Yeah, the Scales Nats and AP mock judging was my first experience with this.
1 Like
We tried a lot of new stuff this year, and as a result we made a LOT of running changes to things during the event to tweak and improve. Was a little stressful, but I feel like we overall made the best of everything.
12 Likes
The judging system changes constantly. We are always discussing it and looking for ways to improve it, while also talking to competitors and fans to better understand what the community whats to reward and how the play styles and attitudes are changing.
People talk a lot about the judging system as though it’s the unyielding monolith that’s blocking innovation when the reality is that it was designed to score players based on what the community felt was the most accurate way to quantify yoyo player, and since those attitudes are always changing the scoring system is constantly trying to adapt to meet new wants and expectations.
25 Likes
This. A lot of people say that we should “blame the system” for picking the wrong winner. But honestly, the system is pretty accurate. The people that place highest in contests really are the best players in the world. Every champion truly deserves the win, even if some people complain that they don’t. I like the way comps work, it’s understandable and comprehensive.
7 Likes
I think this would be a good idea if there was 1/a few judges. If I recall there were twelve people behind the table during 1a finals. Even though the score was remarkably close, the result among 12 judges was that Gentry slightly edged Evan.
But not all of those are clicking
Suppose Asia Pacific has 10 judges, 5 of which are clicking, and 5 of which are doing evals.
If one judge changes one eval by one point, the score changes by 0.2, which is the same as the difference between Hirotaka and Polo’s scores at AP last year.
I appreciate your comment but it’s missing the point of the discussion.
The point was about whether the judging system rewards innovative & creative yoyoing or not.
Have you ever noticed that most unique and amazing tricks come from players who do very well in competitions?
Also, innovative and difficult tech elements do well at competitions. That’s how Janos won. That’s how Zach won. That’s how Takeshi got 2nd. That’s how Ahmad won AP 3 times. A lot of the most innovative players are players who seek to use competitions as outlets for creative and difficult elements.
2 Likes
And that’s how Takeshi got 2nd(not first), that a great example.
Please don’t get start on Takeshi again… there’s already lots of fuss last year.
I’ll shut up now.
Thanks for the insight behind the whole process. Again, I’m basing my viewpoint on the outcome - what freestyles take top honors - and I don’t know what is going into coming up with a fair evaluation system.
It’s certainly good to know that the scoring system evolves with the times. And hey - if the outcome faithfully reflects the expectations of the community and it happens to not favor the yoyoing I want to see more of, then fair enough. I can also admire some good shred even if it’s not my favorite!
3 Likes
That’s exactly it.
This is why I care about competitions and why I feel frustrated when pure technique wins out over creative yoyoing. Because, to me, competitive yoyoing is at its best when it encourages creativity. I love seeing the creative players unveil new tricks on stage and execute them perfectly.
Maybe technique>creativity happens because of current trends, and not necessarily because the judging system… taking what Steve said into account.
PS apologies for the fragmented replies… responding in between finishing breakfast and taking the metro!
1 Like
You gotta understand that some people focus on different tricks. A behind the back regen is harder than any cool slack element. I think that the difficult elements of the meta represent a mastery of various styles. I think the best freestyles are the ones that combine difficult meta tricks and slower tech and slack tricks.
2 Likes
If you want to see how competition scoring has changed over the years, check out this documentary:
It is interesting to hear how being a yoyo champion used to mean being the best 2A player (because there was a time when there was no 1A division yet, since “string tricks” were not seen as a serious play style and “creativity” was discouraged in favor of pure technical prowess.)
7 Likes
Getting 2nd at the WYYC is hardly losing.
6 Likes
“Second place is the first loser.”
– Dale Earnhardt (paraphrased)
8 Likes
“2nd place is hardly losing”
-Moosa Khan (not paraphrased)
There’s always next year in yoyoing. It’s Takeshi’s personal choice to stop competing. If he came back with the intention to win, he would fully capable of doing so.
3 Likes
If you aint first, youre last
Ricky bobby
14 Likes
Fine
The point is, Takeshi is capable of winning. If the system was bad for tech players, he wouldn’t be able to win.
Forgot to mention: Hirotaka Akiba won JN this year.
3 Likes
So I’m not really up on yoyo competition history. Where did yoyo competitions get their start? Was it here in the U.S.? Were trophies always given out for the top three players in each division?
I ask because the notion of awarding trophies to the top three competitors (i.e., “podium winners”) is a European thing and not really an American thing. In the U.S., we only recognize the first place winner, and for the most part nobody remembers (or pays attention to or cares about) the runner-ups.
But yoyo contests have adopted the European “podium” standard. How did that come about?
1 Like