Worlds Xsmall Division Question

[Wendy Trekster]

But with all we now know about xsmall, the dynamic changes. Of course, teams could do the reverse, compete as small with a couple of extra members if they wanted too I suppose. Either way, the xsmalls that will be competing at worlds as small will be competing during the season in a way that they will not be competing at worlds.

In thinking of this, there are 3 gyms I can think of immediately that are very small (3-4 teams in total) that are effected by the larger gyms competing in xsmall during the season.

Their very loyal and dedicated athletes have stayed with them through thick and thin because they are such a close, tight-knit family. They won't gym-hop out of loyalty and they just so happen to have a number of level 5 athletes that the xsmall division is perfect for. Some of these teams may or may not get a Worlds bid and the 2-day competitions may be their only opportunity for success. With the heavily stacked teams from larger programs in the xsmall division, the intent of the division is completely lost. I believe it was created to support smaller gyms so they have success and get the chance to grow their gyms. And it gives those very dedicated athletes a true opportunity to be competitive at worlds.

 

[luv2cheer92]

But with all we now know about xsmall, the dynamic changes. Of course, teams could do the reverse, compete as small with a couple of extra members if they wanted too I suppose. Either way, the xsmalls that will be competing at worlds as small will be competing during the season in a way that they will not be competing at worlds.

In thinking of this, there are 3 gyms I can think of immediately that are very small (3-4 teams in total) that are effected by the larger gyms competing in xsmall during the season.

Their very loyal and dedicated athletes have stayed with them through thick and thin because they are such a close, tight-knit family. They won't gym-hop out of loyalty and they just so happen to have a number of level 5 athletes that the xsmall division is perfect for. Some of these teams may or may not get a Worlds bid and the 2-day competitions may be their only opportunity for success. With the heavily stacked teams from larger programs in the xsmall division, the intent of the division is completely lost. I believe it was created to support smaller gyms so they have success and get the chance to grow their gyms. And it gives those very dedicated athletes a true opportunity to be competitive at worlds.

I wouldn't say the intent of the division is lost seeing as how these were initially not even going to be Worlds divisions, so this whole thing wouldn't even have happened with the initial intent of these divisions. Everyone would have just competed in whatever size they were throughout the regular season, regardless of gym size. I also would not consider any of the 3 current teams heavily stacked at all. Like not even close lol.

 

[retiredl5cheer]

But with all we now know about xsmall, the dynamic changes. Of course, teams could do the reverse, compete as small with a couple of extra members if they wanted too I suppose. Either way, the xsmalls that will be competing at worlds as small will be competing during the season in a way that they will not be competing at worlds.

In thinking of this, there are 3 gyms I can think of immediately that are very small (3-4 teams in total) that are effected by the larger gyms competing in xsmall during the season.

Their very loyal and dedicated athletes have stayed with them through thick and thin because they are such a close, tight-knit family. They won't gym-hop out of loyalty and they just so happen to have a number of level 5 athletes that the xsmall division is perfect for. Some of these teams may or may not get a Worlds bid and the 2-day competitions may be their only opportunity for success. With the heavily stacked teams from larger programs in the xsmall division, the intent of the division is completely lost. I believe it was created to support smaller gyms so they have success and get the chance to grow their gyms. And it gives those very dedicated athletes a true opportunity to be competitive at worlds.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't believe in the idea that less competitive teams should get a pat on the back and an easier win because they come from a small gym, especially at the level 5 level. It's simple enough - either put together a team that's competitive at its level, move that team to a level at which it can be competitive, or understand that your team may not win. If your level 5 team isn't competitive enough to go to Worlds, then 5R is probably a better fit for them anyway.

Here's the thing - the size of your team doesn't determine the talent of your team, and the talent of your team doesn't determine the size of your team. Some of these XS teams have 14 INSANELY talented L5 athletes, and they may have chosen to leave some borderline L5 athletes at the L4 level, which is why they're XS. Smaller gyms can absolutely choose to put 8, 9, or 10 of their most talented L5 athletes on an XS team and leave the borderline L5's on a L4 for the same effect.

 

[Wendy Trekster]

All true - good programs, no matter the size put together the best teams for their athletes based on age and skill - the main thing is the xsmall division has caused all form of uproar and I still believe it's a disservice for a program to play the loophole. Knowingly entering competitions, with the high likelihood of the issue arising is an interesting way to run a program. At this point no matter what they do, they will not be competing all season where they will be at Worlds.

 

[Wendy Trekster]

And ultimately at the end of the season we will see how this all plays out ---- karma may yet provide an answer none of us foresee.

 

[quitthedrama]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't believe in the idea that less competitive teams should get a pat on the back and an easier win because they come from a small gym, especially at the level 5 level. It's simple enough - either put together a team that's competitive at its level, move that team to a level at which it can be competitive, or understand that your team may not win. If your level 5 team isn't competitive enough to go to Worlds, then 5R is probably a better fit for them anyway.

Here's the thing - the size of your team doesn't determine the talent of your team, and the talent of your team doesn't determine the size of your team. Some of these XS teams have 14 INSANELY talented L5 athletes, and they may have chosen to leave some borderline L5 athletes at the L4 level, which is why they're XS. Smaller gyms can absolutely choose to put 8, 9, or 10 of their most talented L5 athletes on an XS team and leave the borderline L5's on a L4 for the same effect.

I hope what I saw at WSF is not an indication of the XS division, because with the exception of 2-3 solid teams, there were some downright scary performances. I believe the highest score for XS coed on day 1 was below 90. This division makes no sense, especially given the ratio rules that are already in place which actually give an advantage to teams with less than the max athletes for their division - and CJA proved they can be competitive with that number of athletes since they globed last year. I feel badly they are in this mix because they aren't doing anything differently than they did before the xs division was created. If anything, have a small gym level 5 senior division compete at the D2 Summit rather than an xs division.

ETA: @Wendy Trekster what does karma have to do with any of this discussion?

 

[retiredl5cheer]

I hope what I saw at WSF is not an indication of the XS division, because with the exception of 2-3 solid teams, there were some downright scary performances. I believe the highest score for XS coed on day 1 was below 90. This division makes no sense, especially given the ratio rules that are already in place which actually give an advantage to teams with less than the max athletes for their division - and CJA proved they can be competitive with that number of athletes since they globed last year. I feel badly they are in this mix because they aren't doing anything differently than they did before the xs division was created. If anything, have a small gym level 5 senior division compete at the D2 Summit rather than an xs division.

ETA: @Wendy Trekster what does karma have to do with any of this discussion?

THIS. I get salty when people complain that the small gyms don't win because of the big gyms. In reality, many of those small gyms don't win because they have no business entering a level 5 division. 50% running fulls and a few level appropriate stunting skills doesn't make a L5 team...

I feel bad for CJA too. They're being lumped into the "working the loophole" argument, when they're just doing exactly what they've always done.

 

[Wendy Trekster]

I hope what I saw at WSF is not an indication of the XS division, because with the exception of 2-3 solid teams, there were some downright scary performances. I believe the highest score for XS coed on day 1 was below 90. This division makes no sense, especially given the ratio rules that are already in place which actually give an advantage to teams with less than the max athletes for their division - and CJA proved they can be competitive with that number of athletes since they globed last year. I feel badly they are in this mix because they aren't doing anything differently than they did before the xs division was created. If anything, have a small gym level 5 senior division compete at the D2 Summit rather than an xs division.

ETA: @Wendy Trekster what does karma have to do with any of this discussion?

It doesn't, it just happens sometimes --- time will tell how this division plays out and how the teams fare ---

 

[cheerios27]

All true - good programs, no matter the size put together the best teams for their athletes based on age and skill - the main thing is the xsmall division has caused all form of uproar and I still believe it's a disservice for a program to play the loophole. Knowingly entering competitions, with the high likelihood of the issue arising is an interesting way to run a program. At this point no matter what they do, they will not be competing all season where they will be at Worlds.

But again, that isn't their decision. I am pretty certain a team can not decide to just compete in a division if you do not have that number of athletes at a Varsity event. Are you suggesting that they now should add an athlete, forfeit their bid and compete in small because their other Worlds team has a bid and 4 months from now they will be at Worlds. Would you be for that if you were a parent of an athlete on that team? They have 14 athletes, which makes them XS for 99% of their season. You can call it a loophole, or you can call it for what it is, and a rule that only applies to Worlds. I see no advantage, or as you say "play the loophole" when you are competing all season in the division you belong in. It is not a loophole, its actually a penalty to those XS teams who are being forced into small because USASF is trying to make a D2 division without declaring it a D2 division. Should a gym base their team size for the season on one competition, or the 5 months of the rest of the season? And honestly every comp before Worlds is no indicator on how you will do at Worlds because because no one competes on the Worlds scoresheet until Worlds. Again, until XS is called D2, it is a regular worlds division all season, that anyone with 14 and under compete in. There is no Karma involved, and I hope no ill will cast against a team just following the rules.

 

[Wendy Trekster]

Oh goodness, no ill will to any team or their athletes - it's just an interesting conundrum that I'm glad my athlete is not involved in at all ---

 

[TealShades]

Oh goodness, no ill will to any team or their athletes - it's just an interesting conundrum that I'm glad my athlete is not involved in at all ---

Well perhaps don't say karma may come to those teams/gyms that are using a "loophole" to their advantage.

 

[CLynn]

They have 14 athletes, which makes them XS for 99% of their season. You can call it a loophole, or you can call it for what it is, and a rule that only applies to Worlds.

It is not a loophole, its actually a penalty to those XS teams who are being forced into small because USASF is trying to make a D2 division without declaring it a D2 division

YES. YES.

it's just an interesting conundrum that I'm glad my athlete is not involved in at all ---

LOL, no disrespect to her current team but pretty sure my child would be thrilled to be a Bombshell.

 

[Wendy Trekster]

Well perhaps don't say karma may come to those teams/gyms that are using a "loophole" to their advantage.

And now you're putting words in my mouth --- you inferred that - peace out and have a great day <3

 

[DonnaM]

Given that gym standings are based on the number of globes/titles, it makes sense to me to have a XS All Girl of 14 and a Small co-ed of 20 rather than one team of 34. Because that is potentially 2 globes, instead of one. There is a real incentive to have lots of small teams.

 

[Ashley]

Given that gym standings are based on the number of globes/titles, it makes sense to me to have a XS All Girl of 14 and a Small co-ed of 20 rather than one team of 34. Because that is potentially 2 globes, instead of one. There is a real incentive to have lots of small teams.

Having more teams doesn't automatically increase your chance of globing. In fact, it probably decreases it. If you only have 4 boys, you're not going to make a Large Coed team of 34 anyway. You don't really have a choice but to make two teams.

You say "gym standings" as if that's a real ranking. There are plenty of programs that were well respected long before they globed, and many of the best-known programs are those with large teams.