Some judging ideas

I was thinking lately about how click-based scoring does not account for many nuances of skill. For example: trick composition, trick variety, smoothness, innovation and creativity, to name a few.
Because of this, many contests have players placing relatively high with relatively easy routines, unfortunately.

To combat pure speed based scoring, I think a part-criteria, part clicker-based score system would be effective.
Note that this is just an idea, and not fully thought out.

Score breakdown:

50% : Clicker clicks
25% : Technical criteria-score
25% : Performance criteria-score

Technical criteria-score-
Broken down into:
Trick Composition

Performance Criteria-
Broken down into:
Use of the stage
Use of music/Choreography
Crowd interaction
Delivery of tricks/Timing of tricks
“Overall impression”

The main problem I’m finding with this system is that it needs many judges. Having a judge score all 3 sections (clicks, Tech criteria, Performance criteria), would be near impossible to do effectively. In my opinion, a judge could handle scoring, at the max, 2 sections effectively.
Additionally, criteria systems require more knowledgeable and qualified judges than do clicker-based systems.

There are enough judges at the National and World level to handle this system effectively and I think it would work great.

Negative scoring:

I think negative clicks should be halved at the end of the freestyle or thrown out altogether.

Why? The pace of current winning freestyles is now 1 to 2 clicks a second. Therefore, every mistake automatically means missing 2-8 clicks due to time lost. Tacking on an extra click for a mistake (or up to 6 for a two yoyo tangle) seems redundant and unnecessary.

Additionally, taking points off for missed tricks greatly encourages players to plan highly safe freestyles, using old, easy, and non-risky tricks.
This results in boring freestyles that discourage innovation, risk, and newness. This can result in unexciting freestyles that are boring for an audience and bad for the promotion of competitive yoyoing to a mass audience.

What do you guys think? =)



I agree! This would help people recognize who the more unique players are.

I like these ideas so much, I’ll agree with them on this forum as well.

I think well.

I think you are my hero.

But seriously, this seems to be a step up. Its going to have some flaws, but what judging system doesn’t?

Very true. Look at the referees for basketball, football, or any other sport. It’s not 100% correct and never will be.

Such a good idea though. Very thought out too. :smiley:

smart… smarter than anything i could have come up with

Yeah, well thought out, fair, just downright a system that makes sense. Great idea Augie!

Is this a way for the slower players to get higher placings? I mean Augie, Your not slow by any means but this seams that it will pay off for the faster players to slow down and if that happens then they will hit every trick and be impossible to beat.

I said I liked it on another board but I really started thinking about it and came up with the above statement.

Wow Augie! I really agree with this!

Happy Throwing! =]

good ideas from the purveyor of all that is good in the world also known as Augie.

the difference to me, is that while referees in other sports ENFORCE the rules, they don’t have any power over the actual scoring of goals, runs, touchdowns, etc. if a guy hits a triple, we don’t need someone to communicate to us that it was, in fact, a 3-bagger.

yeah, they can blow a big play and severely impact the game with human error, but imo, ALL we have right now is viewed through the prism of human error. in those other sports, the competitors know just what theyre training for and how their performance is measured EVERY time, and all of the audience/participants can see the score and understand how it got that way.

putting a ball through a hoop while an official makes sure you don’t step over a line is NOT comparable to executing a blazing-fast combination of expressive tricks while an official gauges its “value” (along with physically clicking it, comparing it to what he’s seen before, and considering vagaries like “stage presence” or “creativity”).

… no i’m not saying we shouldn’t have contests or try to make them better/more fun. i’m just saying that with anything approximating the subjective model we have, we shouldn’t give a crap about who wins (or even makes finals). it’s a blast to watch, and we’re blessed with watching incredible, creative stuff unfolding on stage. the value there far exceeds that of the results.

good idea, but in they way you made it, it sounds like the 1a starters like me would be more likely to place lower just for being unique? i have some really cool combos/tricks and they involve The Matrix and stuff. but i would place lower because of not having cooler combos??? it is all based on a players opinion and thoughts. it is a good idea, but not a great one. and… shouldn’t this be in the contest section?

Agreed Augie!

yah i agree but are you only making this because you dident make it to the finals

Wow. No. His ideas aren’t helping him much and would probably hurt him more.

big impact there - :o

i agree

The others are right. If I land my tricks as they are right now, the current scoring system plays to my style much more than the system I’m proposing.

Actually, no. The current system tends to favor high speed tricks with as many elements as possible, thereby favoring somewhat low risk, simple tricks instead of more creative or difficult tricks.
Fortunately, the best players often still win with the current system, but it’s not always the case.

This new system, with it’s technical criteria, is designed to combat low risk, simple tricks by adding in additional scoring sections for things like difficulty, creativity, and style.

so if i was a beginner 1a, i would place low because of that?!