All-Star Ways To Eliminate Sandbagging

[UK Cheer Girl]

I'm from England, so apologies if I'm asking a really onions question but do you 'credential' your athletes in the US and then limit them to only competing +/- one level from there?

In the UK athletes are free to compete at any level they choose and it does bring up discussion around 'sandbagging' (we don't call it that bit it's a great word!) The general feeling is that the USASF rules make the competition fair as long as each team sticks to the rules, i.e. In level 2 Team A may be made up of level 5 athletes who may be capable of double full but they are only allowed to perform back handspring like everyone else. If true level 2 teams complain it's like admitting that their coaches have taught them bad technique or something, because within the rules they truly shouldn't be at a disadvantage, as long as they can actually perform level 2 skills.

However I know it is different in the UK as we may have however many level 5 teams competing but if we individually credentialled the athletes based on skill, not many of them would actually be level 5. We are still getting over a completely different problem- teams competing at levels they can't actually do!

 

[UK Cheer Girl]

Oh dear, should've said 'obvious' question, not 'onions'.

 

[Jasar2]

Unfortunatly where there is a will there is a way and these gyms who routinely do this will find a way around it especially if they are credentialing their own athletes. My feelings about the little gym being affected by stricter rules??? Well if this trend continues this way without more strict rules there will be no little gyms because this practice will probably about eliminate the little guy from ever being competitive enough to attract athletes. What happens is people on the outside have no idea whats going on see these amazing "level 2" teams and leave their less succesful gym for the "better" gym making it hard for them to grow always being crushed by the big dogs that put lower level stacked teams on the mat.

 

[Num1Stunta]

Ok, here is what I posted on the Level 2 thread...

"I will say this, which I don't think has been mentioned yet. A level 4 athlete throwing a Level 2 routine is much better conditioned than a "true"level 2 kid, and therefore able to perform better technique and skills, not just because they've already been perfected, but because they don't get as tired performing at that level. And frankly, to use the "well, it was only 12 practices" rationalization is nonsense. Last year, I had my level 2 kids split into groups and make a level 1 routine for fun, and we gave a reward to the best group. They had 20 minutes. You're not going to tell me that with 12 practices, a gym like Rockstar couldn't pull a decent level 3 out of that group.

I do believe that athlete registration is necessary, but I don't like the idea of registering for a team, because that doesn't necessarily equal their skill level. I think your skills should be evaluated in STUNTS, RUNNING TUMBLING, STANDING TUMBLING, TOSSES, JUMPS, MOTIONS/DANCE ability. Everything would be scored from 1-5. So, example:

Athlete X can fly level 4 (4), has a layout (4), no standing tuck (3), mediocre jumps (3), great dancer (5)... that averages out to 3.8, round to the nearest decimal and she's a LEVEL 4. This would be her registered level with USASF for that season, and it would mean she could be eligible for a Level 3, 4, or 5 team.

Registering her with a team would not work if her gym doesn't offer a Level 4 team, and she's placed on a Level 3 team. This would mean she'd be considered level 3, which imo creates a problem because then she could technically cross to a level 2 team. Then, you have a level 4 athlete on a level 2 team, in actuality... but on paper, she's level 3 so its fine. Make sense?"

I would like to add to this a few things:

1. REGISTRATION CARDS- i love the idea, and would suggest that instead of the color-coded stickers, we opt for a bar code. EP's would scan the barcode and all of the kid's info would pop up. The USASF would be able to go into a computer system and change the level associated with each athlete's barcode as they progress.

2. WHO DECIDES WHAT LEVEL THEY ARE, IF IT ISN'T THEIR OWN GYM?- I would propose an idea that involves two coexisting options: 1) As in with NCA College Nationals, an athlete could comprise a skills tape and send it to the USASF to get credentialed or to change the level at which they are credentialed. 2) As we do with coaches credentialing, a gym can either pay to have a USASF representative attend their tryout and monitor the credentialing or the USASF can host a number of athlete credentialing events in the beginning of each season in each state.

3. Unless your gym, your coaches, and your athletes are all credentialed, you don't compete anywhere that is USASF sanctioned.

 

[Jasar2]

Its like in high school sports where there is JV and V how would you feel on a JV football team when you know the other team sent their V to play your game so they could have a perfect record? They just put on JV uniforms and call themselves JV schools would never stand for it and this sport shouldn't either!

 

[NEliteSteven]

Question for people in regards to declaring a level. What if you declared level 4, but you wanted to compete as a Senior Open 5 at some competitions? Would this be a problem? Or how teams bump to Senior 5 from Restricted to get a bid?

 

[Num1Stunta]

Question for people in regards to declaring a level. What if you declared level 4, but you wanted to compete as a Senior Open 5 at some competitions? Would this be a problem? Or how teams bump to Senior 5 from Restricted to get a bid?

I would say, if you're talking about a whole team and not just an individual.... the team would have to register their full roster, as well as 3 possible alternates, by a certain date in the season. The team would be permitted to compete up a level, but not down a level.

 

[Num1Stunta]

Also, not much mention of 4.2 in this whole discussion. I can remember a particular gym in my area last year who competed their Senior 4 team in 4.2.... their flyers were the same, their boys were the same, their stunt section was the same.... you would literally see the same group of kids going on the mat for both performances, except for maybe 6-8 nuggeters in the back. They had a winning season, and I was just shocked that coaches would allow something like that.

For 4.2, it's a unique division that perhaps requires different rules. I think the first place to start is the minimum age cap of 13, since this division was meant for older girls who don't have a lot of tumbling, and it's turned into a place to drop 10 year olds with level 3 or better flying skills. Secondly, using the model I mentioned earlier, an athlete's tumbling level and stunt level should be ranked. Say you have a kid with a standing bhs (2) and a ro bhs tuck (3)- they're a 2.5 in tumbling. Say this kid is also a hoss base and can do level 5 stunts (5) and tosses (5) they're a 5 in stunts. If you average the two, you get 3.75 which rounds up to 4. If you consider 4.2 as an average of stunt level (4) and tumbling level (2), then you can say the athletes eligible for this team would be averaging a 3. Half a point difference in either direction would maybe be the deciding factor? So my athlete in the example would be too advanced for 4.2.... If she only had a roundoff bhs, then her tumble average would be a 2 and her total average would be a 3.5, which would make her on the maximum end of the 4.2 eligibility.

 

[Rudags]

Here's my take. I haven't read the past 8 pages, but I was reading the "amazing level 2" thread. I just hope that a rule to eliminate sand bagging doesn't hurt small gyms or gyms that aren't abusing the rule. I really think the rule NCA instilled was a great one, but there were obvious loop holes.

 

[5-6-7-8]

Here's my take. I haven't read the past 8 pages, but I was reading the "amazing level 2" thread. I just hope that a rule to eliminate sand bagging doesn't hurt small gyms or gyms that aren't abusing the rule. I really think the rule NCA instilled was a great one, but there were obvious loop holes.

This is why I keep coming back to the "trending" idea.

It would allow flexibility, but also watch for anomalies such as an athlete competing level 4 most of a season dropping to level 2. (But even then, it would look at the team makeup of that level 2 team, and dismiss it if it is just one level 4 athlete indicating a fill in and not the intent to stack.)

I have no problem with athletes crossing over for good reasons (someone who usually flies to learn to base, a shaky level 2 also competing level 1, last minute injury or illness) as long as it isn't an apparent attempt to sandbag.

Athlete credentialing would be great as well, but I feel it might add complexity (Suzie stunts bases level 2, can fly level 4, tumbles level 3...) without a substantial reward. Or use credentials as a baseline level.

 

[12stepCheermom]

I'm from England, so apologies if I'm asking a really onions question but do you 'credential' your athletes in the US and then limit them to only competing +/- one level from there?

In the UK athletes are free to compete at any level they choose and it does bring up discussion around 'sandbagging' (we don't call it that bit it's a great word!) The general feeling is that the USASF rules make the competition fair as long as each team sticks to the rules, i.e. In level 2 Team A may be made up of level 5 athletes who may be capable of double full but they are only allowed to perform back handspring like everyone else. If true level 2 teams complain it's like admitting that their coaches have taught them bad technique or something, because within the rules they truly shouldn't be at a disadvantage, as long as they can actually perform level 2 skills.

However I know it is different in the UK as we may have however many level 5 teams competing but if we individually credentialled the athletes based on skill, not many of them would actually be level 5. We are still getting over a completely different problem- teams competing at levels they can't actually do!

I think you're right in theory. All things should be the same on paper and according to level play rules. However, the issue for me gets to experience. If legit gym A puts together a team of new level 2's their skill (even if being taught correctly) won't be as polished, jumps are bound to not be as high and they are not likely to have as much experience/body control/ technique as someone from Sandbagger allstars competing three levels down. At competitions like Cheersport and varsity events where "clean, sharp and together" win, the sandbaggers are going to have a significant competitive advantage over the legit gym that has "new" level 2s that are competing at level but don't have the experience to be as crisp as a sandbagger. Let's face it - someone with a double full is likely to throw a MUCH nicer layout than a brand new (and probably younger - i.e. less body control) level 2.

 

[Cheer_Explosion_Coach]

Also, not much mention of 4.2 in this whole discussion. I can remember a particular gym in my area last year who competed their Senior 4 team in 4.2.... their flyers were the same, their boys were the same, their stunt section was the same.... you would literally see the same group of kids going on the mat for both performances, except for maybe 6-8 nuggeters in the back. They had a winning season, and I was just shocked that coaches would allow something like that.

Oh wow do you live in Baton Rouge? Haha I remember someone around us doing this also.

 

[Cheer_Explosion_Coach]

I think the best way to eliminate sandbagging is make Andre interview each athlete individually and let him place them on teams. At least then we'd know we would have (1) more competition in each division and (2) no safety violations. Sorry just a little joke that no one will probably understand.

 

[UK Cheer Girl]

For 4.2, it's a unique division that perhaps requires different rules. I think the first place to start is the minimum age cap of 13, since this division was meant for older girls who don't have a lot of tumbling, and it's turned into a place to drop 10 year olds with level 3 or better flying skills. Secondly, using the model I mentioned earlier, an athlete's tumbling level and stunt level should be ranked. Say you have a kid with a standing bhs (2) and a ro bhs tuck (3)- they're a 2.5 in tumbling. Say this kid is also a hoss base and can do level 5 stunts (5) and tosses (5) they're a 5 in stunts. If you average the two, you get 3.75 which rounds up to 4. If you consider 4.2 as an average of stunt level (4) and tumbling level (2), then you can say the athletes eligible for this team would be averaging a 3. Half a point difference in either direction would maybe be the deciding factor? So my athlete in the example would be too advanced for 4.2.... If she only had a roundoff bhs, then her tumble average would be a 2 and her total average would be a 3.5, which would make her on the maximum end of the 4.2 eligibility.

Wouldn't this put the athlete in the position where they couldn't compete with a respectable gym? Your average puts them at level 4, but what competitive level 4 team would take them without a standing tuck and a layout?

 

[CoachTamara]

Ok, so moving this from the other thread. I don't think athlete credentialing is realistic for the near future... It is going to be a long process, and will not happen anytime soon with the resources we have.
I really want to hear thoughts and opinions on limiting crossovers to a certain number per team. Let's say three. With three crossovers, you can cover yourself for injuries, and allow a few kids who want to be on the team on it. Someone mentioned that small gyms would lose from this because they need crossovers to fill teams, but realistically I can't see needing more than that. The biggest levels for small gyms are lower levels and kids that are just starting out, but you don't need to fill a level 1 team to max out the same way you do for level 5. Like I said on the other thread, I think you can get away with a level 1 team with 8 kids and get close to maxing out, and only need 10 to really max out.
Thoughts?