San Jose Results

Date: Sun Dec 10 1:09 PM, 2006

RE: San Jose Results

Date: Sun Dec 10 1:53 PM, 2006

We knew going into this competition that we would have to hit almost a perfect routine to win. GSSA favors motions and powers style, clean routines with less "flash". Going to this competition is just another challenge for us every year. Some companies choose to only go to competitions which they know they score well at. In my opinion a truly good team will score well at any competition. I dont think our team deserved to win, it is what is is. It is one competition and people will all have their opinions on who is the better team.
And thats exactly what it is an opinon.

Date: Sun Dec 10 2:22 PM, 2006

Review wrote:

I think yesterdays competition was great overall. All of the teams did a great job. I wasn't pleased with some of the results. I think that NCE Sr. Coed 5 did a better job than Motions. They has a shakey beginning, buy they had more fulls and more difficulty. CO did an AWESOME job in Youth Lv 3. They should have won that divison. Again everyone did awesome! Can't wait to see Northern Cali and Sol Cal teams compete against each other at state.

My daughter is on the Youth lv3 team for CO so I thank you for that!! They did do a great job. So did all of the other teams too. It will be nice to know how they all scored.

Date: Sun Dec 10 2:55 PM, 2006

Another Opinion wrote:

Motions was over all cleaner, even with their touchdowns. Nor Cal was more entertaining and I think more difficulty, but did drop stunts and have some tumbling busts. I think the placements for this comp was correct. Motions could be more flashy (but I think that's not cheergyms style) and Nor Cal needs to continue cleaning up their routine. I think GSSA posts actual scores from their comps, it will be interesting to see what the judges actual numbers were.

If you're saying that NCE dropped stunts and having some touchdowns (not denying it at all). I do recall Motions dropping one of their partner stunts and also missing a basket during the tumbling section. I do recall counting at least 7 touchdowns including one girl landing on her butt with Motions coed during her tumbling pass, on top of kids NOT throwing their standing tucks. SO if you're going with a safer, less difficult routine, and using "illusional" tumbling...IT should at least be flawless.

Date: Sun Dec 10 3:31 PM, 2006

After watching both teams I thought it was a toss up but guessed that it would go to motions. Both teams made mistakes, for example, motions had more touches in running tumbling, nce had more touches in standing tumbling, nce had more baskets and stunts but dropped 2, motions dropped one, nce had more fulls, but motions had more doubles, and thats only analyzing some of the basics of the routines. Fact of the matter is that nce knew that because gssa score sheets tend to favor a cheergyms/power style that they would have to be perfect to win. And they weren't perfect so it was okay because they made a lot of improvements since last time, had a great performance and they know what mistakes they need to fix and the work they need to do to get better. And after talking to a motions member, they seemed to feel the same way, both teams made mistakes so thats the way this competition went. I can't wait to see what the performances and outcomes will be next time the two teams go head to head!

Date: Sun Dec 10 3:35 PM, 2006

i think wrote:

After watching both teams I thought it was a toss up but guessed that it would go to motions. Both teams made mistakes, for example, motions had more touches in running tumbling, nce had more touches in standing tumbling, nce had more baskets and stunts but dropped 2, motions dropped one, nce had more fulls, but motions had more doubles, and thats only analyzing some of the basics of the routines. Fact of the matter is that nce knew that because gssa score sheets tend to favor a cheergyms/power style that they would have to be perfect to win. And they weren't perfect so it was okay because they made a lot of improvements since last time, had a great performance and they know what mistakes they need to fix and the work they need to do to get better. And after talking to a motions member, they seemed to feel the same way, both teams made mistakes so thats the way this competition went. I can't wait to see what the performances and outcomes will be next time the two teams go head to head!

I think this is a really good, fair analysis. I think mistakes-wise, they were equal. Motions just had the cleaner, better choreographed routine and that's what won out.

Date: Sun Dec 10 3:49 PM, 2006

cleaner maybe..

but better choreographed?

if you like boring routines, then sure.

Date: Sun Dec 10 3:56 PM, 2006

I just like routines where a third of the time isn't spent running around like maniacs in between each section. Motions routine had no distinct "transition" points, the whole thing just flowed.

Date: Sun Dec 10 4:08 PM, 2006

I actually really disagree with the "running like maniacs" I think that Nor Cals transitions are much better than south bay's were, I didn't see anyone running accross the floor from spot to spot. Motions did have better transitions...however I still thought that the choreography of Nor Cal's routine was better. But that is a personal opinion of style, each team is distinctly different in their style.

Date: Sun Dec 10 4:29 PM, 2006

There aren't many ACTUALLY boring Senior Coed Level 5 routines.

Date: Sun Dec 10 4:42 PM, 2006

NCE put up 10 stunts with 35 (?) members. Motions put up 7 stunts with 28 (?) members. Does that make NCE get higher scores because they have more stunts with more people? Or do the judges look at how many stunts are up based on percentage of members?

Date: Sun Dec 10 4:53 PM, 2006

I don't think GSSA rewards for higher percentage of stunts. Again, back to the cleaner & simpler philosophy. There are other comp companies that incorporate number of stunt groups and number of tumbling skills directly into their score sheets, as well as number of touchdowns, stunt bobbles, stunt falls, etc.

Date: Sun Dec 10 4:56 PM, 2006

For level 5, you want to max out the best you can. So take your number of total team members and divide by 3 - whatever whole number you get, that's how many groups you would have to max out.

So with 35 members, you would have 11, with 28 you would have 9. Neither team maxed out but they're both very close and I think at this point in the season it's not really necessary - it's more important to have as many in the air that will hit as possible. There's no sense in putting up 9 if only 7 are hitting. Get it clean for now and in the meantime work on getting stronger to add more groups. And GSSA doesn't really score that way anyway so there's no sense in breaking your neck to throw in a couple of groups that might fall. Better off to just put in what you can hit. But for American Championships and other places where you get bonus points for maxing out, you really want to go for it.

Date: Sun Dec 10 7:56 PM, 2006

but the team with 35 and 10 stunts at ctc would still get a higher score than the team with 28 and 7 stunts. because in the past they have times number of stunts by body positions. honestly i think ctc has the greatest scoring system. the more difficult team wins over the lower level team that hits perfectly. its how it should be. difficulty with minor mistakes should always win. because chances are.. at worlds those mistakes arent gonna happen and you are going to be sending the best possible team there b/c of their difficulty level.

Date: Sun Dec 10 9:31 PM, 2006

They were correct the past three seasons, but they threw their judging system out the window this season b/c coaches were not understanding how they were judging. They used to judge off of judges scores, deductions panel, and technical merit scores. Tech merit is what you are talking about... they are not doing that anymore. They are soley judging off a combined deductions score with overall judges likeabiliy. So if you have 5 stunt groups but you hit and another team has 9 stunt groups and they drop, looks like tech merit wont come to save you. It sucks huh? I loved their judging. I thought it was super fair and waaaay fun.

Date: Sun Dec 10 9:36 PM, 2006

I agree. We have always been a big supporter of the American Championships because of the scoring system. I wonder how much things will change now that they are owned by Varsity as well.

Date: Sun Dec 10 9:44 PM, 2006

since when are they owned by varisty??

that makes me sad
ctc is nothing like USA or UCA and should never be.

Date: Sun Dec 10 9:54 PM, 2006

They were bought about a month ago. I was very suprised as well. I know that the main focus will stay the same but changes like the score sheet are upsetting.

Date: Sun Dec 10 9:59 PM, 2006

I'm only going to say this once and not argue it. I just want to make my point. You can agree with me, or you can disagree, I could really care less.

What I disliked about the American Championships scoring system (and this was the only thing I disliked about AC, I loved everything else) was that you could perform a skill and get points for it even if the skill is not technically sound. The deductions came from bobbles or touch downs. What if someone sticks an arched or piked layout? That goes for every skill out in the book. You could perform the skill and not bobble or touch down and you would get points for the skill. (so you have a level 4 team and you need those layout points, tell the tucks to just straighten their legs. even if it doesn't look like a clean technical layout you're not losing points.)

In this day and age of gyms and cheerleading companies worried about losing insurance companies to cover us I think it is important to reward for clean technical execution. Because clean technical execution equals safer skills which in turn equals fewer injuries.

Nelson

Date: Sun Dec 10 10:08 PM, 2006

agreed.
But at least american championships were much more specific than lots of companies such as USA or GSSA