All-Star Inconsistent Judging

[imrichhowboutu]

Imagine how long it would take though for someone to be counting by video individual skills for every single team during a competition? The wait time for awards would be insanely long and at 10-11 at night no one really wants to do the Cupid Shuffle anymore. Yes the events can hire more people to do that and then the competitions fees will be raised so it's something that everyone needs to weigh out I guess. I completely agree that there needs to be an objective and subjective part of the score sheets. There is nothing more frustrating than being at a two day competition and your degree of difficulty is completely different from day one to day two, execution yes but degree of difficulty no.

There are certain things that are very easy to count. Stunts, baskets, pyramid flyers.

Things that are harder are running and standing tumbling. Someone could easily review this in 3 minutes with an instant playback TV and remote to rewind, fast forward, and pause.

This could actually be a fun game. Give me a team i've never seen before, and a HQ video, and ill turn around quantities in less than 3 minutes.

 

[stuntaholic]

I completely agree with yojaehs. Its like in any sport you judge what you can see and instant replay is only used if necessary. Such as deductions. For example in football on almost every play there is holding. But most players can hide this fact and therefore it is not called every play. In basketball there is a foul almost every other time down the floor but hiding that tug or pull on the jersey allows a player to get away with it. Along those same lines I think a routine should be judged based on first impression. If a team needs 10 tucks only has 8 but makes it look like 10 I don't care that is good choreography. On the other hand if you need 10 tucks but judges say it only looks like 8 then that is poor choreography. This has happened to me and I have learned my mistakes. I think everything needs to be judged on first impression.

 

[kristenthegreat]

I completely agree with yojaehs. Its like in any sport you judge what you can see and instant replay is only used if necessary. Such as deductions. For example in football on almost every play there is holding. But most players can hide this fact and therefore it is not called every play. In basketball there is a foul almost every other time down the floor but hiding that tug or pull on the jersey allows a player to get away with it. Along those same lines I think a routine should be judged based on first impression. If a team needs 10 tucks only has 8 but makes it look like 10 I don't care that is good choreography. On the other hand if you need 10 tucks but judges say it only looks like 8 then that is poor choreography. This has happened to me and I have learned my mistakes. I think everything needs to be judged on first impression.

The difference to me is that in both of those sports mentioned, you don't DIRECTLY score off of those 'impressions.' You don't score higher if you score a touchdown and the ref misses a holding call. A 3-point shot isn't worth an extra point because a ref misses a foul in the paint.. A ref missing a call CAN change the flow of the game, but it can't completely change your score. You'd be hard-pressed to get someone outside of cheer to understand that because you can be 'sneaky' that you can score more points. Just imagine saying to someone who has no concept of cheer 'Well, we won because the judges THOUGHT we did more x than we actually did! Isn't that great!' I'd be LESS inclined to consider something like that a sport than something you CAN concretely explain. But if that's not where we're going with this, then what does it matter?

 

[yojaehs]

The difference to me is that in both of those sports mentioned, you don't DIRECTLY score off of those 'impressions.' You don't score higher if you score a touchdown and the ref misses a holding call. A 3-point shot isn't worth an extra point because a ref misses a foul in the paint.. A ref missing a call CAN change the flow of the game, but it can't completely change your score. You'd be hard-pressed to get someone outside of cheer to understand that because you can be 'sneaky' that you can score more points. Just imagine saying to someone who has no concept of cheer 'Well, we won because the judges THOUGHT we did more x than we actually did! Isn't that great!' I'd be LESS inclined to consider something like that a sport than something you CAN concretely explain. But if that's not where we're going with this, then what does it matter?

Not sure I see your argument here. If a ref misses a holding call, it can't be reviewed and points taken away, same with bball, a 3 pointer can't be taken away if there is a foul in the paint. Do I agree that some things should video reviewed, YES but ONLY safety violations and legalities. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't MOST judging panels split into "stunt" and "tumbling"? Your telling me that if all you have to watch is tumbling you can't count and critique? Now for stunts give me a break, now pyramid is where I will say where one would need to pay closer attention, guess what, wait for it, YOUR A JUDGE, DO YOUR JOB!

 

[stuntaholic]

Not sure I see your argument here. If a ref misses a holding call, it can't be reviewed and points taken away, same with bball, a 3 pointer can't be taken away if there is a foul in the paint. Do I agree that some things should video reviewed, YES but ONLY safety violations and legalities. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't MOST judging panels split into "stunt" and "tumbling"? Your telling me that if all you have to watch is tumbling you can't count and critique? Now for stunts give me a break, now pyramid is where I will say where one would need to pay closer attention, guess what, wait for it, YOUR A JUDGE, DO YOUR JOB!

I completely agree with you here. I think you are right on the money.

 

[BlueCat]

Not sure I see your argument here. If a ref misses a holding call, it can't be reviewed and points taken away, same with bball, a 3 pointer can't be taken away if there is a foul in the paint. Do I agree that some things should video reviewed, YES but ONLY safety violations and legalities. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't MOST judging panels split into "stunt" and "tumbling"? Your telling me that if all you have to watch is tumbling you can't count and critique? Now for stunts give me a break, now pyramid is where I will say where one would need to pay closer attention, guess what, wait for it, YOUR A JUDGE, DO YOUR JOB!

In those sports you mentioned, the judging is essentially broken into objective and subjective categories. In football, you can't review whether there was interference or not (subjective), but you CAN review whether a receiver's foot was in bounds (objective).

I would suggest the exact same criteria for review in cheer. You can review whether a person (or the number of people) twisted during a flip or not, but you cannot do a video review to see how cute you thought a dance was. You can review how many stunts did double ups vs. full ups, but you can't use video to decide how "original" the idea of the stunt was.

The issue, to me, isn't about preserving the hallowed tradition of how cheer is judged, it is about getting it right. We all want for judging to improve, but by definition, for something to improve, it has to change. If we have the capability to improve the accuracy of judging and make it more likely for the correct teams to win, then I am all for it.

This has the same feel to me as suggesting that tabulators aren't allowed to use calculators when adding scores because that is "taking the human element out of scoring." Sure, it would be more old-school to do the math in your head and judges/tabulators should be smart enough to do that, however, when there is a simple way to make things more accurate, I have a hard time understanding why people would be opposed.

 

[King]

I want the judges to do the job, but we are band-aiding the problem. An ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure. Make the Varsity scoring system the universal scoresheet (to misquote Winston Churchhill... the Varsity score system is the worst one out there.... outside of all the others tried).

There is no perfect scoresheet solution, but the Varsity one is the least worst. Least worst meaning there is going to be no perfect solution that allows all skills to be correctly counted, accounted for, difficulty assessed, and choreography and creativity rewarded. The Varsity one allows the most balance to all the different parts, allows people to adjust weights if really needed by percentage afterwards, and gives the judges flexibility to reward what they prefer.

 

[King]

In those sports you mentioned, the judging is essentially broken into objective and subjective categories. In football, you can't review whether there was interference or not (subjective), but you CAN review whether a receiver's foot was in bounds (objective).

I would suggest the exact same criteria for review in cheer. You can review whether a person (or the number of people) twisted during a flip or not, but you cannot do a video review to see how cute you thought a dance was. You can review how many stunts did double ups vs. full ups, but you can't use video to decide how "original" the idea of the stunt was.

The issue, to me, isn't about preserving the hallowed tradition of how cheer is judged, it is about getting it right. We all want for judging to improve, but by definition, for something to improve, it has to change. If we have the capability to improve the accuracy of judging and make it more likely for the correct teams to win, then I am all for it.

This has the same feel to me as suggesting that tabulators aren't allowed to use calculators when adding scores because that is "taking the human element out of scoring." Sure, it would be more old-school to do the math in your head and judges/tabulators should be smart enough to do that, however, when there is a simple way to make things more accurate, I have a hard time understanding why people would be opposed.

Hand made or hand done in this day and age is rarely better. Most people feel an attachment to things that are hard for them, but really easy to computers. Like there is a personal touch lost. I see it ALL the time with our software for my day job (which is basically replacing a lot of human error with tried and truth math and heavy data calculation).

Computers are really good at crunching massive amounts of data in to simple and easy to read forms. Humans cant compete. I could rant for pages.

 

[yojaehs]

In those sports you mentioned, the judging is essentially broken into objective and subjective categories. In football, you can't review whether there was interference or not (subjective), but you CAN review whether a receiver's foot was in bounds (objective).

I would suggest the exact same criteria for review in cheer. You can review whether a person (or the number of people) twisted during a flip or not, but you cannot do a video review to see how cute you thought a dance was. You can review how many stunts did double ups vs. full ups, but you can't use video to decide how "original" the idea of the stunt was.

The issue, to me, isn't about preserving the hallowed tradition of how cheer is judged, it is about getting it right. We all want for judging to improve, but by definition, for something to improve, it has to change. If we have the capability to improve the accuracy of judging and make it more likely for the correct teams to win, then I am all for it.

This has the same feel to me as suggesting that tabulators aren't allowed to use calculators when adding scores because that is "taking the human element out of scoring." Sure, it would be more old-school to do the math in your head and judges/tabulators should be smart enough to do that, however, when there is a simple way to make things more accurate, I have a hard time understanding why people would be opposed.

I feel that my rant got motivated when I previously read about judges sitting in a room away from arena bc the "music" was too loud etc etc. That really struck me the wrong way, bothers me a lot. Again, I can agree with video review to a point, but to this day, when I look at many teams who have WON WORLD'S there is a bit of smoke and mirrors to say (I'll even admit to it being done Rays, CA, Brandon) to include us all and it is "part of the game" IMO. When it comes to judging I want it done right, I want it done efficiently, I want it done consistently.

I think we are all looking for a solution, my #1 is judges training WITH a Universal Score Sheet. I def would like to see the quality improvement there first and if that doesn't work, then possibly looking into more in depth video review.

 

[travnation80]

I will just share that until you are on a panel judging (if you have never done it) you will never understand what Judges do or go through trust me. As far as a Universal Score sheet in terms of a number scale i'm closely in favor of, but a Universal Score sheet for all companies and competitions will just move us towards no creativity at all, which is what we have now just look back at some divisions at worlds this past season. Plus why would i go to one competition or company over another if its all the same score sheet? what's the point?

 

[cheerinfo]

I will just share that until you are on a panel judging (if you have never done it) you will never understand what Judges do or go through trust me. As far as a Universal Score sheet in terms of a number scale i'm closely in favor of, but a Universal Score sheet for all companies and competitions will just move us towards no creativity at all, which is what we have now just look back at some divisions at worlds this past season. Plus why would i go to one competition or company over another if its all the same score sheet? what's the point?

I am not sure how this argument holds any weight. How would having a universal scoresheet drive down creativity? You need clean skills hit at the highest level in order to win at any competition. Most gyms are not changing their routine 10 times per season in order to win at different events with different scoresheets. Top Gun won a lot this past season. Pretty sure their routines probably stayed close to the same (minus upgrading as the season progressed), and yet, they still won. If these companies all used the same scoresheet, would TG win less? Would they be less creative in their choreography? Would they do less thrilling tumbling sequences and pyramids? I would venture to guess NOT. Universal scoring would just make it more consistent from event to event. Allow training judges properly to occur. Allow judges to not have to learn a new scoresheet and grid every weekend in a 30 minute meeting the day of the event. I think that universal scoring does nothing to limit creativity/choreography/overall appeal. Just sayin though....

 

[travnation80]

Top Gun is one of the few gyms that can still give you creativity and skill but that does not mean that its not harder to do with the way score sheets are now. Some Cheer companies reward other parts of the score sheet than most and cheer gyms like going to those companies that do. The Cheerleading worlds score sheet should actually be more well rounded in all parts of cheerleading to support the over all routine. As you saw this year for example Small Senior was more about tumbling than anything else, international coed 5 and 6 were based on stunts and pyramids. These types of actions will hurt over all routines and have cheerleaders look like robots. I mean look at gymnastics (i never compare cheerleading to gymnastics) they have taken all the artistry out of floor routines that now its all skill and you can not really appreciate a floor routine like you could in lets say 1997 at the Atlanta games.

 

[imrichhowboutu]

Top Gun is one of the few gyms that can still give you creativity and skill but that does not mean that its not harder to do with the way score sheets are now. Some Cheer companies reward other parts of the score sheet than most and cheer gyms like going to those companies that do. The Cheerleading worlds score sheet should actually be more well rounded in all parts of cheerleading to support the over all routine. As you saw this year for example Small Senior was more about tumbling than anything else, international coed 5 and 6 were based on stunts and pyramids. These types of actions will hurt over all routines and have cheerleaders look like robots. I mean look at gymnastics (i never compare cheerleading to gymnastics) they have taken all the artistry out of floor routines that now its all skill and you can not really appreciate a floor routine like you could in lets say 1997 at the Atlanta games.

96 (olympics are always in even # years).
And i still think that there are some people that are more unique. But you also have to look at the skills. Could it be the same in cheerleading, that as the elements get harder, there is less creativity because so much time and effort is put into perfecting things.

I think what A LOT of issues in cheerleading come from is the following: Is cheerleading an ART or a SPORT.
If it is a performing ART, then sure, get creative, wear whatever you want, etc. If it is a SPORT, then I believe there needs to be more uniformity in terms of universal score sheets, rules for uniforms and choreography, etc.

 

[cheerinfo]

Top Gun is one of the few gyms that can still give you creativity and skill but that does not mean that its not harder to do with the way score sheets are now. Some Cheer companies reward other parts of the score sheet than most and cheer gyms like going to those companies that do. The Cheerleading worlds score sheet should actually be more well rounded in all parts of cheerleading to support the over all routine. As you saw this year for example Small Senior was more about tumbling than anything else, international coed 5 and 6 were based on stunts and pyramids. These types of actions will hurt over all routines and have cheerleaders look like robots. I mean look at gymnastics (i never compare cheerleading to gymnastics) they have taken all the artistry out of floor routines that now its all skill and you can not really appreciate a floor routine like you could in lets say 1997 at the Atlanta games.

So if it's harder to be creative now, why would you want to keep it the way it is? I don't follow your line of thinking.

And I agree with you that the Worlds scoresheet should be more well-rounded. I feel ALL scoresheets should be more well-rounded. Hence, going to a universal scoresheet would aid in ALL companies have a standard, well-rounded scoring system and grid. And this would still allow TG to be as creative as they want to be. It would just reward their creativity equally at events and in all areas.

And standardizing scoresheets for cheer doesn't mean you have to just be all about skill like gymnastics. I don't think Varsity's scoresheet takes out the creativity, choreography or overall appeal options at all. If you make the scoresheet be all about skill, I still feel TG would find plenty of ways to make it visually appealing. So again, the argument to me, is moot.

Successful gyms are going to find a way to win regardless. So why not standardize scoring to make it easier to get well-trained judges and in a format that is easy to understand for coaches and judges alike? What is the ultimate harm in that? I see no way that it limits creativity for anyone.

 

[cheerinfo]

I also disagree that TG is one of the ONLY gyms that can still give you creativity and skill. But that's just me. I see LOTS of entertaining routines out there with TONS of skill from plenty of gyms. The scoresheet has nothing to do with that. That has to do with good choreography, good coaching and good knowledge of the sport.