Parents No score out for level 5?

[cmg]

As a college athlete (track and field) when my dd started gymnastics I was super impressed with gymnastics' "scientific" approach to building skills through the compulsory program. In my mind a lot of research and experience was behind each step. I feel like eliminating the need for Level 5 takes a lot of that "science" away.

Saying that, I do think compulsories could be improved. It is tedious for athletes, coaches, and parents to drill the same skills over and over and then in routines having to have the exact dance, skills, and movements as USGA choreographed. A little more leeway on skills and dance would go a long way. I believe that is why a lot of gyms are going Xcel to DP. I am not sure being exactly right in compulsories is necessary for a successful gymnastics career and may be a reason some gymnasts quit because it is tedious. I do think my dd benefited with having a strong compulsory background.

Perhaps combining Xcel and compulsories would be a happy medium? You could have more flexible routines (Xcel based) but keep some of the necessary skill development (compulsory based) as mentioned above? I have never liked the attitude that Xcel is "less than DP". Now maybe they just take compulsories and Xcel away, call it something different and have everyone basically go through the same steps of development and the breaking off point to decide whether you go with DP or Xcel would be at L6 and Platinum. At this point you decide if you want to go onto the college track/DP, or on a less stressful/demanding track with Xcel (maybe call it something else to create a more positive choice). That way everyone gets the same building blocks and athletes that want to practice less hours and perhaps do other sports/activities could pick the "Xcel" track and still develop higher level skills. I have always thought Xcel should have more higher levels. I guess they have Saphire now, but I have not seen anyone compete that level. I will say that our gym has been a DP only gym for some time and only introduced Xcel 3 years ago. I think my daughter would have benefited being in Xcel due to her mental blocks, but too late for that now. However, she would not have wanted to "drop down" to Xcel which I think is sad to have that perception.

Change is always hard, and it seems like USGA is taking baby steps when just redoing the whole program might be better. But I am just a parent, so I have no idea what is behind all the decision making behind the change. Bottom line I do think the skill development that happens in compulsories is really important and Level 5 is part of that.

 

[GymnastMomX2]

Makes me wonder if they should just get rid of level 5, and reshuffle the levels back to how they used to be, just with an extra optional level. Or they could just get rid of compulsory routines and just have compulsory skills instead, then gyms would stop using xcel for early levels just to transition back to DP.

I also see so many people arguing how gymnasts who skip 5 miss out on foundational skills, especially on bars, and I just don’t see it. Our gym skipped 5 for a while, and our girls are all fine, progressions for upper level skills started before and while competing 4. Seems more like a coaching issue to me, proper progressions should be followed regardless of the level being competed.

 

[JBS]

As a college athlete (track and field) when my dd started gymnastics I was super impressed with gymnastics' "scientific" approach to building skills through the compulsory program. In my mind a lot of research and experience was behind each step. I feel like eliminating the need for Level 5 takes a lot of that "science" away.

Ok... so let me preface this with... I agree with a compulsory system... just not the way it is right now.

It does appear that way... until you actually see the process in motion. For example... when my daughter made it to TOPS A camp... all I heard about was how the compulsory system was destroying high level bars and how we should pull anyone out of it that is any good. I was told that the compulsory system creates "stiff robot bars"... a "super hollow cast"... and a "jerky tap". There was more... but I totally remember that. Here is a bunch of random thoughts from me on bars alone...

• A cast does not hollow off the bar... it arches off the bar
• You don't create an arch in a tap swing by hollowing... you create it by arching... which many clubs don't work on... they just hollow the back swing expecting it to jerk into an arch
• The clear hip circle is not the be all end all of gymnastics... the toe circle should be an option... and it's really not. How about Level 3 squat on and jump off or sole circle under the bar to top and jump off? Level 4... get to high bar either way... squat on or sole circle under and jump. And the kicker... Level 5 either kip cast clear hip kip cast squat on jump... OR... kip cast sole circle jump to high bar (no clear hip or pop off the bar to another kip required). The sole circle is all about the down side... not the up side... the kids need more time to get this concept
• BHC-BHC-FHC... um... that's just dumb... talk about destroying one of the most important concepts on bars... rhythm...

So while the whole world is doing this...



GAGE is doing this...



Look at the simple process of a handstand pirouette. It's amazing to me that so many girls first learn it around Level 7 for Level 8 bars... why is there not a handstand pirouette on floor? Then... the first floor pirouette they do is a back extension to blind change drill... holy cow... talk about skipping progressions. Then you hear that a swing half turn to either below the bar or even with the rail is a blind progression... um... not in men's gymnastics... that's just a dismount... you have to go higher for that to even feel anything like a blind.

How about Level 4 floor... are you kidding me? FWO... CW... back extension... it's to teach them how to tumble and they want rhythm... but then they end it with a back extension so the rhythm that they are looking for is auto-killed. It's... carry momentum... carry momentum... slow down... what? How about FWO... CW... BHS step out?

The reasons that they give for the compulsory stuff doesn't line up. Then even worse... some other upper USAG person explains it totally different.

Sorry... just babbling at this point.

 

[gymgal]

I’m not making any assumptions. I stated my OPINION based on fact and knowledge of the compulsory program and why they have it. But mostly my opinion after having my 3 daughters come through the lower levels and seeing the different paths they took and how not training level 5 for a whole season negatively impacted my 3rd daughter’s optional training and performance. And every level does not build on the one before, because Xcel gymnasts can skip skills and just do what’s easiest for them as long as the requirements for their level are met.
Example: backwards roll, to back ext roll in push-up position, to back ext roll to kneeling, to back extension roll to handstand Step down. That’s 4 levels, each building on the one before, training that core skill for 4-5 years, the purpose of which is to strengthen their free hip in levels 5 and above, as it’s the same movement and shape. My youngest missed the final step, didn’t do free hips in Gold or back extension rolls, trained it just before scoring out of 5 and squeaking by with it, and then struggled with it for the next 2 years. My OPINION based on my knowledge and observation and experience.

The fact that her gym chose not to train that progression, or similar ones that achieve the same results, is the problem. It has nothing to do with whether or not it is in the routine. But that wasn't my original point. My point is that The COP can easily stipulate what skills (or selection of skills) are required in the routine without requiring identical routines from the gymnasts, just like they do for the DP optional levels. And yes, every level builds upon the one before, even for xcel. A good gym will train foundational skills and skill progressions regardless of whether they are included in routines.

 

[cmg]

Ok... so let me preface this with... I agree with a compulsory system... just not the way it is right now.

It does appear that way... until you actually see the process in motion. For example... when my daughter made it to TOPS A camp... all I heard about was how the compulsory system was destroying high level bars and how we should pull anyone out of it that is any good. I was today that the compulsory system creates "stiff robot bars"... a "super hollow cast"... and a "jerky tap". There was more... but I totally remember that. Here is a bunch of random thoughts from me on bars alone...

• A cast does not hollow off the bar... it arches off the bar
• You don't create an arch in a tap swing by hollowing... you create it by arching... which many clubs don't work on... they just hollow the back swing expecting it to jerk into an arch
• The clear hip circle is not the be all end all of gymnastics... the toe circle should be an option... and it's really not. How about Level 3 squat on and jump off or sole circle under the bar to top and jump off? Level 4... get to high bar either way... squat on or sole circle under and jump. And the kicker... Level 5 either kip cast clear hip kip cast squat on jump... OR... kip cast sole circle jump to high bar (no clear hip or pop off the bar to another kip required). The sole circle is all about the down side... not the up side... the kids need more time to get this concept
• BHC-BHC-FHC... um... that's just dumb... talk about destroying one of the most important concepts on bars... rhythm...

So while the whole world is doing this...



GAGE is doing this...



Look at the simple process of a handstand pirouette. It's amazing to me that so many girls first learn it around Level 7 for Level 8 bars... why is there not a handstand pirouette on floor? Then... the first floor pirouette they do is a back extension to blind change drill... holy cow... talk about skipping progressions. Then you hear that a swing half turn to either below the bar or even with the rail is a blind progression... um... not in men's gymnastics... that's just a dismount... you have to go higher for that to even feel anything like a blind.

How about Level 4 floor... are you kidding me? FWO... CW... back extension... it's to teach them how to tumble and they want rhythm... but then they end it with a back extension so the rhythm that they are looking for is auto-killed. It's... carry momentum... carry momentum... slow down... what? How about FWO... CW... BHS step out?

The reasons that they give for the compulsory stuff doesn't line up. Then even worse... some other upper USAG person explains it totally different.

Sorry... just babbling at this point.

Like I said, I am just a parent with no personal gymnastics experience. I hereby put JBS in charge of revamping the compulsory system! and I wish we lived near your gym when my daughter started gymnastics.

 

[Aussie_coach]

Many years ago, that was how it worked in the WAG system in Australia.

Level 7-10 were optional, based in requirements, just as they are now.

Level 4-6 (which is like the USAG 3-5). Were compulsory, but the only compulsory elements were the skills. There were a list of skills that had to be completed.

Example, level 5 beam had
Split leap
Straight jump split jump
Full turn on 1 foot
Handstand held 2 secs
Cartwheel or walkover
Front tuck or cartwheel straight jump disnount

You then put together your own routines for floor, beam and bars with those elements in any order.

Level 1-3 has set routines, but for each level there were three options. A more basic routine, ideal for low hour gymnasts which had a start value of 9.0, then the other two routines for progressively harder and had start values if 9.5 and 10.0 respectively.

Then it all changed to compulsory set routines for everyone up to level 6.

I much preferred the old system. Gymnasts got their own floor music, we could express their individuality. We could make routines work for their own developmental level.

But they felt it was time consuming and prohibitive to have individually choreographed routines for all levels. They also felt Compulsory routines taught kids how to perform better.

 

[JessSyd]

But they felt it was time consuming and prohibitive to have individually choreographed routines for all levels. They also felt Compulsory routines taught kids how to perform better.

There were a couple of years after the switch to the current Australian levels program where there was one set level six floor choreography, but clubs also had the option of using their own. It lasted a couple of years, and some clubs ran with their own choreography, but my observation was that most clubs chose the set routine (at least around here - can’t speak for the whole country!). And then they made the level fully compulsory. I remember our head coach explaining the reasoning to us, but I can’t remember what that reason was as my daughter was in a lower level and level six seemed a world away! Easier for gyms and newer intermediate judges I guess.

I don’t mind the compulsory routines here. I think most of them are cleverly choreographed, the music is fairly appealing, and the two options per level means there is some leeway to accommodate a child’s personality. And they have shown a willingness to tweak it if they decide it wasn’t achieving what they wanted it to (eg, the revisions that happened in, was it 2020??) And it is a lot easier for clubs, especially little ones without in house choreographers. We have a gazillion threes, two gymsports, one floor and almost no clear non-floor space. We NEED the threes and fours practicing their routines in lines, not as individuals. Creating and teaching them all individual routines would be tricky even though we do have in house choreography! It’s hard enough for our handful of optionals.

Mind you, I was also glad when my daughter got to the end of optionals - yay, no more walkover skills, which her back was not designed for and which she never really trained properly because they weren’t safe for her.

 

[JBS]

Like I said, I am just a parent with no personal gymnastics experience. I hereby put JBS in charge of revamping the compulsory system! and I wish we lived near your gym when my daughter started gymnastics.

I honestly wish the compulsory system was more of a pass / fail system instead of a competitive system. If the point of it is truly to create a solid foundation... then placement is really not necessary. How cool would it be to have a TOPs program that was more for the average kid? Then instead of requiring an average score to mobilize through the level (which that average score signifies that you are NOT any good... that you lost)... require an average number of points of things achieved that only signifies that you have what it takes to start training towards the future.

They could even run the two programs side by side. Keep the traditional compulsory program for those that want it... but have a pass / fail system for those that just want to show that they have the ability that it takes to move forwards.

Floor could be split into tumbling / jumping / leaping and dance. Jumping and leaping requires a large amount of let strength just as tumbling does. I'd want to see who has the power and who has the grace and who has both.

Trampoline would definitely have a testing component.

Vault... well that would just be a whole new thing. Compulsory vault is something that they have had to change into something that they can figure out how to get a score for. Vault is really all about power and we (gymnastics coaches) definitely don't understand it. Look at the simple warm up of "high knees" and "deer run" that so many clubs do... this is absolutely destroying the run of the athletes. Proper front side and back side mechanics in running has more to do with core and lower body strength than anything else. The front side and back side mechanics have to be connected to each other to actually have a good run... which we in gymnastics never teach. We just yell stupid stuff like... high knees (higher higher faster move those legs)... butt kicks (move those arms super stupidly fast with zero rhythm... that's a joke)... chasses (wtf... this is a dance move... it should never be linked to vault)... deer run (point your toes... um... WRONG). We would be so much better teach a true power drill like a basic bound...



Notice the pointed toes in this one... definitely not what you want for running... and it just kind of happens with all of them unless you specifically tell them not to do it...

Now for all you track freaks out there (@kecks)... I'm not talking the triple jump style bounding like here...

Bounding – How to Teach and Train This Perfect Exercise - SimpliFaster

Coach Rob Assise looks at every facet of bounding and presents ways to utilize bounding within a training program, no matter what your sport.

simplifaster.com

The compulsory program currently has no strength or flexibility testing component. This is probably the strangest part to me. Really the only thing that USA Gymnastics has setup for strength is TOPs... which is like the gold standard of gymnastics strength. It would be nice if there was a starting point for presses instead of just 10 in a row... I mean come on... a press is very helpful... but 10 in row? Strength and flex testing is a good thing... but you don't need the TOPs strength to be passing from L2 to L3... you also don't need a full "periodized" compulsory strength training system that some of these gymnastics progression websites will sell you... 5 strict push ups would be nice though...



I'm just going to post as I don't even know what I am posting again... I need to read it.

 

[JBS]

@cmg What event(s) did you do in college?

 

[Deleted member 18037]

It’s neither fair or unfair. It’s just a different option/path. And it pretty much doesn’t matter. They all get to where they are capable of getting to.

6 of one or half a dozen of another.

For gyms/coaches who feel L5 is not worth doing they are scoring their kids out no matter what. For gyms that feel L5 is important and worth doing. The score out path is irrelevant.

And for many compulsory gymnasts getting a minimum score of 34 in L4 and a minimum of 32 in L5 is more quickly and easily done then 2 scores of 36 at L4.
Not every kid is a consistent 36 scorer in L4. But if they are decent gymnasts capable of being very close to L7 then getting a minimum score of 32 for a score out meet at L5 should be accomplished fairly quickly.

The gym we were at during those levels made decisions based on the gymnasts.

We had kids in the same skill range do a season of 5, then 6 then 7, then 8.
Others score out of 5 and do 6 then 7 2x then 8.
They all practiced in the same group.
They all got to 8 at the same time.

 

[cmg]

@cmg What event(s) did you do in college?

I ran anything from 800 to 3000 meters, mostly the 1500 and on a lot of relays where they needed me. I was a walk-on, and as we have discussed in other threads, a mediocre career due to lots of injuries from running on a small indoor track that were hard on my knees. Back when I ran the PT protocols were pretty non-existent. So, I got repeated injuries. I was not an event or a sprint athlete so not sure where my daughter got her gymnastics abilities. She did have an uncle that was a diver at Harvard, but this was in the 1950's, so maybe in her genes somewhere!

 

[gymm0mof2]

View attachment 8744

Great news... Level 5 is no longer required if you score two 36's at Level 4. See the exact details in the following link...

https://static.usagym.org/PDFs/Women/Committee%20Minutes/NDPC/ndpc_051523.pdf

What do you think... join in the conversation below!

does anyone know if this is certain regions or anyone in the usag

 

[JBS]

does anyone know if this is certain regions or anyone in the usag

Whole country.

 

[gymm0mof2]

Whole country.

Thank you- based of last years scores correct? My kid did 2 years at 4 and is working to move up missing one skill (main one i guess) and i think with more time she get it but the gym is pushing her back to 4 and I don't agree with it. When she has everything else needed.

 

[Coach Kate]

Thank you- based of last years scores correct? My kid did 2 years at 4 and is working to move up missing one skill (main one i guess) and i think with more time she get it but the gym is pushing her back to 4 and I don't agree with it. When she has everything else needed.

What's the skill?

Also, just because USAG allows scores from level 4 to count to pass out of 5, gyms are still free to have their own policies.

 

[gymm0mof2]

What's the skill?

Also, just because USAG allows scores from level 4 to count to pass out of 5, gyms are still free to have their own policies.

Yes i understand that totally but has 3 out of 4 events has routine knows how to do the skill individually but won't connect. Rbhbt- roundoff back handspring back tuck. Again can do each on its own can do round off, standing back handspring, standing back tuck, and round off 2 ( but its a mental struggle for her that she has and usually gets it when needed but won't do it consistent ) We are working with her she gets privates weekly and she really tries. But she was a Bar state champion in her division last year and 5 place AA i feel going back to the level going to make it to easy for her.

 

[gymm0mof2]

Yes i understand that totally but has 3 out of 4 events has routine knows how to do the skill individually but won't connect. Rbhbt- roundoff back handspring back tuck. Again can do each on its own can do round off, standing back handspring, standing back tuck, and round off 2 ( but its a mental struggle for her that she has and usually gets it when needed but won't do it consistent ) We are working with her she gets privates weekly and she really tries. But she was a Bar state champion in her division last year and 5 place AA i feel going back to the level going to make it to easy for her.

I also know she needs work and should be held back for it. I don't understand why if a level 3 can move up from 2 not having a bar routine to continue to practice it to get it, but a level 5 can't stay a 5 because of one skill. I have one on each level so talking strictly about my children no other child.

 

[Coach Kate]

Yes i understand that totally but has 3 out of 4 events has routine knows how to do the skill individually but won't connect. Rbhbt- roundoff back handspring back tuck. Again can do each on its own can do round off, standing back handspring, standing back tuck, and round off 2 ( but its a mental struggle for her that she has and usually gets it when needed but won't do it consistent ) We are working with her she gets privates weekly and she really tries. But she was a Bar state champion in her division last year and 5 place AA i feel going back to the level going to make it to easy for her.

You have to talk to her coaches. All the gyms I've been at have done final level placements somewhere between September and October, so depending on where that falls, it might all work out. In some cases, we might have an athlete scratch an event they aren't ready for. It really depends on the athlete, the situation, and the gym's philosophy.

I feel differently about level 2-3 than 4-5. Repeating level 2 is absurd to me. I personally wouldn't even compete it in the first place if it were up to me.

 

[gymm0mof2]

You have to talk to her coaches. All the gyms I've been at have done final level placements somewhere between September and October, so depending on where that falls, it might all work out. In some cases, we might have an athlete scratch an event they aren't ready for. It really depends on the athlete, the situation, and the gym's philosophy.

I feel differently about level 2-3 than 4-5. Repeating level 2 is absurd to me. I personally wouldn't even compete it in the first place if it were up to me.

both my kids did the level 2, the level 2 did her second year last year. and level 4 competed and completed her second year at the end of May. so this be 3 years on same level. And for the both they did really well as second year,that doesn't make sense to hold back for 3 years and i know safety first and i understand rules but why is it only held back for 1 skill. And we don't even start really competing until end of November so there would still be time.

 

[NutterButter]

My 2 cents is that I'd be very skeptical of a 3rd year at any of the lower levels unless there's special circumstances such as illness, injury or maybe even an exceptionally young gymnast that might explain a 3rd year. 3 years at L4 indicates to me a potential issue with the training (not being progressed properly) or athlete (Xcel might be a better fit) or both. The skill your DD is missing though is pretty big though but I'm surprised there's no wiggle room being offered (such as a reevaluation later or scratching the one event).