All-Star 2014/2015 Videos

[Mclovin]

Exactly as I understood it.

Which means these teams don't have to compete at level 5 to be a sub if necessary. And to the other point about trying to keep kids with new gyms opening up....I've never gotten that entire mentality. Kids and parents who think it's so much better for Susie to be on a level 5 like the one posted rather than a level 4 that is competitive and can win.

Maybe I'm too competitive but I'd rather have a team full of kids with the skills for that level (which in that case would be level 4) and win some stuff rather than claim I'm a "level 5" and finish dead last. We've been on both types of teams and I much prefer the former. If I'm finishing last every time I'm on the floor that's the first way for me to find the door to another opportunity.

Completely agree!! Sometimes when I'm at a competition and I see teams competing at a level they clearly don't belong in I scratch my head and ask myself WHY??? Who wouldn't want to compete in a level where they are competitive and be able to feel proud of their performance when they walked off the floor?? Sometimes it's worth losing those few kids who think they are too good for that level...at some point it has to be about the TEAM...the success of the TEAM...not the ability to keep a few upper level athletes around.

 

[quitthedrama]

I am not defending gyms that put together a team that has no business competing at a level above them and puts kids safety at risk, but given there are no rules, gyms put together teams differently. Some gyms have a philosophy that they want to challenge their kids, so some of their teams may not be as competitive but their athletes are progressing quickly. Some gyms "sandbag" or stack teams and have kids with level 5 tumbling and/or stunting on level 2 teams and win everything, and that athlete stays at the same level for several seasons. I remember CSP answering some questions about her lower level teams not being competitive. She said she would consider herself a failure as a coach if her kids didn't move up a level per year (not an exact quote and not every kid, but on average). I see several "successful" teams, particularly at lower levels, who could be competitive at a level or 2 higher but would rather win more. Which is "right" or "wrong" depends on what an individual values more.

 

[hawkeye87]

I think it depends on the intent and mentality of the team. We were on a level five worlds team last season that was made up of extremely good experienced crossovers and new to level five kids who were learning level five on safe mature kids. Teams goal was to get a bid knowing they wouldn't be using it but to have achieved it. That experience was one of the best of my daughter's life and when the team disbanded she got to join another team going to worlds. While she fell at least once every competition all year she rocked it out at worlds and I credit it to the amazing kids under her all year teaching her as they went along helping her correct mistakes they felt by being under her. Was it an expensive season without winning Yes but to me it was a heck of a lot cheaper than that many hours and hours of privates and she learned more about being a teammate and what kind of leader she wants to be one day when she too is the experienced athlete!

I can understand that putting together a team mixed with experienced and inexperienced kids. My problem is that why as a coach would allow one of your athletes to throw something they are not ready for? If the majority of your team is consistently falling, having tumble busts and look miserable on the floor why would you not bite the bullet and say we need to make a change before something serious happens?

 

[Julia Cole]

Acrobatics & Tumbling - Roster - GoDucks.com - The University of Oregon Official Athletics Web Site

This is the roster for Oregon's A&T team. Notice all the 5'1-5'3 bases. Really the only "tall" girls are backs and by tall I'm talking 5'8. I think this team has won the National Title 3 times in a row? (I could be wrong) So just because someone is fun sized doesn't mean they can't hang or should not be allowed to do their job because of their height.
I'm just very over this whole idea that if your under a certain height you MUST fly and if you don't then get yourself to nugget land. Now ex-cp spent years in the back because everyone told her she was to small to base and she didn't want to fly. Last season she MAIN based on a senior 2 team, the stunt looked pretty much like the one in the video and it was always scored as an extension because Phoebe was extended. There is a reason short people are good gymnasts and bases...shorter quad muscles.

THIS. I have been to several camps with them and everywhere else I was told I had to be a flyer. These girls are amazing with the amount of strength they had. 12 national titles in their locker room and I was practically drooling

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

I am not defending gyms that put together a team that has no business competing at a level above them and puts kids safety at risk, but given there are no rules, gyms put together teams differently. Some gyms have a philosophy that they want to challenge their kids, so some of their teams may not be as competitive but their athletes are progressing quickly. Some gyms "sandbag" or stack teams and have kids with level 5 tumbling and/or stunting on level 2 teams and win everything, and that athlete stays at the same level for several seasons. I remember CSP answering some questions about her lower level teams not being competitive. She said she would consider herself a failure as a coach if her kids didn't move up a level per year (not an exact quote and not every kid, but on average). I see several "successful" teams, particularly at lower levels, who could be competitive at a level or 2 higher but would rather win more. Which is "right" or "wrong" depends on what an individual values more.

If a coach wants athletes to generally move up a level every year, that would mean the median number of years cheering for a level 5 team would be 5 (assuming they started at level 1 and had no previous experience w/ gymnastics, etc.). So every 5/6 year old that walks into that gym w/ zero experience is expected to be doing fulls and double fulls by the age of 12? I just don't find that feasible? Maybe 1 or 2 out of every 5 kids has the physical ability/talent to advance that fast, but I think the majority would not reach fulls/double fulls until their mid to late teens, and kids who started later would progress even slower.

 

[luv2cheer92]

If a coach wants athletes to generally move up a level every year, that would mean the median number of years cheering for a level 5 team would be 5 (assuming they started at level 1 and had no previous experience w/ gymnastics, etc.). So every 5/6 year old that walks into that gym w/ zero experience is expected to be doing fulls and double fulls by the age of 12? I just don't find that feasible? Maybe 1 or 2 out of every 5 kids has the physical ability/talent to advance that fast, but I think the majority would not reach fulls/double fulls until their mid to late teens, and kids who started later would progress even slower.

It's feasible when the athletes don't have all of the skills for that level when they are moved up, sometimes progressed too quickly.

 

[quitthedrama]

If a coach wants athletes to generally move up a level every year, that would mean the median number of years cheering for a level 5 team would be 5 (assuming they started at level 1 and had no previous experience w/ gymnastics, etc.). So every 5/6 year old that walks into that gym w/ zero experience is expected to be doing fulls and double fulls by the age of 12? I just don't find that feasible? Maybe 1 or 2 out of every 5 kids has the physical ability/talent to advance that fast, but I think the majority would not reach fulls/double fulls until their mid to late teens, and kids who started later would progress even slower.

Just to clarify I didn't quote her, but it was her answer when responding to why her level 1-4 teams don't come home with jackets every weekend. It was more of a philosophy than a hard-fast rule, and I was only using the example to show how some gyms operate differently than others. At any rate, I see nothing wrong with it taking 5-7 years to reach level 5 - especially the low end of level 5. Most elite gymnasts don't start gymnastics until they are 6 or 7, so it is very similar since many junior athletes are competing at a Worlds level at age 12 or 13.

It's feasible when the athletes don't have all of the skills for that level when they are moved up, sometimes progressed too quickly.

Some gyms have a youth 5 team, so no double fulls until they are 12 (not saying some aren't on a jr 5 team), and some of the kids on those youth 5 teams may not have all of their level 5 skills, but they are learning to compete at the highest level at a younger age, so many are not hitting high pressure competitions for the first time at age 14. It makes sense to me and is more of how I like to see a gym operate. Not saying it is right or wrong, just a personal preference for me.

 

[luv2cheer92]

Just to clarify I didn't quote her, but it was her answer when responding to why her level 1-4 teams don't come home with jackets every weekend. It was more of a philosophy than a hard-fast rule, and I was only using the example to show how some gyms operate differently than others. At any rate, I see nothing wrong with it taking 5-7 years to reach level 5 - especially the low end of level 5. Most elite gymnasts don't start gymnastics until they are 6 or 7, so it is very similar since many junior athletes are competing at a Worlds level at age 12 or 13.

Some gyms have a youth 5 team, so no double fulls until they are 12 (not saying some aren't on a jr 5 team), and some of the kids on those youth 5 teams may not have all of their level 5 skills, but they are learning to compete at the highest level at a younger age, so many are not hitting high pressure competitions for the first time at age 14. It makes sense to me and is more of how I like to see a gym operate. Not saying it is right or wrong, just a personal preference for me.

Yep, and that's what makes this sport great. There's usually a gym out there for everybody!
To clarify, I wasn't trying to say that every gym that has this philosophy is like that, but there are definitely some out there that IMO seem to progress kids too fast and based on videos (not personal experience), it appears to be putting kids at an increased risk for injury. Some gyms definitely do it right though and I can appreciate that, although it wouldn't be my personal preference.

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

It's feasible when the athletes don't have all of the skills for that level when they are moved up, sometimes progressed too quickly.

And if it's EXPECTED that they advance that fast, that's going to put an exhorbanent amount of pressure on these kids to get skills that their bodies just need more time to get safely. It's not right to expect everyone to be a tumbling prodigy.

I'd expect at LEAST 2 years at level 2 and a repeat of either 3 or 4 would be expected as well - the progression from when a kid does their first backhandspring to the point where they can do a safe no hands flipping skill like a tuck can often take years, AND the time from when someone does their first back tuck, to when they are ready for fulls is another long journey - a good set takes most kids quite some time to develop. And R5 should always be a step before 5 IMO.

 

[mstealtoyou]

they typically all throw it to a full. But at both days that didnt happen so something isn't working??

I only know what happened to the one that ended in a tuck (and there's a left side view video out there where you can see why) but I think sometimes in the teams eagerness to get to their next spot they aren't leaving room for these girls to get a good run going into their pass.....which means they don't get the power to land it to the correct skill.

 

[GreatWhite92]

I started when I was 7 and was throwing fulls by the time I was 11, I think. Definitely by 12. And we were on a hard floor back then so it's definitely possible. I will say that I progressed faster than the majority of the kids I started out with however. Most of them never even got to the point of throwing fulls. So I would say it's possible but not likely.

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

Just to clarify I didn't quote her, but it was her answer when responding to why her level 1-4 teams don't come home with jackets every weekend. It was more of a philosophy than a hard-fast rule, and I was only using the example to show how some gyms operate differently than others. At any rate, I see nothing wrong with it taking 5-7 years to reach level 5 - especially the low end of level 5. Most elite gymnasts don't start gymnastics until they are 6 or 7, so it is very similar since many junior athletes are competing at a Worlds level at age 12 or 13.

Some gyms have a youth 5 team, so no double fulls until they are 12 (not saying some aren't on a jr 5 team), and some of the kids on those youth 5 teams may not have all of their level 5 skills, but they are learning to compete at the highest level at a younger age, so many are not hitting high pressure competitions for the first time at age 14. It makes sense to me and is more of how I like to see a gym operate. Not saying it is right or wrong, just a personal preference for me.

The point about elite gymnasts is true - yes - those girls advance very quick, but there are only about 100 total elite gymnasts in the USA, out of 10's of thousands of gymnasts. Those kids are exceptional prodigal talents that just pick things up at an amazing pace compared to the typical kid. To say most all star cheerleader should advance at the speed of an elite track gymnast is expecting way too much.

The typical gymnast who sticks w/ the sport throughout their school age years will spend at least 8-9 years from the time they first walk into a gym till they reach level 10, and that's where they stay until graduation. Most will not make it to level 10 at all, many peaking out around level 7 or 8.

 

[NatalieB97]

The point about elite gymnasts is true - yes - those girls advance very quick, but there are only about 100 total elite gymnasts in the USA, out of 10's of thousands of gymnasts. Those kids are exceptional prodigal talents that just pick things up at an amazing pace compared to the typical kid. To say most all star cheerleader should advance at the speed of an elite track gymnast is expecting way too much.

The typical gymnast who sticks w/ the sport throughout their school age years will spend at least 8-9 years from the time they first walk into a gym till they reach level 10, and that's where they stay until graduation. Most will not make it to level 10 at all, many peaking out around level 7 or 8.

i only began training for level 8 before i quit and moved to all star. and that means that i had just started learning fulls before making the switch to cheerleading. and before that, i had gone through about 6 years of competing in gymnastics and progressing through levels 4-7. in my own personal experience, it is possible to move up a gymnastics level every year, but at some point, most kids do repeat a level at least once. i don't think it's impossible for cheerleaders or gymnastics to move up levels every year b/c i have a teammate who is an exceptional cheerleader all-around. personally, i really think it's up to the child and how much he/she can handle and is willing to work.

 

[f5forever]

The only thing I have to say about the comparison of gymnastics and cheerleading advancement is that gymnastics stresses technique (which in the long run helps with advancement). If you look at the skills and ages of the different sports, gymnasts tend to (IMO) put in much more time in the gym (granted they have multiple apparatus to train on, not just tumbling). I also feel that there's a different mindset for gymnasts. (As a former gymnast and then cheerleader there was a MAJOR shift for me.) In gymnastics there's no worrying about what Susie can do; I'm just trying to do my best. In cheerleading there's more pressure to be on the best team and not be the one holding a team back (that pressure can come from peers, coaches, parents, and the athlete themselves). There are those who don't and to be level 5 or 6 (and some who are perfectly happy with only a tuck, layout, or back handspring). That should also be acceptable. I just wish that everyone could accept the different levels and be happy to be place on the right (SAFE) level instead of the level they "deserve" or want to be on.
Basically advancement speed depends on the individual athlete. A coach should know the appropriate skills for an athlete; that's their job.

 

[WORKxB4xUxREIGN]

Does anyone have a video of HotCheer Hot 5 from this season? Last year they were one of the first videos that popped up, now this season they are nowhere to be found. If there is no video, has anyone at least seen them compete this season?