Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here,

So far DD is playing her grade level up until 14s. It’s been fine but because she is on a twos team in her grade level, we were considering playing down on the top team in order to have better competition and for a chance to her skills to improve. I know some people recommended staying in your grade level, but if we are looking for a way for her to develop faster on a more competitive team at her age group would that be more helpful?

The club would matter but generally, I’d recommend against this, especially at U15. Stay with her grade level and get private lessons to work on skills.

Anonymous wrote:OP here,

So far DD is playing her grade level up until 14s. It’s been fine but because she is on a twos team in her grade level, we were considering playing down on the top team in order to have better competition and for a chance to her skills to improve. I know some people recommended staying in your grade level, but if we are looking for a way for her to develop faster on a more competitive team at her age group would that be more helpful?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, players tend to improve fastest when they’re challenged by the speed, physicality, and decision-making of older grade-level peers. Being one of the stronger players on a younger team can feel good, but it doesn’t always accelerate development the way competing against bigger, faster, more mature players does.

I’d also consider what practices look like. I’d rather have my daughter training in a higher-paced environment with grade-level players than being one of the stars on a younger team. The competition she sees in practice often matters more than the tournament results.

Of course, team quality matters too, and there are certainly cases where a younger top team is stronger than an older second team. But all else being equal, I’d lean toward the tougher pace of play and higher ceiling that comes with staying at grade level.

Completely agree that players being challenged with the level of competition generally helps players advance the fastest. If you are relying on your club team practices for most of your players development then you don't want to be too far off from the average ability level of the team. In other words you don't want to be the clear top player or a clear bottom player.

However, grade level does not automatically equate to a higher quality of play/pace. Level of competition dictates pace and quality much more than age group, as long as the ages are within a year of each other. At virtually all clubs that compete at the upper levels of CHRVA, their top 14s team will beat their 2nd or 3rd 15s team. And the competition level between regional open-level 14U and 15U is a lot closer than the competition levels of open 15s vs club 15s.

We've seen players try both ways. Generally if you are able to make a team at the top level of an age group and see significant playing time, then that's your best bet. Coaching is generally better, competition is better and the team's overall skill level generally progresses much quicker.

Anonymous wrote:In my experience, players tend to improve fastest when they’re challenged by the speed, physicality, and decision-making of older grade-level peers. Being one of the stronger players on a younger team can feel good, but it doesn’t always accelerate development the way competing against bigger, faster, more mature players does.

I’d also consider what practices look like. I’d rather have my daughter training in a higher-paced environment with grade-level players than being one of the stars on a younger team. The competition she sees in practice often matters more than the tournament results.

Of course, team quality matters too, and there are certainly cases where a younger top team is stronger than an older second team. But all else being equal, I’d lean toward the tougher pace of play and higher ceiling that comes with staying at grade level.