I am generalizing, and of course that doesn't apply to every situation, but if you look as a whole that stunt group would statistically have a harder time than one where the flyer is a few inches shorter than her bases. Of course there are exceptions to everything, but in general flyers that are significantly taller than their bases are at a disadvantage and lighter flyers are easier to base. That's why shorter, lighter flyers tend to be the norm.
How is it dishonest if the rules allow for it??
I do feel like the rules need to change on both of these things, but even if that happens it isn't going to stop teams from looking for the smallest, lightest flyers they can get within whatever set of rules they are working with. It just makes good competitive sense to do so.
But that is a decision the gym made, you don't have to like it but they have their reasons for doing it. One could argue, and we have, that a lot of level 5 teams shouldn't even be level 5 and it seems to me they would be the same gyms that would put a sketchy flyer up only because she is tiny, if she doesn't have the skills to be a level 5 flyer it's not exactly helpful to them. And why would you need to learn how to base a level before you can compete a level? That doesn't make any sense. My CP was the youngest(8) and smallest on her J2 team last year, there is no way on earth she could have based 13 & 14 year old girls, she had to fly. Should she not have been allowed to compete?
If a gym put younger flyers in the air over more experienced older/larger flyers and it was to the detriment of the team than that is on the gym and not the flyers.
On CP's team the 3 non tumblers are all back spots as well.
Our gym didn't put smaller flyers in the air over larger ones, what I was talking about was being a part of a small gym where the age bracket allows 10yr olds to be on a senior team in order for small gyms to have a full team. I would have preferred to have one or two stunt groups made up of actual senior aged athletes is what I was trying to get at.
Do you honestly think the team would have been better off as far as hitting better quality stunts and tumbling or is it a maturity/ personality thing? I ask because at our small gym it is often the younger kids on a senior team that allow the team to hit the 75% needed to max out tumbling and make it possible to max out stunting. It couldn't be done without them. I know that's the case on CP's team. Without the kids that are junior aged on a senior team, they wouldn't hit the tumbling ratio and I don't think stunts would go well. Some of the strongest, most experienced bases are junior aged kids.
To me that again is on the gym to put together the strongest team(s). If a senior team of 10 senior aged athletes would have been stronger and score better than a mixed age larger team then they should have created a small senior team (8-10) and a small junior team for the younger kids. Again I don't know all the details but putting together a poorly performing larger team often doesn't help anyone get better.
