The New Division
The introduction of the Limited Division at The 2022 Cheerleading Worlds didn’t just add another category, it has drawn widespread discussion within the All Star cheer industry. Created to provide a more even playing field, the division has become the sport’s most debated update in over a decade.
The Limited Division limits participation to programs with only one Worlds-eligible team. It’s designed to separate the large, multi-team, programs from smaller gyms with fewer athletes and resources. Supporters say the change gives single-team programs a more realistic chance to compete at the elite level. Opponents question whether adding divisions undermines the significance of a Worlds title, or creates loopholes that could be exploited.
The Three Viewpoints Emerging in the Industry
As of 2025, three main camps have formed around the Limited Division debate:
- Large Gyms and Franchises – End the Division
Many large, multi-location programs believe the Limited Division should be eliminated altogether. They argue that a true “World Championship” should not be split by gym size and that the title’s prestige depends on the best teams competing directly. Franchised gyms are also excluded from Limited, which fuels their criticism that they are unfairly excluded. - Independent One-Team Programs – Keep It Simple
Gyms that operate from a single location with one Worlds-eligible team support the current rule set. For them, Limited works exactly as intended: a fair and level field for programs with limited rosters and resources, without additional restrictions or performance thresholds. - Small Gym Advocates – Add Oversight and Guardrails
Many small gym owners and coaches see Limited as essential but believe USASF should introduce more checks and balances to ensure it remains true to its purpose. Some propose gym-size limits or eligibility reviews for repeat medalists, arguing that Limited should stay a space for true one-team programs, not dominant outliers.
Equity or Exception?
Cathryn Weeden, Owner of Luxe Athletics and one of the leaders behind the Small Gym Association, calls Limited a “big, big, big win” for smaller programs. In an appearance on the Let’s Talk Cheer podcast, she said the change provides smaller gyms with a tangible path to success at Worlds.
“The Limited Division gives hope and keeps gyms alive,” Weeden said “It’s the first time small gyms can realistically chase a Worlds title without needing D1 resources.”
For her, the limited division is a fairness measure for the greater industry. According to Weeden and other small gym owners, the rule helps offset competitive disparities between large and small programs. They point out that more than 80 percent of USASF member gyms are classified as Division II, meaning they have 125 or fewer athletes.
Critics, however, argue that creating more divisions may dilute the prestige of earning a Worlds medal. They say that while equity among programs is important, too many divisions risk weakening the top level of competition.
When Gyms Get Too Good
Jaylen Linkletter of MACs All Stars knows the tension firsthand. Her Senior Starz team dominated the Limited field, raising questions about whether a team can be considered too competitive for a division built to bridge equity in the sport. Furthermore, is only being able to field one Worlds-eligible team enough of a qualification to achieve the larger fairness goal?
“Limited was never intended to be for beginners, or lesser than the standard divisions,” Linkletter said. “It was only intended to be a place where programs with one Worlds team can compete against other programs with one Worlds team exclusively.”
Linkletter emphasized that Limited teams are held to the same technical and scoring standards as every other Worlds division.
“We have the same rules, the same score sheet, the same skills, and the same expectations. It’s not an on-ramp or an off-ramp — it’s just another division.”
Her comments echo a larger theme voiced during the USASF conference earlier this year: Limited was not created to be lesser. It was created to give single-team programs and equitable space on the Worlds stage.
The Integrity of a Worlds Title
Beyond gym politics, the Limited Division feeds into a larger discussion about what it means to be a “World Champion.” Critics warn of “division bloat”, the idea that too many categories weaken the title’s prestige. Since the inception of The Cheerleading Worlds over 20 years ago, we have gone from two divisions (All Girl and Coed), to twenty-nine.
Some of the divisions at Cheerleading Worlds are deep, yielding around 50 teams annually – whereas others never hit double digits, according to USASF data. This variation has prompted questions about the value of the titles. Some athletes view smaller divisions as an opportunity for broader participation, while others see them as diminishing the difficulty of earning a medal. Neither perspective is wrong, but can they coexist?
The Future of Fairness
The Limited Division is more than a new chance at a gold medal. It serves as an attempt by the USASF to balance access and competition, but the organization continues to face scrutiny over how new divisions affect the sport’s overall image. Equality treats every gym the same, equity recognizes that not every gym starts with the same resources.
As the sport evolves, the USASF must continue the conversation on how to balance equitable division splits for industry growth without diluting the competitive prestige of the Worlds title. For now, the Limited Division remains an active experiment and the debate is far from over.
