All-Star Design the perfect scoring system

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

Status
Not open for further replies.

King

Is all about that bass
Staff member
FBOD:LLFB
Dec 4, 2009
14,108
19,303
So, let's design the perfect scoring system. While NCA's method of scoring individual skillsets (a rubric puts you in a range, the difficulty decides the tenth value, and execution is equal to difficulty to give you your final score) it still does correct the fact that really good tumblers have advantages in two categories while really good stunters only have an advantage in one category.

So how do we fix this?
 
The International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) has revamped their scoring system after difficult routines were being outscored by safe, less difficult routines, but with better execution, in order to try to balance the difficulty and execution in scoring. It is my opinion that no team should ever max out in any area unless they are performing the most difficult skill known to the "cheerleading world". When the perfect 10.0 was around, even the most difficult routines performed with the best execution didn't receive a 10.0 because the skill set performed was not a combination of the most difficult skills in the book. The FIG has since redone their scoring system and now the highest score is technically above a 20.0 with combination of skills adding to the total and basic skills performed; however, there is a Difficulty Panel and an Execution Panel

Difficulty score (A-panel score): The difficulty score is determined by two judges who total values for the 10 most difficult skills in a routine, including the dismount. Each skill has a pre-determined value depending on its difficulty. The judges determine the difficulty score during an athlete's performance, not beforehand, in case a skill is performed in such a way that it does not meet the technical requirements for that skill.

Under the old scoring system, the difficulty of a routine was called the start value with a maximum of 10 points. Under the new system, the difficulty score includes points for connecting difficult skills and points for required elements. By separating it from the overall score, gymnasts and spectators can more readily see how routines differ from gymnast to gymnast.

Execution score (B-panel score): The execution score begins at 10, and six judges make deductions for errors in technique, execution, and artistry. A small error nets a 0.1-point deduction, while a fall is an automatic 0.8-point deduction.

Under the old scoring system, judges started at zero and added deductions, then subtracted this amount from the start value.

Scores around 9.5 to 9.6 are common in the finals, and the perfect 10 is far more elusive.

Total score: Add the difficulty score (e.g, 6.600) to the execution score (e.g., 9.500), and the final score in this example is 16.100.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #4
Now I love that idea. So how do we apply that to cheer?

And what skillsets are measured?
 
difficulty judges score skills labeled in the "code"...for example, in cheer, a skill labeled as A in the "code" would be a level 1 skill and "B" would be level 2
 
i love the scoring for gymnastics.
and that is what NCSTA or whatever it is called now does.
you have a set score, and lose points for missed execution
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #7
i dont think you should have a set score. make it open ended. and what you actually perform adds up to what you score.
 
You would have to have ratio in the calculation wouldn't you?

number girls / total team number completing each skill.

This would mean if a comp company combined large and small teams in one division it would even the playing field. If you have 36 girls than a bigger number of girls should be completing the skills. The ratio would even it out for smaller teams.
 
You would have to have ratio in the calculation wouldn't you?

number girls / total team number completing each skill.

This would mean if a comp company combined large and small teams in one division it would even the playing field. If you have 36 girls than a bigger number of girls should be completing the skills. The ratio would even it out for smaller teams.

Absolutely! I believe King may have calculated this just as an idea a few months ago. I love that idea! I think it would really help for those teams who don't want to compete large with only 25 people.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #10
ratio multiplier. if you have x number of people you should be doing at least y number of skills. that gives you a percentage to multiply by.
 
Reminder: You would also have to put that same ratio on the deductions.

Team A (Large): 36 triple toe backs - 3 busts
Team B (Small): 20 triple toe backs - 2 busts.

Who should get a higher total deduction? Most would say Team A. However, Team A hit 91.6% of their skills, while Team B only hit 90% of theirs.

Team A: 9 stunts, 3 falls
Team B: 5 stunts, 2 falls.

Again, Team A hit a bigger percentage of skills (66.7% vs 60%), but gets penalized more under the current system.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #12
Reminder: You would also have to put that same ratio on the deductions.

Team A (Large): 36 triple toe backs - 3 busts
Team B (Small): 20 triple toe backs - 2 busts.

Who should get a higher total deduction? Most would say Team A. However, Team A hit 91.6% of their skills, while Team B only hit 90% of theirs.

Team A: 9 stunts, 3 falls
Team B: 5 stunts, 2 falls.

Again, Team A hit a bigger percentage of skills (66.7% vs 60%), but gets penalized more under the current system.

Were designing this score sheet around large being 30 :)
 
I agree with Rich. I love the way Gymnastics scores. There is far less gray area because each skill has a point value, then you are deducted. Plus, they have specific rules for what happens in every situation. There really isn't much questioning (unless your the 2008 chinese olympic team and use underage girls!)
 
Were designing this score sheet around large being 30 :)

Well then a mistake on a small should be penalized 1.5 times as harshly as a mistake on a large. If you are going to use ratios to give points, then you need to use ratios to take them away. Large teams do a much higher number of "deductible events" in their routines - the penalties should reflect that.

Adjusted Penalty = (Base Penalty) * 30 / (Number on team)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back