Parents Repeating a level after getting a score of 38?????

[Jenny]

Was it the first meet of the season? At our gym, EVERYONE repeats the previous season's level at the first meet, doesn't matter how good you did the year before. Most of them could be moving up at the next meet.

What is the reason for that? Seems like an odd idea.

 

[cadybearsmommy]

Was it the first meet of the season? At our gym, EVERYONE repeats the previous season's level at the first meet, doesn't matter how good you did the year before. Most of them could be moving up at the next meet.

It was the first of the season. I've never heard of that before but I'm sure it's a possibility.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

Was it the first meet of the season? At our gym, EVERYONE repeats the previous season's level at the first meet, doesn't matter how good you did the year before. Most of them could be moving up at the next meet.

Just curious as to what the logic is to that? Not understanding why they would practice routines for one meet knowing they will be moving on?

 

[wgymmom]

Was it the first meet of the season? At our gym, EVERYONE repeats the previous season's level at the first meet, doesn't matter how good you did the year before. Most of them could be moving up at the next meet.

That is really odd and I wouldn't be happy with that at all. A waste of time and money! Why?

 

[BachFlyer]

As I understand it, it's a confidence thing. A way for the girls to get their feet wet again competing, after 6 or 7 months off. We always have one meet before Christmas, and with rare exception, they all compete the previous year's level and then start in January with their new level. For the optionals they compete some of their upgrades where it is allowed. Actually, I don't know if it is the same for compulsories as often, but I do know it's the typical way of doing things. We came here at L9 I don't necessarily agree with it in all cases, but I do see the logic in having a low key, low expectation meet going into the new season.

 

[cbifoja]

I guess I don't see the point of repeating a level where a girl has excelled and 38 is excelling. Just because she can't get a skill for the next level doesn't mean she should go and sweep awards from others. It seems fairer to compete the next level up and scratch the event she is missing the required skill. It feels selfish to let a girl who is doing that well easily take medals when others girl might be working harder since they are competing at their "real" level.

But I'm betting I'm in the minority here. .

 

[Deleted member 18037]

I guess I don't see the point of repeating a level where a girl has excelled and 38 is excelling. Just because she can't get a skill for the next level doesn't mean she should go and sweep awards from others. It seems fairer to compete the next level up and scratch the event she is missing the required skill. It feels selfish to let a girl who is doing that well easily take medals when others girl might be working harder since they are competing at their "real" level.

But I'm betting I'm in the minority here. .

I would be in the minority as well.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

And until there are more specific rules, it is what it is.

Our gym trains 9-12 hours a week, others way more. Some gyms have them all repeat levels, no matter what.

Even how they break up age groups alters outcomes.

Recent meet a kid with a low 30 AA had a podium spot on their age group. Teammate with an upper 30 placed around 6th, different age group.

 

[Natasha]

If they are missing a requirement for the next level, then they are competing at their "real" level. Making a girl move up in that situation means that you may have a talented girl who has no chance at going to regionals because she has to scratch an event.
For those gymnast in it for the long hall (planning on getting to L10) it really won't matter once you get to that level. A first year L10 competes with girls who have been in it for sometimes up to 5-6 years.

 

[skschlag]

It is difficult to make blanket statements like that. DS was 10th in the REGION on rings his 1st year of level 5. 2nd year, he placed in teh state on floor, pommel, rings, and all around, and in the region. He did a 3rd year of 5. We were accused of sandbagging. But in reality, his high bar was SO bad that he could not move on. It did him wonders in his overall development, allowing him to perfect the basics on all events. At the time, I was not too happy, but I see the benefits now.

It is hard to remember, that the placements should not matter that much. Kids know how they did. D won a meet last year with 5 falls, and then didn't place in meets where he had his best scores. They truly know what matters. He was much happier in the meets that he did well in, placement or not, than he was with his first place in that one meet.

Kids do not progress on a continuum, and while it may seem like one thing to us (sandbagging), there may be a completely different reason. I think we just have to celebrate progress and enjoy it rather than worry about what others are doing

 

[cadybearsmommy]

And until there are more specific rules, it is what it is.

Our gym trains 9-12 hours a week, others way more. Some gyms have them all repeat levels, no matter what.

Even how they break up age groups alters outcomes.

Recent meet a kid with a low 30 AA had a podium spot on their age group. Teammate with an upper 30 placed around 6th, different age group.

We see big differences in age groups too! Of course we are always in the age group with the top scorers from the whole session it seems. LOL!

I don't think you guys are in the minority. I have to say as a parent if they wanted to hold back my kid with scores like that I would most definitely be questioning that decision. And I would be the last one to question my kid repeating a level if she needed to (we've been there done that) but with those kind of scores, I would think the newer skills would come in time and if not we would probably scratch events at the first few meets.

 

[cbifoja]

If they are missing a requirement for the next level, then they are competing at their "real" level. Making a girl move up in that situation means that you may have a talented girl who has no chance at going to regionals because she has to scratch an event.
For those gymnast in it for the long hall (planning on getting to L10) it really won't matter once you get to that level. A first year L10 competes with girls who have been in it for sometimes up to 5-6 years.

Nothing personal. I just disagree. Missing one requirement is one requirement. I stand by my opinion that if you're getting 38s it just isn't fair to repeat. It's fine if others disagree but I'm pretty firm in my opinion.

 

[CanAmGymMum]

I guess I don't see the point of repeating a level where a girl has excelled and 38 is excelling. Just because she can't get a skill for the next level doesn't mean she should go and sweep awards from others. It seems fairer to compete the next level up and scratch the event she is missing the required skill. It feels selfish to let a girl who is doing that well easily take medals when others girl might be working harder since they are competing at their "real" level.

But I'm betting I'm in the minority here. .

Let me start by saying that we have only done this once. However, as a coach, I do what is best for each individual athlete. If an athlete is struggling with a fear issue before the season even begins, often times, the best way to overcome the mental block is to take the pressure off. It's pretty hard to take the pressure off if the athlete needs to compete the skill. Why not let her compete at a level she's comfortable at while not making a huge deal over the problematic skill? We scratch events when necessary but if we already know there's a problem before the season begins, our athletes will compete at a level where they can compete 4 events. I don't think it's fair to the athlete to move her up because she's really good on 3 events. Especially at the compulsory level, athletes should have 4 strong events before they move up. I don't believe this is selfish, I believe this is good coaching.

 

[wrzos]

We have unofficial scores to guarantee a move up - but really it all boils down to whether the girl has mastered or close to/on track to get the new levels' skills by May (we compete fall). Then they'd have summer to polish or get one last thing, etc. I'd say that if someone was a steady 34/35 all season, that they'd be originally classified to repeat the level, but even that could change if the girl really excels in the off season and gets her skills quickly, etc. AND - a solid 36er that was set to move up could also repeat if an injury kept her out of training for so long that she couldn't get the new skills...(although this would be rare, I've seen them let her still move up, just realizing she is at a disadvantage score wise b/c of less time for training).

 

[Natasha]

My dd has never been a 38 scorer, so no personal experience with this, but it is not uncommon for gyms to have a list of mandatory skills to move up to next level. You don't have all the skills, you don't move up. Old gym had policy that you had to do the skill 3x on 3 different days within a 2 week testing period in early fall. If you didn't have each skill, you didn't move up. I think what I take issue with is saying that a girl is "selfish" for not moving up and competing at the level that she has qualified for based on her gym's requirements.

 

[cadybearsmommy]

It is difficult to make blanket statements like that. DS was 10th in the REGION on rings his 1st year of level 5. 2nd year, he placed in teh state on floor, pommel, rings, and all around, and in the region. He did a 3rd year of 5. We were accused of sandbagging. But in reality, his high bar was SO bad that he could not move on. It did him wonders in his overall development, allowing him to perfect the basics on all events. At the time, I was not too happy, but I see the benefits now.

It is hard to remember, that the placements should not matter that much. Kids know how they did. D won a meet last year with 5 falls, and then didn't place in meets where he had his best scores. They truly know what matters. He was much happier in the meets that he did well in, placement or not, than he was with his first place in that one meet.

Kids do not progress on a continuum, and while it may seem like one thing to us (sandbagging), there may be a completely different reason. I think we just have to celebrate progress and enjoy it rather than worry about what others are doing

See I wouldn't think twice about him repeating in your situation. No matter how solid you are in one or more events you have to master all the events before going on to the next level. That's completely understandable to me. These girls were scoring high all around, so it's kind of a different situation.

I hope it doesn't seem like I was quick to judge their situation b/c I really wasn't. I didn't participate in the gossip around me about them, but I did think it was a very unusual thing to see and that's why I posted, thinking it may be more common than I thought. I think their are individual circumstances that do come into play but with around 6 girls that were scoring that high and repeating it seemed like it might have been a bit more strategic.

As far as placements go, I definitely put more emphasis on doing your best performance, making personal improvements than placements. I've learned to put absolutely no hope into placements, b/c we always end up in the toughest age group of the session anyway (I think it's the age) and even on her best days she's never been 1st AA and I'm ok with that. DD on the other hand I think would really really love to get that 1st AA one of these days, but she doesn't let it get her down either, she just keeps working harder and harder and that's all anyone can ask! =)

 

[cbifoja]

My dd has never been a 38 scorer, so no personal experience with this, but it is not uncommon for gyms to have a list of mandatory skills to move up to next level. You don't have all the skills, you don't move up. Old gym had policy that you had to do the skill 3x on 3 different days within a 2 week testing period in early fall. If you didn't have each skill, you didn't move up. I think what I take issue with is saying that a girl is "selfish" for not moving up and competing at the level that she has qualified for based on her gym's requirements.

I didn't say the GIRL was selfish. I don't blame any gymnast for the level they compete since I don't think many gymnasts have the privilege of telling their coach what level they will compete.

I don't mind that others disagree with me but don't attribute statements to me that aren't truly mine.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

I only have experience with our dozen or so kids, compulsory level.
Our gym up trains, no score outs, well may be at optional.

Of our dozen 1/3 to 1/2 got to 38 for L3 and while not there yet probably the same kids will get there for L4. They are already working L5/L6 stuff. Those 38 scorers will likely have all the skills to move up by June and have the summer to get better. They won't be 38s out of the gate for Level 5 but will get there. Unless someone has a disaster of epic proportions.

Most have their Tucks on floor, working BWO, BHS on beam. Not pretty or consistant yet but getting there. Some are closer to flyaway, and yes those are the girls who will be 38s by End of the season. A few will likely have their flyaway before June.

The bottom half of the group will likely have their L5 skills but weaker. May be a couple down to wire by decision time in August, one or 2 might get held back, but they won't be the 38 kids.

All of that to say it has been my experience (limited as it may be). Those 38 scorers are score that high because they are strong across all events. And because they are it is my experience that they aren't missing that one elusive skill to hold them back. They weaker girls, yes, but not the 38 kids.

 

[l.c.o]

Yeah my DD placed 2nd AA at L4 state last year with a 36.3 or so, and repeated this year. Now that's no 37 or 38, but wasn't awful. But it's entirely possible that she'll score two full points higher at state this year and place third. Thankfully, she's mostly ok with this, and only cares about shooting for scoring her second 38.

Girls almost always repeat some amount of level 4, except for the rare girl who heads straight to optionals the winter immediately following her first fall season of 4. Her gym doesn't do seasons of level 5 and prefers not to do level 6. When she missed the deadline for level 7 skills, just repeating 4 it was. She will score out of 5 next month and then should forever be done with compulsories... though I think a couple of us moms might ask if our DD's can join another repeat level 4 group that's scoring out of level 5 in spring, just for fun.

I'm of two minds. It sort of sucks, because I really think that had she not had to work level 4 routines at all, she'd have probably been set to go for level 7. At the same time, spending this time refining her basics and spending this entire next year working l7/l8 skills probably won't hurt her when she does get to optionals Jan '17. And she IS having a lot of fun this year.

 

[ascarter1]

Is this common? Now I've seen girls repeat after getting 35's and 36's (still good respectable scores) but I can see the benefit in that. However at a meet we had today, there were girls in our session from another team, and probably about half of their team are repeats from last year, that were all around state champions scoring in the HIGH 37's and even 38s! I'm trying not to be judgmental, I realize it's none of my business and I don't want my inner CGM to make an appearance. But is this a common occurrence or very unusual?

I noticed you are in region 8. I am too! Depending on your state, I bet I could guess the gym in which you are talking about!