All-Star What Is The Best Way To Distribute Worlds Bids?

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

So, to write the rule a little differently.

An Event Producer is allowed to freely pass out its bids in any concentration to any division it so chooses, BUT, within the division, must hand out the highest paying bids to the highest placing teams accepting a bid first, in succession.
 
Or, the bids are to be giving to the highest score in each division (between all girl and co-ed only) but those bids are only to be kept to the top three teams within the division that which do not already have bids. If all top three teams within the divisions have bids, THEN it is open to highest scores within any division.
 
I guess I'm still a bit confused, why is it difficult or what is wrong with awarding the bids to the highest scoring teams? At least at the big comps this season (where I think the most conflict could/would be) I feel for the most part (minus Cheersport bc their score sheet is shall we say "unique") scores have been fairly consistent per division. And YES a sm sr and sm sm can compete with a large coed or large sr and hang with their scores. I feel that is the right way to do it. I ALSO feel very strongly about teams preparing for a WORLDS bid should qualify (or receive their bid) on a WORLDS score sheet!
 
I think some of this discussion is coming up because teams that are placing in the bottom of their division are getting bids because everyone else that placed higher already received one throughout the season when teams in other divisions are scoring higher. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
 
The discussion came about because UCA adopted NCA's style of awarding bids. The issue is that UCA only has 3 paid bids. Someone could have entered an uncontested division (IO5 for example) and gotten a paid bid if all the other division winners had a bid already.

While scoring is definitely getting better, it is still not consistent across divisions. My Senior Open 5 (that went large senior at UCA) outscored the entire Large Limited division. That isn't to say my team isn't talented or did not do well, but it is fare to say we tumble a little less than most of the teams in that division (we are senior open 5, mind you). The scores within each division were definitely consistent, and I would say for both divisions the judges got it right, but it is still VERY hard to score consistently from different panels across divisions. If one panel views an 'average score of around .3 and another an 'average' score around .4 in ever category that ends up being around a point difference between divisions... and both panels would be correct.

I do like the idea of Worlds teams being score on the Worlds scoresheet, the problem is I want the Varsity scoresheet to be the Worlds scoresheet!
 
The discussion came about because UCA adopted NCA's style of awarding bids. The issue is that UCA only has 3 paid bids. Someone could have entered an uncontested division (IO5 for example) and gotten a paid bid if all the other division winners had a bid already.

While scoring is definitely getting better, it is still not consistent across divisions. My Senior Open 5 (that went large senior at UCA) outscored the entire Large Limited division. That isn't to say my team isn't talented or did not do well, but it is fare to say we tumble a little less than most of the teams in that division (we are senior open 5, mind you). The scores within each division were definitely consistent, and I would say for both divisions the judges got it right, but it is still VERY hard to score consistently from different panels across divisions. If one panel views an 'average score of around .3 and another an 'average' score around .4 in ever category that ends up being around a point difference between divisions... and both panels would be correct.

I do like the idea of Worlds teams being score on the Worlds scoresheet, the problem is I want the Varsity scoresheet to be the Worlds scoresheet!
Amen Amen Amen!! I see what your saying BUT if that were the case and ALL judges adopted the I'll call it the "Justin" way of scoring ie. start at .5 better goes up worse goes down and there is a range that has to met in order to score in the solid range (meaning the difficulty chart) then consistency across the board improves therefore eliminating the problem. Oh if only there were some way Justin could do so or maybe VARSITY Brands could get on somewhat of the same page LOLOLOL
 
Amen Amen Amen!! I see what your saying BUT if that were the case and ALL judges adopted the I'll call it the "Justin" way of scoring ie. start at .5 better goes up worse goes down and there is a range that has to met in order to score in the solid range (meaning the difficulty chart) then consistency across the board improves therefore eliminating the problem. Oh if only there were some way Justin could do so or maybe VARSITY Brands could get on somewhat of the same page LOLOLOL

Gonna give UCA credit, that was the BEST it was ever run this year. So if they keep improving at this rate that competition will be huge again.

AND MASSIVE PROPS to giving out the average score for every teams categories (not just the high and low average WHICH is statistically misleading).
 
kingston said:
I do like the idea of Worlds teams being score on the Worlds scoresheet, the problem is I want the Varsity scoresheet to be the Worlds scoresheet!

AMEN!!! I also want the Varsity scoresheet for Worlds!!
 
I guess I'm still a bit confused, why is it difficult or what is wrong with awarding the bids to the highest scoring teams? At least at the big comps this season (where I think the most conflict could/would be) I feel for the most part (minus Cheersport bc their score sheet is shall we say "unique") scores have been fairly consistent per division. And YES a sm sr and sm sm can compete with a large coed or large sr and hang with their scores. I feel that is the right way to do it. I ALSO feel very strongly about teams preparing for a WORLDS bid should qualify (or receive their bid) on a WORLDS score sheet!
This is my problem with that in a nutshell: (i'm only going to use baskets)
Judging panel "A" judges all worlds teams. Sm. Sr. team "X" does the appearance of 5 switch kick doubles. The very next team is Unlimited Coed team "Y" and they do 7 switch kick doubles. It is my belief that the coed team will score higher because of the massive height difference. This is where is see the problem with scores. If it is separate judging panels then that creates an entire set of new issues.

P.S. if anyone brings up "if the coed team was craptastic allstars and the small sr was Cali then Cali would score higher". I'll banish you to the tower to be beheaded.
 
JustCheer said:
O

I think you have stated coed stunt in like every post i've seen, lol. I think its just so much to ask high school tumblers boys, besides size ratios (compared to college) I mean people should be rewarded but i think its almost far-fetched, looking at cheerleading in high school teams and allstar coed stunting before college just doesnt seem so probable. I feel a lot of people are not well versed in coaching it, but thats just me.

Not to hijack this thread but bullet central is a high school in kentucky and they have been doing some very good true coed stunting for a long time, it's not a matter of ability it's a matter of what you focus on... If you expect a 19 year old college freshman to do a coed rewind why can't you expect a 17 year old high school junior to toss a stretch?
 
Not to hijack this thread but bullet central is a high school in kentucky and they have been doing some very good true coed stunting for a long time, it's not a matter of ability it's a matter of what you focus on... If you expect a 19 year old college freshman to do a coed rewind why can't you expect a 17 year old high school junior to toss a stretch?
First let me say that I am ALL for Coed stunting BUT, a 19 yr old MAN is the YOUNGEST on a collegiate team, a 14 yr old BOY is the youngest, should we expect the same from these two? No. Give a bonus, find a way to encourage but unless your going to demand that Boy age minimum is 16, then I disagree with you.
My issue is that regardless of who you are or what team you watch, a boy in a group can do a stunt that looks more impressive than a toss hands stretch ( BORING ). So yes, an effort is being made, but even on the college level, they have all realized it is NOT WORTH the risk to try and stay macho and hold it themselves and bobble/drop so guess what!? Yes, even the MIGHT UK, has been known to compete HARD, WOW stunts with more than one person catch them. I take nothing away, the stunts are amazing to watch and SCORE well. So far this year the only team to compete an unassisted toss stunt to the top is T&S ;) yeah yeah i'm sure someone will find another one but blah to you.

I was a tumbler, but YES I can stunt and stunt well and I encourage ALL males that want to cheer in college to balance the two (I will say I was a much better tumbler than stunter), guess what, MY stunt was assisted, I threw a double and I have the jacket and ring to prove it, I just don't see the fuss. If you force all males to stunt to max scores then the 14 yr old boy will be REQUIRED to do the same stunt!?
I want to encourage guys to stunt, but not at the expense of the overall performance.
 
Maybe the 14 year old boy should be on a junior team or be a spotter... But this is a discussion for another thread
 
haha i meant it in the way that maybe a really famous and world champion gym didnt hit their routine but first place did but the world champion gym got the bid because they were more likely to make top 10 at worlds kind of thing.... (does that make sense? i feel like im not explaining it correctly haha)

Gotta be careful with this type of example (I'm not criticizing you, but people make this argument all the time). Often times a team can hit all of their skills but the execution, synchronization, or overall impression may not be high enough to outscore another team with higher difficulty, better execution, etc. even if they drop a stunt or have a tumble bust.

Standardized scoring can help eliminate "that team got scored better because of their name" arguments.
 
Also, I feel like having a small percentage of coed stunts (in limited coed) shouldnt affect a stunt score. 4 boys + 4 flyers + 4 spotters = 12.. there are still 24 other people on the team for a large team...

And doesn't CEA coed do toss extensions?
 

Latest posts

Back