All-Star 2014/2015 Videos

[ErinS]

:fro:
I said Raffle, DOH!!!! I meant Lottery, where you just entered your name and I won the ticket! Spent over $1,000 Bucks for both of those trips, would have spent more actually! His concert that he was originally slated to do at the arena over in london, I was taking a loan at the bank to finance that trip!!!!

...I spent less than $300....my plane ticket was basically free ( buddy pass....it's great having friends and family friends that work for airlines) and my hotel was $50 ( I had a friend that has a friend that worked for Marriott )

I literally had the worlds cheapest cross country excursion on less than 12 hrs notice (I found out I won the ticket at 8pm and was on a plane by 4am).... And I had long lost distance cousins that took me to dinner and what not

My biggest inconvenience the whole trip were reporters from every news station asking for phone interviews and wanting me to describe everything and tweet everything and killing the battery of my poor black berry

 

[Ashley]

I also think it's because it's easier to compile a team at that age level with guys and girls (not that it's an easy division- considering the top 5 of that division could outscore almost anyone at any time)...You have a team of 23 girls and one guy, you're probably going IOC versus cutting him and staying IO.

I don't think we even HAD more than 3 or 4 IO6/IOC6 teams from USA last year anyway. It affects IO5 a bit, but not really as plenty of Int'l teams are on par or outscore us in that division as well.

We had 15 in IOC6, and 8 or 9 in IO6. They were both the biggest I've seen those divisions in 4 years at worlds. The rule left out a couple of IOC6 teams as well - GymTyme didn't make finals and they've absolutely owned that division.

And an IOC5 team with 1 boy on it has no chance at doing well at worlds.

 

[kristenthegreat]

We had 15 in IOC6, and 8 or 9 in IO6. They were both the biggest I've seen those divisions in 4 years at worlds. The rule left out a couple of IOC6 teams as well - GymTyme didn't make finals and they've absolutely owned that division.

And an IOC5 team with 1 boy on it has no chance at doing well at worlds.

Definitely the biggest- I've remembered years at worlds where IO6 had maybe one or two US teams. They tend to fluctuate a bit..

 

[Ashley]

Definitely the biggest- I've remembered years at worlds where IO6 had maybe one or two US teams. They tend to fluctuate a bit..

I don't think it's ever been quite that low, but IO6 is definitely the smallest of the 4 IO divisions.

In my 4 years, I think 8 was the smallest number of US teams in IOC6.

 

[kristenthegreat]

I don't think it's ever been quite that low, but IO6 is definitely the smallest of the 4 IO divisions.

In my 4 years, I think 8 was the smallest number of US teams in IOC6.

2012 only had 3 IO6 teams- Ladykatz, OC Neon, and T&S Genesis. At least ones that made top 10.

 

[azune]

I keeping checking this thread for new videos. Nope still the IOC discussions lol.

 

[canz]

I understand. And that's what prelims are for. Have as many nations come and compete and try their hardest to make finals. But, let finals be the best of the best, regardless of nation.

Couldn't agree with this more, have travelled to worlds/ICU from NZ and yes it's a long plane ride expensive etc etc but at the end of the day you plan your teams preparation and travel accordingly so that they can cope with the conditions and perform a great routine regardless. It's more meaningful to genuinely finish fourth and know you were x points behind amazing us gym team xyz than to know you really only finished fourth because three other U.S. teams got knocked out due to the 3 per country rule that were ahead of you. I personally think the latter makes the result feel "hollow" for want of a better word.

 

[f5forever]

I wouldn't mind them dropping the "three teams per country" rule and adopting one requiring a minimum score. (So in order to advance to prelims you have to have say at least a 200 out of 300, and to advance to finals you have to have at least a 250 out of 300. Random scores, don't quote me on those, but you get the idea hopefully.) That way it wouldn't matter the country, and everyone would have to work to their strengths from the scoresheet to advance (instead of just relying in the "3" rule to make it to finals.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FlexyTumblerMom]

I don't mind a 3 per country rule. The Olympics has similar rules. It makes it a true international competition and makes things even more competitive within the top countries to get those limited number of spots (lots if great gymnasts have been burned by the per country limits in the Olympics (remember Jordan Weiber), but it doesn't make those countries any less competitive).

I'd see it as more of an honor to make finals in an International division, and to just to be on an International team in general (I.e. your gym thinks you have the potential to make *top 3* in the USA, like wow, that's an honor).

I honestly wouldn't mind if some of the "National" competitions embraced this concept a little - by maybe only letting in a certain number of teams from certain states or certain regionals to their day twos - it may make them more of a true national competition - and it would give areas/states where cheerleading isn't as competitive a reason to up their game, even the highly competitive areas would need to up their game too cause they'd be after a limited number of spots.

 

[youbetterwork]

We're talking very general about international teams right now, but in reality it is a big difference between countries and countries and teams and teams. There are a few international teams who are very good and have a chance to medal. Then there are the international teams that are still in the development stage and just not quite "there" yet with their skills. I'm sure they go to Worlds just for the experience, and competing one day on the Worlds stage would be enough for them. In between, there are those teams which, if there was no 3-per-country rule, would have a chance at top ten. For those teams, it would be a great thing to actually qualify for finals on their own. Now, there are many teams that just go to Worlds and compete without something to aim for. Competing without any type of goal is kinda "blah", lol. In all divisions, except maybe IOC5, top ten is a realistic goal for many international teams. It would make it more fun for them to compete without this rule.

Before I actually went to Worlds I was positive about the 3-per-country rule. After my team competed there and I got to see all the teams in the international open divisions I don't think the rule is necessary.

 

[Tealxblack25]

Shimmy this if you want to see a separate thread to discuss International teammmmms :help:

 

[youbetterwork]

Shimmy this if you want to see a separate thread to discuss International teammmmms :help:

It has been a separate thread years ago. It's still somewhere on this board, I guess! Lol.

 

[UCFKnights07]

It would be unfortunate for the non-US teams, but I wouldn't call it "unfair". "Fair" would be letting the highest-scoring teams into finals without regard for the GPS coordinates of their practice facility. ICU is country-vs-country. Worlds is supposed to be gym-vs-gym.

Not arguing cause I can definitely see both sides, but what's the point of calling it worlds if it's all US teams, I mean you might as well call it NCA 2.0
The two per country rule isn't fair in a lot of sports, but I can see why they have it in place. If international teams are like hey we won't make it past day one, what's the point of spending thousands and traveling thousands of miles for one day. Yes some would still do it for just the one time experience, but what's the draw for getting them to come back year after year. I also thinks its partially a money gaining deal for the people running worlds.
I also want to say that worlds > ICU simply because it gets more recognition and attention from every team that's attending. And I would think the international teams know this, they want to compete in front of a big crowd and have a big awards ceremony, rings, etc. And let's face it, audience wise people attend worlds more then the ICU competition. I would say there's a lot of aspects as to why they have the rule.

 

[DancerDude0118]

If non-U.S. gyms are allowed to compete in the other divisions, why are the open divisions called "international open"? Shouldn't it just be "open" then?

I've noticed people making comparisons to other sports and saying the '3 per country' rule would move allstar cheerleading forward, but you have to realise the so called "Cheerleading Worlds" is organized by the USASF - it's the governing body for allstar cheerleading ONLY in the United States. I've always felt ICU World Cheerleading Championships was more of the true "world championships" for cheerleading because you represented your country and not a specific gym. Also, the ICU (although probably a lot smaller than USASF) to cheerleading feels more like how FIG is to gymnastics. There are only so many sports out there that require you to perform as a group + subjective scoring, the first two that come to mind are synchronized swimming and rhythmic gymnastics. At the international elite level, most countries would only send one team to represent them and that's how the ICU WCC is as well.

Personally, I think they should scratch the word "international" and just call it either "open all-girl" or "open coed". I'm not saying to make the divisions exclusive to U.S. teams, but a name change would better reflect the division if the '3 per country' rule were to be terminated. It's like how in gymnastics there are competitions run by the local gymnastics governing body but still allow foreigners to participate.

 

[AndrewSky]

2012 only had 3 IO6 teams- Ladykatz, OC Neon, and T&S Genesis. At least ones that made top 10.

2012 had 10 io6 teams at trials.