All-Star Crossovers And Sandbagging

[Lazydaisytoo]

With the way quantity and percentage is set up having only 12 athletes would not be the sole reason a team is getting last. We have a gym in our area having a pretty successful season so far with only 10 athletes on their senior 5 team.

Yes, I saw a very small small level 5 this weekend. And they looked great. But I'd bet dollars to donuts that none of those girls was a first year athlete, kwim? If you want to cultivate new blood, you gotta do what you gotta do.

 

[Teacher Mom]

I think quantity and percentage are the reasons to have a small team where everyone solidly has all of the skills required at that level. There are a lot of small teams who win just because of the fact they all are truly that level

 

[KikiD22]

I'm speaking solely as a parent and not from the perspective of a coach or gym owner... my daughter's team is a small junior 2. I asked her today and there is only one girl who crosses and it's to our j1 team because of an injury. We are a true level 2 junior team. Have some girls gotten their tuck since the season started? Probably. I honestly have no idea. But I know they didn't have it at the beginning.

Saying all that, if we competed against another small junior 2 team that has more than two or three girls from a level 4 and/or 5 team, I would be really mad. I don't care what's legal and what's not, if a gym has to put a bunch of level 3, 4 and 5 girls on a level 2 team just to make up the team, then maybe the team shouldn't be formed to begin with.
I am NOT directing this at JAS. I am directing it at any gym anywhere.

Again, this is my parent perspective and my .02.

We're in the same division (well, large junior 2), and we DO compete against teams that clearly have athletes from higher level teams. Guess what? We've still had a great season. I'm just a cheer mom & will probably get blasted for this, but I absolutely believe that crossovers aren't needed to win. We have two athletes out of our 27 that have higher level tumbling but are not ready to be on a higher level team due to age (the two youngest on the team) and other skills. We have one crossover currently from our Junior 3 team due to an athlete recently having to leave the program unexpectedly. We have at least 7 level 1 athletes, since our program has no level 1 team this season at our location. And we also have 2 grand championships, multiple division championships, a WSF national championship and a Summit bid. With creative coaching, teams can be successful without having to stack them with higher level athletes.

 

[haylsv3]

At my last gym we had an open 4.2 team. Another gym we compete against regularity created an open 4.2 from mostly their worlds athletes (3/4 from their level 6 teams and a few from their level 5 team). They hardly had any "regular" members. It was infuriating to compete against them

 

[youbetterwork]

How important is it to have a full team? Is crossovers always the solution if someone quits, or do some teams just re-work their routine and compete with one less person? And one more question: if someone is asked to fill in for an athlete for the rest of the season, do they have to pay for the training, uniform etc. or do the gym cover everything for that extra team?

It's not common to crossover here. I've had one girl do it, Y2 to J1, because her sister was on Y2. It's not even common to have athletes crossover to fill in for injured athletes. We have a rule that you can only crossover L1-L3, and L5-L6 (we don't have L4).

 

[Lazydaisytoo]

How important is it to have a full team? Is crossovers always the solution if someone quits, or do some teams just re-work their routine and compete with one less person? And one more question: if someone is asked to fill in for an athlete for the rest of the season, do they have to pay for the training, uniform etc. or do the gym cover everything for that extra team?

My daughter's gym uses crossovers heavily, but I don't know that any of the teams are "full." Our S4 team has 19 girls right now. I know that some girls who are eligible cross down to J4, and they're a small team too. Our S2 team is in the large category, but again, the team isn't "full."

As far as filling in or re-working, it all depends. We have had some people quit, some injuries. We may have pulled someone up from J4, but I know they have reworked the routine too. Change is constant. I don't know what the gym policy is as far as the finances. I'm sure that if someone is just filling in for one comp as a courtesy, they're not expected to pay a crossover fee. Uniforms aren't an issue for us, as every team in the gym wears the same.

 

[cheer25mom]

Not necessarily, though. I've seen situations where there were enough kids to make a (maxed out) Y2, J2, S2 and a handful of L2 kids left over. To make a competitive team, the gym had to pull a couple of crossovers from a L3 team to make another J2. The numbers don't always work out.

I would think that those cases would be a rarity though, with the option to go with 2 small teams, one small one large, ect just about every combo of kids should be covered. There will likely be some exceptions where a few crossovers are needed. I guess what I was trying to say was that large gyms don't need to depend on crossovers to make their gym work, and they should be the exception not the rule.
There are large gyms out there that have them on every team or almost every team. One close to us routinely crosses about half of J4 to J2. They don't need to do so to field a team, but choose that team to sandbag to try to get summit bids, high point ect. they easily have enough athletes of appropriate skill for a small J2, but pull 10-15 more from J4 to make a large. I know a level 4 child on the team, and they have been told that is what they are there for. This is the kind of thing I think large gyms should not be doing.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

We're with a relatively small, relatively new gym. We had a few new girls start this season, senior age, absolutely no cheer or tumbling experience. But not enough of them to have a S1 team. We had a few J2 girls age out. We had a few girls who were true S2. But even with those 3 groups, there wasn't enough for a S2 team. But adding just a few girls with level 4 experience was enough to gel the team together at S2 level.

Our S2 team is in the large category, but again, the team isn't "full."

I don't understand this. In one post you're saying you didn't have enough to make a S2 at all, so you used crossovers. But now you're saying your S2 is large? Couldn't you have had a small S2 and used fewer crossovers?

It sounds like if you didn't even have enough to field a team at all, and now you have a large team, you maybe are using what most would consider too many crossovers to be "filling" spots. Filling spots is about bringing a team of something like 8 to a more workable number. I don't think bringing a team to 21+ athletes is "filling" it anymore.

As for a team of 12 coming in last every time... I've seen lots of small teams rack up wins. Madison Twisters used to crush our S3 on the scoresheet, at every comp. Pretty sure they won jamfest Supernationals and US Finals too. With 9 girls. (we had 32)

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

I think CP's gym purposely keeps our teams smaller and only certain numbers of kids - my and CP's theory is that it allows you to have less stunt groups and still max out the score sheet - like they have teams of 18 and 19 but not 20, teams of 14 and 15 but not 16, etc. When you have that 20th person you need to do 5 stunt groups w/ no front spots at all, same deal w/ a team of 16 - you have to have 4 stunt groups w/ no front spots. So any number of kids that is equally divisible by 4 is a really undesirable team size. And the team numbers where you divide by 4 and have a remainder of 3 are ideal cause that give you the most front spots possible. A team of 15 is the absolute best cause you can front spot all 3 stunts if you need to.

These are just our theories though - don't think the gym really publicy says that this is the reason why almost all our teams are 15 or 19 kids. Haha.

 

[Lazydaisytoo]

I don't understand this. In one post you're saying you didn't have enough to make a S2 at all, so you used crossovers. But now you're saying your S2 is large? Couldn't you have had a small S2 and used fewer crossovers?

I think the team became large because of the number of incoming level 1 girls-- maybe 8 or so, then the aging out J2 girls. Hey, I'm not claiming to know all the ins and outs of how our gym chose to draft the team. From my outside eye, it looked like there were a few S1 girls, a few S2 girls, but perhaps not enough of either to pull together a workable team. And like I said, as a gym with a single mat and limited coaches, it may not have been feasable to have both a S1 and S2 team. Maybe it's just my limited experience with AS-- my daughter has always been on 2 teams, both at the same level, and that's how most of our gym's crossovers are used. This year she ended up being one of 3 girls crossing down to a lower level because she's no longer eligible to cross to a J team.

ETA: Our gym doesn't compete for Summit bids.

 

[cheer25mom]

I think CP's gym purposely keeps our teams smaller and only certain numbers of kids - my and CP's theory is that it allows you to have less stunt groups and still max out the score sheet - like they have teams of 18 and 19 but not 20, teams of 14 and 15 but not 16, etc. When you have that 20th person you need to do 5 stunt groups w/ no front spots at all, same deal w/ a team of 16 - you have to have 4 stunt groups w/ no front spots. So any number of kids that is equally divisible by 4 is a really undesirable team size. And the team numbers where you divide by 4 and have a remainder of 3 are ideal cause that give you the most front spots possible. A team of 15 is the absolute best cause you can front spot all 3 stunts if you need to.

These are just our theories though - don't think the gym really publicy says that this is the reason why almost all our teams are 15 or 19 kids. Haha.

As I understand it, the new score sheet discourages the use of front spot though, correct? For instance 3 stunts without front spots score better than 3 stunts of equal difficulty with front spots? OS I don't know if this is really an advantage anymore?

 

[MzLyn23]

ok is there a way for me to hit pause... I just want to catch up.... man there's 8 pages lol.... ok I'll try... I don't need lunch today.... I enjoy reading lol

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

As I understand it, the new score sheet discourages the use of front spot though, correct? For instance 3 stunts without front spots score better than 3 stunts of equal difficulty with front spots? OS I don't know if this is really an advantage anymore?

That blows my theory if true - they don't always front spot though - sometimes they tumble. I still think CPs gym is very adverse to team numbers that are equally divisible by 4 - I know of girls who really want to get put on certain teams (and have the tumbling and skills) but are told the team is full and they need to wait for a spot to open (when the team has 19 kids). And I know the gym just isn't just giving them an excuse cause a few of those kids did in fact move to the team when there was an injury or a quitting.

 

[luv2cheer92]

As I understand it, the new score sheet discourages the use of front spot though, correct? For instance 3 stunts without front spots score better than 3 stunts of equal difficulty with front spots? OS I don't know if this is really an advantage anymore?

Yea, having front spots definitely isn't gonna help your score, it's better to have them doing something else. But I do think there is an advantage to not having full numbers for everyone to be in a stunt group (example, having 19 instead of 20), I feel like more and more teams are starting to do this, even some big name gyms.

 

[cheer25mom]

Yea, having front spots definitely aren't gonna help your score, it's better to have them doing something else. But I do think there is an advantage to not having full numbers for everyone to be in a stunt group (example, having 19 instead of 20), I feel like more and more teams are starting to do this, even some big name gyms.

you are right, it gives them more flexibility to move kids around if groups aren't working, and to have fill ins for injuries ect. I just never thought of having more front spots as a good thing score wise. Our gym only uses them when a group is struggling.

That blows my theory if true - they don't always front spot though - sometimes they tumble. I still think CPs gym is very adverse to team numbers that are equally divisible by 4 - I know of girls who really want to get put on certain teams (and have the tumbling and skills) but are told the team is full and they need to wait for a spot to open (when the team has 19 kids). And I know the gym just isn't just giving them an excuse cause a few of those kids did in fact move to the team when there was an injury or a quitting.

I think it is the above reason, more than having front spots. If they move them onto the team, they would have to create another stunt group, then there is no wiggle room if something happens.