WAG L8 - 'Up to Competition Level'

[vagymmomma]

Now that competition season has started for many gymnasts, I'm wondering what everyone is seeing as the standard for L8 and above for the 'up to competition level' requirement. I'm curious if the optional C skills seem to be in play or what the general standards are to meet this requirement (it may vary a lot by region). I've seen a pretty wide range of skills at competitions, but not as many acrobatic Cs as I was expecting at L8 I thought it would be the standard but it's a pretty limited group).

We saw level 10s competing at a meet last night and there were some crazy differences in skill levels. Seemed way more extreme than differences at L8, so it may be more relevant at the higher levels.

 

[kandkfunk]

The only C level acro skills I've seen at level 8 are double back dismounts off bars and maybe one 1.5/1 on floor (if that's a C). But only a couple girls competed them in the two meets we've been to. It's definitely not the standard. My DD is not competing a full on floor. Her B tumbling pass is a front pike. She has not received the 'not up to competition standard' deduction. But we are in a pretty weak region. She'll hopefully get to add her full for the next meet. Very exciting for her since we weren't sure she would get to compete it at all this season.

 

[iwannacoach]

I think the option of including a C element is intended to give athletes and their coaches an opportunity to work toward the following year while not being penalized for going beyond the boundary set to this point by USAG. The coaching community probably drove this car, and USAG finally went along for the ride with the condition that L8 remain a bridge between a child's first year of optional work an the upper levels 9 and 10. That bridge needs to remain accessible and functional for all qualified L8's, and a C may be too much for more than just a few.

 

[Dka]

We have seen 1 1/2 on floor, back tuck on beam and double backs on bars at each meet. I am not sure how it effected the scoring.

 

[vagymmomma]

I think the optional Cs make perfect sense -- it really should ease the progression to L9. I guess I just expected to see more being done based on the coaches comments at the beginning of the season. I've seen Cs at every meet (including with some of our girls), but I guess I thought they would be more common. They are the exception not the rule, but maybe athletes are saving the skills for later in the season.

 

[gymdog]

It's too early to answer your question really but as of now I think the deduction in this region would be more for things like not having a full on floor and not enough combination tumbling to make up for it, I don't think there are enough floor Cs out there.

 

[profmom]

I think this will be a lot clearer by states. Several girls on DD's team are working on C upgrades that they probably won't compete until later in the season. But I think it will be a lot like what we've seen before -- a cleanly executed upgraded routine will beat a clean routine with only Bs, but sloppy Cs will not get you anywhere.

At DD's team's first meet, this was graphically demonstrated by two of her L8 teammates who competed 1.5s on floor. One placed first, and one, who was placing reliably and high on floor all last year, did not place. She'll have it by states and it will be awesome