All-Star I Want You To Tear Apart This Idea And Find Every Hole You Can Find

[King]

No. Larger, elite teams present an impossible challenge to get right on 1 live viewing - even if ALL you were doing were counting skills.

Then it stands to reason that all current judging methods are severely flawed and need to be adjusted.

 

[BlueCat]

Then it stands to reason that all current judging methods are severely flawed and need to be adjusted.

Agreed. Assuming accuracy is one of the main goals of a scoring system, it would follow that something should be done to improve this element of scoring.

 

[King]

Agreed. Assuming accuracy is one of the main goals of a scoring system, it would follow that something should be done to improve this element of scoring.

It can also be said that every single scoring system would be improved if the difficulty section was no longer done live (outside of CHEERSPORT which is comparative) without changing how that comp scores.

 

[yojaehs]

I think there should be more than one difficulty judge. I don't like that its all down to one person. One person that for whatever reason may have something against one team or another. We can't pretend it doesn't happen.

Another problem is that say a gym does invent a new skill. If there is a pre-set rubric with every skill what it's worth, then who determines what their new skill is worth and when does that happen?

I also don't know if I like that the live judges only score execution and impression, though I do think it would make their job easier and let them focus on what they're seeing. However not all live judges may even know the rules for the level they are judging, since technically they don't need to. I do like the possibility that a difficulty judge could be completely 100% knowledgable of the rules, and there isn't the issue we have now of some judges missing illegal things because they aren't knowledgeable enough or they're flipping between divisions and are distracted. I think it would be nice to take it a step further and have a Level 1 diff judge, Level 2 diff judge, etc. and the judge is trained and certified specifically in their level. This may only be possible at large events though, since at the regional level it would require a lot of judges and potentially not that many teams.

Can I get an AMEN!!!???
I would like to see skills based on an "A,B,C" scale such as gymnastics. In gymnastics on beam for example, connection between a split leap and straddle jump would result in a higher level, if the "connection" is missed there isn't credit. I feel that if there could be a "skill ranking" system it would help A LOT. If a "new" skill is created then it should be submitted and a value should be placed on that skill so that it can be scored.
I believe this would help scoring as well when submitting to judges-
Ex. Team A - Standing Tumbling 15 "B" skills + 16 "C" skills
Running Tumbling 15 "A+B" Skills etc. etc.
I think along the lines of submitting skills to a judge it would be much easier.

Now ONE more soapbox rant. Can if all the time is taken to rank these skills so that coaches have to learn to list can we please, please, please take MORE time to properly train judges?

 

[AScheer]

Can I get an AMEN!!!???
I would like to see skills based on an "A,B,C" scale such as gymnastics. In gymnastics on beam for example, connection between a split leap and straddle jump would result in a higher level, if the "connection" is missed there isn't credit. I feel that if there could be a "skill ranking" system it would help A LOT. If a "new" skill is created then it should be submitted and a value should be placed on that skill so that it can be scored.
I believe this would help scoring as well when submitting to judges-
Ex. Team A - Standing Tumbling 15 "B" skills + 16 "C" skills
Running Tumbling 15 "A+B" Skills etc. etc.
I think along the lines of submitting skills to a judge it would be much easier.

Now ONE more soapbox rant. Can if all the time is taken to rank these skills so that coaches have to learn to list can we please, please, please take MORE time to properly train judges?

If someone creates a new skill and it's submitted then is that published for the rest of the cheer world to see? For example if a couple years ago CEA had submitted the 360 ball-up as a new skill in August and planned to compete it at Worlds in the Spring, then when everyone else saw a new skill added to the list there goes the surprise, and its no longer really a new skill since everyone now knows about it and can do it too.

 

[yojaehs]

If someone creates a new skill and it's submitted then is that published for the rest of the cheer world to see? For example if a couple years ago CEA had submitted the 360 ball-up as a new skill in August and planned to compete it at Worlds in the Spring, then when everyone else saw a new skill added to the list there goes the surprise, and its no longer really a new skill since everyone now knows about it and can do it too.

It's submitted to a judges panel, not to the "fierceboard critics". Even if you see a skill, you have to have the coaches to teach it and the talent to execute it. Not to mention the time to practice it.

 

[AScheer]

It's submitted to a judges panel, not to the "fierceboard critics". Even if you see a skill, you have to have the coaches to teach it and the talent to execute it. Not to mention the time to practice it.

Yes, but wouldn't it be added then to the master rubric of skills and what they are worth, therefore other coaches would see it and know about it before you ever competed it. While most of the world wouldn't be able to do it some could. Going back to the ball up, had F5 or WCSS known at the beginning of the season that CEA was planning to do a new stunt - the ball-up 360 - then not only would they have ample time (and talent) to execute it, but also to make it even harder before CEA ever got to perform it. Just using this as an example because its so well known. The thing I worry about with a master set in stone list of what every skill is worth is that some of the creativity will be lost. Obviously choreo will still be different but like gymnastics everyone will be doing the exact same thing.

 

[SarahS]

Yes, but wouldn't it be added then to the master rubric of skills and what they are worth, therefore other coaches would see it and know about it before you ever competed it. While most of the world wouldn't be able to do it some could. Going back to the ball up, had F5 or WCSS known at the beginning of the season that CEA was planning to do a new stunt - the ball-up 360 - then not only would they have ample time (and talent) to execute it, but also to make it even harder before CEA ever got to perform it. Just using this as an example because its so well known. The thing I worry about with a master set in stone list of what every skill is worth is that some of the creativity will be lost. Obviously choreo will still be different but like gymnastics everyone will be doing the exact same thing.

During the season that the new skill is created, perhaps the judging panel could determine a difficulty value and assign the skill a unique number (like 1112501 could be for the first new skill created in level 5 for the 11-12 season). The coach who creates the skill will know the difficulty value but competitors will only know that some team has created some new skill that has a difficulty value of X. After the season in which the skill is created is over, a more descriptive name for the skill will be entered into the rubric.

 

[12stepCheermom]

During the season that the new skill is created, perhaps the judging panel could determine a difficulty value and assign the skill a unique number (like 1112501 could be for the first new skill created in level 5 for the 11-12 season). The coach who creates the skill will know the difficulty value but competitors will only know that some team has created some new skill that has a difficulty value of X. After the season in which the skill is created is over, a more descriptive name for the skill will be entered into the rubric.

I think it's even easier than that. I think you have point values for certain skills, if you combo them - then all you have to do it add. you don't need a specific numeric value for every unique combo of skills teams might suddenly come up with. In the case of the ball up - there is a point value for the ball up, there is one for the 360 and there's one for the tick-tock. What makes that skill so difficult is that is combos multiple things in one stunt - hence, just add the point values for each of those together. In that case, one person did all of it - if you can actually get multiple stunt groups to do it then you've set your difficulty on fire. It works with tumbling too. Two to a double gets you (at level 5) the difficulty points for a double, but an arabian, round off, whip full, whip double would get you points for the arabian, the full and the double in terms of difficulty in that one pass. If you have multiple people throwing it - you have increased difficulty on the whole.

 

[AScheer]

I think it's even easier than that. I think you have point values for certain skills, if you combo them - then all you have to do it add. you don't need a specific numeric value for every unique combo of skills teams might suddenly come up with. In the case of the ball up - there is a point value for the ball up, there is one for the 360 and there's one for the tick-tock. What makes that skill so difficult is that is combos multiple things in one stunt - hence, just add the point values for each of those together. In that case, one person did all of it - if you can actually get multiple stunt groups to do it then you've set your difficulty on fire. It works with tumbling too. Two to a double gets you (at level 5) the difficulty points for a double, but an arabian, round off, whip full, whip double would get you points for the arabian, the full and the double in terms of difficulty in that one pass. If you have multiple people throwing it - you have increased difficulty on the whole.

Good point, and I like it, but then is there too much emphasis on difficulty? We could easily get back to the coaches that put skills on the floor that aren't ready just to up the difficulty. The scoring gaps could become huge bc the difficulty could up the score so much. Essentially a team that hits perfect and scores great with a live judge could still lose by a lot because X team automatically had more difficulty built up even if they're a hot mess.

 

[12stepCheermom]

Good point, and I like it, but then is there too much emphasis on difficulty? We could easily get back to the coaches that put skills on the floor that aren't ready just to up the difficulty. The scoring gaps could become huge bc the difficulty could up the score so much. Essentially a team that hits perfect and scores great with a live judge could still lose by a lot because X team automatically had more difficulty built up even if they're a hot mess.

I thought about that are I posted this, maybe the scoring just gives you bonus points if you combine skills rather than being really specific about what skills they are. Like a partner stunt with 1 skill gets this difficulty score and if you include one or more bullet points ( which may include the combo skills) you can get this set top difficulty score for that sequence so you can't add difficulty points to infinity.

 

[BlueCat]

Assuming that a "script" of skills were turned in, we would need a system/framework to determine difficulty. This is probably worth it's own topic, IMO, so I will start one.