All-Star National Championships Are Won At Tryouts

[lifeoftheparty]

I'm gonna disagree with the wholeheartedly.
I was closely involved with a team that, at it's creation, was set up to just kind of be there. Wasn't stacked or sand-bagged or even leveled by majority in any way.
The athletes were properly coached and encouraged to gain skills, and never competed for "the win," they competed for a clean routine. That team, the parents and coaches had the most fun, loving and best time that season, and won rarely. Without a doubt.
So in the sense that it was for "the journey," yes. They loved that journey. But it wasn't because of the win. It was because they pushed beyond their personal limits and worked for team improvement.

My daughter has a similar experience this past year. They were a first year j5 and most of the children (including my daughter)did not have all lvl 5 skills. Most (including my daughter) never competed lvl 5. They were by no means stacked. They worked so hard, had so much heart and were coached EXTREMELY well. My daughter started with a straight ride toss and now one yr later has a GORGEOUS hitch kick double. They won every competition but one where they placed second, including winning NCA. It was a dream year. Thinking back to when that team was first announced and to what they accomplished is unbelievable. Ideally it would be great to stack each team, but it is not always possible for all gyms with the exception of MEGA gyms.

 

[King]

Athletes grumbling isn't the issue. Athletes leaving for another gym that promises to put them on a higher team is the issue.

NOTE: There are diminishing returns to this strategy as more programs adopt it.

There is tons of threatening. What is the percent of disgruntled athletes to ones that actually leave? I tend to find most angry people are all talk and a small percentage actually leave. (I am close friends with a smaller program and they tend to agree).

 

[DropAndRun]

Going into our second week of this season, I am more in support of stacking than ever before. My 8 year old learned some impressive skills in a very short time this year and made the jump from very small gym junior 2 to multi location large gym youth 5. She tried out with all the skills she needed.

However, at the first practice, she had a massive 8 year old tumbling block meltdown and immediately, I (and her coaches) realized that while she may have been ready skill wise, she was NOT mature enough to handle level 5, so she has been moved down to level 3.

Now, it is my HOPE that she will regain her full and be "that" child who is overqualified for level 3 with a full who can throw level 3 specialty passes in her sleep and strangers looking at her skill level may think.. Why? Or that's not right! However after seeing what pushing her skill level a little too fast did to her, I know for sure that mentally and emotionally she belongs in level 3 this year, regardless of skill.

 

[tumbleyoda]

It happens quite a bit, although I doubt anyone has it down to an actual percentage. I have seen numerous of my friends small gyms close or come dangerously close to it in part because of this strategy of placing kids on a higher level team than they would of made. I have had it happen to me more times than I care to admit, although this year has been the best year for not losing athletes out to other gyms. Even if it is only for the summer, by the time they have spent money for a new uniform, made new friends, etc. if they were moved down to their true level team, the embarrassment factor plus what they have spent already usually will keep them from protesting too much.

Yes you can say other factors may have contributing to them closing. But when you keep losing clients who are promised something you can not realistically, safely or ethically provide them, the handwriting on the wall has begun. No clients, no money. No higher level teams, the lower level athletes tend to look elsewhere to get into a new system to give them a better chance to make the higher level team.

 

[King]

It happens quite a bit, although I doubt anyone has it down to an actual percentage. I have seen numerous of my friends small gyms close or come dangerously close to it in part because of this strategy of placing kids on a higher level team than they would of made. I have had it happen to me more times than I care to admit, although this year has been the best year for not losing athletes out to other gyms. Even if it is only for the summer, by the time they have spent money for a new uniform, made new friends, etc. if they were moved down to their true level team, the embarrassment factor plus what they have spent already usually will keep them from protesting too much.

Yes you can say other factors may have contributing to them closing. But when you keep losing clients who are promised something you can not realistically, safely or ethically provide them, the handwriting on the wall has begun. No clients, no money. No higher level teams, the lower level athletes tend to look elsewhere to get into a new system to give them a better chance to make the higher level team.

You are saying by not overpromising a childs level gyms have risked closing?

 

[tumbleyoda]

You are saying by not overpromising a childs level gyms have risked closing?

Not one child, but a few - usually all connected with each other. One child rarely leaves alone anymore in this industry IMO. Have a real good friends gym this happened to. They were quite content being a small gym. They knew they would never have a World's team and they were ok with that. They always had put their athletes on level appropriate teams. Another gym promised higher levels...FOR THE SUMMER. ...that was the fine print. Once a couple made noise they were leaving, many followed because they wanted to be on a higher level too. Why be on a small level two when you could be on a large level 3 or 4? They could not keep the doors open financially and closed. The night's I spent with them trying to figure out a way and them losing their business without compromising their beliefs because they were in their mind trying to do it the right way cut me to the core. Because it is the silent struggle that is swept away nonchalantly with the bigger is better mantra.

I agree with you that you don't overpromise. That is not safe. And that there can always be other factors like not being aware of what your local market is doing -ie operating in the same mentality in 2014 like you did in 2004 that can make this situation that much worse. But when another gym near you does it year after year, it makes it very hard to hold to your guns, so to speak.

 

[King]

Not one child, but a few - usually all connected with each other. One child rarely leaves alone anymore in this industry IMO. Have a real good friends gym this happened to. They were quite content being a small gym. They knew they would never have a World's team and they were ok with that. They always had put their athletes on level appropriate teams. Another gym promised higher levels...FOR THE SUMMER. ...that was the fine print. Once a couple made noise they were leaving, many followed because they wanted to be on a higher level too. Why be on a small level two when you could be on a large level 3 or 4? They could not keep the doors open financially and closed. The night's I spent with them trying to figure out a way and them losing their business without compromising their beliefs because they were in their mind trying to do it the right way cut me to the core. Because it is the silent struggle that is swept away nonchalantly with the bigger is better mantra.

I agree with you that you don't overpromise. That is not safe. And that there can always be other factors like not being aware of what your local market is doing -ie operating in the same mentality in 2014 like you did in 2004 that can make this situation that much worse. But when another gym near you does it year after year, it makes it very hard to hold to your guns, so to speak.

So, excluding people's feelings, if you can only open a gym and business in a certain area by over promising levels, which you agree is unsafe, is that the right place to open a gym?

 

[BlueCat]

There is tons of threatening. What is the percent of disgruntled athletes to ones that actually leave? I tend to find most angry people are all talk and a small percentage actually leave. (I am close friends with a smaller program and they tend to agree).

We lose around 5% after team placements because the athletes are not on the team they want. (Some of that is level, some is unhappiness that they aren't flyers.)

 

[quitthedrama]

From a business perspective:

Gym owners or coaches have you ever had an exodus of people because last years team was too stacked and you won too easily?

Certainly not an exodus, but this is why my youngest CP made the decision to switch gyms last year. She was tired of not being challenged despite the multiple jackets she had. We've lived it so I guess that is why I feel so strongly in my opinion.

 

[King]

We lose around 5% after team placements because the athletes are not on the team they want. (Some of that is unhappiness that they aren't flyers.)

So you have a consistent amount of 'shrinkage'. If it was just 100 person gym I would say losing 5% to guarantee 95% happier customers and experience is a worthy trade off. At the end of the year if the teams had been picked too aggressively I would say the risk of losing kids was more than 5% on a long enough timescale. Maybe not the first year, but each subsequent year it would grow if it becomes a pattern.

 

[King]

Certainly not an exodus, but this is why my youngest CP made the decision to switch gyms last year. She was tired of not being challenged despite the multiple jackets she had. We've lived it so I guess that is why I feel so strongly in my opinion.

That makes sense for you as an individual, but for the gym as a whole to keep open and continued business should they have changed their model?

 

[BlueCat]

So you have a consistent amount of 'shrinkage'. If it was just 100 person gym I would say losing 5% to guarantee 95% happier customers and experience is a worthy trade off. At the end of the year if the teams had been picked too aggressively I would say the risk of losing kids was more than 5% on a long enough timescale. Maybe not the first year, but each subsequent year it would grow if it becomes a pattern.

We agree and have raised our level standards for multiple reasons. Long term, it is better for the business and for the athletes. We think that our overall progression to elite tumbling levels is actually quicker in the long run since we got pickier about technique.

That being said, the "stack teams to win more consistently" doesn't work for an entire industry. It is like "getting there early to get a good seat." It works until everyone does it, then you are back where you started. Ultimately, the quality of your service, your professionalism, and the overall culture of your program will do much more for your long-term success than whether a girl with a whipped, piked layout gets put on a L4 team.

 

[quitthedrama]

That makes sense for you as an individual, but for the gym as a whole to keep open and continued business should they have changed their model?

In general, I think gyms in our area who have stacked to the point of sandbagging have lost significant business or are no longer in business. I think gyms that compete with level appropriate teams have been the most successful in our area in terms of both numbers and success of teams across the board (versus 1 or 2 winning teams in a gym and the remaining being mediocre).

 

[King]

We agree and have raised our level standards for multiple reasons. Long term, it is better for the business and for the athletes. We think that our overall progression to elite tumbling levels is actually quicker in the long run since we got pickier about technique.

That being said, the "stack teams to win more consistently" doesn't work for an entire industry. It is like "getting there early to get a good seat." It works until everyone does it, then you are back where you started. Ultimately, the quality of your service, your professionalism, and the overall culture of your program will do much more for your long-term success than whether a girl with a whipped, piked layout gets put on a L4 team.

I would say individually your example is generalizing the point. It goes back to the culture of the program which choosing stacked teams would be a part of. Stacking teams by themselves will not make a program successful. It is a giant mixture of things. I just think of it like running a mile. You can run a mile uphill or a mile downhill, but it is still a mile. How hard you make that mile is kinda up to the situation you setup.

 

[tumbleyoda]

So, excluding people's feelings, if you can only open a gym and business in a certain area by over promising levels, which you agree is unsafe, is that the right place to open a gym?

Obviously no. But we are talking about gyms that were already open and established for some years, not brand new start ups. For example if I were opening a gym I would not open a cheer gym at all. Not in this environment.