WAG Curious about gyms that sandbag

[LJL07]

One of my gym mom friends and I were discussing the state meet the other day, and there is one very large gym in our area that apparently uptrains the girls (ex., they are training level 2&3 but competing level 1), but has them compete down a level. We live in an area where even levels 1&2 are taken seriously for competition--I know this isn't the norm. Anyways, at state meet, the girls from this "sandbagging" gym took all of the awards with scores of 9.8 and above on some events and AA scores of 38+. These girls are repeating levels 1&2 in many cases! Two girls from our old gym switched to this gym, and despite doing well at state with AA scores over 37, they will be repeating level 2 next year. What is the point in doing this at levels 1&2? I thought the idea was to move up as quickly as possible.

 

[cbifoja]

I think different gyms have different philosophies and not all of them concentrate on the moving up as quickly as possible. Some gyms take pride in their record and use that as a recruiting tool. It can be frustrating to compete against kids who are uptraining several levels than they are competing but some coaches believe this is a good training model rather than sandbagging.

 

[AmandaLynn]

It depends on your long term goals in the sports. Different gyms have different philosophies.

Does this gym have an optional team at all? If so, does the optional team have the same strong representation at meets?

 

[Becauseisaid]

We also have several gyms in our area that require girls to scores extremely high consistently on an event (think 9.8 or higher) before they are allowed to move up. From a business standpoint, it's a smart move because these gyms can claim to be "Winning" gyms. They produce winners. Parents don't notice that kids are sitting at a low level for 2 or 3 years to achieve those scores. They just see that this gym produces winners so they sign up.

You would think that the girls and the parents would get disgusted with being stuck at one level for a few years. Except, by the time this attitude sets in, the child is at the top of that level and winning. Hard to pull a girl from a gym when she is winning every event and dominating at competitions.

Sadly gyms like this also have kids "retiring" at Level 2 and 3.

 

[LJL07]

It depends on your long term goals in the sports. Different gyms have different philosophies.

Does this gym have an optional team at all? If so, does the optional team have the same strong representation at meets?

They actually do have optional level girls and even a couple who compete at regionals. I'm just wondering how they even get there if they spend so much time at levels 1-3. I have noticed that there are a ton of levels 1-3 at this gym, but then the numbers drop sharply for levels 4 and up. Yes, they must be retiring at level 3. My child definitely won't be winning against these girls, but she would get so bored doing all that repeating. Esp repeating level 1. Just seemed like there would be better retention if they moved the girls up, but maybe that's just me!

 

[Becauseisaid]

They actually do have optional level girls and even a couple who compete at regionals. I'm just wondering how they even get there if they spend so much time at levels 1-3.

Because a couple girls get fast tracked so that the gym can also say to potential customers "See Annie? We took Annie from Level 3 to Level 8 in 3 years. We're an awesome gym. You should bring your money and your gymnast here."

Can you tell I'm feeling cynical today?

 

[lhmom]

Because a couple girls get fast tracked so that the gym can also say to potential customers "See Annie? We took Annie from Level 3 to Level 8 in 3 years. We're an awesome gym. You should bring your money and your gymnast here."

Can you tell I'm feeling cynical today?

Yes, because I know which gym you are referring to. And you are correct on all accounts.

 

[LJL07]

Because a couple girls get fast tracked so that the gym can also say to potential customers "See Annie? We took Annie from Level 3 to Level 8 in 3 years. We're an awesome gym. You should bring your money and your gymnast here."

Can you tell I'm feeling cynical today?

Ah ha. Sometimes I too feel cynical about gyms, and we haven't even been doing this very long...

 

[IreneKa]

There is a gym like this next to us (actually our old gym, we switched because they didn't want DD on their JO team). They don't compete level 1-2, but they kind of sandbag L3. They keep the girls on the pre-team until they are sure the girls can score 37+, and if someone switches from a different gym, they put them a level down. For example, they have a girl this year, who was old L4 at our current gym last year, getting 35-36. Now she it at that other gym competing level 3, and scoring 37-38, while all her teammates, who stayed at our gym have competed L4 this season, scoring average.
But, while they are sandbagging, they are also up-training for the next year during the competition season. So, the girls who are scoring high now as L3, will probably be coring high next year at L4 too. While out girls don't start uptraining until after States.
And that other gym has a huge and successful optional team. So, this philosophy is not necessarily bad.

 

[bogwoppit]

Most kids never get past L3, so really what happens until L4 really doesn't matter. Being an excellent compulsory gymnasts is no indicator of being a great optional, or elite.

This is why I like gyms that do not even bother with L1 & L2. But for some kids that is as far as they ever will go for so many reasons.

This is why placing any emphasis on medaling at meets is a bad idea. You cannot control anything but feeling satisfied with a meet well done. Making placements or scores the important thing leads to disappointment all around.

 

[Deleted member D3987]

Most kids never get past L3, so really what happens until L4 really doesn't matter. Being an excellent compulsory gymnasts is no indicator of being a great optional, or elite.

This is why I like gyms that do not even bother with L1 & L2. But for some kids that is as far as they ever will go for so many reasons.

This is why placing any emphasis on medaling at meets is a bad idea. You cannot control anything but feeling satisfied with a meet well done. Making placements or scores the important thing leads to disappointment all around.

like like like like like like like like like.......................................

 

[Deleted member 14190]

If they get into optional quickly and do well ,, then it is a well executed plan. If not then it is a well executed business plan.

 

[Sasha]

Our gym doesn't compete L1 and 2, but having observed now the progression (and exit) of different girls over the past year+ through our pre-team levels (equivalent of L1-3), it has become clear to me that there are certain girls who (if we had competed L1-2) would have been amazing and medalled all the time. They had that natural form, grace, and ability to get those early skills (pretty handstand-forward roll, straight leg cartwheel, tight body, pointed toes on leaps...) that would have swept the medal stands at those levels. However, a fair number of those girls have now sadly quit, or are struggling, at L3-4 because the next level of skills was just not attainable for them. Several moved to Xcel, and some quit after trying to keep up in L3 training, but simply were falling too far behind.

Watching this happen to real girls whom I thought would have continued to be the top of the class(!) has made me be more understanding of some girls repeating these low levels despite high scores. If we actually did compete L1-2, there would definitely be those "38" girls repeating - and in our gym, they would be the ones that just have not had the FHC or BHS click yet, despite months and months of faithful attempts. I have watched my DD and others in her group (who would have scored mid-pack at L1-2 for less pretty form) zoom past these girls in skills now training L4. I'm happy for DD, but do feel very sad for these girls who have been her friends. It's hard to watch them struggle while friends ascend. I know it's part of the sport, though, and you never know when your own DD will reach a tough impasse.

I'm sure there are sandbagging gyms, as well as other scenarios mentioned above that hold girls back despite progressing well in uptraining, but I now include the possibility when I see this that some of these girls really could not do well, and might even quit, if they had to compete the next level up. L1-L2 really is their 'peak'.

 

[LJL07]

Our gym doesn't compete L1 and 2, but having observed now the progression (and exit) of different girls over the past year+ through our pre-team levels (equivalent of L1-3), it has become clear to me that there are certain girls who (if we had competed L1-2) would have been amazing and medalled all the time. They had that natural form, grace, and ability to get those early skills (pretty handstand-forward roll, straight leg cartwheel, tight body, pointed toes on leaps...) that would have swept the medal stands at those levels. However, a fair number of those girls have now sadly quit, or are struggling, at L3-4 because the next level of skills was just not attainable for them. Several moved to Xcel, and some quit after trying to keep up in L3 training, but simply were falling too far behind.

Watching this happen to real girls whom I thought would have continued to be the top of the class(!) has made me be more understanding of some girls repeating these low levels despite high scores. If we actually did compete L1-2, there would definitely be those "38" girls repeating - and in our gym, they would be the ones that just have not had the FHC or BHS click yet, despite months and months of faithful attempts. I have watched my DD and others in her group (who would have scored mid-pack at L1-2 for less pretty form) zoom past these girls in skills now training L4. I'm happy for DD, but do feel very sad for these girls who have been her friends. It's hard to watch them struggle while friends ascend. I know it's part of the sport, though, and you never know when your own DD will reach a tough impasse.

I'm sure there are sandbagging gyms, as well as other scenarios mentioned above that hold girls back despite progressing well in uptraining, but I now include the possibility when I see this that some of these girls really could not do well, and might even quit, if they had to compete the next level up. L1-L2 really is their 'peak'.

Yes, my DD is definitely mid-pack (and may remain so for awhile) for level 1/2 and doesn't have the natural form/grace you mention. It makes me wonder if it would be beneficial for her to repeat or move slower, but in her case probably not since she is able to learn the skills. I see what you mean about some of the girls looking amazing with the basic stuff but just not being able to pick up the harder skills and plateauing out. I guess this approach allows more kids to compete and be successful in gymnastics but may not be the best approach for someone like my DD who might earn comparable scores at level 1 or 3 due to her form. All the more reason why I am understanding that you really need to choose a gym that's a good fit for the child and not just the one with the kids medaling.

 

[gracyomalley]

And in all fairness, the form thing does have to kick in at some point - DD and her friends training over shoots can be very easily divided into the group with tight strong form and fundamentals, and the group who continue to "almost" hit the right positions - and I am glad to have walked in on the end of practice with DD tight as a drum- much less scary as the mom! (I will now return to staying out of practice...)

 

[Seeker]

This is why placing any emphasis on medaling at meets is a bad idea. You cannot control anything but feeling satisfied with a meet well done. Making placements or scores the important thing leads to disappointment all around.

This (bolded) part is the key...if you have a successful meet, but don't place/medal, then you can still walk away feeling satisfied. I think that's great and about all you can ask for. But if they push them thru the levels too fast, the likelihood of that happening diminishes. It's hard to perform well when you're competing skills you just learned.

 

[Chloe Maher]

We don't really have a lot of gyms in Xcel who do that type of thing. But to me,what their doing is called cheating

 

[Aussie_coach]

I don't see it as sandbagging I see it is as smart coaching. In most gyms in Australia the kids are working skills well above their competition level and this is strongly encouraged.

Most coaches here are very against the idea of having gymnasts competing with skills they have just learned. A skill should be learned, mastered and very safe before it is competed.

A good coaching modal would be
Perfecting your current level
Mastering skills one level up
Learning skills two levels up
Drilling skills three levels up

 

[Seeker]

We don't really have a lot of gyms in Xcel who do that type of thing. But to me,what their doing is called cheating

First of all, the word you're looking for is "they're". What your statement is intending to say is "they are cheating", so you need the apostrophe in "they're". It's a contraction, not a possessive.

Secondly, to say someone is cheating because they might have 90% of the skills, but compete a lower level because they're missing that last 10% or aren't totally solid on the skills they do have is a pretty bold statement. I think that it is just a differing philosophy or strategy and what works for one may not work for another. There needs to be some room for making the best decision for the gymnast in question and that decision won't be the same for everyone.

Unless someone successfully competes L9 or L10 all season and then moves down to L8 or L9 when it's time to qualify for States and Regionals, calling it "cheating" isn't really seeing the bigger picture.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[LJL07]

I don't see it as sandbagging I see it is as smart coaching. In most gyms in Australia the kids are working skills well above their competition level and this is strongly encouraged.

Most coaches here are very against the idea of having gymnasts competing with skills they have just learned. A skill should be learned, mastered and very safe before it is competed.

A good coaching modal would be
Perfecting your current level
Mastering skills one level up
Learning skills two levels up
Drilling skills three levels up

Really I'm talking about sandbagging in levels 1-3, and maybe I should have clarified. I completely understand the rationale for repeating levels or holding back in higher levels where skills are much more demanding.