It is interesting to note the fluctuating scores from one week to another during championship time. It reaches the point of being almost ridiculous. Over years of observing these score variations, it was not uncommon to see fluctuations of 100 points or more from one week to the next. To me that is ludicrous. A diver usually doesn't vary within a 10 to 15 point difference from their average. That is a 20 to 30 point swing in scores. That is a most reasonable expectation from an 11 dive meet. 70 to 100 points or more becomes highly suspect to anyone who has been around diving for years.

Let's zero in on what's happening to get this kind of variation. What I am going to convey here comes from years of conversations with diving coaches, swimming coaches, officials, parents and the divers themselves. These are people who witnessed the scoring fluctuations first hand. They had no axe to grind other than relaying this information. The best of all supportive evidence was viewing videotapes of some of these events.

What happens at a Sectional site starts with the fact that everyone wants their diver to make it to the State meet. Nobody seems concerned that their Sectional meet is one of 15 that are contested all over the state concurrently. Furthermore, the judging at one site will have a direct impact on the other sites. That impact directly affects every Sectional diver except the Sectional winners. It is unfortunate that the winner is the only one who instantly makes it to State. The rest of us have to wait to see who qualifies as one of the next 32 highest scores. That truly becomes a nail biting experience that no one likes to endure.

The following are some of the things that really stood out and demonstrate the reasons for scoring fluctuations. The scoring ranges for dives as outlined in the rulebook are raised to some degree. Some Sectionals score 1/2 a point higher than usual, while others are much more blatant than that. Some sectionals stayed within the maximum penalties while others almost totally ignored them. A 4 is a 4 whether it is a dual meet, Conference, Sectional or the State Meet. The same holds true for a 2 or a failed dive. I have seen 6's given for a failed dive and 8's given for a dive that would have been a 5 in any other meet. I have also seen the winner of a Sectional Meet walk away with a silver medal. Sometimes the finishing order was very questionable down to 7th place. The thing that bothers me the most are those divers that never make it to the State Meet and maybe should have been there. Years ago, one Section had all 12 of its divers qualify to the State Meet and none of them made it past the first cut. It upsets me to think that judging may be taking the competition away from the divers.

This year's State Meet is a fine example of the point I am making. The winner was the only diver over 400 points. To qualify this year, there were 19 girls that scored over 400 points. There was only one diver who through the semifinals was on the same scoring pace as her sectional score. One out of 16 says something about the sectional scoring. What was noticeable at this year's meet was that there were a number of dives that twisted a bit at entry. Some members of the State panel didn't deduct for that. If 380 points is consideration for high school All America, I see no reason why there were 25 divers above that score.

The reason for inserting officials on the Sectional panels was twofold. There is a 4-week span of time between the last dual meet and the State Meet when the officials did not judge diving or for some, even see diving. The officials just needed a chance to keep up and/or improve their judging skills before sitting on a State Meet panel. The second reason was an attempt to keep the coaches from inflating their scores. In some cases it worked. But in others, the officials were swept along with the questionable scoring.

To the people who advocate removing the officials from judging panels, I would say that it is highly unlikely that will ever happen. A better plan would be to help the officials rather than complaining or demeaning them. Many officials have been scared away from judging. Some coaches will say, "That's ok". But is it? When I first began coaching, I did rant and rave about the judging by the officials and it did absolutely no good what so ever. What we must understand is that by chasing them away, the pool of good officials gets smaller and smaller. What frightens me even more is that the caliber of individuals who want to become officials in the future may not be as high as the ones we are chasing away. Today many activities are having trouble finding people who want to officiate. This is beginning to affect the high school level. Since that time, I have taken a more proactive role. I have been involved in clinics to help them understand how to judge. My suggestion is that all coaches to do the same. Keeping the lines of communications open is definitely the best way to go.

In closing this article, I would ask all coaches to think about the following. At this year's State Meet, I have heard a lot of complaining about the officials and their judging. But I can't ever remember hearing those same complaints about those officials after a Sectional meet. We start confusing officials by scoring a dive high in dual meets because it was the best one we've ever seen our diver do. The only person who knows your diver's best is you. Your diver's best should not affect the legitimacy of the score you give. Maybe it's time to straighten out our own judging because we do set a very poor example for officials to follow. The complaints at the State Meet only seem to mirror what we have demonstrated to them at the various sectionals sites. We must set a better example for them than we have in the past.

A Daily Harald article basically stated that the judging at the State Meet was hard to understand and the solution to that problem was to allow the divers to do their 11 dive list twice at the State Meet. In that context, there is no connection between the judging and the meet format some coaches advocate. The same judges will be used during any format. The solution is not in the meet format, it's in the exposure of the people used as judges for diving. This exposure comes partly from the example we set during the season. Our expectations seem to change more frequently than the weather and is demonstrated by our own erratic scoring from Conference to Sectionals to State. It should not be surprising then that the officials might be somewhat erratic in their scoring. They are only following the example we have shown them.

Back To Current Topics
On line since 11/20/2000