All-Star Definition Of "hitting"

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

"Shark-like" - the fiercest! (personally I think this one is pretty clear and should be used more often, but that's just me) <--- (Cheer dad agrees with me so this should stay)

Hey wait, I didn't say I agree with you. I just said I like it but for arguments sake until something better comes along we can use it.
wink.png
 
cheerdiva461 said:
im curious why you used WC?

First cool name I thought of that was obviously not real. I have lots of respect for the tradition of great teams at that program.

Want me to change it?
 
i also agree that hitting would be no deductions but last weekend at spirit cheer day 1 my team CLEARLY had 2 touch downs & our pyramid disconnected so it was illegal at one point but we still got no deductions. i still don't understand how they missed all those mistakes they were pretty obvious.. day 1 definitely did not hit & we had no deductions day 2 we hit/killed it with no deductions.
 
i think equating anything to perfection is unrealistic seeing how nothing will ever be "perfect". when i think of a team hitting a routine, i think that the team has nailed every section with good technique/timing with zero deductions. the "perfect" example of this for me would be top gun's 04-05 cheersport performance. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClwO13kZmRo

Look at 0:48 girl def hits it... the floor that is
 
I haven't been reading this whole thread but I agree 100% with the first post. if you are saying "they hit, BUT" ... Then they didn't hit. A bobble, or touch out, on 1 fall WILL be a deduction. That 1 deduction can put you from 1st-3rd .. IMO
 
i think equating anything to perfection is unrealistic seeing how nothing will ever be "perfect". when i think of a team hitting a routine, i think that the team has nailed every section with good technique/timing with zero deductions. the "perfect" example of this for me would be top gun's 04-05 cheersport performance. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClwO13kZmRo

Great example. This routine is a favorite of many people and has been pointed out there is an obvious tumble bust in it.

I think using standard terms I would describe this as "They had a tumble bust, but otherwise killed the routine" or "One tumble bust, but rest of routine they hit clean"
 
I think if there is a bobble or a tumbling bust but they sell the crap out of a routine then sure say they "killed it". I was more so talking about the people who say a team kills it but they have 2 stunts fall, 3 tumbling busts, and a bobble in the pyramid. Sure they may be your favorite team and they looked like they were having a great time, but I don't see that as "killing it".
 
The point I'm trying to make is to not have it be so different from one person to another. Maybe we can decrease a few of the "they killed it. . .no they didn't" or "they hit. . .no they didn't" arguments a little bit.
 
The point I'm trying to make is to not have it be so different from one person to another. Maybe we can decrease a few of the "they killed it. . .no they didn't" or "they hit. . .no they didn't" arguments a little bit.
 
I definitely agree with everyone. I think a "hit" routine, is a routine with no mistakes, no deductions, no bobbles, busts or touchdowns.
 
Back