WAG Is this fair...or even really happening?

[gymgymgymnast08]

When we were in elementary school, one of my friends from school was on a different gymnastics team than I was so I knew of a lot of the girls on her team because of that. So when I was a level 4 at my gym, I knew of about 5 of the girls who were level 7s at her gym. By the time I get to level 9, these same 5 girls who were level 7s at her gym were only level 8s at her gym. I never skipped any levels and only did one level in each year and I actually repeated level 5 and 8. So in 6 years I had gone from level 4 to level 9 and they had gone from level 7 to level 8. I thought it was hilarious.

EDIT: While they did beat me when we were in level 8 together, I moved up to level 9 and had a successful career there while they stayed level 8 for even longer.

 

[raenndrops]

I agree with having Mandate scores for Compulsories (and possibly Optionals through L9)... but it would be like 37.0 AA in 3 meets with a minimum of 8.8 per event in the meets that the 37+ was achieved OR 36.0+ AA with all event scores of ≥9.0 in 3 meets. This would guarantee that someone with a weak event would not be forced to move up prematurely.

In our "Network" we have mandate scores (with an AA mandate score counted ONLY if they achieve the events minimum in the same meet and they have to do it 2x), but they are lower and it results in girls moving up without all the necessary skills sometimes (but USUALLY, if they actually Mandated, they will have the skills by the next season or be close).

 

[IreneKa]

A former teammate of my daughter did a couple of invitational meets ( our off season) last February and scores 35s as an old L4. Her family moved to the next county a few months later. Her new gym said that she wasn't ready for L3 and put her on their preteam for our season that goes Sept - Nov. She was just now put on the L3 team to compete in fall and now has skills like a fly away, ROBHSBT. We have seen the new gym at meets and the majority of their team has 38s. I had to explain to my DD after a meet with this team that although she didn't place as high as she would have liked, most of the girls will be L4 when she is an optional.

Yes, and that's what's the hardest in this situation, to explain to an 8-9 year old why those other girls are better. We parents understand, that different gyms have different philosophies/tactics, and we are where we are because we like our gym's approach. But my 9 year old comes out of that meet, feeling down, saying that she is horrible, that she's the worst level 3 ever (she did great, by the way, she moved up from L2 mid-season, had only 3 weeks to work on her new routines, and scored 35.3, which I thought was great!). So, I had to explain to her that those girls were better, because they had longer to work on those skills and routines. She did her best and that what matters. Still, I hope at our next meet the competition will not be as tough, so she could get some of her confidence back.

 

[Krystan]

I totally disagree with mandate scores. You can't know what is going on with a gymnast, and it's up to the coach/gymnast to figure out the safest level for her to compete. What if there are major fear issues going on, and the gymnast is not safe at the next level? I will say I have felt in the past that competing "down a level" is unfair (like the girl who got a 9.8 on L5 bars in the first meet of the season - really?), but I've now learned to reserve judgement. My dd is "repeating" because of a major fear issue that she did not get over until the season was half over. She has scored *very* well and placed high at every meet, which has been a good experience for her, but shoving her into the next level to be "fair" would have been a disaster. Now she is doing awesome, is confident, and is talking with her coach about scoring out of a level after states so she can move up with her training group. Honestly, every gym has a different philosophy on this issue. My dd's gym would rather move them up quicker, but treats each girl as an individual - they would never keep a whole team back just "because that 's what we do". They tend to have a higher scoring, better placing optional team than compulsories.

 

[Fliptwisttumble]

We have mandatory mobility rules here. It isn't score related, but placement at provincials (comparable to states). Top 3 or 4 per age, per level move to the next level up, unless injured, or in the case of older teenagers, they have dropped down their training hours due to school.

 

[Bajanswife]

I totally disagree with mandate scores. You can't know what is going on with a gymnast, and it's up to the coach/gymnast to figure out the safest level for her to compete. What if there are major fear issues going on, and the gymnast is not safe at the next level? I will say I have felt in the past that competing "down a level" is unfair (like the girl who got a 9.8 on L5 bars in the first meet of the season - really?), but I've now learned to reserve judgement. My dd is "repeating" because of a major fear issue that she did not get over until the season was half over. She has scored *very* well and placed high at every meet, which has been a good experience for her, but shoving her into the next level to be "fair" would have been a disaster. Now she is doing awesome, is confident, and is talking with her coach about scoring out of a level after states so she can move up with her training group. Honestly, every gym has a different philosophy on this issue. My dd's gym would rather move them up quicker, but treats each girl as an individual - they would never keep a whole team back just "because that 's what we do". They tend to have a higher scoring, better placing optional team than compulsories.

Because of those types of situations, there would have to be a way to petition to break the mandated mobility rules on a case by case basis. I wouldn't support mandated mobility without that. Similar to how you can petition to enter USAG without a mobility score.

 

[raenndrops]

I totally disagree with mandate scores. You can't know what is going on with a gymnast, and it's up to the coach/gymnast to figure out the safest level for her to compete. What if there are major fear issues going on, and the gymnast is not safe at the next level? I will say I have felt in the past that competing "down a level" is unfair (like the girl who got a 9.8 on L5 bars in the first meet of the season - really?), but I've now learned to reserve judgement. My dd is "repeating" because of a major fear issue that she did not get over until the season was half over. She has scored *very* well and placed high at every meet, which has been a good experience for her, but shoving her into the next level to be "fair" would have been a disaster. Now she is doing awesome, is confident, and is talking with her coach about scoring out of a level after states so she can move up with her training group. Honestly, every gym has a different philosophy on this issue. My dd's gym would rather move them up quicker, but treats each girl as an individual - they would never keep a whole team back just "because that 's what we do". They tend to have a higher scoring, better placing optional team than compulsories.

That would be a case in which the coach would petition the gymnast to repeat. (any system with a mandate would have a petition procedure). We have had girls who mandated, but had fear or injury issues and they got to repeat the level. The mandates would basically be to prevent a coach from sandbagging.

 

[SurpriseGymMom]

I'm always fascinated by different gym philosophies when this discussion comes up. I'm glad our gym comes in somewhere in the middle. We don't hold kids back but we don't send kids out to embarrass themselves either. We're in a fairly hard scoring area. So far (we have had only two meets this season) there have been very few "above 9 " scores. Some, all were well deserved, but mostly 7's and 8's all around, not only for our team.
We encountered kids being spotted consistently on bars at our last meet and that was eye opening.... I'm glad our gym doesn't allow that (the gymnast has to scratch unless they can do the routine to the coaches satisfaction the week before each meet). Our coaches told us before the season that we would likely see both extremes: kids that are repeaters and could (probably, not knowing of individual fears etc) compete at least 2-3 levels above what they are AND kids that need spots on the events. Our gym believes in competing the kid where they are proficient but perhaps not perfect, and they constantly up train them a bit. My kid has several of the L5 skills, but not well enough to compete and not ALL her 5 skills. She can do BWO on beam all day long but hasn't even started working on a flyaway for instance. She would be a disaster in L5 but she would be bored out of her mind in L3.

 

[dynamicduo]

We are going to a big meet next weekend and our HC basically prepared the girls to not place well on the podium. He said the gyms we are going up against deliberately hold girls back so they sweep the top 3 places! We are competing level 5, and he said most of the girls we will be going up against are working on level 8/9 skills! Is it fair, NO, but it is what it is!

 

[LizzieLac]

We are going to a big meet next weekend and our HC basically prepared the girls to not place well on the podium. He said the gyms we are going up against deliberately hold girls back so they sweep the top 3 places! We are competing level 5, and he said most of the girls we will be going up against are working on level 8/9 skills! Is it fair, NO, but it is what it is!

Then I have to ask, is it fair to the girls COMPETING DOWN 2 levels or more?? All I can say is that the one year my DD had to repeat (and it was a judgment call) she was NOT happy. She wanted to compete the next level. She won many meets and won states, but she is still "miffed" about repeating.

Did she need to repeat skill-wise (maybe), but for her she wants to compete and show the full range of what she is capable of. I just have to believe that kids competing 5 having level 8 skills, have to be unhappy, just like the kids on the other end having to compete against them.

 

[raenndrops]

We are going to a big meet next weekend and our HC basically prepared the girls to not place well on the podium. He said the gyms we are going up against deliberately hold girls back so they sweep the top 3 places! We are competing level 5, and he said most of the girls we will be going up against are working on level 8/9 skills! Is it fair, NO, but it is what it is!

Some of those may be gyms that are choosing not to compete L6 (which I don't understand since it is one more level for them to dominate, lol)... so a L5 would at least be training L7 skills... and at L7, they are allowed to compete certain C skills (which would technically be L8/9 skills).
When we go to YMCA Nationals, our girls don't expect to do well for a similar reason though... Some YMCAs practice a lot more than we do... they have pits and more / better equipment... they uptrain 1-2 levels or more... they also compete USAG meets and not just Y meets, so they have more experience. That just makes beating them all the sweeter

 

[dynamicduo]

Then I have to ask, is it fair to the girls COMPETING DOWN 2 levels or more?? All I can say is that the one year my DD had to repeat (and it was a judgment call) she was NOT happy. She wanted to compete the next level. She won many meets and won states, but she is still "miffed" about repeating.

Did she need to repeat skill-wise (maybe), but for her she wants to compete and show the full range of what she is capable of. I just have to believe that kids competing 5 having level 8 skills, have to be unhappy, just like the kids on the other end having to compete against them.

I completely agree that this isn't fair either and I'm sure it might even cause more burnout then moving through at more of a "normal" pace. But I know some of these gyms have upwards of 20 girls competing in 1 level, so it might also be a way of weeding kids out?? The really good ones might move through levels a year at a time, and the so-so gymnasts might stay the same level for 3-4 years, then get bored and move on from the sport?? Just speculation, but it's an interesting thought! And, I know there are gyms out there that win states every year because the girls have been in the same level multiple times!! Kinda a bummer if you ask me!

 

[SignHere]

We were at a meet where 6th place in all 4 events was around 9.5. The first place AA score was a high 38. One team pretty much swept the podium, and the girls were not repeaters. This is the beginning of the season.

These girls were Level 7s, about 9 years old, and doing some of the C skills (that are allowed and count as Bs).

I had to ask a parent standing near me... 30 hours a week of training time. It showed.

 

[emorymom]

If your gymnast has mastered a level and then gets scared, why can't they take a season to just train, rather than waste money competing a level they mastered to 37+?

 

[Pineapple_Lump]

We are going to a big meet next weekend and our HC basically prepared the girls to not place well on the podium. He said the gyms we are going up against deliberately hold girls back so they sweep the top 3 places! We are competing level 5, and he said most of the girls we will be going up against are working on level 8/9 skills! Is it fair, NO, but it is what it is!

Ummm... on your video link the children are working cast to handstands and double backs, they are certainly not at the level your children are competing. Personally I don't have an issue with this (preparing skills well in advance). Your coach probably shouldn't mentally prepare kids for a failure when they are playing the same game as what the other teams are being accused of. Instead of justifying lesser results by pointing fingers, coaches need to own their process and be upfront with parents or play the game better. It feels like some people are really quick to play the sandbagging card when they are not winning, I really respect those parents/coaches who are comfortable with what their gym is doing, and don't need to tear others down when they don't win.

 

[LIGYMMOM]

Ummm... on your video link the children are working cast to handstands and double backs, they are certainly not at the level your children are competing. Personally I don't have an issue with this (preparing skills well in advance). Your coach probably shouldn't mentally prepare kids for a failure when they are playing the same game as what the other teams are being accused of. Instead of justifying lesser results by pointing fingers, coaches need to own their process and be upfront with parents or play the game better. It feels like some people are really quick to play the sandbagging card when they are not winning, I really respect those parents/coaches who are comfortable with what their gym is doing, and don't need to tear others down when they don't win.

Dynamicduo's girls are 5's heading into optionals soon. I'm pretty sure they're just doing a bit of uptraining.

 

[gymdog]

Because of those types of situations, there would have to be a way to petition to break the mandated mobility rules on a case by case basis. I wouldn't support mandated mobility without that. Similar to how you can petition to enter USAG without a mobility score.

Right. You could either petition, compete some of the events and keep training, or just keep training. I'm not sure how I feel (personally wouldn't be upset if it happened, but not too worked up about it), but it's not like anyone is going to forced to compete an unsafe routine. It'll be like a million other situations where kids are almost ready and have to wait to enter meets until they are.

 

[Pineapple_Lump]

Dynamicduo's girls are 5's heading into optionals soon. I'm pretty sure they're just doing a bit of uptraining.

Exactly and that is how the other gyms see what they are doing... as up training. It just annoys me that people refer to kids who are winning as competing down or sandbagging, but kids who are not winning are simply up training. Sometimes others are just better for what ever reason. If you don't like it change it, or change your attitude. When I was a gymnast my gym was always well down the pack, instead of addressing the reasons why we were loosing, we used to constantly rip on why everyone else was so much better, most of it was speculation, exaggerated or simply false, based on the middle of the pack and 'winning' gyms I have experienced.

 

[GYM0M]

Our gym operates on the motto, train up, compete down. We 'win' some and 'lose' some. Most of our gymnasts score 34-36 right out of the gate and move up to 36-38 by the end of the season. There are many many factors which determine which level a gymnast competes, I.e. Mentality, commitment, AGE , and mobility scores. DD competed in her first L5 meet, scored 37.295 AA, Trains level 7-9 skills, has giants, bhs series on beam, full twist on floor, but she isn't old enough to move up. I know some can petition to move to a higher level, but I assume it's much easier just to take those gymnasts through the levels. I think the idea of a mandate score is great, in theory, but there are so many different situations that could come up that writing new by-laws will take forever! We are in a highly competitive state and I don't feel that our gyms philosophy puts any of the gyms that we compete against at a disadvantage. Quality coaching, training hours, equipment, this is what puts a gym at a disadvantage

 

[dynamicduo]

Exactly and that is how the other gyms see what they are doing... as up training. It just annoys me that people refer to kids who are winning as competing down or sandbagging, but kids who are not winning are simply up training. Sometimes others are just better for what ever reason. If you don't like it change it, or change your attitude. When I was a gymnast my gym was always well down the pack, instead of addressing the reasons why we were loosing, we used to constantly rip on why everyone else was so much better, most of it was speculation, exaggerated or simply false, based on the middle of the pack and 'winning' gyms I have experienced.

I get what you are saying, and yes, the girls in my link are my daughters and they do up training at the gym. We got a new HC 10 months ago. All he did with the girls for 5 months was work on shapes and form. Thats it. He assured us that after a few months they will be much stronger and be able to throw new skills much easier because of their body awareness. In July, we learned the routines for level 4 and competed Sept.-Nov. My girls were scoring 35/36, made it to states and faired well, 6th & 9th place. Because they were getting skills much easier because of all the months spent on basics, the HC decided to move them through to Level 5. They had 5 weeks to learn all new routines and so far, they are scoring 35/36 and winning a few 1st places on certain events.

Now, what I was referring to was about us going up against teams whose girls have been doing level 5 for 2-3 years and are scoring upwards of 38+. My girls have been in level 5 for 3 weeks, and are just doing these few meets for mobility. They will be training optionals starting in March, so yes, they are up training quite a bit but this definitely leaves less time to "perfect" the compulsory routines. We are also from a small town and have to travel 3-4 hours each meet and trust me, our gym does not sandbag in any way. My girls are just doing levels 4-5(skip 6) & 7 in 1 year. We have a phenomenal coach and I love our gym and we definitely don't "rip" on other teams! We are just being realistic with our girls!

@LIGYMMOM - thanks for understanding where I'm coming from!