D
Deleted member 15
Well the people have issues with it... Too vague IMHO.
It's intentional. Put your best routine on the floor and let the best one win. A world champion coach shouldn't have to be told what to do.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well the people have issues with it... Too vague IMHO.
FYI, we've done this at NCA College Nationals and, in many ways, its been counter-productive. The Skills Declaration turned in by the coaches are often DRASTICALLY different than the skills the team actually performed--sometimes, to the point that the judges spent more time figuring out the discrepancies, as opposed to just scoring the routine on the mat.4. Coaches turn in a skills declaration before their teams compete. The judges have a written list of the skill elements in the routine to use as a reference in deciding difficulty. This would be in the order that they are performed in the routine. (Execution would still be subjective, and a major part of the final score.) Penalties would be given if athletes changed their skills to something easier. (Athlete throws a tuck instead of a double, flyer singles down instead of doubles, etc.) A judge sitting with the deduction judge would watch video to determine compliance with written skills. Coaches would have the ability to make last-minute changes in the case of injury or water-down decisions.
FYI, we've done this at NCA College Nationals and, in many ways, its been counter-productive. The Skills Declaration turned in by the coaches are often DRASTICALLY different than the skills the team actually performed--sometimes, to the point that the judges spent more time figuring out the discrepancies, as opposed to just scoring the routine on the mat.
That was the only idea that I've had direct experience with and not certain of the added value it brings. You bring up some good ideas.
Subject those teams to deductions for every skill NOT performed that was listed on the skill declaration page and I bet that stops happening, unless by last minute choice on the mat...
I used to agree with deducting teams for omissions in their script, but it goes against the idea of the best performance winning.
BUT, what is considered the "best" performance? A substantially easier routine that hits, or a substantially harder one that has slight technique and/or performance flaws? I still believe a routine should start with a point value, and for each skill not performed that is listed, that start value goes down. Then let the live judges judge the technique and overall impression of the routine and may the best OVERALL team win.
I interpret getting deductions and the start value being lowered as different things. I think we got off track there.
Come up with a system for determining the start value(s) and we go from there. (I've asked people that want this to create the system for the last 5 years and have yet to get as much as 1 category for 1 level. Maybe you'll be the one.)
I will respectfully admit I am not qualified enough to make that determination. There is SO much to consider.
Theres such a big variance, some sports/arts you have to sit an exam and receive a qualification, others complete courses and are qualified to judge at particular levels, others are elected officials. I quite like the sit an exam and receive a qualification route.When you look at other sports how is this type of thing handled? With judges and who they are hired from and what not?
front spot/ no front would be a factorAre there any other factors that need to be considered?