nationals. not...
 
yep, sure that's why there were so many 10-12 year olds at nationals. not...

Junior A and some of Junior B. Check out the SEC, when there gymnast hit level 10. Not all level 10 get scholarship. Alot of Senior C and D do not have scholaarships.
 
Junior A and some of Junior B. Check out the SEC, when there gymnast hit level 10. Not all level 10 get scholarship. Alot of Senior C and D do not have scholaarships.

Ok , one of the "older" Jr As that we know turned 14 the week of JOs (around May 9th) , so the Jr Bs definitely aren't "10-12 yrs old"...some gymnasts are young when they go Level 10, but the AVERAGE age is more around 14 ....
 
^^Yep - the age cut-off for Junior A was February 1, 1999. That means only 12% of girls were younger than 14 years and 3 months. And I am willing to bet that the majority of the Junior A girls were younger 14 and 13 year olds, with a smaller portion in the 10 to 12 range.
 
i was there and i certainly didn't see any 10 or 11 year olds. maybe 2 12 year olds that were closier to 13. and i don't know what the heck the other poster is talking about...SEC...scholarships...
 
i was there and i certainly didn't see any 10 or 11 year olds. maybe 2 12 year olds that were closier to 13. and i don't know what the heck the other poster is talking about...SEC...scholarships...

Thanks Dunno, I was thinking the same thing...I only recall seeing a couple of kids I thought were really young (Trinity Thomas was a 2001 DOB , and Olivia Dunne was tiny as well...and they were both in the NIT) ....most seemed around 13 in the Jr A group
 
My daughter was the youngest L10 qualifier in our state this year. (Her birthday was the cutoff). She was 12.5. There weren't many her age competing in her group. The group ranged in age from 12.5 to almost 14 years old.

Her gym has a good sized L10 team and it appears from my informal survey that 14-15 is the average age to make it to L10.
 
I agree with you bookworm, I think the average is probably around 14, but I think others were stating that there were clearly younger ones there who were 10, 11 and young 12s, not old. Not only was Agrapides a very young 12, she did very well too against the "older" (which is a joke actually to say) Jr. As. I laugh out loud because I refer to my L10 as a geriatric 10 at the ripe ole age of 16, almost 17!
 
I agree with you bookworm, I think the average is probably around 14, but I think others were stating that there were clearly younger ones there who were 10, 11 and young 12s, not old. Not only was Agrapides a very young 12, she did very well too against the "older" (which is a joke actually to say) Jr. As. I laugh out loud because I refer to my L10 as a geriatric 10 at the ripe ole age of 16, almost 17!
This is one of the things I have wondered about for awhile now. When gymnasts reach level 10 at such a young age - and really 14 is very young - they are working level 10 skills and routines for years in high school and if they go on to college for years there too. 8-12 years to be doing those difficult skills seems so hard on the body, I am unsure how the girls can really hold up to make it through college without lots of injuries or creating long term problems from the pounding. It seems to me that colleges would prefer someone who had only been level 10 for a couple of years instead of the more experienced because there bodies would hold up better. What do y'all think?
 
I don't get this sport. You hear from some people how kids have to be an L10 by their freshman year (14YO) to be considered for a college scholarship. You hear about freshmen and sophomores "verbally committing" to colleges, etc.

So what gives???? Is it undesirable to be an L10 so young or desirable????
 
depends on what they are doing on hard surfaces and some other things to long to go in to. and remember, when you go up the age stream the numbers go down. it's not a coincidence. statistics don't lie. :)
 
This is one of the things I have wondered about for awhile now. When gymnasts reach level 10 at such a young age - and really 14 is very young - they are working level 10 skills and routines for years in high school and if they go on to college for years there too. 8-12 years to be doing those difficult skills seems so hard on the body, I am unsure how the girls can really hold up to make it through college without lots of injuries or creating long term problems from the pounding. It seems to me that colleges would prefer someone who had only been level 10 for a couple of years instead of the more experienced because there bodies would hold up better. What do y'all think?

I think the kids who make L10 around 14 years of age have a better background sense of what a skill requires of them, as well as an appreciation and ability to work the skills correctly, and understand that concentrate isn't something you make orange juice with. Once they're at that level of fitness, awareness, and understanding, the skills tend to be less punishing, and the main concern becomes pounding into the vault, floor, and beam with high numbers of repetition. That risk can be managed by using alternative surfaces and training strategy. So I'd say the early age L10 kids, barring accidental injuries, have an equal or better chance to make it through to college as long as they train for the long haul and avoid rushing skills just to have them for comp season, because if it ain't there, it ain't there.
 
Seems like a lot of generalities. I've seen kids start as old as 11 or 12 and do well in one year of 10. It depends on the physical ability of the child and their personality. If all things were equal obv a child who is moving faster past the baseline probably has some natural advantages. But you have to control for when the kid started and what their early training was like.
 

New Posts

DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members see FEWER ads

Gymnaverse :: Recent Activity

College Gym News

New Posts

Back