Are "sports" worth it at 3?

[MunchiesMom]

For some reason I DREAD putting my 3YO DS in organized sports. I was surprised to learn our city offers t-ball, basketball and soccer clubs for 3 YOs.

What are your thoughts on sports for children this age? I can just imagine his standing on a field playing with his shoes or kicking the dirt... all for my $50-100 registration fee! We do a music appreciation class and library classes together, and this fall he'll be taking a tumbling class and swimming lessons. I.don't want to be one of those families who over schedules life. I want to take time to smell the roses, you know?

[MJB]

Swimming and tumbling ARE sports and it sound like you have enough going on already. If he really wants to do it, I think you should suck it up, but chances are it's not even on his radar yet. Both my sons did soccer, gymnastics and swim lessons starting at 3, but not every single session (and my middle son only did 1 session of preschool soccer, which he hated, and decided to wait until kindergarten to play again-- he wanted soccer to be a lot more organized than the preschool program). My guys are way more into sports than most of their friends, some don't do any sports at all even at 6-9 years old.

[MunchiesMom]

You're right, swimming and tumbling are sports. I wonder what it is that scares me about the rec clubs through the city? Maybe I'm comfortable with the tumbling and swimming because those classes are "mommy and me," while the others are not? Maybe it's because I see baseball, soccer basketball as really competitive in this area.and I don't even "want to go there" especially at a young age? I'm not sure what my deal is.

[mamazee]

3 is young for a lot of sports, though at that age they don't generally make it competitive - it's more about skills building. But I don't think anything other than plain old play is necessary at 3. Some kids like it, and it can be good for exercise in bad weather, but it's more for fun than anything else. As your ds gets older, you'll get an idea of whether he likes competitive sports or not - that's a personality trait not everyone has - and you can get him further into sports if he's into it and you're up to the task (it can be very intense, schedule-wise).

[LynnS6]

Unless your child expresses a strong wish to do one of those sports, I'd hold off until 7-8 before introducing them. Teams at age three are a waste, IMO. Classes can be fun, but it depends on the child.

[stik]

I like it when my kids run.  I'm not interested in the competitive aspects, but I love the post-soccer-practice nap.  Also, I don't really mind sitting by the side of the field with a book for 30-45 minutes.  

[Tonia Starr]

My eldest was in a homeschool soccer league at age 3-4. It was adorable watching a clan of preschoolers chase the ball and attept to manuever around cones and all but really was a waste of money as we could do the basic stuff like that right in our back yard. I would say unless your c hild is REALLY expressing a desire to play a team sport, its just as fine to let them wait til about first grade or so. Just my opinion....

[Tjej]

My DS did a little soccer class at a local rec center this last spring (3yo).  DH really wanted to do some sport thing with him, and DS wanted some activity since DD has dance.  So anyway, it was cute and I was surprised by how much they actually did learn (but it was all really fun). 

So anyway, it is totally unnecessary, but it can be fun.  DS sure liked it.  We'll probably do another low-key one like we did again.  I avoided the regular league sign-up, though, because it is way more expensive and makes for way more driving for us.

Tjej

[lovepickles]

I'm not a fan of competitive sports ... but there are many positive activities to involve your child in at this age to promote healthy interaction with other peers. I personally wouldn't do anything competitive until the child was old enough to understand the dynamic and elect to participate but then again I have such a poor opinion of so many organized and competitive activities masked as "games".

Good link about sports/competition, btw: http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/tcac.htm

[pigpokey]

At three there is no benefit to starting the ball sports over waiting until 5-6, unless the child AND parents want to spend time that way.

I would agree that the ball sports should wait until 7-8, but around here, unless you have access to one on one coaching from someone who understands the sport very well, it's hard to enter the sport at 7.  It's probably best to enter at 5 or young 6.  We don't have sandlot anything around here, and all the little kiddies are highly trained athletes by 2nd grade.  It's not a problem from a developmental standpoint, it's just that getting access to quality programs gets harder if you wait.  Now my DH was somewhat of a baseball star so he can backyard train DS just fine.

[karne]

At 5, most of the kids in my son's t-ball league would choose the swings/park over the game.  We actually lost kids to the swingset when they would run after the ball, couldn't find it, and decide to go play instead.  Huge waste of money and time as far as we were concerned.

I will say that there were some seriously competitive parents who absolutely took the games seriously, practiced with their kids, did NOT laugh when the kids ran off to the swingset or jungle gym....you get the picture.  Those parents have pretty good players in little league right now, and they are the folks that make us want to stay away.

Somehow soccer is less intense around here at the younger ages.  

[cjam]

I put my kids in organized sports at 3.  I found it was an excellent way to get them exercise.  I aim for a minimum (but more is better) of one hour a day of exercise for the kids and organized sports helped to contribute to that goal.   All our programs were non-competitive and age-appropriate.  I really enjoyed sitting on the sidelines, talking to other parents or reading a book.  And my kids loved it.  It was win-win for us.  It's not necessary, parents can always find other ways to ensure their children are getting exercise but this is one tool that fit in nicely with the rest of our plan.  I wouldn't have done it if I felt the programs were putting too much pressure on the kids, but the one time that I felt that was an issue, I switched to a different program.

[LynnS6]

Originally Posted by pigpokey 

At three there is no benefit to starting the ball sports over waiting until 5-6, unless the child AND parents want to spend time that way.

I would agree that the ball sports should wait until 7-8, but around here, unless you have access to one on one coaching from someone who understands the sport very well, it's hard to enter the sport at 7.  It's probably best to enter at 5 or young 6.  We don't have sandlot anything around here, and all the little kiddies are highly trained athletes by 2nd grade.  It's not a problem from a developmental standpoint, it's just that getting access to quality programs gets harder if you wait.  Now my DH was somewhat of a baseball star so he can backyard train DS just fine.

Ds started organized sports at 8-9, and he was just fine. Yes, he had some catching up to do, but the leagues (even Little League) weren't so competitive that he couldn't catch up. He learned much faster at 9 than he would have at 7, so IMO, it's a wash. Now, my kids are never going to be elite athletes, so it's not important for them to get into club soccer or baseball at that level. I also firmly believe that it's not developmentally appropriate to have highly trained athletes by 2nd grade. Furthermore, if your child has athletic talent and does physical things, they'll catch on to the skills of whatever sport even if they don't have 1-1 coaching.

[MJB]

Originally Posted by pigpokey 

At three there is no benefit to starting the ball sports over waiting until 5-6, unless the child AND parents want to spend time that way.

I would agree that the ball sports should wait until 7-8, but around here, unless you have access to one on one coaching from someone who understands the sport very well, it's hard to enter the sport at 7.  It's probably best to enter at 5 or young 6.  We don't have sandlot anything around here, and all the little kiddies are highly trained athletes by 2nd grade.  It's not a problem from a developmental standpoint, it's just that getting access to quality programs gets harder if you wait.  Now my DH was somewhat of a baseball star so he can backyard train DS just fine.

I agree-- there's no way a kid who had never played soccer before could just join a competitive under-8 or under-9 team at 7-8. If you aren't into sports and you don't care if your kid is a competitive athlete later on, it doesn't matter, but if you think they might want to, waiting until 8 is just too long. Most kids won't get much of an edge out of preschool sports. It's 5 and 6 where they really learn how to play. Playing at 3-4 is just for fun (and for a lot of 5+ year old players and leagues, too). 
 

[pigpokey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LynnS6 

Furthermore, if your child has athletic talent and does physical things, they'll catch on to the skills of whatever sport even if they don't have 1-1 coaching.

Of course they will but the problem where I am is that if you enter a ball sport at 8-9 (with the exception of some of the unpopular ones, like possibly lacrosse), it is hard to gain access to experienced coaches and high aptitude players.  So of course the child can overcome that, but some won't, who would enjoy playing and competing if they'd gotten into the stream earlier. 

I don't know that the ball sports feel this way, but some gymnastics coaches prefer, and will shut out, kids over a certain age.  An eight year old would be considered too old for pre-competitive training.  And have all the fun you want in rec classes, but it's hard to prepare for team in them.  I don't know about other sports.  Now my kids' gym is not like that, but it's not horribly uncommon.  My son is an L4 gymnast at age 6, and I'm told that the big deal boys' program across town does not like to take them in L4 team over age 7. 

It doesn't make it right, it just makes it something we need to pay attention to if our kids want to compete a sport.

Look at swimming, swimming is a long term development sport and you can start at 8-9 and do just fine with the fire in the belly, there are no limits to your performance as a teen and young adult.  The problem is that if the parents and/or child don't understand the process they might be disappointed by many years of slow races.  So let's say a child starts swim team at age 8.  She is older and bigger so it only takes her 6 months and she can beat my 6 year old who has trained twice as long.  However she can't beat my 7 year old and doesn't  make the fastest heat at any of her meets.  Should she be concerned?  No.  But she probably wants to win.  And maybe she thinks she is never going to win ... because she's 8 and she doesn't really have a vision.  So OK, she's ready to train even harder this year and she's now 9 and no longer swimming 8-under.  She is swimming 10-under.  And at nine, she gets creamed . every . time . by the ten year olds.  Which is what happens to most of the kids who are "right in there" competitively in odd years.  So she's at risk of deciding that this just "isn't her sport."  But let's say she does stay in and trains hard for ANOTHER year.  Now she's starting to place.  And she goes through another odd year at 11 being creamed by 12 yo's ... but she's understanding the process now, and she's focused on her personal best, instead of "winning."  And now at 12 she's coming into her own. 

Edited by pigpokey - 7/31/11 at 4:16am

[gcgirl]

Originally Posted by LynnS6 

Unless your child expresses a strong wish to do one of those sports, I'd hold off until 7-8 before introducing them. Teams at age three are a waste, IMO. Classes can be fun, but it depends on the child.

ITA. I tried to put DS1 in soccer TWICE because he wanted to (and he loves playing sports stuff at home), but both times he got bored and we never finished out a series. What a waste of $. 

Some kids will take to it. But it's very likely kids that young will not want to play/be intimidated/get bored/whatever/etc. That's what I've decided, anyway! ;)

[LynnS6]

Originally Posted by pigpokey 
 

I don't know that the ball sports feel this way, but some gymnastics coaches prefer, and will shut out, kids over a certain age.  An eight year old would be considered too old for pre-competitive training.  And have all the fun you want in rec classes, but it's hard to prepare for team in them.  I don't know about other sports.  Now my kids' gym is not like that, but it's not horribly uncommon.  My son is an L4 gymnast at age 6, and I'm told that the big deal boys' program across town does not like to take them in L4 team over age 7. 

It doesn't make it right, it just makes it something we need to pay attention to if our kids want to compete a sport.

But if you enroll your 3 year old in CLASSES (especially parent child classes), you'll find out if they've got any interest or aptitude. Then you can pursue the more formal stuff at 5-6 if they show any talent.  If you're only aspiring to be rec league players, there's no reason to start LEAGUES so early. My kids aren't athletically gifted. They don't need to start early. 

[samstress]

our city offers the same type of programs.  i put dd in basketball when she was 2 1/2-ish.  it was clear after the first class that she just wasn't interested.  i didn't want to force her to go because it would have just been painful for the both of us and trying to teach her a lesson about sticking with something would have been wasted on someone that young.  luckily, if you cancel before the second class (which i did) you get a refund (of the entire cost minus the first class you attended). 

last summer (at three) dd and i took a two week swimming class.  she didn't love it, but we did go every day (i think it helped that i was in the pool with her and was careful not to push her at all). 

this year (at four) i signed her up for an ice skating class (her choice).  she really seemed to enjoy the first class, so i never considered canceling.  however, when it came time to go the following week, she didn't want to go.  i talked with her for a while and convinced her to go.  the following week she really didn't want to go.  i was frustrated (i had spent the money and it was too late to get a refund -- and she had chosen the class -- and she hadn't told me after class one that she didn't want to go anymore).  luckily, dh was home and talked some sense into me.  he still felt she was too young to understand a lesson about stick-to-it-tive-ness and didn't want her to think of sports as some painful thing that she would dread (he's an athlete and would like our children to be involved in some sport at some point).  we allowed her not to continue, but we also decided that we would not even consider enrolling her in any other sport until she's at least five.

so, to answer your question (finally), no i don't think sports are worth it at three.  i think being active with your kids is very worth it (which is something we've done with her since she could walk and what we plan to do with our son as soon as he can walk), but organized sports?  not really.

[pigpokey]

Originally Posted by LynnS6 

But if you enroll your 3 year old in CLASSES (especially parent child classes), you'll find out if they've got any interest or aptitude. Then you can pursue the more formal stuff at 5-6 if they show any talent.  If you're only aspiring to be rec league players, there's no reason to start LEAGUES so early. My kids aren't athletically gifted. They don't need to start early. 

I'm glad you pointed this out.  The OP has her child in beginning swimming and mommy and me gymnastics, which are "sports" that are developmentally appropriate (they are not real sports at that point but they are pre-sports or can just benefit the child in recreation).  Similarly there are pre-ball-sports classes like Playball that develop the child's body and mind in a way preparing them for sport, or for just having fun in the backyard. 

I might disagree that they should show talent to move into serious training.  But of course, when picking a physical training for a child who has neither a strong preference nor a strong aptitude, it may be best to lean towards skills that seem suited to the child's physical presence, that develop slowly without requiring early competition, that might give the child negative feedback.  But if they pick up a passion, I don't think they should need to show aptitude or body type, if the training they want fits the family's resources and values.

I don't think it's developmentally necessary to get a kid into training young (though if the child has some tendencies to overweight, it may be one of the solutions, if getting them playing hard regularly doesn't fit the family's lifestyle as well).  But if a child is going to enter training at 8-9, the parents just need to understand a couple of things:

(1) If the child is entering a sport that other children have been training at from a younger age, the child's lower performance in the first 2-3 years does not reflect poor aptitutude for training.

(2) For such a child entering late, the parents may want to educate themselves about what kinds of training the experienced children are doing at 8-9, and if the child has a passion for the sport, supplement the child's "beginning" level training with some privates or home training to even the field.

(3)  Consider sports that children often start training later, such as competitive cycling, archery, riflery, horseback riding, rowing, diving.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by pigpokey 

I'm glad you pointed this out.  The OP has her child in beginning swimming and mommy and me gymnastics, which are "sports" that are developmentally appropriate (they are not real sports at that point but they are pre-sports or can just benefit the child in recreation).  Similarly there are pre-ball-sports classes like Playball that develop the child's body and mind in a way preparing them for sport, or for just having fun in the backyard. 

I might disagree that they should show talent to move into serious training.  But of course, when picking a physical training for a child who has neither a strong preference nor a strong aptitude, it may be best to lean towards skills that seem suited to the child's physical presence, that develop slowly without requiring early competition, that might give the child negative feedback.  But if they pick up a passion, I don't think they should need to show aptitude or body type, if the training they want fits the family's resources and values.

I don't think it's developmentally necessary to get a kid into training young (though if the child has some tendencies to overweight, it may be one of the solutions, if getting them playing hard regularly doesn't fit the family's lifestyle as well).  But if a child is going to enter training at 8-9, the parents just need to understand a couple of things:

(1) If the child is entering a sport that other children have been training at from a younger age, the child's lower performance in the first 2-3 years does not reflect poor aptitutude for training.

(2) For such a child entering late, the parents may want to educate themselves about what kinds of training the experienced children are doing at 8-9, and if the child has a passion for the sport, supplement the child's "beginning" level training with some privates or home training to even the field.

(3)  Consider sports that children often start training later, such as competitive cycling, archery, riflery, horseback riding, rowing, diving.

This is fantastic advice. I have two children that perform at a high level in their respective sports: soccer and rock climbing. My daughter is the climber and she started training at 8, almost 9 and last year at 13, she ranked third in her age group in our region. We live in a town that has some of the top climbers in the country so she has been able to learn from the best. She is not a particularly athletic kid, and doesn't have a naturally flexible body, but through training she has developed the core strength and great technique to be a good climber, My son (11) is an elite soccer player and from a two year old it was clear he was athletic and had exceptional eye/hand coordination for such a young one. He started by attending a multi-sports camp at four and a half and at five started a program called soccer tots, even at that age, he preferred soccer. At almost six he moved on to a new non-competitive academy style program, he was one of the first batch of kids to participate. We were lucky that the person who ran the program was a high level college coach that had trained several national team players, but more than that, he was great with kids and made it super fun fostering a great love of the game in the children. I think around four other boys who started with DS have excelled in the sport but most of the others still love and play soccer. DS got the best possible start, with soccer, unlike many other sports, the technical skills do need to be acquired early, and if those technical skills aren't well in place by twelve the child will never be an exceptional player. Of course for most children this doesn't matter, what does matter is they love playing and are active. It does for my DS because he wants to be a pro. He has really put in the time and dedication to acquire those skills, we never relied on the training of parent coaches, but have sought out the best trainers/coaches in our area. He now plays for a MLS club, with high level coaches and has been recognized as a young elite player that the club intends to develop as far as he can go. 

It is well-known that to be great at an activity you need to have put in at least 10,000 hours practice, for some sports that means starting early and training hard, for example gymnastics. For other sports it is not so important, for a team sport, football would be an example. Soccer is one of those sports which requires the mastery of technical skills to be laid down at a fairly early age, so waiting until eight or nine, is putting a child at a huge disadvantage, unless they are really willing to put in the time and you have a skilled coach to teach them. Sadly, in the US there are few great coaches teaching the young ones, most are volunteer parents who really don't have the knowledge and technical skills to develop players.