All-Star For The Judges

[Jennaw]

wouldn't that go into the category you called routine creativity and overall appeal though? I mean, they're definitely small categories, but i feel like that would definitely take away, at least in some minds.

Honestly, Judges dont sit online and watch previous years youtube videos. and this would have ABSOLUTELY no effect whatsoever on the RC-SC or overall performance area.
We are concerned with the scoring of the team in front of us, not thinking about who did what last year.

 

[King]

Honestly, Judges dont sit online and watch previous years youtube videos. and this would have ABSOLUTELY no effect whatsoever on the RC-SC or overall performance area.
We are concerned with the scoring of the team in front of us, not thinking about who did what last year.

On the varsity scoresheet how do you know what is worth a .9 then?

 

[Jennaw]

So back to my original post, if you expect every team is average and the second greatest team ever comes up, you might get them close to maxing out.

then if the GREATEST team ever comes directly after them you might have run out of room to reward them?

Refer to Andres post earlier. ^^
I know your talking theoretical, and a perfect, ideal cheer world. But we have 11 points to work with.
It is possible that those teams might score the same in difficulty, but the "skills creativity" is also a place to put points in for stunting.
BUT: We know whats out there (and what could possibly) be able to max out the scores. If a team comes out and performs something better, we will have room to score them accordingly.
In my opinion, with the current level 5 rules and restrictions, there is probably no stunt a team could perform that could absolutely surprise me, make me fall off my seat, and completely shock the difficulty system.
Like I said in an earlier post, When I coached gymnastics, I used to stay and watch the acrobatic gymnastics meets right after. If you watch those stunts, those are the Amazingly shocking stunts, but they have very little restriction to what they can do. Over the past 5 years, I honestly think I have seen a stunt that "shocked" me.... Ive seen stunts that were impressive because at the time they were uncommon and performed well, but I knew they could be done....
Restrictions set limits.
You keep asking "what if".... Do you know of a stunt that would "shock" the judges system? enlighten me....

 

[Jennaw]

On the varsity scoresheet how do you know what is worth a .9 then?

When I say this, I talking about the fact that I dont care that a team copied a stunt sequence from the world champs of last year.... I wont deduct for it.
a .9 would go to (and this is MY personal way of doing it) a team performed a stunt sequence, in the max number of stunts-every stunt group participated, that was better than "above average", and is extremely close to what is in my mind, the best thing you could do in that level.

 

[King]

When I say this, I talking about the fact that I dont care that a team copied a stunt sequence from the world champs of last year.... I wont deduct for it.
a .9 would go to (and this is MY personal way of doing it) a team performed a stunt sequence, in the max number of stunts-every stunt group participated, that was better than "above average", and is extremely close to what is in my mind, the best thing you could do in that level.

So if a team performed something better than what you expect the best thing in that level is, there wouldnt be a way to reward it.

 

[Jennaw]

So if a team performed something better than what you expect the best thing in that level is, there wouldnt be a way to reward it.

I always score, to expect the unexpected.

 

[Deleted member 15]

So the judges knowledge and expectations come into play, yes?

So if you educate the judges about what is possible then you could raise the disparity of scores if ii were to do amazing stuff?

Knowledge of what level appropriate teams are competing and expectations as far as what level appropriate teams should be performing, yes.

Yes, but I think you see a small disparity in stunts and a slightly large disparity in creativity or overall routine, one of the extremely subjective categories.

 

[King]

Knowledge of what level appropriate teams are competing and expectations as far as what level appropriate teams should be performing, yes.

Yes, but I think you see a small disparity in stunts and a slightly large disparity in creativity or overall routine, one of the extremely subjective categories.

So go back to my original question on the first post, the most amazing stunt ever performed by WCSS. Would that affect the score of F5 and CEA if they went before as compared to after?

 

[Deleted member 15]

So go back to my original question on the first post, the most amazing stunt ever performed by WCSS. Would that affect the score of F5 and CEA if they went before as compared to after?

Probably not at that event.

 

[King]

Probably not at that event.

But at future events? Same or different season?

 

[Deleted member 15]

But at future events? Same or different season?

As soon as possible, but it's hard to say when. I'll say had I seen something at Chattanooga I would have adjusted for Providence, but things that happened at Indy would have to wait until I can see them on video since I wasn't there.

 

[NJ Coach]

As soon as possible, but it's hard to say when. I'll say had I seen something at Chattanooga I would have adjusted for Providence, but things that happened at Indy would have to wait until I can see them on video since I wasn't there.

So, would you say (hypothetically) don't debut something at a big competition because you won't get the full credit for it? Better to debut it somewhere earlier so the judges are aware it's coming and can score it (and the rest of the division) appropriately?

 

[Deleted member 15]

So, would you say (hypothetically) don't debut something at a big competition because you won't get the full credit for it? Better to debut it somewhere earlier so the judges are aware it's coming and can score it (and the rest of the division) appropriately?

It's not necessary, but it wouldn't hurt. Using the Varsity system as the example again, I have Stunt Difficulty and Skills Creativity to reward you and between the 2 their is enough room to give you credit. It may not be exactly where it should have been, but it will be reflected in your total score. So far this year I think I've given 8.9 out of 9 once, but I actually think that was a pyramid score and my highest stunt score was 8.8 out of 9. My highest creativity has been 2.3 out of 2.5.

I know .1, .2. or .3 don't really sound like much, but as Kingston has explained several time, every level 5 team should score at least an 8 in difficulty so we are really working with a 1 point range for difficulty plus a 1 point range for technique so .1 here and .2 there is the difference between 1st and 2nd, just ask Kentucky.

 

[King]

More importantly I would guess judges rarely give the 9.0 and 8.0. I would assume even with the best sequence you are looking at a 9 iteration score possibility, not 11. Judges like to hold off giving that really high score. But why? Because to give perfection means you are saying there is nothing else that could possibly be better or score higher than this.

If scores had no ceiling a judge would not be scared to award what they feel is proper for the routine.

 

[Deleted member 15]

More importantly I would guess judges rarely give the 9.0 and 8.0. I would assume even with the best sequence you are looking at a 9 iteration score possibility, not 11. Judges like to hold off giving that really high score. But why? Because to give perfection means you are saying there is nothing else that could possibly be better or score higher than this.

If scores had no ceiling a judge would not be scared to award what they feel is proper for the routine.

I give a decent amount of 8.0s and 7.8s. I think I've only done one perfect difficulty this year and that was on Level 4 baskets.

I'm not sure not having a ceiling is a good idea, but please tell us why it is.