Lots of 29’s playing down in 2030 too. No reclassing either…just based on summer bdays and being non-contributor on the 29 team
Yeah, figure this will happen. Anyone who thinks this age thing will keep teams together is clueless. If you have the age cutoff at June 1, kids will be aging out RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER SEASON. They should have used birth year, period.
This makes zero sense. It's like the poster has absolutely no clue and just looking to create laughs. Unless a kid's birthday changes date - so for example, he goes from being born on July 10th to the same kid being born on May 15th....there's no way he will "age out in the middle of a season". His birthday is his birthday - and that drives his ability to be rostered on a 2029 team.
I’m guessing this previous poster was pointing out that having the age breakpoint in the exact middle of the high season of lacrosse (Summer), teams or divided at the least opportune time. If we’re going by age only, and grade no longer mattters. I dunno, just glad she is becoming meaningful again.
This is even more incoherent than the "birth year" post. Didn't think it was possible.
Clearly, the terms “median” and “mean” in mathematics mean nothing to you, so I won’t attempt to explain. But having the split between two different age groups right in the middle of the HEIGHT (or middle of bell curve) of the lacrosse season does not make sense, if they actually thought about what they’re trying to accomplish with this change. It would be January 1st.
For a 2029 team, the kids will have birthdays between 6/1/2010 to 5/31/2011 (unless a kid is playing up). For games played before 6/1/2024 all the kids will be on-age 2029s. For games played after 6/1/2024 all the kids will be on-age 2029s. Please explain to us what exactly will happen on June 1st that has you so upset and provide an example.
Nobody upset. Simply pointing out that if they want the greatest number of 12 year olds closest in age to one another at the height of the season (June)— the cutoff would be January 1st. With the middle of that age group (let’s continue to use 12u for this purpose), you would have 50% of the 12 year olds playing together at the height of of the June season (kids born March, April and May and kids born Nume, July and August). You will always have kids who are 364 days older than other kids in their age group. But you’d be closer to the median age at the height of the season if January was the cutoff, and the season is June/July. Not a big deal, not upset.
Ice Hockey does it. You play by birth yesr. 14 year olds today are playing in the 2010 division. Just an example.
This sentence does not make sense: "If you want the greatest number of 12 year olds closest in age to one another at the height of the season...". How close in age kids are to one another never changes. A kid 1 day older than another stays 1 day older - forever. Same with a kid 364 days older than another. The rosters do not change on June 1st.
I think you're getting hung up on the "12U" designation which frankly I've never seen used in any tournament or league my son has played in. It's always just "2029".
Last try… lacrosse season starts June 1 and goes through July 15.
The age group 12 U is kids born June 1 through August 31 of the following year. Assuming the dispersion of birthdays is equally scattered throughout that time period— you’re needlessly overweighting the advantage to the kids born in those first 3 months.
Now try to follow. If the split was in the middle of that time period— you’d have 25% of the kids 3 months younger, and 25% 3 months older.
Done trying to explain mean average or bell curves to lax bros. Carry on.
