All-Star Small Gym/large Gym Question

[Rudags]

With all this small gym/large gym talk. I have a question. When they say "75 and under" for competition purposes - Does that mean 75 REGISTERED kids? Or 75 TOTAL kids.

Example. ABC Allstars has 100 kids. They compete locally with all 100 kids. Their out of town competitions they only take their Senior 3, Senior 4, and Senior 5 (60 Kids).

Is ABC Allstars a SMALL GYM at this competition?

 

[Hungry]

It's the number of kids registered with the gym (and one physical address)

 

[Rudags]

So - For example, If Cheer Extreme were to only bring Senior Elite and Coed Elite to Jamfest Indy (36+36=72) They would be Small Gym?

 

[King]

So - For example, If Cheer Extreme were to only bring Senior Elite and Coed Elite to Jamfest Indy (36+36=72) They would be Small Gym?

Under the current system, yes. There is no way to track, no definition of a program, so nothing is enforceable.

 

[tumbleyoda]

So - For example, If Cheer Extreme were to only bring Senior Elite and Coed Elite to Jamfest Indy (36+36=72) They would be Small Gym?

They could choose to be small gym. However using those particular teams from CEA would probably be a bad example.

I think the more common scenario which is why another reason the definition of a program is needed:

Super Duper Trooper All Stars has 275 competitive athletes and four total locations. Super Duper Trooper All Stars with 4 locations that crosses athletes between all 4 locations to make their competitive teams. They take a team from location A which has 59 kids total at that location to a competition. That team is made up of members of all 4 locations of Super Duper Trooper All Stars.

Are they eligible to enter small gym when 1/2 that team is made up of kids that come from the other locations? Yes the one location of Super Duper Trooper fits the small gym definition but the program as a whole does not.

If you define exactly what a program is, you have your answer.

 

[Rudags]

They could choose to be small gym. However using those particular teams from CEA would probably be a bad example.

I think the more common scenario which is why another reason the definition of a program is needed:

Super Duper Trooper All Stars has 275 competitive athletes and four total locations. Super Duper Trooper All Stars with 4 locations that crosses athletes between all 4 locations to make their competitive teams. They take a team from location A which has 59 kids total at that location to a competition. That team is made up of members of all 4 locations of Super Duper Trooper All Stars.

Are they eligible to enter small gym when 1/2 that team is made up of kids that come from the other locations? Yes the one location of Super Duper Trooper fits the small gym definition but the program as a whole does not.

If you define exactly what a program is, you have your answer.

Thanks for clarifying. That makes better sense. I realize it was a bad example, but hopefully it was specific enough to help others who were confused.

 

[Hungry]

Hmmm...this confuses me then. I interpret the explanation at USASF differently. It says:


A "Small Gym" is defined as having one physical address for its location and has
75 or less athletes registered in its competitive cheer program at the time of competition. Exhibition teams, crossover athletes, special needs teams and dance teams do not count toward the 75 or less athletes.

It is up to the event producer’s discretion as to how to monitor this.

Is the "cheer program" what's up for debate? To me, it reads the amount of athletes at the entire gym as a whole, not how many you take to a competition. I can't see how a gym with 4 locations and 400 athletes could qualify as a small gym just because you only take two teams to a particular competition. JMO!

This is interesting, though. I had never thought of it the other way that was explained above. I don't agree but has given me something to mull over...

 

[CGAcheer]

Hmmm...this confuses me then. I interpret the explanation at USASF differently. It says:


A "Small Gym" is defined as having one physical address for its location and has
75 or less athletes registered in its competitive cheer program at the time of competition. Exhibition teams, crossover athletes, special needs teams and dance teams do not count toward the 75 or less athletes.

It is up to the event producer’s discretion as to how to monitor this.

Is the "cheer program" what's up for debate? To me, it reads the amount of athletes at the entire gym as a whole, not how many you take to a competition. I can't see how a gym with 4 locations and 400 athletes could qualify as a small gym just because you only take two teams to a particular competition. JMO!

This is interesting, though. I had never thought of it the other way that was explained above. I don't agree but has given me something to mull over...

You're right, but there currently is no way to count, nor do we know what a "program" is. So it is up to the event producer which only has access to how many kids under one named program are at their competition.

 

[hopskipandjump]

Hmmm...this confuses me then. I interpret the explanation at USASF differently. It says:


A "Small Gym" is defined as having one physical address for its location and has
75 or less athletes registered in its competitive cheer program at the time of competition. Exhibition teams, crossover athletes, special needs teams and dance teams do not count toward the 75 or less athletes.

It is up to the event producer’s discretion as to how to monitor this.

Is the "cheer program" what's up for debate? To me, it reads the amount of athletes at the entire gym as a whole, not how many you take to a competition. I can't see how a gym with 4 locations and 400 athletes could qualify as a small gym just because you only take two teams to a particular competition. JMO!

This is interesting, though. I had never thought of it the other way that was explained above. I don't agree but has given me something to mull over...

THIS HAS BEEN MY ARGUMENT ALL ALONG! There is no ambiguity here; come on people. You know what they mean. Taking 3 teams from your 200, 000 plus kids from your gym does not put you in the "small gym" category. It is called cheating.

 

[tumbleyoda]

THIS HAS BEEN MY ARGUMENT ALL ALONG! There is no ambiguity here; come on people. You know what they mean. Taking 3 teams from your 200, 000 plus kids from your gym does not put you in the "small gym" category. It is called cheating.

I agree with you. But has it happened and it has not been called cheating? My best guess is yes. Event producers do not want to lose money from confronting gyms if there are consequences to their confrontation. Very easy to tell Who the heck are they anyway All Stars that they are breaking the rules.

 

[Hungry]

There is also the NSGA (National Small Gym Assoc) through the USASF. It would be nice if competition companies would be able to refer to that member list or something to confirm/deny the gym is in fact considered a "small gym". JMO

 

[MissCongeniality]

I agree with you. But has it happened and it has not been called cheating? My best guess is yes. Event producers do not want to lose money from confronting gyms if there are consequences to their confrontation. Very easy to tell Who the heck are they anyway All Stars that they are breaking the rules.

Especially gyms with 200,000 athletes! LOL! I have seen a rule here and there where an exception is made (by the competition companies) for the 200,000 athlete program that the 75 athlete programs do not get the exception. I mean it boils down to the mighty dollar. 200,000 x $80 is a heck of a lot more money you want to keep bringing to your events than 75 x $80.

 

[SharkDad]

Can someone please PM me with an example of a large gym that claimed small gym status just because they only took a small number of kids to a comp? I've neer seen it actually happen.

 

[newcheerdad]

You're right, but there currently is no way to count, nor do we know what a "program" is. So it is up to the event producer which only has access to how many kids under one named program are at their competition.

Wouldn't this be a non-issue if every athlete competing an event was required to be a member of USASF? It'd be awful hard to hide the fact you've got 250 athletes registered, even if you have them at multiple locations. If they're competing on the same team, they're part of the same "program".

At least that's my view from the cheap seats.

 

[SharkDad]

I've gotten a few responses from 1 person and so far it looks like situations where this has happened, the gym might have been part of a large program but competed with no crossovers and was placed in the small gym category by the event producer or had more athletes the beginning of the year, but not when then competition happened. No responses of programs cheating the system yet. . .

In the 11 years I've been watching, whenever I thought something was unfair I usually found out it was just something I didn't know all the details of. I finally decided to not make a judgement unless I found out the details first.