All-Star Crossovers And Sandbagging

[FlexyTumblerMom]

No experience of this and I don't think our gym does many crossovers. But I'm intrigued by the debate.

Question: If kids are crossed down level(s) just to win, how do they and their parents feel about it? More money, more practices, longer time at comps... to compete skills that are below your level. I don't think I would like it much as a parent?

I know if my kid had a standing back handspring to a double (lol - I keep going back to that example on the other thread cause I found it very shocking), and someone wanted her to do a level 2 team of her same age level, I would not want that - it's not fair to steal glory away from true level 2 kids - ones who worked really hard to get their back handspring and now are gonna be pushed to the back row - there also would be very little progress to be gained stunting-wise for my CP unless she was basing instead of flying or vice versa.

Now if it was down or up one level, maybe even 2, it wouldn't be so bad - but from 5 to 2, or 4 to 1...thats just not right for a big gym to do IMO. Let the level 1's and 2's have their time to learn and experience what it's like to compete, win or lose, w/o the level 4/5 kids carrying the routine for them.

Eta - reading about that situation on that other thread has moved me into the "we need rules governing crossovers" camp. I think I'd suggest no more than 2 levels down, maybe even 1 if the gym is big enough. And that gyms w/ less than ~75 athletes total, or less than 25 -30 level 4 or 5 atheletes, are exempt.

 

[HeyMom]

A strong level 3 team can beat a team of L5 athletes also doing a L3 routine. With the right coaching and good choreo this isn't out of the realm of possibilities.

Something like this happened to us this weekend. Granted we were at a smaller comp but our J3 outscored a level 6 team. They were from a small college from out of state and it didn't appear they had many "true" level 6 athletes on their team but our level 3 routine outscored their level 5ish/6ish routine....

 

[GreenStormLucy]

It would be dishonest if it was never their intention to compete at L5. But if they really went for it and practiced all summer and got a routine together and could hit elements during warm up but come December or January still couldn't hit a full out, then I think dropping to L3 or 4 would be more about safety and being able to hit confidently. The kids need to feel safe and be confident and they can't be either if they aren't hitting.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they are not ready for L5 full outs, dropping down to 4 or even 3 the whole team is maybe the best decision and for me a whole other story than filling a L3 with 25 or more percent of L5 athletes that can hit L5 skills in a competition routine without problems [emoji6] But maybe that's just my opinion and not directed at a certain gym, but bothers me whenever whichever gym goes that.
And if they have maxed out skilled kids on L2, that could help out at this L3 team to gain more experience for next years tryouts, but choose to go with the L5 athletes, i'm side eyeing you.



Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

 

[cheer25mom]

I know if my kid had a standing back handspring to a double (lol - I keep going back to that example on the other thread cause I found it very shocking), and someone wanted her to do a level 2 team of her same age level, I would not want that - it's not fair to steal glory away from true level 2 kids - ones who worked really hard to get their back handspring and now are gonna be pushed to the back row - there also would be very little progress to be gained stunting-wise for my CP unless she was basing instead of flying or vice versa.

Now if it was down or up one level, maybe even 2, it wouldn't be so bad - but from 5 to 2, or 4 to 1...thats just not right for a big gym to do IMO. Let the level 1's and 2's have their time to learn and experience what it's like to compete, win or lose, w/o the level 4/5 kids carrying the routine for them.

Eta - reading about that situation on that other thread has moved me into the "we need rules governing crossovers" camp. I think I'd suggest no more than 2 levels down, maybe even 1 if the gym is big enough. And that gyms w/ less than ~75 athletes total, or less than 25 -30 level 4 or 5 atheletes, are exempt.

ITA. Big gyms don't need crossovers to field level appropriate teams.

Sometimes small gyms are forced to use crossovers to some extent, but it still stinks for the athletes that are true to the level. CP's first full season of cheer she was one of 5 true mini 1 athletes in the gym. There were about 3 that could have gone either youth 1 or 2, but no other level 1's in the gym. They ended up crossing 5 kids that were mini aged with level 3 skills down from a youth 2 team to mini 1. The true level 1's didn't have tumbling passes, didn't fly, and were pretty much hidden in the back. It wasn't really pleasant. The team won, but CP never really got to contribute much.

 

[cheermomforever]

You'd be surprised at how often this happens. The push for L5 is real and scary. Many teams never drop levels though, and just keep competing at a level that is way too advanced for them.

I saw a 5 team this weekend that would really b a great R5 due to maybe 1 or no doubles.

 

[Lazydaisytoo]

We're with a relatively small, relatively new gym. We had a few new girls start this season, senior age, absolutely no cheer or tumbling experience. But not enough of them to have a S1 team. We had a few J2 girls age out. We had a few girls who were true S2. But even with those 3 groups, there wasn't enough for a S2 team. But adding just a few girls with level 4 experience was enough to gel the team together at S2 level. Sandbagging? Absolutely not. The team is nowhere near full tumbling. And they definitely needed the mentorship of the S4 crossovers to assist in getting the level 2 stunts to work. I'm glad that my daughter got the opportunity to cross over. She's always been on a level appropriate team, but she's never been the "star." This year has given her a leadership experience that she never would have had otherwise. We're not out there winning every competition, but we're also not finishing last every time either.

Editing to add: Perhaps I should have said "not enough girls to make a working S2 team." Adding one experienced girl to each of 3 stunt groups allowed the combination of brand new cheerleaders and level appropriate returning girls to be able to work. I still don't think having a 10% crossover is sandbagging. Others might. Agree to disagree. I don't know why my gym didn't make a small S1 and small S2 with no crossovers.

 

[cheer25mom]

We're with a relatively small, relatively new gym. We had a few new girls start this season, senior age, absolutely no cheer or tumbling experience. But not enough of them to have a S1 team. We had a few J2 girls age out. We had a few girls who were true S2. But even with those 3 groups, there wasn't enough for a S2 team. But adding just a few girls with level 4 experience was enough to gel the team together at S2 level. Sandbagging? Absolutely not. The team is nowhere near full tumbling. And they definitely needed the mentorship of the S4 crossovers to assist in getting the level 2 stunts to work. I'm glad that my daughter got the opportunity to cross over. She's always been on a level appropriate team, but she's never been the "star." This year has given her a leadership experience that she never would have had otherwise. We're not out there winning every competition, but we're also not finishing last every time either.

This is an example of appropriate use of crossovers IMO. They were needed to make the team work.

 

[mybabywantstotumble]

I would like to see a percentage rule in place and perhaps limit it to a one level cross and eliminate worlds athletes from crossing down. I have a friend who's CP is at different gym than us, she is a level 5 athlete but due to age and not having an appropriate level team for her is on a level 4 team and crosses to level 1 & level 2- and she's not the only one, there are 3 of them that cross from the 4 to the 1. That same level 4 team has 3 crossovers from Senior 5. So including my friends cp, there are 4 level 5 athletes on that 4 team. To me, it just seems a little unethical.

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

Something like this happened to us this weekend. Granted we were at a smaller comp but our J3 outscored a level 6 team. They were from a small college from out of state and it didn't appear they had many "true" level 6 athletes on their team but our level 3 routine outscored their level 5ish/6ish routine....

Lower level teams get higher scores than higher level teams all the time - heck, I bet that L2 team from that other thread would score higher than Senior Elite cause they are so perfect for their level. The score is about who is maxing out the score sheet of that particular level, not who is more skilled.

I think what the poster above was saying is that team filled w/ kids who have a tuck as their highest skill doing a L3 routine can sometimes beat a team filled w/ kids who have a full as their highest skill also doing a L3 routine. Sounds unlikely cause it's just assumed that if you have your full your tuck should be amazing, but I do believe it happens.

 

[CheerBank]

I just heard a team in our area is creating a Sr 2 team with athletes that are all level 4 athletes just so they can win. That bothers me, doing anything just to win.

We had a local gym put together a "special Summit seeking bid" team last season. Most of the athletes were on the jr 4 and I believe this team was a jr 2. Didn't work - no bid for them.

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

We're with a relatively small, relatively new gym. We had a few new girls start this season, senior age, absolutely no cheer or tumbling experience. But not enough of them to have a S1 team. We had a few J2 girls age out. We had a few girls who were true S2. But even with those 3 groups, there wasn't enough for a S2 team. But adding just a few girls with level 4 experience was enough to gel the team together at S2 level. Sandbagging? Absolutely not. The team is nowhere near full tumbling. And they definitely needed the mentorship of the S4 crossovers to assist in getting the level 2 stunts to work. I'm glad that my daughter got the opportunity to cross over. She's always been on a level appropriate team, but she's never been the "star." This year has given her a leadership experience that she never would have had otherwise. We're not out there winning every competition, but we're also not finishing last every time either.

Totally acceptable in the situation you describe - a small gym doing what they need to in order to make any team at all for those S2 girls. This is what my CP's gym does, and they do it because they have to. But once a gym becomes a certain size, you don't need to do that anymore and it does turn into sandbagging for the win - I think that size is somewhere around 100 athletes.

 

[notyourcheermom]

I know if my kid had a standing back handspring to a double (lol - I keep going back to that example on the other thread cause I found it very shocking), and someone wanted her to do a level 2 team of her same age level, I would not want that - it's not fair to steal glory away from true level 2 kids - ones who worked really hard to get their back handspring and now are gonna be pushed to the back row - there also would be very little progress to be gained stunting-wise for my CP unless she was basing instead of flying or vice versa.

Now if it was down or up one level, maybe even 2, it wouldn't be so bad - but from 5 to 2, or 4 to 1...thats just not right for a big gym to do IMO. Let the level 1's and 2's have their time to learn and experience what it's like to compete, win or lose, w/o the level 4/5 kids carrying the routine for them.

Eta - reading about that situation on that other thread has moved me into the "we need rules governing crossovers" camp. I think I'd suggest no more than 2 levels down, maybe even 1 if the gym is big enough. And that gyms w/ less than ~75 athletes total, or less than 25 -30 level 4 or 5 atheletes, are exempt.

The thing is the level 4/5 kids can't carry the rest of the level 2 team for them. It is what a team of 18 or so can do together as one team all at once, not what the 10 in front can do these days. When CP started AS five years ago, they could get away with it some at the comps they attended with having 10 level athletes and eight who didn't care, didn't have skills whatever, level 2. My SM year 2 I started paying attention, figuring out level play, watching teams throw skills and pushed/waited on CP to make up her mind that she would go to a gym where the whole teams had the same skills from there.

 

[notyourcheermom]

We had a local gym put together a "special Summit seeking bid" team last season. Most of the athletes were on the jr 4 and I believe this team was a jr 2. Didn't work - no bid for them.

Right. Witnessed the same thing at a local gym. Everybody jumped in on the Summit Sr. 2 team for the friends and the fun team and the going to the Summit team and they didn't get a bid either.

 

[cupieqt]

We're with a relatively small, relatively new gym. We had a few new girls start this season, senior age, absolutely no cheer or tumbling experience. But not enough of them to have a S1 team. We had a few J2 girls age out. We had a few girls who were true S2. But even with those 3 groups, there wasn't enough for a S2 team. But adding just a few girls with level 4 experience was enough to gel the team together at S2 level. Sandbagging? Absolutely not. The team is nowhere near full tumbling. And they definitely needed the mentorship of the S4 crossovers to assist in getting the level 2 stunts to work. I'm glad that my daughter got the opportunity to cross over. She's always been on a level appropriate team, but she's never been the "star." This year has given her a leadership experience that she never would have had otherwise. We're not out there winning every competition, but we're also not finishing last every time either.

This is exactly what the spirit of crossovers is about and exactly how we use them too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cupieqt]

.........edited to comment on the bottom part...

I think what the poster above was saying is that team filled w/ kids who have a tuck as their highest skill doing a L3 routine can sometimes beat a team filled w/ kids who have a full as their highest skill also doing a L3 routine. Sounds unlikely cause it's just assumed that if you have your full your tuck should be amazing, but I do believe it happens.

I said that. And that's just it. BOTH of those teams should have amazing tucks. No one should be competing at a level where the skills they are SHOWING OFF to be JUDGED are anything less than showstopping, heart pounding, jaw droppingly good.
I shouldn't be able to tell that you're a shaky little newborn L3 giraffe. You should look like the king of the jungle. And if you're not that, drop a level and BE that.

ETA: not that there can't be a few kids on the team that aren't the most amazing. All teams have a weak link. Just can't have a team full of weak links.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk