Local tournaments- Bracket by Birth Year or by Grade?

[DocWrestling]

I agree it happens but 99% of those kids are summer birthdays so we really are only talking about a month or two difference.  They simply went from youngest in one grade to oldest in another grade.

If we are truly worried about them then make the cutoff at September 1st rather than January 1st.

If we truly had duals and team events it would be worse with splitting grades in half but for the most part it is an individual sport.  But it seems like all the youth dual tournaments go by grade?

[imnofish]

I agree it happens but 99% of those kids are summer birthdays so we really are only talking about a month or two difference.  They simply went from youngest in one grade to oldest in another grade.

If we are truly worried about them then make the cutoff at September 1st rather than January 1st.

If we truly had duals and team events it would be worse with splitting grades in half but for the most part it is an individual sport.  But it seems like all the youth dual tournaments go by grade?

Another consideration: If you are a kid who was held back in school, do you want to compete in a sport that singles you out in front of your peers because of that?  Sounds like a great way to disenfranchise some kids.

[Handles II]

We actually aren't worried about disenfranchising kids or we wouldn't run tournaments the way we continue to year after year, no changes, despite seeing HUGE drops in participation. Therefore grade or birth year doesn't matter.

[imnofish]

We actually aren't worried about disenfranchising kids or we wouldn't run tournaments the way we continue to year after year, no changes, despite seeing HUGE drops in participation. Therefore grade or birth year doesn't matter.

So, we agree that multiple changes need to be made, if we wish to stop the decline in participants...   and yes, it does appear that we'd rather whine about that problem, instead of making changes that address it.  In my opinion, we are so focused on the top kids that we collectively devalue the rest.  

[Handles II]

We actually aren't worried about disenfranchising kids or we wouldn't run tournaments the way we continue to year after year, no changes, despite seeing HUGE drops in participation. Therefore grade or birth year doesn't matter.

So, we agree that multiple changes need to be made, if we wish to stop the decline in participants...   and yes, it does appear that we'd rather whine about that problem, instead of making changes that address it.  In my opinion, we are so focused on the top kids that we collectively devalue the rest.  

Yep. I think many of us, and probably a large majority of both HS and college coaches agree. Over and over and over proactive ways to help youth wrestling (and therefore all the other levels of the sport) have been brought up. But, not one of those ideas has been implemented. And what happens? The exact same thing over and over and over. Go figure. 

[GradeTough]

Maybe I'm lost on this one but not sure why age level tournaments wouldn't be the norm or recommendation at the youth level which eliminates having to deal with age level restrictions on grade level tournaments. Are we still saying that Grade level tournaments are the way to go?

[imnofish]

I think the dichotomy we are faced with results from 2 different perspectives/priorities.  On one hand, everyone wants the fairest possible competitive opportunities for kids.  On the other hand, we also want the best possible overall environment for each kid.  Knowing how hard it can be for a kid to fit in, especially if they have been held back in school, I do think we need to at least consider the potential ramifications of further separating them from their peers.  We are essentially cutting them from the herd, emotionally.  I know that sounds "too sensitive" to some hardliners, but it's a real concern for many kids in that situation.  Sports are more than competition; they are also a social and developmental support system.  The challenge is always finding the best ways to balance our approach to best serve the needs of the kids, but it's also easy for us to narrow our focus and lose sight of that.

[GradeTough]

I think the dichotomy we are faced with results from 2 different perspectives/priorities.  On one hand, everyone wants the fairest possible competitive opportunities for kids.  On the other hand, we also want the best possible overall environment for each kid.  Knowing how hard it can be for a kid to fit in, especially if they have been held back in school, I do think we need to at least consider the potential ramifications of further separating them from their peers.  We are essentially cutting them from the herd, emotionally.  I know that sounds "too sensitive" to some hardliners, but it's a real concern for many kids in that situation.  Sports are more than competition; they are also a social and developmental support system.  The challenge is always finding the best ways to balance our approach to best serve the needs of the kids, but it's also easy for us to narrow our focus and lose sight of that.

I would say age level would accomplish most of the priorities. I had a friend who's son was held back because of immaturity. Which put him against less physically mature kids. While he was himself developing I encouraged her to put him in the grade division he would have been part of because he was getting a false sense of development beating up less mature kids.

In addition, since State was age level it would be great for him to realize the different level of the kids in his age division. It has worked out for them in that he developed better wrestling against kids in his age bracket than those a year or two younger because of grade level.

Plus, he was hanging out with kids in his age group during tournaments versus just those in his grade level. So for that situation, age level tournaments worked out great and for grade level they moved him up to the grade level he would be part of if they didn't hold him back.

[imnofish]

I think the dichotomy we are faced with results from 2 different perspectives/priorities.  On one hand, everyone wants the fairest possible competitive opportunities for kids.  On the other hand, we also want the best possible overall environment for each kid.  Knowing how hard it can be for a kid to fit in, especially if they have been held back in school, I do think we need to at least consider the potential ramifications of further separating them from their peers.  We are essentially cutting them from the herd, emotionally.  I know that sounds "too sensitive" to some hardliners, but it's a real concern for many kids in that situation.  Sports are more than competition; they are also a social and developmental support system.  The challenge is always finding the best ways to balance our approach to best serve the needs of the kids, but it's also easy for us to narrow our focus and lose sight of that.

I would say age level would accomplish most of the priorities. I had a friend who's son was held back because of immaturity. Which put him against less physically mature kids. While he was himself developing I encouraged her to put him in the grade division he would have been part of because he was getting a false sense of development beating up less mature kids.

In addition, since State was age level it would be great for him to realize the different level of the kids in his age division. It has worked out for them in that he developed better wrestling against kids in his age bracket than those a year or two younger because of grade level.

Plus, he was hanging out with kids in his age group during tournaments versus just those in his grade level. So for that situation, age level tournaments worked out great and for grade level they moved him up to the grade level he would be part of if they didn't hold him back.

I'm glad it worked out for that kid, but not every kid matures according to the same time table.  If you are concerned about some kids maturing earlier than others, how do you provide consistency, when some kids who were never held back will mature early and some kids who were held back mature late?  Age is not a reliable predictor.  When our son was in 6th grade (and not an early maturer) he could easily beat our varsity 98 lb. wrestler, who was a Junior and a very late maturer.  Focusing on technique and team unity, regardless of birth age, or physical maturity is the best course of action for every kid and the team as a whole.  The more we complicate things, the more we disrupt the potential benefits of that formula.

[GradeTough]

I think the dichotomy we are faced with results from 2 different perspectives/priorities.  On one hand, everyone wants the fairest possible competitive opportunities for kids.  On the other hand, we also want the best possible overall environment for each kid.  Knowing how hard it can be for a kid to fit in, especially if they have been held back in school, I do think we need to at least consider the potential ramifications of further separating them from their peers.  We are essentially cutting them from the herd, emotionally.  I know that sounds "too sensitive" to some hardliners, but it's a real concern for many kids in that situation.  Sports are more than competition; they are also a social and developmental support system.  The challenge is always finding the best ways to balance our approach to best serve the needs of the kids, but it's also easy for us to narrow our focus and lose sight of that.

I would say age level would accomplish most of the priorities. I had a friend who's son was held back because of immaturity. Which put him against less physically mature kids. While he was himself developing I encouraged her to put him in the grade division he would have been part of because he was getting a false sense of development beating up less mature kids.

In addition, since State was age level it would be great for him to realize the different level of the kids in his age division. It has worked out for them in that he developed better wrestling against kids in his age bracket than those a year or two younger because of grade level.

Plus, he was hanging out with kids in his age group during tournaments versus just those in his grade level. So for that situation, age level tournaments worked out great and for grade level they moved him up to the grade level he would be part of if they didn't hold him back.

I'm glad it worked out for that kid, but not every kid matures according to the same time table.  If you are concerned about some kids maturing earlier than others, how do you provide consistency, when some kids who were never held back will mature early and some kids who were held back mature late?  Age is not a reliable predictor.  When our son was in 6th grade (and not an early maturer) he could easily beat our varsity 98 lb. wrestler, who was a Junior and a very late maturer.  Focusing on technique and team unity, regardless of birth age, or physical maturity is the best course of action for every kid and the team as a whole.  The more we complicate things, the more we disrupt the potential benefits of that formula.

Yes, you are correct on that point for sure. Kids will mature at different ages...absolutely. So what is your solution looking back at the original question?

[imnofish]

I think the dichotomy we are faced with results from 2 different perspectives/priorities.  On one hand, everyone wants the fairest possible competitive opportunities for kids.  On the other hand, we also want the best possible overall environment for each kid.  Knowing how hard it can be for a kid to fit in, especially if they have been held back in school, I do think we need to at least consider the potential ramifications of further separating them from their peers.  We are essentially cutting them from the herd, emotionally.  I know that sounds "too sensitive" to some hardliners, but it's a real concern for many kids in that situation.  Sports are more than competition; they are also a social and developmental support system.  The challenge is always finding the best ways to balance our approach to best serve the needs of the kids, but it's also easy for us to narrow our focus and lose sight of that.

I would say age level would accomplish most of the priorities. I had a friend who's son was held back because of immaturity. Which put him against less physically mature kids. While he was himself developing I encouraged her to put him in the grade division he would have been part of because he was getting a false sense of development beating up less mature kids.

In addition, since State was age level it would be great for him to realize the different level of the kids in his age division. It has worked out for them in that he developed better wrestling against kids in his age bracket than those a year or two younger because of grade level.

Plus, he was hanging out with kids in his age group during tournaments versus just those in his grade level. So for that situation, age level tournaments worked out great and for grade level they moved him up to the grade level he would be part of if they didn't hold him back.

I'm glad it worked out for that kid, but not every kid matures according to the same time table.  If you are concerned about some kids maturing earlier than others, how do you provide consistency, when some kids who were never held back will mature early and some kids who were held back mature late?  Age is not a reliable predictor.  When our son was in 6th grade (and not an early maturer) he could easily beat our varsity 98 lb. wrestler, who was a Junior and a very late maturer.  Focusing on technique and team unity, regardless of birth age, or physical maturity is the best course of action for every kid and the team as a whole.  The more we complicate things, the more we disrupt the potential benefits of that formula.

Yes, you are correct on that point for sure. Kids will mature at different ages...absolutely. So what is your solution looking back at the original question?

My position is that we will never be able to "level the playing field" on the basis of physical maturity, which is what the birth year advocates are attempting to do.  We need to adjust our focus at the younger ages, so we are less concerned about competitiveness and more supportive of learning and utilizing solid technique.  My nephew (who wrestled in a different state) is a great example for how this can work.  His parents gave him an extra year before sending him to school, so he could be more developmentally ready to learn.  That proved to be a very good decision, long-term.  He was a larger, softer-built kid, who showed no interest in wrestling until 4th grade.  He started out getting thrashed by the more experienced and more physically mature kids, so his coaches did not put him in very many tournaments, initially.  Instead, they focused on helping him perfect his technique through drilling and enjoy the sport through games and other team activities.  He stayed with the sport and started winning some tournaments as a 6th grader, but he was still physically immature.  He was winning matches on technique and also didn't think each loss was the end of the world.  Instead, he just tried to learn from it and improve, as his coaches and parents encouraged him to do.  In 8th grade, he qualified for their state's Jr. High State Tournament.  In high school, he started lifting weights, as his body matured.  By the time he graduated, he had become a very tough, physical, 220 lb. wrestler and football player.  He was recruited to wrestle heavyweight by several colleges, but ended up playing defensive nose tackle in football, for which he was recruited by over 150 schools.  I think the key to his success was the patient and low-key progression utilized by the supportive adults in his corner.  Our sport needs a lot more of that, as well as their focus on technique and being a good drilling partner.  Their entire team benefited from this approach, regardless of their physical maturity level, because their focus was on long-term results, rather than immediate wins.  During the tenure of that head coach, their high school program was highly successful.