WAG Regional Percentages Question - R8

[mom2newgymnast]

50+ absolutely not, but NC only has 22 bids. Over the course of this season I've seen at least 10 girls in just child A score over 38

Sorry, I meant 22.

 

[wallinbl]

Level 6 is skipped by many gyms, so numbers are lower. As for level 8, it may be a residual glut from when the levels were renumbered and a lot of gyms jumped their 5's to 7 due to the way the levels bridged that one year.

As for 38 at 6 being harder than 34 at 9, 9 and 10 have nationals, so regionals is really the qualifier to get to nationals.

 

[Natasha]

The numbers per level for regionals are a predetermined # for l6,7,8 based on how many girls they can fit into each session. The % varies overall and from state to state based on # of competitors. The cut off score will also vary each year in each state for each level. The # each state gets is based on # of gymnasts earning the 32 reagardless of if they go to state. Regions are required to have a regional competition for l8. There are more sessions dedicated to l8 so more girls qualify, there are also less l8 competitors so a much higher percent qualify.

 

[gymgal]

I was just curious if things have changed that much since the 2009 and 2012 numbers were published for registered athletes/level. Or if I just don't understand how the # of girls who qualify for regionals is calculated.

What gymmutti said. But in terms of the 2009/2012 stats compared to now - The levels changed in 2013 so that old 6 is now new 5 and new 6 is a new level it is a very basic optional level. There are a lot of gyms that do not use it at all. They skip their girls from 5 to 7. So the numbers from before 2013 can't be compared with after 2013.

It must be a participation thing at states for Region 8 as well. I know our L6 meet has 4 Sessions of 3 flights a piece (12 age brackets)... figuring on around 15 or so girls per bracket attending gives 180 so the ~15% thing seems a tad low (147), but not far off... but I know we see a bit of diversity in the meets we attend, but we definitely don't see all the gymmies in NC, much less the entire region and I feel very confident that a LOT more than just 180 girls in NC had qualifying scores for L6 states (32AA). I think the lowest AA score I saw at any of the attended competitions (not including scratches) was single high 31 and that stood out as being a significant outlier.

I guess if one state reports that every gymnast there qualifies even if they don't attend states. And another only reports the number attending states - then the latter gets shafted on the number that get to go to regionals?

Side Note: Given the low number of slots and based on the scores I have seen at competitions this year I wouldn't be surprised if 38.2+ are the only scores that make L6 regionals for NC - which is substantially more daunting than the 34+ for L9 or even the 34.5 for L10.

Looking at last year, L6 in NC had 160 at state meet. The L7s were 145. and L8 132. So those numbers seem pretty reasonable in terms of gradual step down in the levels.

In terms of how slots are awarded - each state in the region reports how many gymnasts earned a certain score. I believe this is done at the state level, not individual gyms so they do not know who plans to go to state meet or skip, so no state will get "shafted" because they reported differently than others.

It will be interesting to see what it takes to qualify for L6. Going by last year's state scores slot 22 would have been a 37, which sounds about right, given the L7/8 scores. L7 needed somewhere around a 36.7 for NC this year. In previous years, it was in the 37.3 range but they added additional slots so it brought down the numbers. Same with L8. A couple years ago, the last qualifying spot was a low 36. This year, it was a 35.325

Just for the record, L9 has a qualifying score of 34.5 and L10 is 34. They increased L9 score two years ago. used to be 34. And as wallibl noted, L9/10 are lower because nationals is their championships - not regionals. To get to nationals, you have to be the top 7 in your age group. Last year in region 8 that meant between 37.2 and 37.8-ish for L10, depending on the age group. L9 was lower, some as low as 30, if I remember correctly.

 

[cadybearsmommy]

L6 regionals is new in R8 this year I believe. We are in SC and none of our L6's made regionals, it was very tough competition. One of our L7's missed regionals by one spot. It is definitely harder to qualify in the lower optional levels. Hopefully the L6 regionals will be a big hit and maybe they will be able to accommodate more girls next year. Best of luck to your dd!

 

[ascarter1]

L6 regionals is new in R8 this year I believe. We are in SC and none of our L6's made regionals, it was very tough competition. One of our L7's missed regionals by one spot. It is definitely harder to qualify in the lower optional levels. Hopefully the L6 regionals will be a big hit and maybe they will be able to accommodate more girls next year. Best of luck to your dd!

Our gym had 1 lv6 qualify, all 5 of our lv7's qualified, our 1 lv8 qualified, 4 of our 6 lv9's qualified, and our only lv10 qualified. Our gym had a lot more qualify this year than in years past.

 

[ProudDad]

Ok... because I am a complete math nerd I went out to MMS and pulled the numbers from the 2016 State Meets. NC and MS haven't gone yet... so they aren't there and LA apparently doesn't do MMS.

So using the fact that NC and SC were granted the same 22 regional gymnasts I assume that they have the same number of state qualifiers (147 which is reasonable if you accept NC would be the only state to have less L6 gymnasts than in 2015)

With the same logic LA and AL both received 12 bids and AL had 59... so assume 59 for LA.... and MS only had 35 last year and they were at best 75% of LA with 8 bids... so being generous we give them 45 state qualifiers (reducing it to 35 just gives everyone a fraction of a bid)

Ok with the assumptions out of the way... the numbers of state qualified gymnasts for 2016 Region 8 are:
ST # %Total Calc_Bids Actual Bid %
AL 59 5% 10 6%
FL 327 27% 55 25%
GA 350 28% 59 31%
LA 59 5% 10 6%
NC 147 12% 25 11%
SC 147 12% 25 11%
TN 99 8% 16 8%
MS 45 4% 7 4%

This gives a total of 1236 gymnasts +/- whatever error is made by assumptions. This does give 207 gymnasts instead of the 206 because it would just be rude to count someone as a fractional gymnast... so we need to steal one from somebody... and MS has to get enough to at least make a team so we have to steal another from someone... even if we took them both from the Carolinas that is still 24 each.

Based on the actual number of state participants there is no mathematical way for GA to have 63 bids and the rest of the states to have the number of bids they have been given - unless the numbers for regional weren't based on actual participants. For those working on fitting me for a straight jacket... that would mean that GA and FL would have a 12% no show rate that none of the other states would exhibit.

The actual breakdown of bids percentage gives FL and GA a ~3% advantage or 4 more gymnasts than they should have... AL and LA got 2 more than they should... and NC and SC are each shorted by 3...

My deep dive into the numbers also showed that FL and GA had much larger increases in their L6 population than anyone else - both increasing by nearly 100 since last year... while everyone else had very modest increases except (as mentioned earlier) NC who by the numbers should go down by ~10% - we'll see next weekend. I have a much better understanding of how the numbers work, but feel like there is something a little hinky though not quite as far off as I first thought.

Anway.... Thanks to all who wished my or any of the girls good luck this weekend... they are all champions for getting as far as they have and pushing themselves well beyond limits I could ever imagine even trying myself.

 

[wallinbl]

If you want the details on Region 8 Regional numbers, they're below. FYI - the target was 204 gymnasts +/- ties and accounting for scratches for Level 6.

PERCENTAGE QUALIFIERS TO REGIONALS -- 2016


LEVEL 8:

Total # OF

STATEGYMNASTS


AL27(8 team + 19)


FL141(8 team + 133)


GA99(8 team + 91)


LA27(8 team + 19)


MS8(8 team)


NC67(8 team + 59)


SC39(8 team + 31)


TN40(8 team + 32)
Total448

LEVEL 7:

Total # OF

STATEGYMNASTS


AL21(8 team + 13)


FL114(8 team + 106)


GA76(8 team + 68)


LA17 (8 team + 9)


MS8(8 team)


NC52(8 team + 44)


SC31(8 team + 23)


TN28(8 team + 20)

Total 347

LEVEL 6:

Total # OF

STATEGYMNASTS


AL12(8 team + 4)


FL51(8 team + 43)


GA63(8 team + 55)


LA12(8 team + 4)


MS8(8 team)


NC22(8 team + 14)


SC22(8 team + 14)


TN16(8 team + 8)-------

Total 206



Any state with a fraction of .50 gymnast or higher rounded up. Any with a fraction of .49 or less rounded down.

A foreign athlete is eligible to compete at Level 7 Regionals as long as an additional gymnast from that state is accepted to Level 7 Regionals. The foreign athlete would receive duplicate awards at Regionals.Foreign athletes would be in addition to the above numbers.

source: http://www.region8gymnastics.org/

 

[wallinbl]

Based on the actual number of state participants there is no mathematical way for GA to have 63 bids and the rest of the states to have the number of bids they have been given - unless the numbers for regional weren't based on actual participants. For those working on fitting me for a straight jacket... that would mean that GA and FL would have a 12% no show rate that none of the other states would exhibit.

The actual breakdown of bids percentage gives FL and GA a ~3% advantage or 4 more gymnasts than they should have... AL and LA got 2 more than they should... and NC and SC are each shorted by 3...

The numbers that are to come from each state are decided prior to the state meets, and are not based on how many attend the state meet. They're based on how many within that state achieve a particular score by a specified date.

Dig around on the Region 8 website. Most of the information is in there.

 

[gymgal]

To get to nationals, you have to be the top 7 in your age group. Last year in region 8 that meant between 37.2 and 37.8-ish for L10, depending on the age group. L9 was lower, some as low as 30, if I remember correctly.

NOT 30 - it was supposed to read 36. Sorry...

 

[Deleted member 18037]

Gymnastics is not fair. There will always be kids who train more hours than others. There is quality of that training. There will be kids doing multiple years at a level. Kids competing below a level they should be. States handle things differently. Gyms handle things differently. And on and on. You could move to a state where you like the odds better. You could move to a gym that competes your kid at a lower level for better scores. Or a gym that does more hours or more conditioning or has better "coaches" or uses their hours better.

But it will never be fair. This is a sport where an Olympic qualifying meet only one kid is guaranteed a spot based on performance at that meet. The rest are decided in a back room. This sport is not "fair" by any objective measure.

 

[ProudDad]

Gymnastics is not fair.

I have seen this plenty of times over... and have been in the threads about age brackets (mine is on the bottom end of a 15mo bracket... other than the top end everyone else is 3mo... oh well that's just how it goes to get enough kids spread evenly across divisions) and scoring (sour grapes). This was more of a mental exercise for me because I saw something that at first blush appeared egregiously out of whack when looking at 2015 state numbers, you all just got to come on the ride inside my head.

I don't expect anything to change and given the potential for variability the committee faces I think whatever methodology they use to dole out bids is about as fair as anyone could expect - only way to do it better is to wait until all state meets conclude. With a lower state qualifying score (32) and the stats I have seen showing that 6 (or old 7) has a lot more gymnasts than higher levels (makes sense... its harder and a tough age) I just expected the numbers going to regional to trend the same direction. Once the full season is over, I'll likely go through and look at the scores by level and see if the number of gymnasts per level align with scoring (e.g. regional qualifiers end up being 37+ across all levels) or if they are using dark voodoo magic (or just avoiding having another venue) to come up with the 204+/- scratch number.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

I only have experience with our region. Which is 6. All regional meet decisions are made at states. And you need to qualify to go to states/regionals. (excluding petitions).

Its different for the levels. At 9/10 you need to score 34 or higher at states to go to regionals. At L7/L8 Top 7 scores regardless of age are the Regional State Team. Then a percentage of gymnasts qualify for the state All Star team, which totals 112 gymnasts. So clearly a state with more kids will get to 112 with in all likelihood higher scores, then a state with fewer gymmies. Higher amount of kids the percent cut off will be narrower to get the 112 totals.

The other factor is the quality of gymmies in any given year. Some years the group of kids is just stronger then others.

There are no surprises, the qualification criteria is clearly spelled out.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

Quick dig of Region 8. Qualifying scores for L9/10 and state percentages (formulas) were decided back in June 2014. Don't know how often they revisit.

 

[ProudDad]

Quick dig of Region 8. Qualifying scores for L9/10 and state percentages (formulas) were decided back in June 2014. Don't know how often they revisit.

Thanks for looking that up.

The scores and percentages thing makes sense to me, the only thing that is still a question is why R6 gets 112 for L7/L8 + the State team.. so 119 for 7 and the same for 8? and in R8 we have 206 L6, 347 L7 (based on the 2016 State Meet we have roughly the same number of L6 and L7 make State) and 448 L8. Where does the number of gymnasts who get to go to regionals come from... most simply put - why was 204 the target for L6?

 

[gymgal]

Prouddad,

It is not a straight up percentage of girls qualifying to states. There are 2 sets of numbers. First, girls who scored a 32 in regular season. These are the majority of the spots assigned. Then they count the number of girls who scored a 34 in the season, for a smaller set of spots assigned. This is the way it was when dd competed. Since I haven't heard any different, I think it is still like this, at least for L7/8. Would stand to reason that level 6 is set up the same. The specifics are shown here, though these are for 2014. The total number of spots increased considerably this year for L7/8
Region 8 Rules and Regulations 2014 - Region8Gymnastics.org

 

[Deleted member 18037]

Thanks for looking that up.

The scores and percentages thing makes sense to me, the only thing that is still a question is why R6 gets 112 for L7/L8 + the State team.. so 119 for 7 and the same for 8? and in R8 we have 206 L6, 347 L7 (based on the 2016 State Meet we have roughly the same number of L6 and L7 make State) and 448 L8. Where does the number of gymnasts who get to go to regionals come from... most simply put - why was 204 the target for L6?

Oh I am guessing you have to read the meeting minutes for the Region and how the vote went for the final decision. Again, your region and mine clearly do things differently but then there are not nationals for those levels.

 

[ProudDad]

There are 2 sets of numbers. First, girls who scored a 32 in regular season. These are the majority of the spots assigned. Then they count the number of girls who scored a 34 in the season, for a smaller set of spots assigned. This is the way it was when dd competed. Since I haven't heard any different, I think it is still like this, at least for L7/8. Would stand to reason that level 6 is set up the same. The specifics are shown here, though these are for 2014. The total number of spots increased considerably this year for L7/8
Region 8 Rules and Regulations 2014 - Region8Gymnastics.org

I promise I'm not trying to be difficult, just genuinely curious...

RULES & REGULATIONS FOR REGION 8
Compilation of Region 8 USA Gymnastics Committee Minutes
Revised 9/2014 Updated 3/18/15

There be four sessions for Level 7 Regionals on Friday, including the Level 7 team session. (6/11/09) (8/9/12) Top four scores count for Level 7 team scores at Level 7 Regionals (6/11/09)

If a tie for state team occurs at Level 7 Regionals Team competition the tie will not be broken. (7/9/03)

The number of gymnasts at Level 7 Regionals is 262 + all ties. The number of team members is 64 (8 per state with 4 scores counting for team). There are no petitions accepted to Level 7 Regionals. Each state turns in to RACC the number of Level 7 athletes in their state with a 32.00 AA by the designated deadline, from all 8 states. A percentage for each state is figured for the 198 All State places. (6/11/09) (8/9/12)

In 2015, NC had 143 Level 7 gymnasts score higher than 32AA at the state meet.
In 2015, SC had 85 Level 7 gymnasts score higher than 32AA at the state meet.
In 2015, FL had 309 Level 7 gymnasts score higher than 32AA at the state meet.
In 2015, GA had 207 Level 7 gymnasts score higher than 32AA at the state meet.

Ignoring the other states (no offense intended, I just got my number well above what's needed) that means that well over 744 gymnasts meet the 32AA minimum (likely closer to 900)... so why the 262? Nothing on the site or in this document indicates why the seemingly arbitrary number of 262+ all ties is selected? Do they just take ~30%... if so great I have an answer, but nothing I can find officially documents how that number was picked.

 

[gymgal]

I promise I'm not trying to be difficult, just genuinely curious...

Ignoring the other states (no offense intended, I just got my number well above what's needed) that means that well over 744 gymnasts meet the 32AA minimum (likely closer to 900)... so why the 262? Nothing on the site or in this document indicates why the seemingly arbitrary number of 262+ all ties is selected? Do they just take ~30%... if so great I have an answer, but nothing I can find officially documents how that number was picked.

That is simple. They begin with the venue and how many gymnasts they can accommodate in a certain number of sessions. Then they award a higher percentage of those spots to the L8 competition and smaller to the L7 and L6 competitions. Over the past few years, they have increased the amount for 7/8 and now they have added L6. I know this year, because of the bigger venue and the increase to 3 days instead of 2, they were able to offer a lot more spots for L7/8. I suppose they could have had separate competitions/venues for each level, or for one and combine the other 2 and that way they could have had more spots available. Not sure why they choose to combine them. Perhaps resources, number of gyms willing/able to host the meets.

 

[ProudDad]

r if they are using dark voodoo magic (or just avoiding having another venue) to come up with the 204+/- scratch number.

That is simple. They begin with the venue and how many gymnasts they can accommodate in a certain number of sessions. Then they award a higher percentage of those spots to the L8 competition and smaller to the L7 and L6 competitions. Over the past few years, they have increased the amount for 7/8 and now they have added L6. I know this year, because of the bigger venue and the increase to 3 days instead of 2, they were able to offer a lot more spots for L7/8. I suppose they could have had separate competitions/venues for each level, or for one and combine the other 2 and that way they could have had more spots available. Not sure why they choose to combine them. Perhaps resources, number of gyms willing/able to host the meets.

Thanks gymgal, that was one of the suppositions I had made earlier - and its interesting looking at the meets breakdowns by state. Based on the numbers for each State competetion, some have a single competition for JO and XCEL - All levels, because they fit, some have 6/7, 8-10 and break up XCEL or lump just the bronze in with 6/7... I figured it had to be a logistics (and ultimately cost) thing, it would just be nice to see the decision documented... I went through all the meeting minutes I could find... the result was there but never the how they got there. I'm guessing "Deb K." is the only one that really knows.