Copyright 1993
What I have tried to do throughout
my coaching career is to find a way to judge more objectively. In
order to do this; I had to somehow deal with my own personal biases.
Having a personal bias means
that there are certain things I like to see when a dive is performed.
The things I like to see are usually the techniques I teach. Such things
would be showing the forward dive before doing the half twist or what I
consider the proper kick out sequences for various dives. If I don’t see
these things happen, I may not score the dive as high if it were closer
to the techniques I teach. The question arises, “Do we want all divers
to do everything the same and look exactly the same?” Also, do we want
all divers to do their dives my way? To extend this thought a little
further, “How many my ways are there?” Obviously in this case, there
would be one for each judge. There are many ways to perform a dive well
and my personal biases should not get in the way of giving that dive a
good score.
One thing that upsets me
is when a judge is asked, “Why did you score that dive low?” the response
is “I just didn’t like it”. Early in my career I was just
as guilty of judging that way but now I feel there has to be a better way
to judge than that. This is when the idea that there are criteria in the
rulebook that have not been applied as yet. At one time, the Forward
Dive Straight was the only dive that was spelled out in the rulebook. It
has since been omitted because even the best coaches in the world couldn’t
agree on what appeared to be a simple point. “Where do you place
the arms during the dive?” Describing dives was a great idea. Because
there was no consensus, describing all dives in the diving table would
prove to be time wasted. It does seem that everyone knows what a good hurdle
looks like and what good height is. It would seem that if there were other
common parameters to base scores on, there wouldn’t be a need to describe
all of the dives.
After some thought, it
seemed that over or short of vertical was one of those parameters accepted
by coaches. All that would have to be done would be to find acceptable
limits for scoring this aspect. This is the point where the idea for “A
New Judging Angle” came to be. It seemed to satisfy the interpretation
of the rules. After using it for a while, I like the idea so much that
I began to apply the premise to twisting dives. In both instances, I began
with failed dives and worked up from there. The intent was not to define
the perfect dive or score. It was intended to help separate the bad
dives from the really bad ones. All of this energy has been directed toward
finding an acceptable way of judging that was more objective than subjective
and more consistent than what appears to be happening now. If a judge combined
the penalty categories with the above criteria, judging might be more consistent
and better than it has been in the past. It should be noted that this
is not intended to be the sole criteria for basing any score.
The National Federation
rulebook was the basis for the whole idea. Only minor changes would need
to be made to convert the whole idea to the US Diving format.
A NEW JUDGING ANGLE
After finishing a judging
clinic, a question from one of the coaches got me to thinking about the
following presentation. The question was; “Is over / short or over /
under twisting given equal penalty weight as that of a form break?”
The answer I gave at the time was, “When it gets to a certain degree,
yes!” The word deficient has been defined only as a partial break in
position. When judging form breaks, a judge must make a decision as
to the degree of the break in order to classify it as deficient or unsatisfactory
(complete or partial). The degree of the break will determine which
range the dive will be scored. It seemed only logical that the same could
hold true for dives that over / under rotate and dives that over / under
twist. Degree would be the answer but there needed to be a way to determine
a range for this kind of deduction.
What I was searching
for was a way to better separate dives that were good from those that had
a twist that wasn’t suppose to be there and those dives that flopped over
or short. This idea was intended to be more objective and not based
on bias of a particular style or technique used to complete any given dive.
In both diagrams,
I began with the definition of failed dive and worked up from there. The
diagram for vertical was the first because it seemed easier to come up
with parameters for judging. After years of seeing dives that entered
the water at various angles, I began to think about what score I would
give and have given dives that landed nearly flat on the stomach or back.
In most cases the score was two or less. This is where I used a compass
and noted that many of my unsatisfactory scores where given to dives that
were within twenty degrees of horizontal.
From here I needed
to set a line for deficient dives. Again the use of a compass helped
to determine that forty-five degrees seemed to be my line of demarcation
for scoring a four. I applied the same idea to twisting and came up
with basically the same system. However to understand the diagram, you
must remember that you are viewing the diagram from the top down rather
than from a side view.
I have used this system
for over seven years now and feel quite comfortable with it. I realize
that it may not be the perfect system but it does reveal my standard for
judging. This system will also give the officials better insight into scoring
dives particularly twisters.
Point of Understanding
It should be obvious that these two diagrams are not the only criteria for judging dives. They do however show that these are areas are important and should also be considered when judging.
In the above, placement of the
diving board either to the left or right of the diagram would indicate the
type of dive being performed. If the end of the board were on the left,
this would be Forward or Backward rotation. If it were on the right, this
would be Reverse or Inward rotation.
Line
A-B represents the finish of the exact amount of twist. Line 0-0 in this
drawing, represents 90 degrees past the intended twist. Most rulebooks
have interpreted this as the range for a failed dive. Current High School rules (2005) dictate that going past line 0-0 is a failed dive.