All-Star Difficulty Scores: Subjective Or Objective?

[JulieP]

I start this thread because I am a little bit at a loss when it comes to the differences in scoresheets from EPs when scoring difficulty- particularly in stunting. I am a scoresheet studier to say the least, so I definitely understand the scoring rubric/grid before we go to competitions. Yes, there have been threads on universal scoresheets, but I think this is a different issue. So I guess the question is whether or not difficulty is a subjective score (meaning that the judge watches the routine and then assigns it a score) or an objective score (difficulty decided by # of body positions, level appropriate transitions, etc). So, what do you think? What scores should be subjective and which shouldn't?

 

[chyeeaaa69]

Objective. 100%. It's one area of the scoresheet where the possibility for objective scoring can exist, so why not let it? There's elements of objective scoring in tumbling and jumps, and as much clarity as a team can be given on their scoresheet the better.

 

[BlueCat]

Theoretically, it would be mostly objective. In actuality it is probably an even mix of both.

 

[Deleted member 15]

I start this thread because I am a little bit at a loss when it comes to the differences in scoresheets from EPs when scoring difficulty- particularly in stunting. I am a scoresheet studier to say the least, so I definitely understand the scoring rubric/grid before we go to competitions. Yes, there have been threads on universal scoresheets, but I think this is a different issue. So I guess the question is whether or not difficulty is a subjective score (meaning that the judge watches the routine and then assigns it a score) or an objective score (difficulty decided by # of body positions, level appropriate transitions, etc). So, what do you think? What scores should be subjective and which shouldn't?

It's impractical to make scoring difficulty completely objective.

 

[KikiD22]

I start this thread because I am a little bit at a loss when it comes to the differences in scoresheets from EPs when scoring difficulty- particularly in stunting. I am a scoresheet studier to say the least, so I definitely understand the scoring rubric/grid before we go to competitions. Yes, there have been threads on universal scoresheets, but I think this is a different issue. So I guess the question is whether or not difficulty is a subjective score (meaning that the judge watches the routine and then assigns it a score) or an objective score (difficulty decided by # of body positions, level appropriate transitions, etc). So, what do you think? What scores should be subjective and which shouldn't?

I was questioning the same thing today. I wonder why that may be... Could it be a common competition this past weekend? I think that some scoring systems try to be more objective on things like stunts, tumbling, pyramids, by breaking out difficulty and execution scores, but I think that by also offering judges a range of scores for a certain set of skills, there is still some subjectiveness in play.

For example, in level 1 Varsity score sheets (picking level 1 because I'm most familiar with it), in standing tumbling, a forward roll, cartwheel/round-off, and front/back walkovers are all lumped in a diffculty score range of 3-4 points. So, potentially, depending on the judge, a team with 1 back walkover could receive the same score as a team with full team back walkovers. That's where the subjective piece comes in. How do the judges determine what score to give within that range? When placements are being determined by less than 1 point, it's an important factor to consider.

I am still questioning a lot of the results, including some that were favorable towards our program.

 

[cupieqt]

It's impractical to make scoring difficulty completely objective.

Why? I love having a set rubric that tells me what skills will score higher. I think the overall impression and execution sections of a scoresheet are best for subjectivity. With difficulty it's easier to say "team A has squad standing 2 bhs, 5 body positions in a single stunt sequence with appropriate skill level LDT's so they will score between a 9.5-10 and team B has majority squad bhs, 4 body positions in a single stunt sequence and level appropriate LDTs so they will score between a 9.2-9.5". The teams are fairly equal and execution/overall impression will help determine the winner. Having that base of objective scores keeps everyone on a level playing field to start.

 

[Deleted member 15]

Why? I love having a set rubric that tells me what skills will score higher. I think the overall impression and execution sections of a scoresheet are best for subjectivity. With difficulty it's easier to say "team A has squad standing 2 bhs, 5 body positions in a single stunt sequence with appropriate skill level LDT's so they will score between a 9.5-10 and team B has majority squad bhs, 4 body positions in a single stunt sequence and level appropriate LDTs so they will score between a 9.2-9.5". The teams are fairly equal and execution/overall impression will help determine the winner. Having that base of objective scores keeps everyone on a level playing field to start.

In your examples you had ranges or 9.5-10 and 9.2-9.5. Those aren't completely objective. To be completely objective you would have to be able to say it X is done it will score Y and given the number of people on the floor and the number of variable that go into a stunt score I don't think it's practical to make objective.

 

[cupieqt]

In your examples you had ranges or 9.5-10 and 9.2-9.5. Those aren't completely objective. To be completely objective you would have to be able to say it X is done it will score Y and given the number of people on the floor and the number of variable that go into a stunt score I don't think it's practical to make objective.

I see what you mean. I still like the "somewhat objective" scores then. At least I know my minimum score would be a 9.5 instead of a 9.2.

 

[juscheerthatisall]

It can't be completely obj what's difficult for a mini 3 team is not the same as what's difficult for a senior 3 team. Using 2 bases is more difficult than doing the same skill with 3. Using a 10 yr old flyer Is a lot less difficult than using an 18yr old (the last one can be argued but I know judges sometimes look at this, even if they don't mean too) basically a junior 5 team where every1 is 10 will be looked at diff than a junior 5 team where every1 is 14, I don't think it's purposeful necessarily it's just human

 

[cupieqt]

It can't be completely obj what's difficult for a mini 3 team is not the same as what's difficult for a senior 3 team. Using 2 bases is more difficult than doing the same skill with 3. Using a 10 yr old flyer Is a lot less difficult than using an 18yr old (the last one can be argued but I know judges sometimes look at this, even if they don't mean too) basically a junior 5 team where every1 is 10 will be looked at diff than a junior 5 team where every1 is 14, I don't think it's purposeful necessarily it's just human

So with all things being equal, level 3 mini is scored easier than level 3 junior? I'm trying to understand what you mean. Will my tiny little 16 y/o flyer (that looks like she's 10) be scored differently b/c she looks younger?

 

[kristenthegreat]

Ideally, YES it would be objective. The problem lies in defining what is 'harder.' I've been watching a plethora of gymnastics videos, and it's easy to quantify what is harder (in tumbling levels for us, it's also pretty straightforward). However, stunting-wise, what's easier for one team might be harder for another. Some say high-high ticktocks are harder because you have less time, while others say they're actually easier because when you dip on a power press low-high you have to control the flier on the way down from the initial extended one leg. Is a high-high easier than a 1 1/4 up? Should we just address it by tick tocks and fullups with different levels for each (as in gymnastics, let's say a full up and a switch up are both 'D' skills)? I don't know..

 

[retiredl5cheer]

To continue Kristen's analysis, if we were to apply assigned grades for different stunting skills, what happens when a team creates a new skill? This happens in gymnastics too. Anyone know what is done if a gymnast is the first to perform a skill? How do they assign a starting value?

 

[WuToDouble]

Scores should not be subjective, and creativity shouldn't be scored. That is y cheering isn't a sport and shouldn't be a sport the way it is. Good coreography shouldn't decide who wins, athletism should. That is y I am all for STUNT and Maryland all girl do what they do.

 

[Deleted member 15]

Scores should not be subjective, and creativity shouldn't be scored. That is y cheering isn't a sport and shouldn't be a sport the way it is. Good coreography shouldn't decide who wins, athletism should. That is y I am all for STUNT and Maryland all girl do what they do.

Execution is subjective. Can you create a scoring system you like without factoring in execution?

 

[kristenthegreat]

To continue Kristen's analysis, if we were to apply assigned grades for different stunting skills, what happens when a team creates a new skill? This happens in gymnastics too. Anyone know what is done if a gymnast is the first to perform a skill? How do they assign a starting value?

I'm GUESSING (I don't know for certain) that they look to see what the skill mimics and go from there? Like the Patterson (Carly Patterson's dismount at the 2004 Olympics), I'm guessing they looked to see where it closely matched and then tried to squeeze it in somewhere between.