All-Star For The Judges

[KB_Legend]

Every company I have ever judged for you turn your score sheets in right away but most judges keep a tracking sheet so you do have a reminder of what you scored each team

 

[StarshipTrooper]

Just needs to be on the first page.

 

[King]

Every company I have ever judged for you turn your score sheets in right away but most judges keep a tracking sheet so you do have a reminder of what you scored each team

Any reason you keep track of what you scored other teams?

 

[MissBee]

Any reason you keep track of what you scored other teams?

I keep track for several reasons:
1. When we go back to tabulation at the end of a session, I check to make sure that
A) my scores were entered correctly
B) to see if I have the same order as the results and other judges
2. I like to see if I am in the same range as the other judges (am I the high? the low? in the middle?)
3. At the end of some events the coaches are allowed to speak to the judges. I like to have my record sheet with me so that I can look at it to see if a coach has a question (sometimes I'll jot notes about something in the routine, that I didn't put on my score sheet, to jog my memory of the routine...when you see a hundred teams in the day and the coach from the first tiny team at 9am is asking you about their routine after you've just been judging SrL5 and it's 9pm at night...you need that memory jogger)!

 

[King]

I keep track for several reasons:
1. When we go back to tabulation at the end of a session, I check to make sure that
A) my scores were entered correctly
B) to see if I have the same order as the results and other judges
2. I like to see if I am in the same range as the other judges (am I the high? the low? in the middle?)
3. At the end of some events the coaches are allowed to speak to the judges. I like to have my record sheet with me so that I can look at it to see if a coach has a question (sometimes I'll jot notes about something in the routine, that I didn't put on my score sheet, to jog my memory of the routine...when you see a hundred teams in the day and the coach from the first tiny team at 9am is asking you about their routine after you've just been judging SrL5 and it's 9pm at night...you need that memory jogger)!

That right there is the thing I keep coming back to. The whole reason for this thread.

 

[Nothanks]

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.

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.

 

[imrichhowboutu]

I don't get to watch judges score cheer because I'm usually holed up in the warm-up area and then just dash out to watch a few teams if there is a break in the back. However, I DO get to watch gymnastics judges - both J.O. and college. Here's how I have seen them do it (right or wrong ... and they try to be discrete about it). They judge each routine as it comes up. Each gymnast has a number assigned for that meet. When they judges see a particularly great routine, they jot down their number and their score. When the next awesome routine is thrown, they go back to look at the score sheet of the other numbers - theoretically there is no "color of leotard" involved this way - and look at the content.

Example: "Number 216 averaged a 9.775 on floor and had a double Arabian and a full-in. I just watched number 231 and I have a 9.770 for her routine, but she did a double layout, and a front full transition before her double Arabian ... hmmmm ... I'm going to back off on one of my deductions and award 231 with a 9.780 average."

I don't have a clue if cheer judges do the same thing (and I don't know if gymnastics judges would admit to it) ... but it isn't a bad way to go. Awesomeness should be rewarded.

[And a side note, the only time that a gymnast has to declare a skill is if it has never been done in competition and they are petitioning to have the skill named.]

But in answer to your question, if WCSS does something amazing and innovative (and I think that they ALWAYS do!!) ... shoot(ing) yeah they should win!

Thats actually how i score.

when there is a division of more than 2 teams, i write down every score i give them on a piece of paper... So i can compare the routine i just saw to previous routines. This way I make sure that if you did a higher stunt section, you will get a higher stunt score. If you do worse in tumbling though, I can lower that one. etc. if it is impossible to reward a team with a higher score in a certain category due to limits, that is when you reward them in the subjective categories like choreography or overall effect (depending what competition it is)

 

[King]

Ok, would anyone on a varsity stunt section give the difficulty points you would assume each sequence would get (lets assume perfect execution, because if you arent executing perfectly consistently then why are you doing that sequence?). My difficulty scores are listed as guesses

Straight up Arabesque DD - 8.0
Fullup Arabesque Double Down (ADD) - 8.1
Fullup Imediate ADD - 8.2
1.25 ADD - 8.3
1.25 Immediate ADD - 8.4
1.5 ADD - 8.5
1.5 Immediate ADD - 8.6
Double up Add - 8.7
Double up IADD - 8.8
Double up IADD smoosh switch up stretch double - 8.9
Double up IADD smoosh Ballup stretch double - 9
Double up IADD smoosh ballup 360 release tick tock to stretch double - I ran out of points

If you can only give solid point values, where did I go wrong?

 

[Deleted member 15]

Ok, would anyone on a varsity stunt section give the difficulty points you would assume each sequence would get (lets assume perfect execution, because if you arent executing perfectly consistently then why are you doing that sequence?). My difficulty scores are listed as guesses

Straight up Arabesque DD - 8.0
Fullup Arabesque Double Down (ADD) - 8.1
Fullup Imediate ADD - 8.2
1.25 ADD - 8.3
1.25 Immediate ADD - 8.4
1.5 ADD - 8.5
1.5 Immediate ADD - 8.6
Double up Add - 8.7
Double up IADD - 8.8
Double up IADD smoosh switch up stretch double - 8.9
Double up IADD smoosh Ballup stretch double - 9
Double up IADD smoosh ballup 360 release tick tock to stretch double - I ran out of points

If you can only give solid point values, where did I go wrong?

You have to group things of similar difficulty, which is subjective for the time being. When I give a score I think in terms of percentile, similar to College testing. If the stunts in the routine are better than 95% of the teams I've seen or imagined they'll get a 9.0. (I'm using the Varsity System and level 5 for my example as King did). If they are better than 85-95% they'll get 8.9, 45-55% a 8.5, 15-25% a 8.2. Yes, this groups things together, but I only have 11 slots to work with.

Concerning the "imagined" I mentioned in the paragraph above. I'm not factoring in things I dreamt about after a glass or 2 of bourbon, instead thinking of things like Senior Elite doing 9 highlight stunts instead of 1. Rewarding something amazing is difficult, but seldom comes into play. How many times in the past 5 years have you seen Half+1 do something that fits into that category. More often you see a highlight stunt first which puts the idea in your head so it can be factored into future scoring.

Given the way I think about scoring what it takes to get an 8.5 today will not get you an 8.5 tomorrow and there would be some benefit to advanced notice of an amazing stunt you plan on performing (by performing it and putting it online).

Kingston/KB_Legend - A straight up arabesque/stretch double down should be scored below an 8 because it doesn't have an elite entry.

 

[King]

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?

 

[imrichhowboutu]

NCA was also a step in the right direction last year with telling you the highest score in each category for each division. They didn't tell you who, but it still helps you see where you are slacking.

 

[Jennaw]

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?

The way I start when I judge is that I expect every team is average. Then award/deduct accordingly.

 

[Jennaw]

That right there is the thing I keep coming back to. The whole reason for this thread.

I have never used this system.
In fact, I dont think I have ever seen another judges scores.
We are always told, as long as we are consistent in out own scoring, then it doesn't matter if you are the low/high scoring judge.

Keep in mind this is category judging .

 

[King]

The way I start when I judge is that I expect every team is average. Then award/deduct accordingly.

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?

 

[MissBee]

The way I start when I judge is that I expect every team is average. Then award/deduct accordingly.

That's what I do too! I go in with the assumption that all teams are going to be doing the middle level for their level/division.

I wish that the HS Varsity had three divisions: novice, intermediate and advanced. I hate when they just have Super Large, Large, Medium, Small. You could have a Large team that maxes out difficulty and execution and a Large team that is putting up extensions and cradling them, but also maxing out execution.