All-Star For The Judges

[Jennaw]

So what you are saying is at a certain point trying new or more difficult stuff that is light years ahead of everyone else has extremely small gains in the score (one of my points). In the end it is better to be slightly better than the pack in difficulty, but not light years ahead.

And to your example:

Team 1: Standing squad doubles, running squad doubles executed perfectly.
Team 2: standing squad (minus 1 person) doubles, running squad doubles (minus 1) executed perfectly. That one person NOT tumbling is standing in the middle front of the floor making it obvious they are not tumbling.

Is that worth the exact same?

If worth the same, the extra difficulty is not worth it because there is no reward.

But in practicality would a judge find a way to not allow them to max out in some little way, then how your competition does do matters.

Im not saying dont go for the new and innovative tumbling, Im saying go with the clean and a difficult tumbling..
It will beat out the "new and innovative" 9 out of ten times.
New and innovative has a tendency to be not executed well while its still "new"... It might score a 9.0 on difficulty, but thats no good when you get a .3 on execution.
Clean and difficult will score 8.5-8.7 and will get you a 1.0 on execution.... do you understand what Im saying?
In the particular situation you proposed:
Judges would score one of two ways:
Identical in difficulty, and would reward Team 1 with and extra .1 in performance or routine creativity, (due to there routine was more appealing because they didnt have little Billy standing in the middle of the floor)
Or
Judges would keep difficulty the same, and score team 2 less on performance or routine creativity (because they had little Billy standing in the middle making it awkard) :)

This does not include the obvious fact that both teams would have different execution scores.

 

[Jennaw]

We usually just have a side bet for how many times a song will be played. Closest without going over wins.

I quit listening to music because I judge cheer.
I talked to a few other judges and we agree that their should be a category that rewards for good Music.
I watched a stunt sequence to Jimmy buffet and I nearly cried of happiness!
and FYI coaches, Voice overs (besides your teams name, or something really innovative and cute) are terrible and annoying.

 

[StarshipTrooper]

Im not saying dont go for the new and innovative tumbling, Im saying go with the clean and a difficult tumbling..
It will beat out the "new and innovative" 9 out of ten times.
New and innovative has a tendency to be not executed well while its still "new"... It might score a 9.0 on difficulty, but thats no good when you get a .3 on execution.
Clean and difficult will score 8.5-8.7 and will get you a 1.0 on execution.... do you understand what Im saying?
In the particular situation you proposed:

I think this may best express the philosophy of the SE routine this year. As King said early on, it was not that new or innovative, but it is probably enough to win. Yes it started out and still looks a lot like last year's routine. But they are getting very good at hitting it as the year goes on and she is changing it incrementally enough to give it newness.

 

[StarshipTrooper]

I watched a stunt sequence to Jimmy buffet and I nearly cried of happiness!

Superstar. All the way to A1A.

 

[Jennaw]

I think this may best express the philosophy of the SE routine this year. As King said early on, it was not that new or innovative, but it is probably enough to win. Yes it started out and still looks a lot like last year's routine. But they are getting very good at hitting it as the year goes on and she is changing it incrementally enough to give it newness.

You are correct
Why fix whats not broken?
We dont judge by the "ohhh they so did that last year" "or the "ohhhhh they ripped that off of JO-JO elite" systems.
The only people that care about this are the people that download cheer music so they can shout the voiceovers when they watch a team, trade shirts, live on youtube, and idolize flyers on top squads.

We judge on a Point system, we dont care if you copied "JO-JO elites" pyramid from 2006, if it scores well, its scores well.

 

[King]

There is not secret "Unspoken level of Awesomeness" We score the team in front of us, not compared the team before or after.
The key to these teams success is the highly under-appreciated
10 points given out for performance, and the 10 points given out for skills, and routine creativity.
Teams focus SO much on having the BEST sequence, and the BEST tumbling, that they either:
1. Worried the entire year about hitting stunts, that their entire routine has became centered around them, therefor scoring low in both performance, and choreography because you had time to teach sally a full up, tik-tok... but not a basic "high v".
2. They might have a WELL built routine, and choreography, but Become so concerned about hitting stunts, and landing tumbling, when something goes wrong, and sally drops her double full up, and jane puts her knees down after her double the rest of the routine just falls apart because they have it in their mind that stunts and tumbling are the only thing that count. And if you look at EVERY level 5 team, whats one of the first elements that you do? Tumbling and stunts.
Therefor these teams are either going to make or break themselves within the first 30 seconds on the floor.

This brings me to my personal opinion why I watched World Cup fall apart from the judges stand this past sunday. (NO I WAS NOT JUDGING them at the time, I had judged earlier and came back to watch)
They are a WELL coached and AMAZINGLY well choreographed team, but like all level 5's stunts are ALWAYS one of the first things in the routine. The pressure these girls must face is unimaginable! The entire arena expects perfection, and an amazing performance. These girls KNOW that they are Amazing, but they also knew what part of the routine they have trouble with..... They came out AMAZING, standing tumbling looked good, energy was high.... and when they dropped those 5 stunts, and heard the crowd make the "OOOOOOOOOOOO" sound, the girls energy and performance was all downhill from that point.

This is where stingray nails it every time. (not just them, but using them for an example)
They focus on EVERY aspect of the routine.
Their stunts might not be hard, but they are guaranteed to max out execution.
They only perform stunts they know that they can hit 9 out of 10 times. Everything is SAFE, and can be executed perfectly, thats how they make up for those difficulty points.
Fictional example:
WCSS does 9 double up to stretch, tik-tok to scorp. Lets say they all hit, no deductions but are very shaky and body positions are not properly executed due to right leg flexibility. They look scared in the air, and are not confident till the end of the stunt.
StingR: does 9 full up to stretches (left), double down reload, into tik-tok (switch kick) from the ground. (I call them switch ups). They all hit, and are all SOLID. flexibility was amazing, and confidence was high throughout the entire sequence.

The way I would score would be (and keep in mind, I am a VERY low scoring judge, and these scores are fictional)
WCSS- 8.8 difficulty .5 execution 9.3 total Performance 9.5 RC:4.8 SC: 4.8 TOTAL 19.1
StingR-8.5 difficulty 1.0 execution 9.5 total Performance 9.9 RC:4.5 SC: 4.7 TOTAL 19.1
String Ray though not having as hard of stunts wins the stunt portion of the score sheet, and ties the Overall routine categories with WCSS.... and even though WCSS scored higher on Stunt difficulty, routine and skills creativity, Stingray would win.

While I agree with you in practicality (as I coach at Rays and have done exactly what you say many times to many victories) we arent discussing practicality, we are discussing theory.

Where we are stunt wise is only because of where we have been. A certain small senior team in 06-07 got perfect 10's on jumps. That same jump sequence would not get perfect 10's nowaday. Why?

 

[King]

Im not saying dont go for the new and innovative tumbling, Im saying go with the clean and a difficult tumbling..
It will beat out the "new and innovative" 9 out of ten times.
New and innovative has a tendency to be not executed well while its still "new"... It might score a 9.0 on difficulty, but thats no good when you get a .3 on execution.
Clean and difficult will score 8.5-8.7 and will get you a 1.0 on execution.... do you understand what Im saying?
In the particular situation you proposed:
Judges would score one of two ways:
Identical in difficulty, and would reward Team 1 with and extra .1 in performance or routine creativity, (due to there routine was more appealing because they didnt have little Billy standing in the middle of the floor)
Or
Judges would keep difficulty the same, and score team 2 less on performance or routine creativity (because they had little Billy standing in the middle making it awkard) :)

This does not include the obvious fact that both teams would have different execution scores.

If the new and innovative WAS executed well. You keep coming from a practical standpoint, I am coming from theory.

 

[Jennaw]

$10 per guess. Winner takes all.

Andre..... So thats how you always have cash? I thought you might of liked a different type of night entertainment :)

LOL just kidding people.... I have no idea about Andres money and extracurricular activities!!! Dont go robbing Andre :)
He will drop kick you and tell you how illegal your teams stunts are.

 

[King]

The most frustrating thing about this is that skills in cheerleading should not approach an asymptote. Meaning, we set a barrier to how good skills should be and the key to winning on the scoresheet is getting as close to that asymptote as possible without spending too much energy on it. As gyms and teams get better and better it, by the law of diminishing returns, means that harder skills pay off less and less INSTEAD of rewarding new and better skills. Its part of the stalwart in what we see.

Jennaw, you keep pointing out winning strategies for the current scoresheet. But look at if the scoresheet itself is flawed to correctly encourage people to go beyond the ceiling.

 

[Jennaw]

While I agree with you in practicality (as I coach at Rays and have done exactly what you say many times to many victories) we arent discussing practicality, we are discussing theory.

Where we are stunt wise is only because of where we have been. A certain small senior team in 06-07 got perfect 10's on jumps. That same jump sequence would not get perfect 10's nowaday. Why?

Because the definition of "Advanced Jumping skills" and the scoring system has changed as has the level of the sport has changed.
I remember watching teams in 1999 and FREAKING out if they did full squad triple toe-back, and over the years it has become the standard that you must have in your routine to score in the level 5 range.
The difficulty score now is a mix of how many different jumps you do, how many you actually perform (total), and the way you set for and connect the jumps.
I do agree with you said earlier about score sheets, I see no problem with releasing them to the public.

The flaw is not in the judging, because we a told that if a team performs certain skills, we have to reward them with a certain minimum score. Its in the continuous changing of rules and guidelines that have flawed the system, and now we expect level 1 to perform perfect triple toe? Level 1 in my opinion should be focused on the basic skills of cheer leading, but instead, we do the same thing we do in level 5, and focus primarily on stunts and tumbling. I literally sat on the judges stand this past weekend and watched EVERY level one and two team perform a MINI version of senior elites stunts. When they got to their jump formation, the kids couldnt even perform a High v, and had no jump technique during the tragedy of triple toes. I judged Dance/motions, transitions/ formations and overall routine... and I dont believe a gave more than a .5 this weekend in execution except to maybe 3 teams.

 

[Jennaw]

If the new and innovative WAS executed well. You keep coming from a practical standpoint, I am coming from theory.

Then the new and innovative tumbling would score higher, no doubt. and if It was THAT AMAZING it would most likely boost both performance, and routine/skills creativity.

 

[Num1Stunta]

Correct, and there has been no need to try Level 5 stunting except double downs to this point due to the teams and what they are trying. I think body positions played a role in the stunt score at Indy, and SE did not change due to the risk of problems with one day to practice. It worked out. I do believe teams routinely use the double downs to get to range and then use relatively simple body positions and stunts to otherwise minimize risk and maximize score. However, as Kinston says in so many words, it should not be that hard to grid stunting, and as you suggest, view beforehand and afterwards to calculate the score. Especially in big nationals and worlds with the highest finishers. It would also allow for effective review and challenge by the staffs. That said, there will be more evolution next year, and the entire sequences will be more "Level 5 specific", especially when it is clear what skills will differentiate in a range. In the end, however, judges must judge.

What really needs to happen is a change to the level 4 stunt rules.... the fullup to two legs rule is a start, but maybe disallow ticktocks? Or limit it to switchups? Limit it to non-twisting release moves? Or simply say all release moves have to end in two feet, then level 5 would be release moves to one foot... I don't know, but to me it has always seemed like the jump from Level 3 to Level 4 is huge in comparison to the jump from Level 4 to Level 5 in stunts. And, I will repeat this on probably the 4th thread- ALLOW REWINDS IN LEVEL 5 WITH NO HAND CONTACT REQUIREMENTS:)There is really no Level 5 inversion that can't be done at Level 4, or at least none that have been attempted on a large scale. I mean, what yo-yos?

Level 3- rewind with 2 hand
Level 4- rewind with 1 hand NO twisting flips
Level 5- rewind with no hands, twisting flips require a one-hand connection

Then, you have a true progression to level 6 when you can throw whirly birds;)

 

[King]

Because the definition of "Advanced Jumping skills" and the scoring system has changed as has the level of the sport has changed.
I remember watching teams in 1999 and FREAKING out if they did full squad triple toe-back, and over the years it has become the standard that you must have in your routine to score in the level 5 range.
The difficulty score now is a mix of how many different jumps you do, how many you actually perform (total), and the way you set for and connect the jumps.
I do agree with you said earlier about score sheets, I see no problem with releasing them to the public.

The flaw is not in the judging, because we a told that if a team performs certain skills, we have to reward them with a certain minimum score. Its in the continuous changing of rules and guidelines that have flawed the system, and now we expect level 1 to perform perfect triple toe? Level 1 in my opinion should be focused on the basic skills of cheer leading, but instead, we do the same thing we do in level 5, and focus primarily on stunts and tumbling. I literally sat on the judges stand this past weekend and watched EVERY level one and two team perform a MINI version of senior elites stunts. When they got to their jump formation, the kids couldnt even perform a High v, and had no jump technique during the tragedy of triple toes. I judged Dance/motions, transitions/ formations and overall routine... and I dont believe a gave more than a .5 this weekend in execution except to maybe 3 teams.

Now you have just backed up my point. The definition of what is elite is not set in stone and is up for change. The stunt sequences that all the large seniors are performing today are considered elite, but in 5 years time they may be considered the low end of elite and the theoretical stunt sequence that I described WCSS as doing as the standard elite. The defintion of what is elite is based off what we consider, at this moment, elite. The 4 minute mile was impossible until someone ran it. Then everyone (meaning elite runners) started running a 4 minute mile. The elite stunt in 5 years, lets say the one I described, performed today would NOT be properly rewarded because the standard is not meant to judge and handle that elite.

If you are ahead of your time you will not be rewarded on the scoresheet as well as you should have unless you go before another team.

OR

Let us say Worlds is only a 1 day competition. There are no prelims, just finals and you have to judge 80 teams. Do you think the winner would be accurate?

 

[King]

What really needs to happen is a change to the level 4 stunt rules.... the fullup to two legs rule is a start, but maybe disallow ticktocks? Or limit it to switchups? Limit it to non-twisting release moves? Or simply say all release moves have to end in two feet, then level 5 would be release moves to one foot... I don't know, but to me it has always seemed like the jump from Level 3 to Level 4 is huge in comparison to the jump from Level 4 to Level 5 in stunts. And, I will repeat this on probably the 4th thread- ALLOW REWINDS IN LEVEL 5 WITH NO HAND CONTACT REQUIREMENTS:)There is really no Level 5 inversion that can't be done at Level 4, or at least none that have been attempted on a large scale. I mean, what yo-yos?

Level 3- rewind with 2 hand
Level 4- rewind with 1 hand NO twisting flips
Level 5- rewind with no hands, twisting flips require a one-hand connection

Then, you have a true progression to level 6 when you can throw whirly birds;)

Ugh. I hate whirly birds. They are not hard as hard as you think they would be, and just hurt. A fullup awesome is harder than a whirly bird.

 

[Jennaw]

The most frustrating thing about this is that skills in cheerleading should not approach an asymptote. Meaning, we set a barrier to how good skills should be and the key to winning on the scoresheet is getting as close to that asymptote as possible without spending too much energy on it. As gyms and teams get better and better it, by the law of diminishing returns, means that harder skills pay off less and less INSTEAD of rewarding new and better skills. Its part of the stalwart in what we see.

Jennaw, you keep pointing out winning strategies for the current scoresheet. But look at if the scoresheet itself is flawed to correctly encourage people to go beyond the ceiling.

I do agree with this, and I dont think the Varsity score sheet is ANYWHERE near perfect.
In a way, the score sheet does drive coaches to the "popular" elite skills, It names off every stunt you can do, but that little point at the end that says "any skill that might be considered elite" that gives the judges the flexibility to look for these new and innovative skills. Then not only will they be rewarded with difficulty, but also with the other creative, and overall routine aspects on the score sheet.
But MOST coaches are not going to try anything "new and innovative" until Top gun or someone wins worlds with it.
I see this not as a flaw in the score sheet, but a flaw in the way coaches are driven by the expectations of the "cheer world."
If you have something NEW and Innovative that you might consider elite.... GO FOR IT!!! Believe me, I would be THRILLED to see something other than tik-tok's and full ups.