Routines

[shredzilla]

I think we can still have this discussion with out citing current events....sorry!! so getting back on point, should routines be judged more artistically or more technically? How are they being judged now? Does this represent the best footbagger? Is it supposed to represent the person with the best game or the person with the best performance?
I really like the representation prof. brought up...

Shred 30: Technical
Rippin': Consistency
Routines: Creativity
Circle: Technical, Consistency, Creativity

So........who's the best?

No, as my understanding Routines do not represent solely creativity, otherwise Jorden would've won hands down, given that consistancy is thrown out the window.

I gave my explanation in my previous post, but it's a reflection of all 3 elements. That's why it was so close between Dave and Penske. I think the judges just felt that Dave's routine reflected the most Technical Ability, Consistancy and Creativity, where as Penske's strongpoint was mostly Technical, some Creativity, and some Consistancy by comparison. Jorden became a wild card, and won 2nd spot for having two strong elements: Technical ability and Creativity. His consistancy suffered with the drops. Had he not made those drops, he would've won hands down, as he'd have executed all 3 elements of footbag perfectly well.

You mentioned that you wanted to push current events aside, and then in the same post you say So......who's the best? That was my assessment of how routines are judged, and why I think the judges felt Dave's routine was the best. Dave also won 3 of the 4 events you'd mentioned, including Circle Comp which you and others claim represents all 3 elements. Does that make him the best? Maybe, maybe not. But it makes him the Champion of this tournament, which in turn gives him the title of US Champion of this footbag seasonal year.

[bustinjustin]

who's the best was a rhetorical question. I really wanted to know how we arrive there. Which you evaluated all the events, which I think should be the case, not just one event that is supposed to portray one aspect, the performance part of shred.

[james_dean]

I gave my explanation in my previous post, but it's a reflection of all 3 elements. That's why it was so close between Dave and Penske. I think the judges just felt that Dave's routine reflected the most Technical Ability, Consistancy and Creativity, where as Penske's strongpoint was mostly Technical, some Creativity, and some Consistancy by comparison. Jorden became a wild card, and won 2nd spot for having two strong elements: Technical ability and Creativity. His consistancy suffered with the drops. Had he not made those drops, he would've won hands down, as he'd have executed all 3 elements of footbag perfectly well.

Bam. Spot on.

[dyalander]

should routines be judged more artistically or more technically? How are they being judged now? Does this represent the best footbagger? Is it supposed to represent the person with the best game or the person with the best performance?

-Neither, the current system of an artistic and a technical score combined to make a final score is fine.
-It varies from one set of judges to the next (and this is the real problem if there is one, because that variance can be quite large when it should only be minimal)
-No, but so what.
-How can it be anything other than best performance, the judges are judging the perfomance, the players are giving a performance - that perfomance requires both skill and artistry and the final results should reflect how those performances stacked up, this won't necessarily reflect how the performers stack up as footbagers, but in any competition you can only go on the performance in that competition so there is no way of guaranteing the best footbagger will win s/he might have an off day, or be poorly prepared etc etc. No matter if its routines or circle or shred30, one discipline may in your opinion be a better reflection of general footbag ability that the others, fine, but that doesn't mean we should change or abandon those others.

[Jimpenske]

I don't know much about judging but I thought using floor space was taken into consideration. I thought David hit his routine a little better than me. And him being seated 1st going into the final round helped. But I thought I was going to get 2nd at least. Oh well, I'm glad it was so close. I thought we all had great routines. Props to Dave and Jorden for being two of the best in the world. I'll leave it at that.

[dyalander]

OK sorry about the double post but I got a chance to watch Dave, JOrdan and Jim's routines from the US Open and see why this discussion came about. They were all very good routines with different pros and cons, and subsequently very difficult to set apart. Rather than keeping it all rhetorical maybe using these three routines as an example is a good way to proceed.
I watched each once and judged them as i if i were a judge (obviously theres a difference between being there and watching video but i don't think its too big a deal in this case.)
My scores were DC: Art - 4.9 / Tech - 4.9, he had clear choreographed sections which were tied to sections of the song. Good variety, plenty solid tricks, good shuffle. O.K crowd interaction.
JM: Art - 5.0 / Tech - 4.9, excelent crowd interaction and a well choreographed routine hurt by drops and bails. Good form and variety, solid links.
JP: Art - 4.8 / Tech 5.1, clearly choreographed, some good use of specific music cues, but song slightly didnt fit - seemed slightly disjointed in relation to the shred, the final section worked in spite of the music rather than with it - this can be its own sort of choreography but I just felt that the shred didnt entirely suit. Excelent shuffle, and OK crowd interaction. excelent form and control.
You're welcome to disagree with these judgements (but keep in mind you only get a single real time viewing as a judge, this is enought to be fairly rigorous but you can't get down into infintismal details, and you're not comparing the routines to each other per say but rating them on a fixed scale)
Regardless I think the scores illustrate how the structure of routines can get caught out a little - if you combine the scores to give a final score DC = 9.8, JM = 9.9, JP = 9.9 (The tie isn't the problem - it'd pan out using multiple judges) But if you use that ranking system that often gets used DC = 4, JM = 3, JP = 4. So the same scores can give two different results. Personally I prefer the combined scores, it makes the progress easier to follow for the crowd.
The other thing this shows is that artistic is already a key component even though it supposedly only contributes to half the score- Even with his drops JM's solid choreography kept him right up there against two routines with less drops and excelent techincal skill. If you think about it and break it down the current system already places higher value on artistic elemnet - While on the technical side you have 6 key elements - trick difficulty, combo difficulty, variety, cleanliness, form and drops, on the artistic side you have only 4 key elements choreography, crowd interaction, usage of the stage space, drops. As a result each inividual artistic element carries greater weight than each individual technical element.