All-Star Am I The Only One? (score Sheet Talk)

[newcheerdad]

Here is how cheer scoring works in relation to soccer. At one competition a goal is worth a point. But at another competition a goal is worth .5 points and how you scored it is worth 5.

I kinda figured that. :) Which is why I am totally with you on the "universal scoresheet" idea, because I couldn't fathom the idea that a goal is worth one point at competition X, but two points at competition Y if they scored from outside the 18 and three points if it was scored using some other part of the body than their feet. It's hard enough to referee soccer as it is with 17 laws and three officials on the field.

 

[King]

I also ask the OP if he would be in favor of the companies being like international divisions sometimes?

 

[rvnblue]

On a side note: I don't like video review unless it is about a legality uncertainty.

 

[BlueCat]

I think it is about empowering the judges. What? Empowering the judges? Yep, that is what I said.

Let us take the NFL for example (and even college football). Now that EVERY play is reviewable AND a coach can challenge calls the belief in fair and equitable refereeing has gone way up. Sure there are still mistakes, but I would be willing to be the general satisfaction in ref-ing has gone way up and is rarely part of the discussion when talking about who should have won a football game (as opposed to soccer... ughh).

Scoresheets, at the moment, should NOT be released. It would be unfair to judges. Even to the trained eye switching systems from week to week is going to produce inaccuracies. There are great, smart, and talented judges out there, but not enough to have ones who only work in one scoresheet. So you have either under talented judges having to be on a scoresheet because they will be more familiar OR very talented judges try and cross over on scoresheets.

I can look at a stunt on an NCA scoresheet and pretty much figure out exactly how something will score (and usually when I get our scoresheets back I am pretty close). But I was trying to help someone with a Jamfest scoring thing earlier this week and MAN am I out of my element. Yes I know skills, but it is soooo different and out of my comfort zone. How the heck can we expect a judge to make a smooth transition from one scoresheet to another and NOT make mistakes? Then release those scoresheets and expose the judges errors when we are asking them to take on an rather difficulty and impossible task.

And from a pragmatic standpoint it is NOT like the top teams at every competition change. That is the CRAZIEST part about it. It is not like CEA, F5, and WCSS go to Jamfest and we expect those three to NOT be battling it out for top spot. Yes, let us say WCSS is more favored on the Jamfest sheet (I dont know if they are, just for the sake of argument) how they perform and do will still be the deciding factor.

So, I ask this to the OP: If you believe that everywhere Top Gun Jags goes has a strong routine and should probably win, why does it even matter if the scoresheets are different if the results are all the same?

(this is not questioning TG's ability, duh they are good)

I am really not following your logic on this one. NFL's "judging" has gotten better because of the exposure, but cheer judging wouldn't? Cheer judging is too hard to expect the judges to get it right? The industry is better off not knowing how many mistakes are made? Sweeping the problems with judging under the rug will improve the process? I am much more concerned with the accuracy of results than I am with whether a judge or event producer gets their feelings hurt by being held accountable.

WAY too much time, effort, and money goes into a competition for the results to be decided the way they are. I have seen SOOOO many blatant mistakes (arithmetic mistakes, scoring of wrong team, scoring out of theoretically possible range, deductions for things that didn't even happen, etc.) over the last 20 years to be comfortable with either the validity or the progress of the whole judging process. These are primarily just mistakes that we happen to have caught on our OWN scoresheets. Who knows how many results have been altered because of blatant errors on the thousands of scoresheets that we don't see? (I don't mean the "I like dance A better than dance B" kind of errors - I mean obvious, objective errors.)

Event producers have had years and years to improve their systems and very little progress has been made. How many more decades of trying should we give them before they start being held accountable for the quality of judging and scoring?

On a positive side, perhaps this would be a way for judges to start getting better compensation. If we got to actually somewhat evaluate the judges, then the good judges would become much more valuable. Bad or unqualified judges would, in turn, become a liability for the event producers.

 

[King]

I am really not following your logic on this one. NFL's "judging" has gotten better because of the exposure, but cheer judging wouldn't? Cheer judging is too hard to expect the judges to get it right? The industry is better off not knowing how many mistakes are made? Sweeping the problems with judging under the rug will improve the process? I am much more concerned with the accuracy of results than I am with whether a judge or event producer gets their feelings hurt by being held accountable.

WAY too much time, effort, and money goes into a competition for the results to be decided the way they are. I have seen SOOOO many blatant mistakes (arithmetic mistakes, scoring of wrong team, scoring out of theoretically possible range, deductions for things that didn't even happen, etc.) over the last 20 years to be comfortable with either the validity or the progress of the whole judging process. These are primarily just mistakes that we happen to have caught on our OWN scoresheets. Who knows how many results have been altered because of blatant errors on the thousands of scoresheets that we don't see? (I don't mean the "I like dance A better than dance B" kind of errors - I mean obvious, objective errors.)

Event producers have had years and years to improve their systems and very little progress has been made. How many more decades of trying should we give them before they start being held accountable for the quality of judging and scoring?

On a positive side, perhaps this would be a way for judges to start getting better compensation. If we got to actually somewhat evaluate the judges, then the good judges would become much more valuable. Bad or unqualified judges would, in turn, become a liability for the event producers.

Judges won't benefit form exposure until the scoresheet is Universal. Until we have a universal scoresheet exposing scores is only going to make judges look incompetent. Judges have to change sheets weekend to weekend and mistakes made from having to adjust from one week to the next will become more will become extremely glaring.

I want to expose scores but only if we have a universal scoresheet (and I really want a universal scoresheet). That clear it up?

 

[BlueCat]

That makes sense. I say open the process up now, regardless of universal or not, but I get your point.

 

[newcheerdad]

Judges won't benefit form exposure until the scoresheet is Universal. Until we have a universal scoresheet exposing scores is only going to make judges look incompetent. Judges have to change sheets weekend to weekend and mistakes made from having to adjust from one week to the next will become more will become extremely glaring.

Furthermore, I guess that it's a surefire way to turn people off from being judges, especially inexperienced ones at lower-tier competitions. (where it's more likely mistakes will be made)

I do believe that the universal scoresheet is the base of all of any wholesale improvements in judging, because until you have that, cheer judging will be impossible to evaluate objectively.

I am really not following your logic on this one. NFL's "judging" has gotten better because of the exposure, but cheer judging wouldn't?

Actually, improvements in professional sports officiating are due to training, technology (including the use of instant replay), and a constant cycle of learning and evaluation.

 

[BlueCat]

Can we agree that a primary goal should be to get to the point that blatant mistakes are NOT being made in judging events? Can we agree that this needs to happen as soon as possible?

The purpose of opening up the scoring is twofold, actually. One is that it forces the event producers and judges to be more accountable for results. (Which leads to improved scoring systems.) The other is that it allows coaches to know why they won or lost. Even if the system never improves, there is much to be gained from at least allowing the coaches and the public to learn as much about the system as possible.

 

[King]

Can we agree that a primary goal should be to get to the point that blatant mistakes are NOT being made in judging events? Can we agree that this needs to happen as soon as possible?

The purpose of opening up the scoring is twofold, actually. One is that it forces the event producers and judges to be more accountable for results. (Which leads to improved scoring systems.) The other is that it allows coaches to know why they won or lost. Even if the system never improves, there is much to be gained from at least allowing the coaches and the public to learn as much about the system as possible.

As much as it would suck for judges in the current state of the industry, if the scores were opened up it would drastically speed up the adoption of a universal scoresheet.

 

[SharkDad]

and the concerted effort to be diligent about training and studying the rules

 

[BlueCat]

I would be fine with not putting the judge names on the sheets. There is no need for the "public" (coaches) to know what the name of Judge #2 is. They should be able to look at the whole day's worth of Judge #2's scores, though.

I am also OK with not showing other teams the comments that are put on scoresheets - just the number scores.

 

[BlueCat]

This would also alleviate forcing judges to score within .1 of each other. It is OK to have harsh/lenient judges - as long as they are consistent throughout the day/division. You WANT a variety of viewpoints represented to have more robust results.

 

[Hungry]

Talking about releasing scores...here in California, there is a competition company called JAMZ. Our gym doesn't really compete with them (I did more as a youth rec league coach many years ago) but the main thing I love about them, is when you get your score sheet at the end of the day, you are given the scores from EVERY judge, in EVERY category, for EVERY team in your division.

For me, it absolutely holds those judges accountable but it's also an incredible coaching tool as well. I can see clearly where I've done well and what I need to work on.

Other venues will give me the overall scores from the teams in my division, but so often I wonder...how? Where? Sometimes I just don't get it and would really love a breakdown!

 

[NJ Coach]

This weekend at Spirit Fest, included with your scoresheets was the division break down. This sheet had every team's scores in every element. It was wonderful. You were able to see who was beating you, and in what section. Absolutely loved it.

 

[coachTSC]

can someone give me a cliff notes version (or some major differences) of the current scoresheets as they are now? ie: varsity vs. jamfest vs cheersport, etc... i'm most comfortable on varsity's scoresheet and grid