All-Star The Key Ingredient.

[King]

This is how I define it in relation to our discussion (I went and found this online....too lazy to think this late at night haha).

Athleticism can be defined as, "the ability to use a variety of motor abilities (strength, power, speed, agility, coordination, stability, balance, etc.) to effectively and efficiently perform a wide variety of sporting actions." Less complicated than it sounds, this definition simply means that being a great athlete requires possessing a variety of athletic qualities (motor abilities) and being able to use them effectively to perform sporting actions. Although specific "sporting actions" are different for each particular sport, most sports also have many common sporting actions required such as sprinting, changing direction, and jumping. The difference between an average athlete and a great athlete is the ability to perform these things effectively, efficiently, and consistently.

I think our discussion has a couple nuances we have to introduce.

First I think a correctly picked team will have athletes of a certain athleticism for each level. On average the body type of each female (males are way too sporadic in our sport to follow any patter) looks very similar for levels 1 and 2, and then makes a huge jump once level 3 happens. The athleticism needed to perform a ROHS Tuck successfully limits the type of body that would be in level 3 (again correlation NOT causation). Level 3 and 4 sees another jump in body type because of the standing tuck requirement (I don't think the need for physical being goes up from a ROHS Tuck to a layout nearly as much as for the standing tuck). Last level 5: This is where you usually see the level 4 bodies but now have an extreme amount of abs and everyone is in shape extreme.

Now, here is what we have to think of. The requirements of physicality limit people of LESS physical ability to be in higher levels. Looking at the top tier of teams in any division I rarely think 'holy cow T&S just has better athletes than SOT!' Because of the requirements of what everyone has to do unless there is one physical feature that absurdly stands out (aka CA abs) everyone is extremely fit. In the case of CA abs while I do believe their training helps at this high level of ability genetics and proper diet is the largest factor in how those are expressed. As far as diet is concerned I bet you would also find local culture to be a strong influence as well.

So when we look at teams and discuss athleticism and ability to get through the routine I think we need to narrow down our discussion to a couple factors: stamina, skill level, difficulty of task being asked, and mental toughness. Athleticism is just too broad.

 

[BlueCat]

I agree with Kingston. The term "athletic" is a bit hazy as it is being used here. I'm not at all disagreeing with its importance, but i dont think we all define it the same way. Do you mean having strong coordination skills, having great aerobic/anaerobic conditioning, having optimum body composition, great range of motion, strong work ethic, or having the ability to perform well under psychological pressure? Those are all very different things in my mind, but all very important.

 

[Level5Mom]

Perhaps we should separate them into physical athleticism (PA), and mental athleticism (MA) for the purposes of our discussion?

A good sound conditioning program addresses all of the things you mentioned above BlueCat with the exception of MA. Can MA be improved through a good PA program? Maybe, but from what I've studied about MA, not really. They are two very different strategies.

If anyone took a peek at the PEP program link I posted earlier, you will see that all aspects of PA are addressed in a 3 times per week, 15 minute workout. My cp has conditioned every morning before school for 10 minutes each morning since the 6th grade (she's in 9th now). She does most of what the PEP program lists, but she splits it into 5 days per week instead of 3 to keep the time down. We also added a few upper body exercises to it, because the PEP program is really designed to prevent acl tears so it focuses on lower body. If anyone is interested in my cp's workout, I will type it out in detail for you.

For MA, I have through the years purchased her a few books to read right before competition season that deal specifically with pre-comp anxiety, achieving peak performance mentally, etc. They have helped her tremendously, and she has been able to help others having freak-out sessions in holding lol. Before a comp we usually discuss briefly the things she has learned about coping with anxiety to remind her how to stay in a focused but alert state of mind. She has not been able to learn any of those things in her workouts. It is through competition experience that she practices and perfects these techniques. Full outs in front of others is a great way to practice MA, as is showcases. These events tend to evoke the same adrenaline response as a competition.

So to reiterate, yes I agree they are very different things, but I feel you can group all aspects of PA together for discussion (assuming a good program addresses all aspects), and you can group all aspects of MA together for discussion.

ETA: Are they related? I think the main relationship is that having a higher PA relieves some of the stress of MA (one less thing to worry about).

 

[StarshipTrooper]

So when we look at teams and discuss athleticism and ability to get through the routine I think we need to narrow down our discussion to a couple factors: stamina, skill level, difficulty of task being asked, and mental toughness. Athleticism is just too broad.

Let me illustrate in a different way. The thing that I have seen that most consistently limits teams of any skill or difficulty level from being as successful as the could and should be is a lack of commitment to basic training in fitness and stamina so as to be able to perfrom the learned skills in the expected manner. Clean, tight, timed, flexible, however you may want to judge. And I say that because there is a place in a cheer routine for almost everyone of different body type, God given ability, whatever characteristic you may choose IF the athlete is willing to define their strengths and role while becoming as athletically fit as they can possibly be for the sport then they can excel. There is a wide variation in athleticism across the sport that in my opinion could and should be easily closed by the athletes and teams lacking the trait with the result being the potential to compete with anyone at any level at any given time and place. The term athleticism may be too broad, but I think it is an area of great opportunity for teams willing to commit to improve.

 

[StarshipTrooper]

I agree with Kingston. The term "athletic" is a bit hazy as it is being used here. I'm not at all disagreeing with its importance, but i dont think we all define it the same way. Do you mean having strong coordination skills, having great aerobic/anaerobic conditioning, having optimum body composition, great range of motion, strong work ethic, or having the ability to perform well under psychological pressure? Those are all very different things in my mind, but all very important.

But they all easily fit into the definition of athleticism to some extent. Too broad and hazy? I don't disagree with this discussion and how it has evolved. However, I have convinced myself from watching athletes and helping few with blocks, dare I say lack of mental toughness, that they can overcome those blocks with a regimen of training and commitment to improving fitness. I think a block may in it's basic form be a subconscious lack of confidence in the athlete's ability to perform the skill safely. I see the mental hesitation and anguish that is common among all those athletes trying to overcome the block. And here is the point. I have seen athletes multiple times overcome blocks through a program of starting over to the very basics, even back to cartwheel, walkovers and rolls, and doing them repeatedly while improving their strength, flexibility, stamina and reasserting their confidence in ability at the conscious and subconscious level that overcomes the block. Body over mind so to speak, physical competence convincing the mind of no need for fear. Is it that simple, well no humans are too complex to paint with that broad of brush, but is it a reasonable hypothesis? Could be, but who has the time to test and collect data?

 

[cupieqt]

That's a great idea. Cutting the music out....I'm a high school principal and the first thing I thought of was a fire and lockdown drill.sure you can't prepare kids for everything but I really don't think they'd lose their minds in a real fire (as long as its not IN their room i mean ) because they're so conditioned to walk out the door like lemmings. They definitely know what to do.

How do you work on getting them to not freak out when youre coming into day two a hairs breadth out of first place and Susie's group eats the mat right in front of you in the routine?

We have talked about that before and it happened to my srs recently (although we were in 5th by 3 points). We discuss what judges are looking for and often judges can be super impressed with a team even if they have a mistake so if a mistake happens they need to show them how well they can recover. Sometimes an amazing save can help you. Showing the judges that you are a well seasoned, well trained, athletic, team even during disaster can be just as impressive. Finishing strong with energy and enthusiasm can still win over a judging panel. You never know how it'll actually shake out. (And although that fall hurt our score we still jumped to 2nd place. First and high point without the fall but that doesn't matter bc we DID have the fall so we earned 2nd). And the judges WERE impressed with the 2nd day performance despite the fall.

And we also had our music cut out this year when the EP's sound system failed. Glad we practice for that!!

 

[King]

But the skill and overall ability of the athletes to perform a task in the first place is a determining factor. If someone is so HIGHLY skilled at something their physical ability doesn't have to be that high. For example I have some friends who follow trampoline and were very excited when it was added to the Olympics in '96. The guy who won the gold came out of retirement just to win a gold medal. To quote my friend: "That is a guy who lights his next cigarette with his last one." Would I say he was at the peak of his possible physical condition? Nah. But his skill is SO high that having stamina and good physical ability is not as strong a requirement. Good technique and and understanding of the kinetics of cheerleading in general can lesson the need for great physical ability. In coed cheerleading this is especially true because not everyone is required to do everything (you have 5 basic groups of people: bases, boy tumblers, girl tumblers, flyers, utility people). And some of those may be in terrible shape because of the high level of speciality.

I think our argument comes down to the whole a square is a quadrilateral but a quadrilateral is not a square.

A team to win does not need to be in peak physical condition but a team in peak physical condition has an advantage and can win.

 

[LeahofthePack]

Gonna say it even another way: I'll take a team full of conditioned athletes over non conditioned athletes.

I'll take a team of mentally tough kids over not tough kids.

I'll take extremely skilled people over not skilled people.

But in that which one of the three is worth more?

I feel like these all relate. If you are more conditioned, then gaining skills will become easier (IMO, not always works this way..) If you are mentally tough you can gain more skills (as in not having a mental block to prevent you from progressing) and if you are mentally tough you could push your self to become more conditioned (again, IMO. such as if you are working out and look at it as the "pain is weakness leaving the body vs. ugh I am tired of working out). And if you are skilled, then you should be conditioned to do all your difficult skills, and learning these skills would help you become mentally tough. All three componants come full circle to me.

 

[tucknduck]

Without question, the athletic and well-conditioned athlete will have the advantage and has the biggest impact. The major difference being a Level 5 athlete vs say a Level 1 athlete is athleticism and conditioning. The Level 5 simply can do things physically the Level 1 can't do.

With that said, the mental part comes into play big time ecause the weird phenomenom of cheer is the mental blocks in this sport. Having observed this sport for a number of years, you can't minimize the impact the mind has on being able to do the things that a well conditioned high-end athlete can do only to be cut down by a messed up head. You see these athletes go from executinng the most difficult moves to barely beingable to doing a cartwheel. Of course, if the mental block is broken, these Level 5 athletes can regain all their skill sets they had.

 

[cupieqt]

When mental blocks occur our policy is "don't feed the animal". Our theory is that, without a lot of attention it won't grow or last as long. They still occur every so often and we deal with them quietly. We may move the athletes spot and we will work with them on drills to help with muscle memory. We try not to name it (I swear it's like saying Voldemorts name out loud) if we see it happening. When we see the signs we try to act quickly (and with stealth lol) to help re-direct their focus. We find that if they focus on it too much then it becomes bigger and harder to conquer than it is in reality. Unlocking the mind-body connection to overcome blocks is tricky but with mentally tough athletes it is a bit easier. Encouraging their strengths during blocks also helps to loosen it's grip.
This is just one part of our mental training, we try to educate our girls as much as possible to strengthen their minds along with their muscles. It's mental muscle hehe.