All-Star Placements

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

Not being snarky, but....Just because a score is released, doesn't make it transparent. Baseball, basketball, soccer, etc are transparent, you make a goal, you get a specific amount of points. Cheer, dance and ice skating are subjective, it's fact, and the only way you get consistency is with the same panel of judges, and even Olympic ice skating throws out the highest and lowest scores. You can't tell me if level 3 is being judged in two different arena's and Arena 1's top teams are scoring in the 96's while Arena 2's are scoring in the 94's people aren't going to side eye the fact that all bids go to Arena 1. That is the trouble with immediate scoring in multiple arenas with multiple bid divisions and judge panels. Then there's the fact that if they do a review of Arena 1 and 2 top teams to be fair for the sake of bids with one new judge panel, and Arena 2 truly has some teams that deserve to earn bids, then you have people questioning the fact that they scored lower if you have so called immediate "transparent" scoring.

I'm a person that loves to chart, graph, and analyze numbers every which way, but realized the first year AS scoring varies greatly by arena and competition. Where is the "transparency" or value in having a score if it wasn't judged by the same panel of judges?
This was our level this last NCA. We were in Division A. Across the division scores were lower than Division B in another arena.

I think they should have all same level in the same arena, same judges. They can stagger it enough to not make it run so late.
 
This was our level this last NCA. We were in Division A. Across the division scores were lower than Division B in another arena.

I think they should have all same level in the same arena, same judges. They can stagger it enough to not make it run so late.

I agree, if they can do it within one arena, with one set of judges it makes sense if they can run within a reasonable time. The issue at some of the large Nationals is the judge panels are staggered, as well, so just because they are in the same arena being staggered, doesn't necessarily mean they have the same panel of judges.
 
I think part of the problem is people look at it as some dirty secret instead of the reality that it is unique that AS is usually judged from multiple arenas, with multiple panels of judges and paid bids would be awarded off of scores from several different panels of judges. I, also, think it's a problem that people think a score of 4.7 in jump technique is somehow "transparent." Does that reflect height, timing, formation, flexed feet, arm placement,....? It means nothing without the judges notes.

@Keep_Believing gymnastics, dance, sky diving and ice skating are judged by one panel of judges in the same arena. The problem isn't that it is only subjective, it's that it is also in different arenas, with different judges and money is often given away. If people are fine with immediate scoring and paid bids being given to the teams from the arenas where the scores were higher then there's no issue. But, I've already witnessed a comp where a level 1 team had either the 2nd or 3rd highest percent of perfection in all levels from leaked information and they didn't win the paid bid. Why? Because Arena A was more generous with their scoring, they missed a tumble deduction and the Level 1 team in Arena B deserved it over the other team. People were in an uproar because of the "transparent" score that was leaked was higher than the team that won the bid. <<<That's the issue that is unique with AS.

The biggest problem is that it is secretive and hidden.
 
But, I've already witnessed a comp where a level 1 team had either the 2nd or 3rd highest percent of perfection in all levels from leaked information and they didn't win the paid bid. Why? Because Arena A was more generous with their scoring, they missed a tumble deduction and the Level 1 team in Arena B deserved it over the other team. People were in an uproar because of the "transparent" score that was leaked was higher than the team that won the bid. <<<That's the issue that is unique with AS.
But by not publishing the score you aren't changing anything, that scoring still happened it is just quiet now. Actually imo that makes it worse because everything comes out eventually anyway and then people are really upset. We should be looking at ways to create a more fair system for bid distribution vs. advocating for less transparency because people will have hurt feelings or judges need protecting.
 
I agree, if they can do it within one arena, with one set of judges it makes sense if they can run within a reasonable time. The issue at some of the large Nationals is the judge panels are staggered, as well, so just because they are in the same arena being staggered, doesn't necessarily mean they have the same panel of judges.
We had HS state last weekend. There were 3 panels of judges. One panel did AA, one did AAA and the other did AAAA. Then the rotation was AAA, AAAA, AA. It ran like clock work. Could totally be doable at NCA or Cheersport.
 
The biggest problem is that it is secretive and hidden.

If I said Mediocre AS just received a score of 86.4, tell me why. ..............<cue the crickets>............. It's not secretive or hidden when a score literally means nothing to the public without the notes, or if it can't be compared to other scores by different judges in different arenas or at different comps. If they released the entire score sheet notes and all, I'm all for that, but you would still have the issue of different judge panels in different arenas, so the top teams would still need to be re-scored to be fair for bids. I'm all for that, as well.

But by not publishing the score you aren't changing anything, that scoring still happened it is just quiet now. Actually imo that makes it worse because everything comes out eventually anyway and then people are really upset. We should be looking at ways to create a more fair system for bid distribution vs. advocating for less transparency because people will have hurt feelings or judges need protecting.

I disagree, people get married to scores, myself included. If my kid's Sr. team was just announced as having the highest score in level 4 and paid bids are being handed out by level, myself and everyone else is going to expect my kid's team to get the paid bid. Meanwhile, in the next arena, the Jr. level 4 was actually better, but the judge panel in that arena scored on average lower. Who should get the paid bid? Do they give it to the Sr team just because the scores were released and it's the highest when the Jr team was actually better in the next arena with a lower score? People are going to get upset, but I would rather the more deserving team get the money. Without scores, there aren't people throwing out meaningless numbers on Twitter that were scored by two different panels of judges. With that said, if it's by the same panel of judges, I'm all for scores being released.
 
Here is a perfect example of why I think scores should be released. There was a bid event this weekend with 45 teams. Literally 32 teams out of 45 received 1st place banners. That's 71% of the teams that attended walked home with a 1st place award. Clearly there are differences between the quality of teams, but there is now way to get an understanding of a teams performance quality when just placements are released.
 
What annoys me is when scores are not released at all. For example, UCA MidSouth didn't have scores up yet even after Bluegrass, a week later, did. That was a competition with a lot of single team divisions, so it would have been nice to see scores between divisions (and between the same judges) to see how it went, since when almost every team was either first or second place. (They were finally up when I checked today-almost a month later)
 
Last edited:
Are you the same poster who sticks up for stay to play? It truly feels like a hidden agenda.

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Scores should be shared.
Yup. I don't even bother responding anymore. It's like Varsity is commenting via a cat.
 
If I said Mediocre AS just received a score of 86.4, tell me why. ..............<cue the crickets>............. It's not secretive or hidden when a score literally means nothing to the public without the notes, or if it can't be compared to other scores by different judges in different arenas or at different comps. If they released the entire score sheet notes and all, I'm all for that, but you would still have the issue of different judge panels in different arenas, so the top teams would still need to be re-scored to be fair for bids. I'm all for that, as well.



I disagree, people get married to scores, myself included. If my kid's Sr. team was just announced as having the highest score in level 4 and paid bids are being handed out by level, myself and everyone else is going to expect my kid's team to get the paid bid. Meanwhile, in the next arena, the Jr. level 4 was actually better, but the judge panel in that arena scored on average lower. Who should get the paid bid? Do they give it to the Sr team just because the scores were released and it's the highest when the Jr team was actually better in the next arena with a lower score? People are going to get upset, but I would rather the more deserving team get the money. Without scores, there aren't people throwing out meaningless numbers on Twitter that were scored by two different panels of judges. With that said, if it's by the same panel of judges, I'm all for scores being released.
I think advocating that no scores be released unless judged by the same panel sets us back about 10 years in the sport. I understand the issue you have with different panels and don't disagree that is a concern but my conclusion is not less transparency as that does not address the underlying issue. In your example that comes down to the bid declaration. It could read bid awarded to one team in each level that wins their division , therefore the bid could go to the J4 or Sr 4 regardless of highest score. Given that the reveal is Monday night anyway, I am not opposed to some sort of video review of all division winners by one panel to determine bid winners. Heck, there might even be a way for some math guru to crunch the numbers and reweight scores to account for higher scoring arenas before bids released Monday night.
 
I think advocating that no scores be released unless judged by the same panel sets us back about 10 years in the sport. I understand the issue you have with different panels and don't disagree that is a concern but my conclusion is not less transparency as that does not address the underlying issue. In your example that comes down to the bid declaration. It could read bid awarded to one team in each level that wins their division , therefore the bid could go to the J4 or Sr 4 regardless of highest score. Given that the reveal is Monday night anyway, I am not opposed to some sort of video review of all division winners by one panel to determine bid winners. Heck, there might even be a way for some math guru to crunch the numbers and reweight scores to account for higher scoring arenas before bids released Monday night.
Isn’t that why they WERE moved to Monday? For top placing team videos could be reviewed and watched by one panel?
 
In your example that comes down to the bid declaration. It could read bid awarded to one team in each level that wins their division , therefore the bid could go to the J4 or Sr 4 regardless of highest score. Given that the reveal is Monday night anyway, I am not opposed to some sort of video review of all division winners by one panel to determine bid winners. Heck, there might even be a way for some math guru to crunch the numbers and reweight scores to account for higher scoring arenas before bids released Monday night.

Then we agree. I said above, "If they released the entire score sheet notes and all, I'm all for that, but you would still have the issue of different judge panels in different arenas, so the top teams would still need to be re-scored to be fair for bids. I'm all for that, as well." As far as, the math guru comment, I've thought of that, but then you have the issue of a possible better day 2 going down by quite a few points and that would have people taking to Twitter, as well.

Everyone wants transparency, but unlike you, many people aren't even willing to admit there's glaring issues with multiple judge panels, multiple arenas, money being distributed, and a score that literally tells us nothing without the notes.

@quitthedrama @Keep_Believing If wanting the notes along with a score and re-scoring for bid divisions makes me a Varsity lover then #ILOVEVARSITY :cool:
 
Given the insane amount of money Varsity makes on Summit and the whole bid chasing process, they are never going to endanger that golden cash cow. However, they should at least admit that cross-panel score comparisons are not reliable and re-score the top teams by a neutral panel via video by Monday for bids.
 
Given the insane amount of money Varsity makes on Summit and the whole bid chasing process, they are never going to endanger that golden cash cow. However, they should at least admit that cross-panel score comparisons are not reliable and re-score the top teams by a neutral panel via video by Monday for bids.
If they rescore the top teams, what happens if it actually impacts the winner? Like the winning team at the comp turns out to be the 2nd place team.
 
Back