All-Star Crossovers And Sandbagging

[HeyMom]

Your J3 routine was awesome! :) They were so fun to watch!

Thanks - we do have some pretty amazing coaches and it is so fun to watch them choreograph a routine.

The coaches told the kids that someone from the EP contacted one of the CA owners and told him that he had been in the business a long time and had seen lots of routines and rarely comments on them but he wanted to let him know that their routine was one of the most fun and entertaining routines he had ever seen.

ETA: @newbiemom I woke up this morning and realized that I forgot to tell you how adorable your CP and her little sister are and what a great job CP did Saturday!!

 

[Sparkle Mom]

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.

I agree that big gyms do not need many crossovers (if any) to field level appropriate teams. I don't think many people question it when a gym has three teams total and they just don't have many kids to fill enough teams. Of course there is always a possible injury or person leaving that may need to be replaced but again I don't think this is what upsets people. I can't buy the excuse that my CP just loves being at the gym so she needs to be on every team...blah blah. IMHO this is not a reason anyone is buying as valid. My CP loves being at the gym 5 days a week or even more but she doesn't need to be on three or more teams to do it. Crossing over kids from level 5 to 2 doesn't make sense to me when there are level 3 and 4 teams. My experience has been that crossing over can help a team with out sandbagging. My CP was asked to cross over (up) to fill in a gap that came up after tryouts and it has given her a chance to work on higher level skills and new stunting. When there are 100 kids at a gym maybe there is still a need for crossovers however when would it be really necessary to put a flyer from level 5 as a flyer on level 2 as center flyer.....when you care most about winning. If that is what is most important I'm fine with it but there is no need to pretend it is for a different reason.

 

[Sparkle Mom]

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.

Some parents/coaches/kids will do it for the win.....they must love those jackets/rings enough to justify it.

 

[omgitssydthekid]

You don't need maxed out numbers to do well, we don't have a single team maxed out (in terms of number of athletes) and our teams have been pretty successful so far this season. Our mini 1 has 11 kids, our junior 1 has 18 kids, our youth 2 has 25 kids, our junior 3 has 19 kids, our 4.2 has 27, and our senior coed 4 has 17. Our youth prep team has 14 and our senior prep has 10 and I think we have nine total crossovers and I believe that only one was planned. Its all about the percentages.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[klynn64]

Unfortunately @Kris, NCA is not ironclad safe either from blatant sandbagging...If a team comes in with 2 teams, one lvl 5 and lvl 1 that gym can place all of their lvl 4 athletes on that lvl 1 team and get away with it...just saying!

NCA does a good job attempting to eliminate sandbagging however, there will always be those individuals that look for loopholes. As noted, this did occur to our Level 2 team a few years ago at NCA. The offending gym was bringing one of their Level 5 teams to NCA. They decided to bring a second team formed exclusively to compete at NCA "for the experience". The athletes chosen for the team consisted of athletes currently competing on Level 2, 3, 4, and 5 teams. They chose to compete as a Level 2 team. The NCA rule states that to compete on a given level you must have previously competed twice on that same level. They did that. And since they had no other teams attending NCA, Crossovers weren't an issue. This team did win, Imagine our surprise when we learned this same team that was formed solely for the NCA experience, went on to win at Summit.

 

[TheVipersMom]

My daughters team does not have any crossovers from a different level. (None of our teams do)

And they have done pretty decent this season. We have 7 teams and they are all good.

I would like to see a rule put in place like a percentage rule some are suggesting but I won't hold my breath!

 

[CAmom66]

Whether another team has level 5 athletes or not, they can only perform level 2 skills if competing as level 2 - the same skills level 2 athletes should be able to perform. If you focus on the score sheet and max out difficulty, creativity and technique you can't go wrong. This can be done just as successfully with all level 2 athletes, as with having higher level kids. In fact, so times level 5 athletes no longer perform certain lower level skills with the grace that athletes at that level do. Ie. the ones who throw standing fulls, but back walkover is 't that pretty. My CP's team has no crossovers from other levels and is very successful at level 2.

 

[Lablover]

A lot of these posts seem to imply that it's only sandbagging/stacking if there are higher level crossovers on the lower level team. However, in my opinion the issue isn't just crossovers. What about gyms who make a level 3 team with majority of athletes who are working on fulls? Is that ok as long as those athletes don't compete on another team?

 

[cheer25mom]

Whether another team has level 5 athletes or not, they can only perform level 2 skills if competing as level 2 - the same skills level 2 athletes should be able to perform. If you focus on the score sheet and max out difficulty, creativity and technique you can't go wrong. This can be done just as successfully with all level 2 athletes, as with having higher level kids. In fact, so times level 5 athletes no longer perform certain lower level skills with the grace that athletes at that level do. Ie. the ones who throw standing fulls, but back walkover is 't that pretty. My CP's team has no crossovers from other levels and is very successful at level 2.

Level 5 athletes are much more likely to have near perfect technique at level 2 than a true level 2 athlete, plus they will have experience with higher level stunts, making their level 2 stunts much more solid. What is basic to them is maxed out to a true level 2. It is easy for them, whereas a true level 2 athlete has to work for perfect technique and execution. IMO, THAT is why sandbagging is unfair. Bringing a level 5 down to level 2 is like sitting a high schooler in a 3rd grade classroom, of course they will make 100 on everything.

 

[DropAndRun]

A lot of these posts seem to imply that it's only sandbagging/stacking if there are higher level crossovers on the lower level team. However, in my opinion the issue isn't just crossovers. What about gyms who make a level 3 team with majority of athletes who are working on fulls? Is that ok as long as those athletes don't compete on another team?

I'm my opinion, yes it is ok. There is a huge difference between working a skill and having it down with perfect execution. Droplet competes on a level 3 team and tried out with a full and jumps to tuck. She actually initially made a level 5 team but was moved down to 3 when it became obvious that she was not ready to compete those skills.

As everyone says, there is a lot more to cheer than tumbling.

 

[cupieqt]

Level 5 athletes are much more likely to have near perfect technique at level 2 than a true level 2 athlete, plus they will have experience with higher level stunts, making their level 2 stunts much more solid. What is basic to them is maxed out to a true level 2. It is easy for them, whereas a true level 2 athlete has to work for perfect technique and execution. IMO, THAT is why sandbagging is unfair. Bringing a level 5 down to level 2 is like sitting a high schooler in a 3rd grade classroom, of course they will make 100 on everything.

The skills being too easy shouldn't be a part of the argument.
It would mean that gyms should not be allowed to to put absolutely perfect technique and execution on the floor. Flawless technique and execution is not fair?

No I don't think a whole team of L5 capable athletes should be competing at L2 but if that's what those kids want to do and the gym owners and coaches would rather have a team knocking it out of the park......it would certainly leave a lot of time at practices (NOT stressing about routines) for working individual skills instead.

ETA: I'm playing Devil's advocate bc this has always been a hot topic with lots of arguments on both sides. Ethically, everyone feels the same way. But technically this will always be a hot topic because it can't be regulated without killing some gyms business plans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tumbleyoda]

Whether another team has level 5 athletes or not, they can only perform level 2 skills if competing as level 2 - the same skills level 2 athletes should be able to perform. If you focus on the score sheet and max out difficulty, creativity and technique you can't go wrong. This can be done just as successfully with all level 2 athletes, as with having higher level kids. In fact, so times level 5 athletes no longer perform certain lower level skills with the grace that athletes at that level do. Ie. the ones who throw standing fulls, but back walkover is 't that pretty. My CP's team has no crossovers from other levels and is very successful at level 2.

I can video a Level 5 who can do BHS to Double Full, BHS series to Whip to Double Full vs a true first year level 2 doing a BHS and there is no way you can tell me they will look exactly the same. The technique required to generate enough speed and power to execute a safe double full out of BHS is not present in a true level 2. Now add in several athletes like that. They stand up cleaner and tighter. Less frogged legs. Less questionable arm bends. Same thing for doing an extension. Take an athlete that can do full ups, double ups every day and place them doing a straight extension vs one who is in their first year of doing it. Sorry it wont look the same. It shouldn't. Theoretically the Level 5 not only has had more practice and more reps, they have more competitive experience over a true first year Level 2. What everyone likes to dismiss is the years competitive advantage a Level 5 (in your example) has in dropping down to Level 2. The time to train new skills is drastically reduced, thereby given more time for clean up, fluff (creativity pieces) and performance because the skills are way too easy.

My point being the small gym has way more first year and second year level athletes which has them having to put teams together way differently than a gym that was numerous athletes to pull from. It is what it is, but to deny there is a difference is in error.

On technique I agree with you yet remind all that proper technique takes time, patience and proper progressions. With parents rushing to promote their kids up levels, it often makes the journey to proper technique a much longer one.

My Level 4 and 5 can do BWO - Tucks and a few BWO Layout and Fulls. Why? Because I make them. They can't get out of Level 2 tumbling classes unless they can do a BWO. And even if they somehow skirt the system or mover here without one they have to do it in tumble class warm up lines, embarrassed or not. They all drill several Layouts before they twist every time they tumble, even if they can do Specialty to Double Full. And like you our Level 2 doesn't have crossovers from higher levels either because we don't use crossovers unless it is an emergency or injury situation. They have been successful by our standards. But would they be a powerhouse nationally if we dropped down some athletes from higher level teams? Definitely. Our sense of ethics won't let us do that even if others are.

 

[cheer25mom]

The skills being too easy shouldn't be a part of the argument.
It would mean that gyms should not be allowed to to put absolutely perfect technique and execution on the floor. Flawless technique and execution is not fair?

No I don't think a whole team of L5 capable athletes should be competing at L2 but if that's what those kids want to do and the gym owners and coaches would rather have a team knocking it out of the park......it would certainly leave a lot of time at practices (NOT stressing about routines) for working individual skills instead.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just don't think it's fair to the true level 2 kids on that team. They never have a chance at being anywhere other than the back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cupieqt]

I just don't think it's fair to the true level 2 kids on that team. They never have a chance at being anywhere other than the back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's ok to be in the back sometimes. I have lots of teams with kids on the back row. Very rarely do I have a team with all of the kids on the front row.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cheer25mom]

It's ok to be in the back sometimes. I have lots of teams with kids on the back row. Very rarely do I have a team with all of the kids on the front row.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, of course someone has to be in the back, but would you honestly be ok as a parent that your competent level 2 athlete is not getting to use their skills, have a tumbling pass, or fly because the gym chose to bring in level 5 athletes to fill those spots? How many years would you be willing to let that situation go on with your kid nuggeting while a level 5 threw tumbling and flew?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk