Competitions/Worlds Bids

Date: Sat May 13 8:45 PM, 2006

RE: Competitions/Worlds Bids

Date: Sun May 14 8:42 PM, 2006

I think I may have given the wrong impression when I spoke of AC. Let me take a moment to clarify:

- I said that AC rewards poor technique and sub par choreography. I think rewards was the wrong word here. I'm not saying that you'll win if you have the above, or that anyone that has won at AC had the above, what I'm saying is that it seems easier to get away with poor technique and sub par choreography. Now don't get me wrong, you can't win with any of that at any competition, but I don't think that you are deducted enough for it.

- I said that the one thing I really enjoy about USA is that you have to have good choreography to be sucessful. That's not to say that the USA scoring system is perfect; far from it. I like that choreography comes into play so much with USA and I personally think it should everywhere (my personal opinion, again take it for what its worth). However, the problem with USA is that they don't have clear deductions for mistakes. You can drop a stunt but as in most other competitions, you don't get points taken out because of it.

Just my opinion guys, take it for what it's worth.

Nelson de Dios
Gym Director
Motions Cheerleading Gym

Date: Sun May 14 10:27 PM, 2006

I also agree that USA should have clear deductions for falls. I can't help but compare cheerleading with gymnastics, and even figure skating. Most of us probably watch both during the Olympics. They are expected to successfully land particular skills.. we even know when they're coming (well, we wouldn't know most likely, but the commentators usually fill us in). And when they don't land them, there are deductions. And the ones who land everything typically win, right? If cheerleading should ever make it into the Olympics, the judging must be just as clear cut. As is the case with the other sports mentioned, there are points for presentation of course. But I believe in both cases (figure skating and gymnastics) there are basic skills that must be executed flawlessly, and the person/team who succeeds in doing that typically ends up on top. Am I wrong to compare the sports? Just something I've been meaning to throw out to see what others thought, and I figured now would be a good time.

Date: Mon May 15 6:02 AM, 2006

agree totally, and have been waiting for this train of thought. As the level 5 teams get better, the only way to seperate them is execution-landings, stunts, perfect jumps. My daughter competed in gymnastics and there were several cases of the perfect routine scoring higher over difficulty that was not executed well.

Date: Mon May 15 9:23 AM, 2006

But What Other Sport wrote:

I see what you're saying NCE, but I would argue that the competition companies themselves should be the diversity-- how they are run, what they offer, etc..., NOT the judging. Otherwise you have a situation where organizations with nice sharp robotic motioned choreography, yet lacking in technical difficulty can choose competitions that reward that kind of thing, and they never have to go against the ones with true technical skills. I guess it depends on the goals of each organization, but I would love to see everyone using the same set of rules and judging criteria, because it would force everyone to work on BOTH, and placings and trophies would really mean something.

Yea i can totally see what you are saying. I just dont see this happening anytime soon. Also if all the competitions scored exactly the same, there really would be no need for lots of different competition companys. We would essentially just need one with ONE nationals which would be the new "worlds." I like it how it is right now, and I hope it dosnt change too much. We have a lot of freedom in the all star cheer world which other sports just dont. I wanna keep it that way.

Date: Mon May 15 10:44 AM, 2006

NCE, I would want to know how I stack up against the same tough judging criteria everyone had to experience. We might go to a competition company in Sacramento while others go to Anaheim, and if the judging is consistent, I can truly compare our scores. YOu can still have your choice of which competitions to go to, which locations, etc... It makes no sense at all to say, in any sport, that you WANT inconsistency in judging. I guess I'm missing something here.

Date: Mon May 15 10:57 AM, 2006

In Baseball every umpire's strike zone is different.

In Football a referee may see a holding call different than the next Ref.

In Basketball a foul to one ref is just an aggressive bump to another.

In Soccer one ref my say tripping while another says he just tripped.

Micheal Jordan, Barry Bonds, Joe Montana, Wayne Gretzky, and Mia Hamm have all consistently got the benefit of close calls. Their reputation and success precedes them.

The world of Sports is never fair or perfect. In my opinion that is what makes it beautiful and interesting.

Date: Mon May 15 11:34 AM, 2006

You're right of course, but I don't believe in any of the sports you mentioned they pick particular ballparks, stadiums, etc... based on who is referring or ump'ing that day, and based on a different set of rules. You can have consistency in judging (i.e., same scoresheets) and the outcome will still depend on who the judges are on that particular day, you don't lose that, you never will. But to go into a competition knowing full well they go by a different set of rules than another, how can that be right in any sport? Just some thoughts on the matter.

Date: Mon May 15 2:36 PM, 2006

Wouldn't You Want To Know wrote:

NCE, I would want to know how I stack up against the same tough judging criteria everyone had to experience. We might go to a competition company in Sacramento while others go to Anaheim, and if the judging is consistent, I can truly compare our scores. YOu can still have your choice of which competitions to go to, which locations, etc... It makes no sense at all to say, in any sport, that you WANT inconsistency in judging. I guess I'm missing something here.

I see what you are saying and yes it does sound logical. But again, what would be the point of going to american championships over jamz then? They would essentially be the same competitions in vegas, just at different times. Today in the all star cheer world it is NOT really about the location and time, its about the actual competition. Its about where you score good and where the competition and worlds bids are gonna be. THats what it has come down to.

You cannot compare your scores even if there is the same scoring because you would not have the same set of judges, some score higher or lower. I dont want inconsistancy in judging, I want a variety of opinons. If you are truley the best, you will always win.

Date: Mon May 15 2:40 PM, 2006

So what is the point of having different scoring systems if you are trying for Worlds bid and go to Worlds with a completely different scoring system? Seems like if that was your goal you would put together a routine and kids that would fit into the Worlds scoring system. That is if you want to do good at Worlds.

Date: Mon May 15 2:49 PM, 2006

If you are a good team, you will do well at any competition, with any rules.

If you are a level 5 worlds team, yea it might be smart to look at that score sheet. But chances are that if you are at that level, you already know how to put together a sucessful routine.

I come from a program that does not have a favored "style" in Nor*CAL. Up here, it seems to be more about technique and sharpness, SO*CAL seems to be more about fun choreography and flash. SO you would think I would think its a good idea to adopt one score sheet...

But still, I just dont see how Jamz would be different at all over UCA except for the fact that you get different jackets if you win. Why would you travel all the way to florida when you can as you say.. "get the same exact score" right here at home?

Date: Mon May 15 3:07 PM, 2006

I think there are PLENTY of reasons to go to different competitons. How about just the fact that you're going against different teams each time?

Do people really sit around, when choosing competitons, and say "hmm, let's go here because they give more points for this, and let's go to this other one because they also give more points for this, and let's NOT go to this one because they don't give points for that, etc..."? I always thought it was "let's go to this one because it's fun and entertaining, and let's go here because Vegas is a blast, and let's try this one because it always has a good turnout and we'll be going against a lot of teams, etc...".

There are so many other factors that would make one competition different from the other -- I agree that rules/scoresheets should NOT be one of them. I also agree that human element will ALWAYS be a factor in judging. You don't need different rules to get diversity. Like the umps and refs, they all see things differently BUT, the basic rules are the same.

Date: Mon May 15 4:30 PM, 2006

I agree that the scoring should be standardized. You already have one factor built in to ensure scoring will vary from competition to competition - they're called judges. Different panels will score different ways. It's really not great for the credibility of our sport when I can choose a competition for my team based what my teams' weaknesses might be and what competition company is most likely to let those weaknesses "slide".

It really makes our sport look stupid when we can't even agree on what a "good" routine is...

Date: Mon May 15 9:25 PM, 2006

Of course the coaches and directors look at the scoresheets and base their decision off of what counts for more...if my team is a strong pyramid team and lacks in baskets then I will not take them to a comp that has a totally seperate score for baskets an tosses and so on and so forth. If we only went to a comp because it is fun then we are doing our teams an injustice. Of course we want them to have fun but we also want them to do well. Hope that helps.

Date: Mon May 15 10:20 PM, 2006

I think California Coach hit the nail right on the head. It is hard to take a sport seriously that gets to pick and choose where they will fare the best.

Work harder on those basket tosses, don't avoid competitions where those count. If that doesn't work, strengthen other parts of your routine so that the points you may lose where you're weak, you'll gain back where you're strong. Doesn't that make more sense?

Date: Mon May 15 10:39 PM, 2006

who's to say what style of routine is right and what is wrong?

Date: Mon May 15 11:12 PM, 2006

That was just an example...but you know what your week points are....and sometimes even at their best it still will hurt your overall score. Just a thought.

Date: Mon May 15 11:41 PM, 2006

Well, I think the answer to that might be if you had standardized scoring, it wouldn't be about right or wrong. It would be about x amount of points for particular skills (for the level you are performing in), x amount of points for deductions (falls, unexecuted stunts, etc...), x amount of points for choreography, overall presentation ... you get the idea. Judges are human, you will get their interpretation of the scoring standards. And that's a good thing. I have heard more reasons why we should move in this direction than reasons not to.

Date: Tue May 16 1:26 AM, 2006

There are many companies that offer a similiar system that the above person has mentioned. For example with American Championships or Athletic Championships the scoring panel does have a sheet that gives them a range of score based on skills. Meaning that if there are 10 points possible for standing tumbling to achieve an 9 or 10 you will need to throw multiple jumps into standing tucks or if you want a 7 or 8 you need to have more than 75% of your team tumble out of jumps...that is just an example. So as a coach going into the competition you do have an idea of what score your teams skills should be around. Some coaches don't check that but I know we do as well as many other coaches in Nor Cal.

Date: Tue May 16 8:18 AM, 2006

Right. I think the real question here is, what would be wrong with all competitions using the same scoring system. What would be wrong with USASF making it consistent? You would still have differences/diversity between competition companies (we know they are all different) and you can choose according to factors that have nothing to do with scoring. You could choose the ones who allow you to videotape, for example. Or whatever other reasons particular competitions are more appealing than others. You would always always always have individuality in your scoring because every judge is different. But having different judges go by the same set of rules just makes the most sense, and I have yet to hear a good arguement for why we shouldn't go in that direction. I wonder what the members of their board think, and has anyone tried to suggest it to them?