All-Star Design the perfect scoring system

[drewpate]

With a set skill range for majority, what is the incentive for doing anymore skills than half plus one. I could use the remaining half minus one to start to max out other areas in the same counts.

 

[King]

With a set skill range for majority, what is the incentive for doing anymore skills than half plus one. I could use the remaining half minus one to start to max out other areas in the same counts.

Same thing it is now, your score will be higher if you have more people do it.

In other words, I would love for a team I am competing against to only do majority and try to do other stuff.

 

[King]

In level 3 if you did an extended 1 leg stunt, but didn't do two leg full down, would that drop you to the .5 of the range below? What if you did like a maxed out level 2 stunt in level 3, is it an automatic .5 of the lower range or could it be .8? If someone did just level 1 stunts at level 3 would they still be at that same .5?

Also, if you hit all of the listed skills, does that put you at the bottom of the range or middle?

have you thought about a transitions or load ins and dismounts type score in stunts and pyramids to score all of the full ups, double downs tick tocks handstand over the back, and flips and release moves separate from the actual stunt or pyramid?

For level 3 stunt I think it should. I tried to chose a skill that is not only performed by most teams already, but is intelligent in that it leads to the other levels above it (a full down leads to double downs). Choosing the correct compulsory skill is important. It also will help those teams trying to decide if they should go 2 3 or 4 that if they dont meet the compulsory skill requirements, they need to wait until they have the abilities.

I think I want to change things to majority (half +1) for compulsory skills to be scored in the correct level.

Think about what this will do: the scary teams that want to be level 5 to throw that kick double that almost kills people but barely has toe backs and 3 fulls... they will probably go and stay 4 for a while and improve their technique and skill.

Also, you should not be doing a maxed out level 2 stunt in 3. You should be competing in 2. This will be a huge push of progression progression progression.

As for the level 1 stunts, yes you will get the same score. The idea is that if you aren' competing the level 3 skills you are in the wrong division.

I have not gone into detail on the skills themselves, still working on the general idea. Get the 50,000 foot view, define the details after the structure is good.

 

[King]

Just reading back through the thread and some of the ideas thrown out, just my few minor suggestions/thoughts. My major concern is simplification, as not only does this help coaches/athletes, it also helps parents/fans, thereby cutting down argument and unnecessary debate:

*Ratio multiplier for skills (x number of girls you should be throwing y #of skills). I like this, just make it simple to understand per section (building, tumbling etc). How will it effect your score? Under which part (execution? difficulty? It's own section?) Since you're using ranges, will it hurt your range placement as in 7.5 instead of 8 [if that's the max]? What about a team like CEA who does above the level 5 compulsory for skills but uses 8 stunt groups in one section (just as an example)?

*If you're going to use a ratio multiplier for deductions, same as above. Simplification. As an outsider, this could be simple OR difficult to understand, depending on how you choose to implement it, if you even choose to. I'd need to see the concept in action against an actual team's routine (pick any video) and show me how it would work.

*If you're not going to use a deduction multiplier (or even if you are) what are the basic deductions for skills? Make sure it's explicitly labeled as clear as you can make it what constitutes a bobble, a fall, a 'collapse' (when the stunt comes down to the ground/or falls worse than a cradle catch), a touchdown, a bust. What happens when part of a pyramid doesn't go? How do you deduct on that? I'm assuming we haven't addressed these things yet, but they're popping in my head as I go along.

I'm sure I'll think of other things as I go along.

I like the ratio multiplier. It would not be done by the judge scoring the skill, but by the people afterwords. It would be non-subjective score thing, but it might take more though to apply after the scoresheet itself is setup.

I do not like deduction ratio, but there is a possibility. I am starting to think for this scoring system to work (and I think it will work) it will require a strong software program that is easy to use for judges. Doing it all on paper leads to mistakes in tabulation anyway.

As for all deductions, I think skill specific deductions should take off in the skill categories. you bust a jump back, it is a deduction in jump backs. your tumbler across the front of stunts busts a full.. comes off in tumbling. Numbers are not important at this stage as the WAY the numbers are applied.

 

[King]

Ok so I read through and most posts are using the current system and modifying it..

mine would require a little education for Judges, coaches, and choreographers but I think it would retain cheerleading's creativity but add a system that diminishes bias. I will use a small sample to try and get my point across.

The idea would be to require every routine be given a start value in each category equal to the level competing.
Level 1 Points allowed 4 - 5
standing tumbling
Start Value 4
Few level skills
Start Value 4.1
Majority fwd rolls, bkwd rolls,
Start value 4.3
few bridge kickovers, few back walkovers
start value 4.5
majority back walkovers
start value 4.7
majority back walkover series
BONUS
technique .2
creativity .1

So say Team A has full squad Fwd rolls PLUS a few bridge kick overs and I had great creativity and good technique my score would be ...
Start Value 4.3 PLUS a creativity bonus of .1 PLUS good technique bonus .2 for a score of 4.6
and Team B has full squad back walkovers but average creativity and technique
Start Value 4.5 no bonus for a score of 4.5
-OR-

Team A full Squad walkover series PLUS great technique
Start Value 4.7 PLUS technique bonus of .2 for a 4.9
Team B has full squad Bkwd rolls PLUS few Back walkovers PLUS great technique and creativity
Start Value 4.3 Plus .3 bonus for a score of 4.6

Now as a coach and choreographer I need to know my squads skills PLUS what my start value could be and what bonus points I could be given and then use my creativity to achieve my highest score possible.

As a judge I must be alert to the skills thrown and use my judgment ONLY in awarding the appropriate bonus points.

The issue with this is the practicality of qualifying all the routines before they go. Judges will not be able to do all that math on the fly, I dont think.

 

[Coach Troy]

The start value would be identified by the judges at the time of performance in the same way they identify ranges now only the judge would be given less ability to use personal preference to assign value. At the moment my Jr 1 could do back walkovers and your Jr 1 could do back walkovers and the judge could put you at the top of the range and me at the bottom based solely on his or her own preference. They may like your uniform more, or my music, or your bow, etc. etc.
But with this system we both get the same start value and if we do our job well we both get the technique bonus and then it is only the creativity bonus that the judge can screw up LOL

 

[King]

The start value would be identified by the judges at the time of performance in the same way they identify ranges now only the judge would be given less ability to use personal preference to assign value. At the moment my Jr 1 could do back walkovers and your Jr 1 could do back walkovers and the judge could put you at the top of the range and me at the bottom based solely on his or her own preference. They may like your uniform more, or my music, or your bow, etc. etc.
But with this system we both get the same start value and if we do our job well we both get the technique bonus and then it is only the creativity bonus that the judge can screw up LOL

actually, i think that is what i would like. difficulty would be kinda be set in stone. it is the technique you use, how you do it and your creativity that would be the subjective part.

but HOW exactly to do that and remember all those numbers is the issue. we would be pigeonholing judges into just knowing 1 level REALLY well.

 

[kristenthegreat]

I like the ratio multiplier. It would not be done by the judge scoring the skill, but by the people afterwords. It would be non-subjective score thing, but it might take more though to apply after the scoresheet itself is setup.

I do not like deduction ratio, but there is a possibility. I am starting to think for this scoring system to work (and I think it will work) it will require a strong software program that is easy to use for judges. Doing it all on paper leads to mistakes in tabulation anyway.

As for all deductions, I think skill specific deductions should take off in the skill categories. you bust a jump back, it is a deduction in jump backs. your tumbler across the front of stunts busts a full.. comes off in tumbling. Numbers are not important at this stage as the WAY the numbers are applied.

I just threw in deduction multiplier because someone else mentioned it..It seems very complicated, and maybe something that can be added in later once all the ideas are hammered out.

I like the idea of attaching the deductions to the skill itself..although I was curious about something (don't think it would work well, or maybe this is what you are trying to say/this is deduction ratio-multiplier?), if deductions would take away from your majority? As in you need, let's say 5 stunts or something to hit majority, and one falls. It takes away from your majority score. It would put the emphasis on hitting things well instead of throwing something up and hoping for the best..

 

[King]

I just threw in deduction multiplier because someone else mentioned it..It seems very complicated, and maybe something that can be added in later once all the ideas are hammered out.

I like the idea of attaching the deductions to the skill itself..although I was curious about something (don't think it would work well, or maybe this is what you are trying to say/this is deduction ratio-multiplier?), if deductions would take away from your majority? As in you need, let's say 5 stunts or something to hit majority, and one falls. It takes away from your majority score. It would put the emphasis on hitting things well instead of throwing something up and hoping for the best..

i think that might over complicated it. honestly if you are throwing it up there and hoping for the best you aren't really exploiting the scoresheet that much. you are still gonna have a terrible score.

with this way of scoring you have an entire point (for example, jet us just say level 5, 8-9 final score) to judge a team on. That my not seem like a lot, but I think at minimum a judge would be able to use 100ths in the decimal places to give difficulty and technique. BlueCat would prefer they allow 1000ths if the judge so chose, but that might be giving a little too much free. a judge needs to feel comfortable.

As well the difficulty of a stunt sequence is hard to quantify. I am still working on how to do that quickly and make sure everyone is rewarded.

 

[ohkcheery]

I just threw in deduction multiplier because someone else mentioned it..It seems very complicated, and maybe something that can be added in later once all the ideas are hammered out.

I like the idea of attaching the deductions to the skill itself..although I was curious about something (don't think it would work well, or maybe this is what you are trying to say/this is deduction ratio-multiplier?), if deductions would take away from your majority? As in you need, let's say 5 stunts or something to hit majority, and one falls. It takes away from your majority score. It would put the emphasis on hitting things well instead of throwing something up and hoping for the best..

I really like this idea.. though it would be hard to keep track of unless it is reviewed later through video (for tumbling, at least). I'm not sure if I'm too keen on double dipping deductions, but I think depending on the deduction (a bobble vs. complete collapse) it could be very much worth looking into.

 

[ohkcheery]

King - for stunt sequences.. how are you looking to quantify the scoring? for X # of flips in a pyramid you get x# points? Or say.. 1 flip = .5, 1 full twist up =.5 on top of the actual stunt score? Say you do a full up bow and flip out, reload back up to a scorp.. the difficulty would be say an 8, with a max # of additions of 1 point (.5 each for the full up/flip reload) if properly executed. Fall on the bow but keep it going, you could get a 7.5 with the added skill bonus for the special ones. Only a full up, 8.5. Double full up = 9.5, etc. I think I just made that really confusing.. lol

 

[King]

Well, what if all advanced skills were .05, elite skills were .1, super elite skills were .15, and elite combinations were .15?

Like a power press (for as simple as it is) is still not easy. That is worth a .05. A fullup is elite, so thast worth .1.

1.5 up immediate stretch is .15? maybe .2?

Then I am not sure if this is a good or bad combo. The subjective part is a the execution / creativity category. I don't know if I like those, but JUST a creativity category isnt good.

Play around with it.

Same can be applied to most categories. And then does this translate correctly to the lower levels?

 

[ohkcheery]

Well, what if all advanced skills were .05, elite skills were .1, super elite skills were .15, and elite combinations were .15?

Like a power press (for as simple as it is) is still not easy. That is worth a .05. A fullup is elite, so thast worth .1.

1.5 up immediate stretch is .15? maybe .2?

Then I am not sure if this is a good or bad combo. The subjective part is a the execution / creativity category. I don't know if I like those, but JUST a creativity category isnt good.

Play around with it.

Same can be applied to most categories. And then does this translate correctly to the lower levels?

Gahhh! Amazing. Though I think stunt scores will be a lot lower (unless either for stunting you're delegated a max of 2 points and you've got to do whatever to get there, or if you're planning on multiplying that score x # of stunts that completed it).

I think it could translate to lower levels easily. What's advanced for level 5 isn't the same as what's advanced for level 1 so to modify for a lower level say for example: A level one "elite stunt" may be an extension. Level 4 elite could be a 360 up.. I think it could work quite well!

 

[Coach Troy]

actually, i think that is what i would like. difficulty would be kinda be set in stone. it is the technique you use, how you do it and your creativity that would be the subjective part.

but HOW exactly to do that and remember all those numbers is the issue. we would be pigeonholing judges into just knowing 1 level REALLY well.

exactly the idea!! I cannot tell you how many panels I am on where the judge is very uneducated about modern cheerleading and what is hard and what is not. By giving each skill set a value and forcing our judging community to be educated we will have a true FAIR outcome at competitions. I would love to see a qualifying system where judges must have so many tests taken combined with so many hours judging before you can move form one level to the next. As it is now we have dance people judging level 5 tumbling and cheerleaders from 1902 judging stunts that they never performed or taught.

 

[CGAcheer]

for deductions for falls and ratio multipliers, all of that could be put into a percentage score.

example you have 18 of 20 girls throwing a tuck which would equal 90% but one of them busts, that puts you at 85% and multiply it by the difficulty score and then have it as a separate score.
So you would have 3 scores-
difficulty(what you do)
participation?(how many successfully do it)
technique/execution(how well you do it)


We're competing under a scoresheet that gives a range and then bases your score within that range on the number of people doing the skill. But they did it with thresholds which I don't like.
on a level two team for example if you have half your team with a standing bhs and then one kid that kinda sorta almost has it, a lot of gyms would throw that kid out there and tell them to do it, because crossing that threshold bumps you up half a point in a 1pt range, if its a gradual increase it keeps that one kid doing the skill from being such a huge difference.