I guess SCR had a new contest scoring format - http://scr.yoyocontest.com/results/
They used a tech cap instead of normalizing the tech scores.
What are your thoughts on the tech cap?
Do you think this should be the new system for all contests?
Why or why not?
I have my own thoughts on this, but I want to here yours first.
I have no problem with a tech cap, but that’s because I’d rather see yo-yoing move away from pure speed and string hits and put just a little more focus on the overall performance. Tech is awesome for other players to watch, but if yo-yoing ever wants to grow outside of the niche it’s in it’s going to have to appeal to a bigger audience who can actually understand and appreciate what’s going on.
Here’s the problem I have. In a contest with the tech cap, most of the serious players will reach the cap. That means that they will all have the same tech scores. That means that the tricks themselves don’t really matter. I think that at least half of a person’s score should depend on his tricks.
I’m all for moving yoyoing toward innovation, but a tech cap is not going to do that.
I dont quite get how this is supposed to work. Further down that page, no one seemed to have reached any cap, which I assume is 50 (out of 100).
The raw tech score for a 3 min freestyle is typically 100+ but there is no upper limit. Does this mean like they simply divide the raw score by 3 or so, and anything above 150 is capped to 50?
I think so.
But now that I think about it, I’m not sure how the tech cap would work. Normalizing the scores makes it so that each judge contributes the same amount. Some judges click liberally, while others don’t. Normalizing evens it up.
What information did you base this off of?
And why do you say you understand how the cap works? You cannot know the details, because there are none. I’d say your post is a little premature.
As my understanding goes, the traditional way is that the highest score given in the whole competition by a single judge is used as the base, and all players average score between judges is divided by this. Like if a player gets 150/145/140 by 3 judges and another one gets 120/130/140, the first will get a final score of 145/150(times watever the full score is, 50, 60 or 70) and the second 130/150. I still dont have too reliable sources, just that someone explained to me once why the highest tech scorer does not automatically get full score.
I think you got it. Here is a reliable source -
BTW the full score is 65.
The biggest problem to the cap system that everyone should agree with is that liberal judges have more influence than conservative ones. I guess that is just a detail though.
Edit: by liberal judges, I mean judges who give a lot of clicks, not politically liberal. Same with conservative judges.
???
Personally I think if the tech cap does kick in, then all the underlings who have to work to get to 65 don’t get to have a “performance”
Here is how I see it.
A lot of people want to move yoyoing away from speed and start encouraging innovation and performance.
The best way to encourage innovation and performance is to make these two things win contests.
The question is: what system will make those two things win.
The tech cap is suggested because it is supposed to be better than the current system.
The tech cap makes it so that top competitors will often tie in tech, making the tie breaker preformance.
The only way innovation would be encouraged by this system would be if the judges take innovation into account in the performance categories.
The system might even discourage innovation because people may play it safe and do generic, easy tricks to get high cleanliness score.
Thoughts?
I’m not sure I follow you. Are you saying he would agree or disagree with me?
Also, just to clarify, generic, easy tricks give you a high cleanliness score only because it is easy to not mess up with easy tricks.
