This year, there is live scoring at VEX Worlds. Scored by refs with tablets on the side of the field, the live scores can be seen on the screen by spectators at the event and viewers online. DWAB Technology is apparently planning to release this functionality in Tournament Manager for the 2016-2017 season.
What do you think about the live scoring at Worlds? Does it make the game more interesting, or does it take away the excitement of waiting for the match score?
Nothing But Net is fairly easy to score live since one just counts each ball as it goes into the goal. In contrast, a game like Sack Attack would be more difficult to score live because it is harder to see the exact number of sacks added or removed from the goal. Does this imply that next year’s game will also be easy to live score?
I don’t think the live scoring has taken away from the experience of watching a match, as unless the match is a total blowout there’s always a chance for a team to come back.
I’ve certainly found it more convenient, though I’ve noticed that sometimes it’s a bit off, though that’s usually fixed.
I like the live scoring feature, however I agree that in games where it is hard to count scoring objects, or there is descoring, it will be very hard to keep track. It’ll be interesting how it plays out next season.
I think the live scoring is cool. As for subtracting from the game, I don’t think it does. There a few matches where the score isn’t updated at all, and there is always a 10-15 point margin of error, which is usually the deciding factor.
They don’t seem to do too well with the live scoring at worlds. Most matches I watch either fail to add any scores for one or both alliances, or flip the scores around somehow, or are insanely off the real value (i.e. showing 50 when it’s actually 200+).
I find they seem to have way too many issues with the numbers they’re putting up for them to be any use to me. Even the commentators seem to make comments about how inaccurate the live scores are.
In NZ we’ve had live scoring at our last 2 Nationals and I think we showed that if the numbers are actually reliable then it’s a nice feature to have.
I agree with @nallen01. The live scoring has been eh, at best. I also like the graphs they’ve used at NZ Nationals better than displaying just the current score. Fortunately Starstruck should be easier to score and I think it’s a good feature.
Not sure if Starstruck will be easier. It will be constantly back and forth, not just adding.
Also, regarding the live scoring in general I am glad they are giving it a shot but I have not been very impressed. I think the main problem though is not the software/hardware but the people running the tablets. When I watch them it seems they are often not really paying attention. Hard to get accurate counts when you are looking around at the audience.
That’s true. Scores changing constantly will make it harder. What I was thinking was that with Nothing But Net, if a scorer misses something, the score gets off and it’s hard to get back on track. In Starstruck, with only a few objects and all in plain sight, that won’t be a problem.
As someone who watched the operation of the livescoring at Worlds and has been involved with livescoring back in New Zealand, I can honestly say that the way livescoring was run at worlds was not ideal. The major problem, as far as I’m concerned, was that the refs were the people doing the livescoring. Because of this the refs were either distracted from their main role or were distracted from the live scoring. This basically meant that neither the refereeing or livescoring were reliable.
I do not want to start an argument over the quality of refereeing at this World Championships, I’m just saying that in my opinion the ability of the referees was degraded by the use of livescoring in this instance.
The problem at the World Championships is there is so much to do, there is a shortage of volunteers. That was no different this year. In New Zealand we use ‘non-experienced’ volunteers to live score and another set of more ‘experienced’ volunteers to score at the end of the match so that the referees are not hindered by those tasks. We strive to provide consistent, high quality refereeing and because we have an abundance of volunteers we have the ability to do it this way. Plain and simply I dont believe worlds can afford the nicety of live scoring at the cost of potentially losing high quality refereeing. If they had extra volunteers, as we do in NZ, then it would be a possibility.
I do like what livescoring brings to the game. I like that the teams playing can see what the livescore is saying, this allows easier coaching. But at the same time, if this information is unreliable it puts undue pressure on students. We always said that livescoring wouldn’t be 100% reliable, its just too difficult to achieve that, but I do think there should be a reasonable error margin on the score, and if scoring is outside of that margin, then livescoring should not be used. I did discuss with Nathan before NZ nats the possibility of adding an error cone around the snake to make it clear that the line was not 100% reliable.
To conclude, I would love to see reliable livescoring utalised at all tournaments and I do not see any problem with livescoring system that DWAB has developed and implemented in TM. I do think that to be used there has to be a set of guidelines so that reliable and consistant refereeing can be maintained as well as ensuring that livescore data can be depended upon.
It doesent add much to the game, but it surely doesent take anything away.
@mattynmax It might take away valuable volunteers who could be doing things like setting up other fields or reffing. If you have a lot of volunteers relative to the size of the competition, no prob.
It was very unreliable for Nothing But Net I belive it should be better for StarStruck it should be easier to keep scores during matches.