I have not heard that, not sure how that works, as competing level 6 without the skills would be dangerous.Anyone heard of new rules for this competition season concerning age limits on levels, for instance-level 5 capped at age 12, not allowing anyone over 12 to compete, 13 and over must compete as level 6?
Yah I get the minimum age thing I was referring to the maximum. Many gyms don’t have JD as an option so the door is shut for gymnasts then too (especially since it’s not like WAG where you bump into another program on every street corner in most areas). I guess to me it’s not that crazy. If you’re going to get edged out at 15 because you aren’t ready for 9 might as well get edged out at 13. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t AGREE with any of the upper age limits. I just think if it’s the direction MAG already seems to be going it wouldn’t shock me (also, I’m bitter because I have an older non-superstar kid who is going to get screwed over by the age limits at some point which is maybe why it would shock me even less).Because it is a compulsory level. For it to be restricted like that means you are closing the door to the kid who never stepped foot in gym until they were 12. Optional levels are restricted to a minimum age because the skills get more dangerous. There’s nothing that is more dangerous for a 12 year old level 4 learning a round off than it would be for a 6 year old.
The upper age limits in optionals are new, and I believe they’re meant to shuttle advanced kids who aren’t quite in the same range as others into JD.
I agree, but I also think it promote pushing those young superstars even harder than they already are. Some of the stories i have heard are not good. Part of me thinks the lower limits are there to try to keep from rushing those younger guys and beating them up even more. I overheard a couple of college coaches at nationals talking about how the boys are doing skills now there were elite skills just 5 years ago and they are starting to see more boys with shorter 'careers' than in the past. Even talking about how they are more beat up for college and they have to be careful with them to prevent injuries.I think it's pretty clear the powers that be want older boys who aren't in age in JD. I hope that this will cause the program to evolve into something more than just a place for guys who do lower hours and aren't competitive in JO.
And I get the idea of the age limits for 8 and 9, but really, with open-ended scoring, I think it is not accomplishing anything except keeping the superstars from bouncing some pretty good L10s from nationals.
Exactly. We have seen kiddos go to college and have their routines significantly altered to less difficult/more clean. They have also not competed AA every meet Some coaches do a great job of trying to save those bodies for future use!It's definitely not good and really serves no one's interests. What's the point of being able to do D and E skills at age 11 if the result is that you're too busted up to make it through your first NCAA season at age 18?
15 is the minimum age for L10.That is crazy. Men's gymnastics is very different to women. Girls often do better prior to puberty, but boys need the strength that comes on after puberty in order to develop many of the higher level skills and boys go through puberty later. Crazy to expect level 10 by max age 15 as some boys are only just starting to go through puberty and gain their adult strength at that age.
Boys can start gymnastics much later than girls and still make it as an elite. Boys can't even compete as a senior international until they are 18, and boys can continue at an international level far longer than girls.
Maximum age limits means a lot of boys withnthe potential to become elite will be pushed out, as there are already so few boys in the sport, that seems like a great way to make sure the USA Men are never recognised as a great MAG nation.