It has become painfully obvious that you are unwilling to have a logical conversation about this problem we call judging. If you wish to try again please let me know.
it is the problem with judging cheer, more than one thing happens at a time:
if 4 groups do a fake up and 3 do full ups do you do 4/7 x (fake up score) averaged with 3/7 x full up score, but then the next team just does 4 full ups. What if they do a skill that wasn't thought of when the score sheet was made. Tumbling is even harder, 12 people do ro bhs fulls but the other 8 do a variety of specialty passes to doubles. or a team of 20 does 10 standing doubles which might be counted the same as a team of 20 doing 11 standing fulls Since the majority didn't do the doubles.
Also if you get too specific in a score sheet and say that a particular skill is worth 10, why would anyone not have that in their routine (besides not being able to do it)
or you could look at the cheersport sheet which just counts the # of performed skills, and have a guy in the corner doing 15 standing doubles and a group in another corner constantly tick tocking to drive up scores.
If I were to design a sheet it would be based on a 10 point range as follows:
1-10 for difficulty with a scoring grid outlining the types of skills that would get you in the bottom, middle, and top of that range, but it is the combination of skills that gets you higher in the range.
Execution Score 1-10 based on how well they did the skills, bobbles and whatnot would be included with this score
Participation score Percentage of team involved with/performing the skills multiplied by the difficulty and the execution scores and then added together.
so lets say the level 5 score is ranged from 90 - 100
a Team of 24 does 2 ball up 360 tick tock bow and arrow double downs which for this example we will say is worth 9 in the ten point range.
and they do 3 ball up tick tock bow and arrow double downs which lets say is worth a 7.
So to score that sequence 2/5 x 9 + 3/5 x 7 would equal 7.8 for difficulty
lets say the execution was a 9 (scoring the sequence as a whole)
Since they only had 5 groups and had 24 people their Participation score would be .83 so that would give us 6.5 for participation difficulty and 7.5 for participation execution.
Then we could avg that all together and get a 7.7 for the score within the range giving us a stunt score of 97.7.
a second sequence could be scored the same way and then averaged in to create the final "stunt" score
But you would probably need to hire someone just to do the math and possibly someone to count especially in the tumbling sections.
Perhaps its overly complicated, but I think it accounts for the majority of peoples questions on score sheets.
