All-Star Does Execution Matter?

[newcheerdad]

I think 50/50 is fair. The team with janky doubles gets a 9.6/10 on difficulty but a 6.3 on execution. The team with clean fulls gets a 8/10 on difficulty and a 9.3 on execution. The clean team wins the tumbling section.

I think you're on the right track. Ultimately the issue is this:

Should perfect fulls score better than average doubles?

Should horrible doubles score better than perfect layouts?

When you can identify the point where difficulty trumps execution, and do so with a fair degree of certainty and consensus, then you've got something.

 

[jcheermom]

I think you're on the right track. Ultimately the issue is this:

Should perfect fulls score better than average doubles?

Should horrible doubles score better than perfect layouts?

When you can identify the point where difficulty trumps execution, and do so with a fair degree of certainty and consensus, then you've got something.

In these instances, your difficulty scores SHOULD offset your execution scores, but reward those who are throwing perfected skills and not janky skills, but this is what we are trying to figure out...

 

[MomOf2ThatsMe]

I'm notsure DQing a team for a badly executed routine is right. Everyone has a bad day at some point, even the best teams.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

Should a team be awarded a "trickle down" World's bid even though they are "having a bad day"? Not trying to start the whole bid argument, just an example I came up with...

 

[yojaehs]

Should a team be awarded a "trickle down" World's bid even though they are "having a bad day"? Not trying to start the whole bid argument, just an example I came up with...

Goes back to IF we have a Universal Score Sheet. IF we do then a qualifying score could be required, but until then. If your next in line OR if the EP wants for that matter, YES the bid could be passed down.

 

[BlueCat]

Here is where I will make lolsmileyface happy.

I think mechanically (meaning the process at which a judge produces a score) judging should be done on a base 10 scale (meaning out of 10, or 1, or 100). Why? Everything we do is based on base 10 so it is very natural to everyone. Second, I think that execution and difficulty mechanically speaking should be the same score. So if you judge difficulty out of 10 you judge difficulty out of 10. This way a judge could never accidentally give a wrong value because of mechanics. NCA's scoring system works the best for this because it is a rubric where you have to perform and compete certain skills to get into the right difficulty category. From there judging difficulty and execution is done in the exact same format. Execution, however, is done a bit different. Everyone starts with a .5. If you perform with an average ability you get that .5. If you are worse it lowers your score. Better, it raises it. Difficulty is a score that is always relative to your peers, and that is fine. As long as we dont value each thing in a routine individually (which would be very difficult and time consuming) that set range does give the judges a decent way to separate difficulty.

One of the many problems with other scoring situations is it seems to be out of a random number (20, or 10, or 35). That so goes against how we run our everyday life. You ask how attractive someone is, and they give you a score based off of 1 - 10. You ask how good is that mean, you say on a scale from 1 - 10 how was it? Who says on a scale of 1 - 35 what would you rate that? It goes against us.

Have we discussed the matrix idea? Judges give 0-10 regardless of the category. The EP simply has multipliers for each category and can set up the weights of the various categories however they want, but the judges essentially do the same thing each week? If an EP wants stunting to be worth more, they just set that multiplier higher, but the judges are still 0-10 regardless of what the final weight is going to be. Scores are easily done by computer.

 

[yojaehs]

Have we discussed the matrix idea? Judges give 0-10 regardless of the category. The EP simply has multipliers for each category and can set up the weights of the various categories however they want, but the judges essentially do the same thing each week? If an EP wants stunting to be worth more, they just set that multiplier higher, but the judges are still 0-10 regardless of what the final weight is going to be. Scores are easily done by computer.

Maybe its bc its early, I think I get it but could you give an ex?

 

[cheerlove]

yes. execution should be a huge part of the score sheet. not only are routines cleaner and more fun to watch when execution is through the roof, but it helps keep us safe imo. if there was not execution, we would have girls throwing skills they can barely land that still look janky at competitions and creates a higher risk for injury. with execution, coaches want a skill pretty and perfected before it goes in the rountine, keeping us safe!

 

[King]

Have we discussed the matrix idea? Judges give 0-10 regardless of the category. The EP simply has multipliers for each category and can set up the weights of the various categories however they want, but the judges essentially do the same thing each week? If an EP wants stunting to be worth more, they just set that multiplier higher, but the judges are still 0-10 regardless of what the final weight is going to be. Scores are easily done by computer.

Yes I think this is the best solution for EP's wanting to reward a certain skill more than others. Don't have the judges change how they score anything (which is the common solution to giving more points to stunts or tumbling) but instead multiply and change the percentages AFTER the judges are scored.

At NCA again they have 10 categories worth 10% each. If you as an EP really want to reward stunting more than tumbling then after scoring then have each judge score as normal but after scoring make tumbling worth 5% and stunting worth 15% (just multiply by those values). There, no judge can misappropriate possible points and the EP can be happy because their stunting favorite won! (of course that stunting favorite may go onto worlds and get their butt kicked because they are weak at the stuff that matters at worlds, but I guess thats a moot point?).

 

[BlueCat]

Example of "matrix" (sounds better than "array") scoring.

Judges score every category 0-10. They are looking for the same thing every week. There is a single set of guidelines for what gets you a 7.2 in jumps, etc that is consistent throughout the year. Their job is to just go in and put their scores down for each category that they are responsible for. They hand in something that looks like this:

Standing Tumbling: 8.4
Running Tumbling: 8.5
. . . . all the way down the categories.

Every year, the event producer announces how much weight they will give to each category. Say that there are 10 total categories - the event producer just assigns a percentage of what each will count towards the total score. If they thought all ten should be even, then their "matrix" would look like this:

0.1 x ____ Standing
0.1 x ____ Running
0.1 x ____ Jumps
0.1 x ____ Baskets
0.1 x ____ Stunts
0.1 x ____ Pyramids
0.1 x ____ Dance/Motions
0.1 x ____ Formations
0.1 x ____ Choreography/Creativity
0.1 x ____ Overall Impression

The judges basically fill in their 0-10 scores in the blanks and the computer pops out their score.

If an EP wanted to change how much each category counted, then they simply adjust the numbers on the left to reflect how they want to do it. The only restriction is that the numbers on the left need to add up to 1.

This way, the judges are doing the exact same job every week AND the event producer has the ability to adjust how much weight to give each category. Computers make this very easy.

 

[Cheerfan1234]

I was slightly disappointed with the Worlds scoresheet this year...For a while it seemed to progress in the right direction with execution actually playing an integral part in the final placements...In Small Senior and Small Limited especially, it really was disappointing for a lot of teenagers (and coaches) to sit back and watch routines that hit get outscored by routines with a number of drops, tdowns, etc. just because of tumbling and synchronized tumbling...

I absolutely think difficulty should be rewarded..but CLEAN difficulty...There needs to be boundaries. If the most prestigious competition in the World is going to advocate difficulty at all costs, then this sport is definitely going in the wrong direction and more athletes are going to hurt themselves.

 

[cupieqt]

I think you're on the right track. Ultimately the issue is this:

Should perfect fulls score better than average doubles?

Should horrible doubles score better than perfect layouts?

When you can identify the point where difficulty trumps execution, and do so with a fair degree of certainty and consensus, then you've got something.

Yes, they should score perfect fulls better than average doubles. If we want to push perfection before progression then we need to reward prefection over imperfect progression.

Difficulty only trumps execution when its executed well. Meaning the team with clean, solid double fulls should definitely beat the team with clean, solid singles. If you risk the execution points for difficulty, you should be taking a huge risk because the skill is scored for difficulty AND execution. My example of the scores shows how it balances out and shows how the odds are in your favor to go with the execution over the difficulty points.

It goes against the whole pull and pray mentality that is ingrained in all-stars from the early days of throw the hardest even if you can't hit.

 

[SaraDee023]

It SHOULD matter. Executing a skill correctly should count just as much as simply doing it. Sometimes I have seen judges do this. For example a judge this season didn't count some of our layouts because the girl's legs were not completely straight. When execution doesn't count it encourages people to throw shaky skills cause "who cares if it's ugly, you did it"

AGREED. execution should 100% count. if a team both does full ups and tic tocks but one is sloppy and one is super clean, the cleaner team should be rewarded more points....you cant just do things...that defeats the purpose of really "hitting a routine"

 

[uaLaurennn]

i do think execution should matter . but some of the teams that won worlds who didnt have execution kind of confused me . because if it should matter then why did those teams win and not ones with perfectly sharp routines not win ?

 

[uaLaurennn]

i do think execution should matter . but some of the teams that won worlds who didnt have execution kind of confused me . because if it should matter then why did those teams win and not ones with perfectly sharp routines not win ?

who didnt have good execution *

 

[Seeker30]

Should it matter though? If one team throws squad doubles but they are all janky and one throws squad fulls but they are textbook who should win?

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

textbook! because of Safety! i rather see a clean full thats for sure going to land and safe then a janky one that my step out touch fall or hurt them selves.