- Dec 4, 2009
- 14,108
- 19,303
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #16
Which I will say the Worlds scoring worked exactly as intended. I don't think that was the issue. It was a perfectly executed flawed system.
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.
It's very difficult to do that bc Worlds scores are based off of the rest of the teams in the divIs there anyone that's willing to watch a particular team's video from this weekend and let me know what they would score the routine, based on the Worlds scoresheet?
Is there anyone that's willing to watch a particular team's video from this weekend and let me know what they would score the routine, based on the Worlds scoresheet?
Is there anyone that's willing to watch a particular team's video from this weekend and let me know what they would score the routine, based on the Worlds scoresheet?
Edit: Oh and why are we competing 2 days if none of the score carries over? I can see the purpose behind doing it for the IO divisions but if your not going to carry over a percentage than just compete one day and be done with it!
The 2 day comps reward consistency, but Worlds rewards excellence.
It's not dissimilar to a team doing well in the season but catching fire in the playoffs.
I like it because there's pressure every day.
So the scoring this weekend is a large departure from what is used all season. The good news is there is a large top end to allow more clear separation for teams. The bad news is the scoring is completely comparative based. What does that mean? When scoring a judge has to predict if what they are looking at is at the top level or not. If it is at the top the judge will put the score closer to the limit, but if they believe that the team they are looking at is not near the top they will leave room for higher scoring later.
So the scoring this weekend is a large departure from what is used all season. The good news is there is a large top end to allow more clear separation for teams. The bad news is the scoring is completely comparative based. What does that mean? When scoring a judge has to predict if what they are looking at is at the top level or not. If it is at the top the judge will put the score closer to the limit, but if they believe that the team they are looking at is not near the top they will leave room for higher scoring later.
There are a couple issues with this.
1. Team name does play into bias of what is considered difficult and what not. If a judge knows a harder team is coming later even if the team in front of them is fantastic they will leave room for what is coming later in CASE it is better. PS - if your ball gets pulled #1 during the lottery it is almost not even worth going to Worlds because of this.
2. Judges are human and susceptible to the recency effect ( Serial position effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). Whatever they see happening before or after a team affects that preceding teams score. See a bunch of low scoring routines in a row and then just a decent team will have an elevated score. This is reason we see rubrics and divisions split at other competitions. The smaller amount of teams a judge has to be concerned with the lower this effect.
3. Nothing can be learned from what won at Worlds this year to plan for next year. Because all scoring is strictly situational no coach can look at what was done to win and say next year I see our weak points and we will improve on them to have a better chance.
4. Difficulty and Execution scores are defined that day arbitrarily in a judges head depending on how well the judge interprets the intentions of the writer of the scoresheet.
Will the new glitter mod use a rubric? Or will I need to wait till the end of each week to determine if I'm rewarding the most glitterific post?
And this is where I think the problem lies. You can either get killed or rewarded depending on where you are in the OOA. Results should never depend on a flipping bingo ball, and in the large divisions such as small coed and small senior semi-finals, this is exactly what happened. I don't like it, but I think the concept works much better for finals, but it is a fail for prelims and semis - you can't score team 3 effectively if you have 35 teams left to score.A team only scores what it did based on how difficult their competitions routines were.
In theory a the same routine performed this season and next season with the Varsity rubric will score the exact same if the execution is the same. Granted perfectly exact same is not possible for a team, but you get the idea. The scores would be near eachother.
At Worlds the winning routine competed could have drastically different scores based on what was around them. For example Wildcats score was I think the highest of the competition. That does not mean Wildcats performed the hardest routine with the best execution at the competition. It more means they had the greatest difference between them and what other programs put on the floor. I think IOC 5 had also some of the lowest scores.
This in no way is taking away from the performance Wildcats did, mind you. It's just saying at Worlds you don't win by having the hardest routine, but by having a routine the judges think is harder than your competition.
The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android || Upgrade Your Account!