All-Star Making Scores Easier To Read

[King]

How much would it even take to fund? Other than the networking it doesn't seem like it would be much more complicated than a formula/value system in excel. Then again, I am not a programmer, so maybe it's easier said than done. :)

There are two types of scenarios:

It can be done... Or it can be done well.

To make something functional that meets the requirements not hard. But I'm a big interface guy. I believe technology should be well designed, intuitive, and easy. With the amount of time judges would use this and the amount of teams it would affect I think it would take a 3 person team. A backend programmer, project manager, and an interface designer. All together for two months of work... Spit balling, 20k for a ready for use product with all the kinks worked out, including deployment plans. Again the difficulty isn't in the execution, but the design and attention to detail from the user stand point. I made a baby score system a few days ago and it worked. Even showed winners in order. Hah.

 

[King]

What if, instead of having the judges re-score when they say a score is out of range the system automatically bumped them into range. It would be the smallest amount to be in range, but it would then within range.

An example would be a .5 range on all scores is acceptable. 4 judges came to the scores of .9 .7 .6 and .2
The .2 should at a minimum be a .5 to be within range. Likewise if the scores were .2 .4 .5 .8 the .8 would become .6. The judges could come to an answer without having or knowing the scores are corrected.

 

[BlueCat]

Not-easily-anwered questions that would have a big influence on the design of such a system. (IMO)

1. Should judges have the ability to go back and change their own scores after other teams have gone?
2. Does a judge being out-of-range from other judges mean that his/her score is wrong and should be corrected?
3. What is an acceptable amount of score differential between judges?
4. Is it necessary for every judge to make comments?
5. What role (if any) should video replay have for the deduction judges? Can they only confirm what they saw previously, or can they add deductions from watching replay?
6. Should judges get a run-down of the basic routine with listing of major skills prior to seeing routines? (It is incredibly difficult to see an elite L5 routine once live and give an accurate assessment of everything that happened.)\


Also, how would you rank the following in terms of importance for a scoring/judging system:

A. Accuracy
B. Perceived fairness
C. Actual fairness
D. Speed
E. Feedback for teams
F. Differentiation between event producers
G. Ability of event producers to get desired outcome
H. Promotion a particular agenda/goal? (We want more non-US teams to attend, we want more "true" coed stunts, etc.)
I. How do you want to divide rewards between creativity, difficulty, and clean execution?
J. How much should scoring match public opinion? (What the crowd likes vs. what judges like)

 

[Deleted member 15]

Not-easily-anwered questions that would have a big influence on the design of such a system. (IMO)

1. Should judges have the ability to go back and change their own scores after other teams have gone?
2. Does a judge being out-of-range from other judges mean that his/her score is wrong and should be corrected?
3. What is an acceptable amount of score differential between judges?
4. Is it necessary for every judge to make comments?
5. What role (if any) should video replay have for the deduction judges? Can they only confirm what they saw previously, or can they add deductions from watching replay?
6. Should judges get a run-down of the basic routine with listing of major skills prior to seeing routines? (It is incredibly difficult to see an elite L5 routine once live and give an accurate assessment of everything that happened.)\


Also, how would you rank the following in terms of importance for a scoring/judging system:

A. Accuracy
B. Perceived fairness
C. Actual fairness
D. Speed
E. Feedback for teams
F. Differentiation between event producers
G. Ability of event producers to get desired outcome
H. Promotion a particular agenda/goal? (We want more non-US teams to attend, we want more "true" coed stunts, etc.)
I. How do you want to divide rewards between creativity, difficulty, and clean execution?
J. How much should scoring match public opinion? (What the crowd likes vs. what judges like)

1. Yes while the division is still going.
2. No.
3. 40% or .4 on Varsity within a category.
4. No.
5. I can go with either extreme on this. If they are allowed to watch replay they should be able to count everything the video shows, but I'm OK with deductions not having replay and just calling it live. I'm separating rules from deductions like tumbling busts and stunt falls.
6. Yes. It works at NCA College but there needs to be a better way of doing it, such as it being done electronically and being automatically showing up on the judges screen when the scoring screen appears for that team.

 

[BlueCat]

Adding a few to the second list.

K. Scoring being consistent between events/panels. (same performance would get same score regardless of setting)
L. Easy for judges to learn/understand
M. Easy for athlete/coaches to understand
N. Easy for spectators to understand
O. Weighting of relative punishment for performance errors.
P. Expense of training/implimentation.

 

[King]

Not-easily-anwered questions that would have a big influence on the design of such a system. (IMO)

1. Should judges have the ability to go back and change their own scores after other teams have gone?
2. Does a judge being out-of-range from other judges mean that his/her score is wrong and should be corrected?
3. What is an acceptable amount of score differential between judges?
4. Is it necessary for every judge to make comments?
5. What role (if any) should video replay have for the deduction judges? Can they only confirm what they saw previously, or can they add deductions from watching replay?
6. Should judges get a run-down of the basic routine with listing of major skills prior to seeing routines? (It is incredibly difficult to see an elite L5 routine once live and give an accurate assessment of everything that happened.)\


Also, how would you rank the following in terms of importance for a scoring/judging system:

A. Accuracy
B. Perceived fairness
C. Actual fairness
D. Speed
E. Feedback for teams
F. Differentiation between event producers
G. Ability of event producers to get desired outcome
H. Promotion a particular agenda/goal? (We want more non-US teams to attend, we want more "true" coed stunts, etc.)
I. How do you want to divide rewards between creativity, difficulty, and clean execution?
J. How much should scoring match public opinion? (What the crowd likes vs. what judges like)

Adding a few to the second list.

K. Scoring being consistent between events/panels. (same performance would get same score regardless of setting)
L. Easy for judges to learn/understand
M. Easy for athlete/coaches to understand
N. Easy for spectators to understand
O. Weighting of relative punishment for performance errors.
P. Expense of training/implimentation.

1. No
2. If we have enough judges to drop a high and a low score, then no. But if we do NOT have enough judges to drop the high and the low then yes they should be corrected, and I believe done the way I presented with the software I dreamed up.
3. This one is tough to answer and I agree with Andre's spitball answer, but would want to collect data about it to determine what is an acceptable range.
4. No. Especially cause most comments are awfully unhelpful.
5. I think deductions can only be called at that moment BUT all legalities can be called at anytime.
6. I think this could go a long ways into helping judges judge. I am playing with this idea in my head now.

As for ranking the attributes listed I think that is a bit harder and probably a different thread altogether.

 

[Rudags]

Curious to what the resistance to this would be. Every scoresheet in Cheerleading has a max score you can get. Every single one. Your final score is a percentage of what's possible. How every single EP arrives to that number can be completely different and no one would have to change how they score. Just take a teams final score and divide by the points possible.

One of the smaller companies (that hosts a Worlds bid event) has a generic scoresheet with no rubric. When I coached at Platinum last year, we did hit a perfect routine (no bobbles, touchdowns, etc) and scored a 99/100. While I was not complaining about the score, no way was that routine 99% perfect executed. We had some bent legs in our tumbling, double downs were not perfect and basket timing was a bit off. How would we use that in explanations?

 

[Deleted member 15]

One of the smaller companies (that hosts a Worlds bid event) has a generic scoresheet with no rubric. When I coached at Platinum last year, we did hit a perfect routine (no bobbles, touchdowns, etc) and scored a 99/100. While I was not complaining about the score, no way was that routine 99% perfect executed. We had some bent legs in our tumbling, double downs were not perfect and basket timing was a bit off. How would we use that in explanations?

Sometime you have to give a score that will put the teams in the correct order even if it means that score is higher or lower than it would be in a perfect world. The placement order is much more important than the score.

 

[Rudags]

Sometime you have to give a score that will put the teams in the correct order even if it means that score is higher or lower than it would be in a perfect world. The placement order is much more important than the score.

I agree. But 99/100 with all positive comments doesn't help kids learn. We only had Kick Doubles instead of switch kick. We had several layouts in two to fulls. We had one group full down instead of double down. I guess I look for judges to tell me what to add/fix/etc. Not that I don't already know it, but I like to read it off the scoresheets for kids to hear what to improve on for the future. Not just "WOW" "AMAZING" etc. Id like "Great Baskets! Work on adding Hitch or Switch Kick for higher score"

 

[Deleted member 15]

I agree. But 99/100 with all positive comments doesn't help kids learn. We only had Kick Doubles instead of switch kick. We had several layouts in two to fulls. We had one group full down instead of double down. I guess I look for judges to tell me what to add/fix/etc. Not that I don't already know it, but I like to read it off the scoresheets for kids to hear what to improve on for the future. Not just "WOW" "AMAZING" etc. Id like "Great Baskets! Work on adding Hitch or Switch Kick for higher score"

I'd rather hear nothing than that. I already know that and if we could do them they'd be in. Tell me something I don't know or feel free to leave it blank.

Add basket variety to score higher, even if additional baskets are not level appropriate.
Add skill variety to stunts. You twisted several times, but consider adding a release move.
Consider changing the show and go in the opening to a basket to get more basket variety.

 

[newcheerdad]

There are two types of scenarios:

It can be done... Or it can be done well.

To make something functional that meets the requirements not hard. But I'm a big interface guy. I believe technology should be well designed, intuitive, and easy. With the amount of time judges would use this and the amount of teams it would affect I think it would take a 3 person team. A backend programmer, project manager, and an interface designer. All together for two months of work... Spit balling, 20k for a ready for use product with all the kinks worked out, including deployment plans. Again the difficulty isn't in the execution, but the design and attention to detail from the user stand point. I made a baby score system a few days ago and it worked. Even showed winners in order. Hah.

If you need a programmer for this, let me know. :)

 

[King]

If you need a programmer for this, let me know. :)

If you are up for doing it for free, let me know! If funding isn't needed we can probably write out what needs to be done. I am not a heads down programmer, I am a bit slower than that. But I can design the heck out of systems.