I really lol the idea of having separate judges for technique/ execution and difficulty.
It eliminates the "saving room for better teams" thing. By that logic the judges literally be picking the winners of each division rather than giving the appropriate scores to each team. I've personally never understood why anyone would do that... They may as well be saying "I want food stamp allstarz to win.." And leave it at that.
Just because team a scored a 9.7 on execution in stunts doesn't mean that one can't give teams d,k, and x that same score... Especially once difficulty is factored in those those who belong at the top will be there. Rather than team x is generally better than team g so I'm gonna score team g a little lower because I'm expecting big things from team x. I feel like people are afraid of ties in some cases. And afraid of team x not placing as close to the too as they would expect/ like.
When I judge, from a technical standpoint, you're being judged based on how that skills looked versus how it's SUPPOSED to look if it had been executed perfectly. When I'm watching you team I have a side by side comparison of a team using perfect technique going and I take off points accordingly. Even when I seemed to be taking away or awarding more to an individual, when compared to another judges score, we had them in the same range for the group.
I also like the video judging. If I had a dime for every time I've gone back to a video to help me argue a deduction...
Also scores or at least a deduction sheet should be readily available to coaches. Why do I have to wait 2 hours for my sheets. That makes no sense. Two hours after my kids perform the awards is already passed and there's no point in arguing it at that point.
And I like the idea of making all scores public. It allows you to REALLY see where you stack up against your competition in each category rather than having the assumption based on the final score and placement.
I'm not sure how I feel about a skills declaration.
In theory it should be fine. There would be open communication between athlete and coach and the kids are fully aware of what's expected of them and the consequences. The athlete make the coaches aware of their concerns: I'm not comfortable doing this here yet, etc. and the coach takes into account actual readiness of the athlete performing a skill. Is it consistent (in terms of the athletes confidence in the skill not whether it will hit or not) because we all know that until it's a matter of second nature anything could happen that could chAnge the outcome of what happens.
And the additional stress is something that as an athlete when you aren't confident in a skills is either going to make you bail, no throw, whatever.
If there are completely open lines of communication and coaches aren't being too pushy with skills ex. Susie can do it but isn't ready/ comfortable enough with it to compete it. There should be a problem.
Idk that just makes me uneasy.
When it comes to classifying the difficulty level/ point value for skills especially in building I think hat rather than trying to compare to different things like where someone mentioned earlier full-up vs. tic tock.
We need to rank the skills in order of difficulty by type. Ie release moves high to low, twisting mounts/ transitions high to low, dismounts high to low and from there include whether body position has an effect on the score. For example to me a scorpion double down scores higher than an arabesque double down. CleArly. Double twisting dismount from an advanced body position.
Any combination of skills would then be ranked accordingly based on the score of each skill on its own.
I think I'm totally in agreement with everything, but number 4.
The Fierce Board App! ||
iPhone