All-Star How Would You Change All Star Scoring?

[CoachDerek]

I would like to see more weight put on the overall performance, I feel like too many scoresheets are like checklists and not enough emphasis is put on the overall show. Where is the eyeball test? Which of the routines was the one that without the scoresheet staring you in the face would you just by gut say, that was the best.

For level 5 specifically, there should be a minimum score to get a bid also... too many times I have watched at larges go to teams getting outscored by level 3 teams.

 

[kristenthegreat]

Love 1-3.

Number 5 wouldn't really change anything we're not doing now. Take the US Women's Gymnastics Worlds Team. They took some girls based on their all-around capabilities (girls in cheer who can base, tumble, jump well, good dancers, etc). They take someone like Anna Li who's good on bars, where the US typically lacks (a girl who's a stronger tumbler if they're a tumbling-weak team or a girl who's a better flier because they don't have one)..the rest they fill in based off of previous performances, additional holes, and what have you. Just because we're quantifying doesn't mean everyone will be able to DO those things, and who knows how well they'll do them.. who would have expected the Women's 08 Olympics team to fall apart during Team All-Around? There are enough chances/surprises to make things interesting.

 

[BlueCat]

What I am saying is that you are not going to be able to see how many of those 16 did fulls, layouts, doubles, or any other skill. In order to do this you would need a video replay in order to go through the entire routine from start to finish, and that reduces time efficiency of competitions.

Most sections would not be as difficult as that. Yes, there would be replay (like they often do for legalities). If there was an incredibly difficult part that looked different from the declared skills, then they could review just that section. To keep coaches from inflating their skills, there would need to be some threat of it hurting your score to be wrong.

The teams that this likely presents a real challenge for are the elite, world class L5 and 6 teams. If you are trying to decide between the top two or three Medium Coeds at Worlds, having someone watch a replay to make it more accurate doesn't bother me in the least. As it stands, there is simply too much luck involved in which athlete the judge happened to be looking. Picture 4 fulls in a group of doubles - as it stands, the judge could be WAY off in estimating how many doubles were thrown either way. A team could be getting too much or too little credit for the skills they are doing. I was hoping to eliminate that.

This would allow the judges to focus more on watching for quality of skills and creativity, and less on trying to count.

 

[garretttt]

Please let deductions be a lot more than wha they usually are. Like cheersport.

 

[kristenthegreat]

Please let deductions be a lot more than wha they usually are. Like cheersport.

YES. I know 'we' get why such and such team can drop a stunt and still win..but that's like saying 'Well, the Giants were so good at passing that even though they didn't quite rush those few yards they needed to, we'll add in those extra pass yards and give them a touchdown'. Doesn't make sense..

 

[King]

what if each section on a scoresheet had a minimum required amount of eight counts? must at least have a 5 eight count dance. must stunt for at least 7 eight counts.

just an idea i was throwing around in my head.

 

[Allstarcesi]

what if each section on a scoresheet had a minimum required amount of eight counts? must at least have a 5 eight count dance. must stunt for at least 7 eight counts.

just an idea i was throwing around in my head.

I feel like that may expose some teams that dont excel in certain areas. Say there is a team of strong stunters, but are so-so dancers, will have multiple amazing stunting sequences and manage to throw in just enough 8-counts of dance to be scored on. Having to stretch out a weak point in their routine could harm them more than it already does...if that makes sense

 

[King]

I feel like that may expose some teams that dont excel in certain areas. Say there is a team of strong stunters, but are so-so dancers, will have multiple amazing stunting sequences and manage to throw in just enough 8-counts of dance to be scored on. Having to stretch out a weak point in their routine could harm them more than it already does...if that makes sense

But won't having a balanced score sheet expose that anyway? If dance is worth as much as stunts and a team is not good at dance and they stunt amazingly well... no matter how long or short a dance they have they will still score low in dance.

 

[Deleted member 15]

But won't having a balanced score sheet expose that anyway? If dance is worth as much as stunts and a team is not good at dance and they stunt amazingly well... no matter how long or short a dance they have they will still score low in dance.

I'm against the idea, but if it's already self regulating why make a rule?

 

[King]

I'm against the idea, but if it's already self regulating why make a rule?

Oh im not really into the idea, just seeing if it had merit.

 

[rvnblue]

Most sections would not be as difficult as that. Yes, there would be replay (like they often do for legalities). If there was an incredibly difficult part that looked different from the declared skills, then they could review just that section. To keep coaches from inflating their skills, there would need to be some threat of it hurting your score to be wrong.

The teams that this likely presents a real challenge for are the elite, world class L5 and 6 teams. If you are trying to decide between the top two or three Medium Coeds at Worlds, having someone watch a replay to make it more accurate doesn't bother me in the least. As it stands, there is simply too much luck involved in which athlete the judge happened to be looking. Picture 4 fulls in a group of doubles - as it stands, the judge could be WAY off in estimating how many doubles were thrown either way. A team could be getting too much or too little credit for the skills they are doing. I was hoping to eliminate that.

This would allow the judges to focus more on watching for quality of skills and creativity, and less on trying to count.

I disagree because if you tell a judge that there is a penalty for a skill with reduced difficulty, they will be looking for the deduction rather than the execution and creativity. If I say to a judge in a particular standing tumbling section there will be 8 three to layouts, they will be looking for a quantity, rather than looking at the back handsprings, the body position of the actual layout, and the landing.

 

[cheer8]

I like 1, 2, 4 and 5!!!

 

[cheer8]

Which I would like 3 if the coaches only knew, so we could debate if there was reason for debate! Not just to B----!

 

[CGAcheer]

But won't having a balanced score sheet expose that anyway? If dance is worth as much as stunts and a team is not good at dance and they stunt amazingly well... no matter how long or short a dance they have they will still score low in dance.

Yes their dance score would be low regardless, but then it limits the 8 counts available to show off their strengths

 

[cupieqt]

I disagree because if you tell a judge that there is a penalty for a skill with reduced difficulty, they will be looking for the deduction rather than the execution and creativity. If I say to a judge in a particular standing tumbling section there will be 8 three to layouts, they will be looking for a quantity, rather than looking at the back handsprings, the body position of the actual layout, and the landing.

If they see 8 three to layouts will they not see the execution of them as they are looking at them? If they only see 6 will they miss the execution of those 6 bc they're using their fingers to count them? I don't understand how you can look at a group of tumbling skills and not immediately see the execution and synchronization of it. If the flaws are so well hidden that the judges miss it, then are they worthy of a big deduction? Janky always stands out so I don't think that would be too hard to miss either.