All-Star Usasf Proposed Rule Changes For 22-23

oncecoolcoachnowmom

Bestest Newbie '14
Mar 2, 2014
6,684
18,716
46
I am a(n)...
Coach
See also:

The proposed rule changes effectively add a skill in standing tumbling to most levels.

For example, you’d be able to standing tumble to a layout in L4 when it used to be a tuck.

Or now standing tumble to full in L5 instead of just to layout.

That sound you just heard was the collective concern of everybody who is (this close) to leveling up potentially not doing so if their running tumbling is not progressing as quickly as their standing. Because you could in general get away with being a step behind in standing before. (Example: You could have a running layout and still be at standing tuck and still make J4.)

Add to it kids who due to age grid changes have been on same teams for a little bit and are anxious to move on. (Ex: If you’ve been on J4 for a couple of seasons and the next leap for you is S5.)
 
Feb 4, 2010
367
485
1
It looks like they're trying to make Worlds harder to win/more competitive, but at the same time they've made Worlds much easier to win in the Limited divisions. So "Suzy's All Stars" will have a drastically better chance to win Worlds than a normal Level 6 gym that tends to have more than 1 Worlds team. Go figure.

Extra Small & Sr Open were great divisions at Worlds this year, but sure, let's get rid of those divisions while simultaneously creating "Limited" divisions that dilute already existing divisions and reward gyms for either axing their 2nd Worlds team, or never forming one. (I see NT teams, especially, getting axed.)

Why get rid of Sr Open 6 and not Sr Coed Open 6? Do only boys want to cheer past the age cutoff? If the reasoning is that Sr Open is too similar to International Open (which is true), doesn't the same thing apply to the Coed division as well?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JerseyGirl112
Feb 4, 2010
367
485
1
Senior Level 6 Worlds division sizes- Small 5-14, Medium 15-22, and Large 23-30

I like this idea to create more competition, but it might result in most teams being perpetually stuck at 3 stunt groups. Entering Medium with only 4 stunt groups could be daunting. With Large capped at 30, more Mega-gyms might have enough "extras" to form a Medium team as well. So "Normal size" gyms might be reluctant to do more than 3 stunts so that they stay Small. I would hate to see the majority of Level 6 only doing 3 stunts. The fact that XS teams are currently encouraged to form 4 stunt groups should be seen as a good thing, not something to get rid of.

Capping Large Sr at 30 would be great to make the division more competitive, safer, and easier to judge. There are too many bodies on the floor at 38, but I'm assuming the mega-gyms want the number that high so they can stuff as many athletes as possible onto their top team. These gyms tend to have over 40 kids on the roster at tryout time.

I would maybe do this:
Small 8-17 (4 stunt groups + 1 extra)
Medium 18-22 (5 stunt groups + 2 extras)
Large 23-30 (7 stunt groups + 2 extras)

It's not perfect, but I hate encouraging gyms to only build 3 stunts, especially if we've already created these silly Limited divisions for gyms who can only do 3 stunts. There should be room for a Small team to add a 4th stunt if they are able to. We need to encourage bigger team sizes if possible, not smaller. We don't want gyms to have to turn away kids because they don't fit on a 14 person team.

_____

As for allowing back handsprings in Level 1, I like this because a back walkover isn't necessarily needed for getting a BHS. If a Level 1 team has a few froggy/weaker beginner back handsprings on it, I see no issue with that. The problem is that Level 1 teams are trying to max out for the sake of Summit. So there's no place for actual beginners anymore and we'll soon see full-team beautiful BHS in Level 1 which is just ridiculous. I'd personally eliminate Level 1-3 from Summit, but we know that won't happen.
 
Last edited:

Staff online

  • JBS
    Admin / Gymnastics Coach

Members online