- Dec 25, 2009
- 261
- 556
Thank you, I really appreciate this!!!I saw them compete on Sunday. Not sure why anyone should have anything negative to say. For a first year IO5 team they did just fine!
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.
Thank you, I really appreciate this!!!I saw them compete on Sunday. Not sure why anyone should have anything negative to say. For a first year IO5 team they did just fine!
Well Cali had a great dance I'll be first to admit it.Look - I'm sorry that somehow the R5 division that Vipers was in is now under a microscope - that was never my intention and I'm not even sure how it came to be?? Maybe from VipersMom posting scores/pics? Irregardless.. I'm not interested in the actual point breakdown.. it's how judges arrived at the conclusion of how to award the scores they did in so many divisions. I think Rockstar is a better example in this division than the Cali scores she posted but I did just go watch a bunch of videos in that division again.. and that Cali team delivered an incredible dance and as she said in her vipers post.. I'm sure it's because of how excited all those athletes were that they had just hit too. So how judges decided to award vipers .10 more on dance and to give them the win based on that?? Just seems ridiculous to me.. but what do I know. Just a parent that's been watching this all for a long time spouting off her opinion. This is a great division to use to dissect though and it does make my point quiet well so thanks for that. All top three teams in this division were so great to watch and super talented.
Do people feel like big name gyms are scored easier, ie the judges sort of expect them to be great, no matter what the team level is and score them a little bit higher than teams that aren't as well known?
Both dances start at 2:45
I'm just gonna say that my kids teams could be considered from Texas I guess and definitely did not win, especially cp14. Le sigh for her. Such potential to win her first jacket this season and it totally didn't happen. :(
And if I remember the numbers right, only 6? Of our 55 teams (all but 9 of them legitimately from the Lone Star State) in attendance won.
I'm not so hot at math, but it doesn't scream "Longhorn Conspiracy" to me.
What I find hilarious is that NO ONE is addressing the actual issue with the scoring. AGAIN I ask...how does one team hit a perfect clean routine and get 0.8 on execution and then team 2 goes out almost drops stunts, has tumblers to their knees and yet scores the exact same 0.8 on execution for those areas?? Anyone? Because that is what I was seeing this weekend when score sheets were posted.
I don't think they're judged easier. Yes they're expected to be great, but in my opinion it's just because they have a larger talent pool to choose from.Do people feel like big name gyms are scored easier, ie the judges sort of expect them to be great, no matter what the team level is and score them a little bit higher than teams that aren't as well known?
Mind you, CU's tweets aren't always accurate..... so unless you're taking about an image he tweeted listing scores/breakdowns I wouldn't rely on his accounts 100%.But how can both teams have the same execution score? That's what doesn't make sense to me. I will try to find on example on CU's twitter.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Unsurprisingly, we believe that it works the other way. Judges are more critical of "big name" gyms because, fairly or not, they have higher expectations. My guess is that it averages out over the long run.Do people feel like big name gyms are scored easier, ie the judges sort of expect them to be great, no matter what the team level is and score them a little bit higher than teams that aren't as well known?