Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [bbshop] Number of Judges

Expand Messages
  • Marti Lovejoy
    ... Not financial as much as logistical. We have 30 regions. Many contest weekends have 6 contests going on simutaneously. That s 24 judges per weekend.
    Message 1 of 12 , Mar 31 12:28 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Dan Roberson wrote:

      >Just curious as to why SAI regional contests have only one judge per category,
      >but SPEBSQSA has 2 or 3 per category for district contests and five per category for International. Possibly a financial constraint but I really don't know.
      >
      >

      Not financial as much as logistical. We have 30 regions. Many contest
      weekends have 6 contests going on simutaneously. That's 24 judges per
      weekend. And judges can't be expected to judge six or seven weekends in
      a season (they do have other lives and obstacles like jobs, you know).
      Our training program is producing new judges but long-term judges are
      also retiring (or probably wanting to) and the system just cannot handle
      double panels for regionals.

      --
      Marti Lovejoy
      Proud "Owner" of SING: sponsor of a YSF Scholarship in 2002
      Score Collector for SING (and the site below)
      Life Member, Reg 10, TX, USA - 30 years so far
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SweetAdelinesScores/messages
      LovejoyMar @ att.net <--remove spaces
    • Dan Roberson
      Just curious as to why SAI regional contests have only one judge per category, but SPEBSQSA has 2 or 3 per category for district contests and five per category
      Message 2 of 12 , Mar 31 2:20 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Just curious as to why SAI regional contests have only one judge per category,
        but SPEBSQSA has 2 or 3 per category for district contests and five per category for International. Possibly a financial constraint but I really don't know.

        Dan Roberson
        chapter-mate of the rich and famous
        "Handsome" Dave Philo


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Bob Caldwell
        The SAIs have a lot more Regions than we have Districts. Could be part of the reason though I m sure someone will come up with a better answer than that.
        Message 3 of 12 , Mar 31 3:52 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          The SAIs have a lot more Regions than we have Districts. Could
          be part of the reason though I'm sure someone will come up with a
          better answer than that.



          =====

          Harmony-us-ly, BobCaldwell@... O{/////}
          ENCORE! www.geocities.com/EncoreQ

          HARMONIZERS www.Harmonizers.org
          CITY SLICKERS www.geocities.com/SlickerLeadQ
          2003 International Senior Bronze Medalist Quartet (retired)
          Easy Street Mixed Quartet
        • Glenda and Danny Millgate
          I don t know the official reason, but I m thinking...if your judges are well trained and practised and good at what they do (as ours are!) why would you bother
          Message 4 of 12 , Mar 31 5:06 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            I don't know the official reason, but I'm thinking...if your judges are well
            trained and practised and good at what they do (as ours are!) why would you
            bother having more than one for each category? Seems a bit redundant to me.
            Of course, international competition is quite different, and I think that
            the double panel is a good thing there.

            I have had discussions with judges in the past about the number of contests
            vs the number of judges. Trying to juggle personal schedules against
            regional schedules and taking into account the fact that many judges also
            compete makes it a logistical nightmare just to get four judges to each
            comp, let alone eight!

            Cheers, Glenda

            Glenda Millgate
            Director, Brindabella Chorus
            Bass of 'Synchronicity'
            Regional Education Faculty
            Webmistress www.sweetadelines.org.au
            Southern Cross Region #34 Australia
          • Brian Gordon
            ... Because judges are human ... Haven t you been to a contest where one judge was off , at least for you? When you see scores in one category of 79, 78,
            Message 5 of 12 , Mar 31 5:29 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 11:06:56AM +1000, Glenda and Danny Millgate wrote:
              > I don't know the official reason, but I'm thinking...if your judges are well
              > trained and practised and good at what they do (as ours are!) why would you
              > bother having more than one for each category? Seems a bit redundant to me.
              > Of course, international competition is quite different, and I think that
              > the double panel is a good thing there.
              > [...]

              Because judges are human ... Haven't you been to a contest where one judge was
              "off", at least for you? When you see scores in one category of 79, 78, and
              62, you are glad the 62 wasn't the only one there!

              --
              +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
              | Brian Gordon -->briang@...<-- <This space for rent> |
              +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
            • Sammonds, Steve
              ... Of course, don t forget the contest when you see scores of 62, 63, and 75 and thankful that the 75 WAS there! -Steve Sammonds [Non-text portions of this
              Message 6 of 12 , Mar 31 6:43 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                Brian Gordon wrote:

                >Because judges are human ... Haven't you been to a contest where one judge was
                > "off", at least for you? When you see scores in one category of 79, 78, and
                > 62, you are glad the 62 wasn't the only one there!

                Of course, don't forget the contest when you see scores of 62, 63, and 75 and thankful that the 75 WAS there!

                -Steve Sammonds


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Sammonds, Steve
                ... For all the training, judging is still subjective. And in SPEBSQSA each judge brings to the pit his own collection of life experiences through which the
                Message 7 of 12 , Mar 31 6:59 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Glenda Millgate wrote:

                  >I don't know the official reason, but I'm thinking...if your judges are well
                  > trained and practised and good at what they do (as ours are!) why would you
                  > bother having more than one for each category? Seems a bit redundant to me.

                  For all the training, judging is still subjective. And in SPEBSQSA each judge brings to the pit his own collection of life experiences through which the performance is filtered. Having just gone back to read portions of the C&J Manual this weekend, I was reminded of this again since it is actually mentioned in the manual. As a performer, I prefer contests with double and triple panels because my experience is that the average score of the multiple judges is the more accurate measurement of your performance. I have a real problem with single panels, not because I don't trust the judges but because I always find that having more than one opinion (reflected by a score) is more valuable than just one opinion. If the contest was solely about picking the winner, I wouldn't be as concerned. But I go to contest for more than just "competing"; I go to see how I measure up against the current standards and receive as many certified judges' opinions that I can get my hands on. I go not only to sing, perform, and compete, but also to learn.

                  There is a good logistical reason for having a multiple panel as well. I don't know if Sweet Adelines have evaluation sessions after each contest. I would think the logistics of doing so would be near impossible with a single panel. In SPEBSQSA, we get to sit and discuss our performance with one judge from each category for a specified period of time. That time is determined in part by how many competitors there are and the size of the panel. For example, in our NorCal West division contest in a couple weeks, we will have 18 quartets competing with a single panel of judges. So we are likely to get much less time per judge as we would if there were to be a double panel.

                  So there are my two arguments of why I would bother to have more than one judge per category. But yes, logistics and economics do come into play so I understand the reasons why we can't always get what we want. But I sure do prefer double and triple panels when I'm competing.

                  In harmony,
                  Steve Sammonds
                  Music Director, Palo Alto-Mountain View Chapter
                  The Peninsulaires, 2002 FWD Small Chapter Chorus Champions (singing fourth in Santa Rosa)
                  Lead, Adagio (singing eleventh in Santa Rosa)


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Shelley Herman
                  The classic reason to have multiple panels happened many years ago at R21 (or maybe old R11) contest. A fine comedy quartet, The Norse Winds, came out and did
                  Message 8 of 12 , Mar 31 10:56 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    The classic reason to have multiple panels happened many years
                    ago at R21 (or maybe old R11) contest.

                    A fine comedy quartet, The Norse Winds, came out and did a
                    hilarious send up on the Jeannette Macdonald and Nelson Eddy
                    movies of the 1930's, with two ladies dressed in big flowing
                    dresses and two dressed as Mounties.

                    The young showmanship judge had never seen one of those movies
                    and did not have a clue what the whole bit was about. That was
                    almost as funny as the send up!

                    Shelley A. Herman
                    Whittier Chapter
                    saherman@...
                  • Matt Swann
                    ... one judge was ... 79, 78, and ... Very good point. Even the best judge in the Society can be off from time to time (yes, even you Gene.) When humans are
                    Message 9 of 12 , Apr 1, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, Brian Gordon <briang@p...> wrote:
                      > Because judges are human ... Haven't you been to a contest where
                      one judge was
                      > "off", at least for you? When you see scores in one category of
                      79, 78, and
                      > 62, you are glad the 62 wasn't the only one there!

                      Very good point. Even the best judge in the Society can be off from
                      time to time (yes, even you Gene.) When humans are involved, it will
                      never be completely objective. Until we come up with judging
                      machines (Which, by the way, wouldn't require hotel rooms, plane
                      tickets and food that we pay the judges for **wink wink** :-))

                      Yet its the human aspect that makes judges so great. It makes the
                      competition less certain. There is no "formula" for winning
                      contests, because certain judges like this sound or that sound a
                      little better. They can still tell a good sound from a bad one, of
                      course, but the uncertainty adds a bit of excitment to contests!

                      Matt Swann
                      Coral Gables, FL
                      Baritone, the Miamians
                      Choral Studies at the University of Miami
                      Tenor, University of Miami Chorale
                      AOL Screen Name: IlovetheVM
                    • David Roberts
                      For that matter, let s use a *secular* example and just have instant replay judge all plays on the football field or baseball diamond. Judges, like umpires and
                      Message 10 of 12 , Apr 2, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        For that matter, let's use a *secular* example and just have instant
                        replay judge all plays on the football field or baseball diamond.
                        Judges, like umpires and referees, are part of the *games* that we
                        play each season. Their experiences and skills are what we
                        contestants are measured against and I, for one, would not have it
                        any other way. How else can we be sure that our *work* is
                        entertaining to *real people*?
                        Dave Roberts
                        bari - Final Note / Tulsa Founders Chorus

                        --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, "Matt Swann" <vmfaninflorida@y...>
                        wrote:
                        > --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, Brian Gordon <briang@p...> wrote:
                        > > Because judges are human ... Haven't you been to a contest where
                        > one judge was
                        > > "off", at least for you? When you see scores in one category of
                        > 79, 78, and
                        > > 62, you are glad the 62 wasn't the only one there!
                        >
                        > Very good point. Even the best judge in the Society can be off
                        from
                        > time to time (yes, even you Gene.) When humans are involved, it
                        will
                        > never be completely objective. Until we come up with judging
                        > machines (Which, by the way, wouldn't require hotel rooms, plane
                        > tickets and food that we pay the judges for **wink wink** :-))
                        >
                        > Yet its the human aspect that makes judges so great. It makes the
                        > competition less certain. There is no "formula" for winning
                        > contests, because certain judges like this sound or that sound a
                        > little better. They can still tell a good sound from a bad one, of
                        > course, but the uncertainty adds a bit of excitment to contests!
                        >
                        > Matt Swann
                        > Coral Gables, FL
                        > Baritone, the Miamians
                        > Choral Studies at the University of Miami
                        > Tenor, University of Miami Chorale
                        > AOL Screen Name: IlovetheVM
                      • rogsp10r@aol.com
                        In a message dated 4/2/03 8:01:23 AM, drobpam@swbell.net writes:
                        Message 11 of 12 , Apr 2, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          In a message dated 4/2/03 8:01:23 AM, drobpam@... writes:

                          << Their experiences and skills are what we

                          contestants are measured against and I, for one, would not have it

                          any other way. How else can we be sure that our *work* is

                          entertaining to *real people*? >>

                          Ummm, sing for real audiences as opposed to convention/judge audiences?

                          Of all the wonderful things I think judges do, making sure that we're
                          entertaining to real people AIN'T one of 'em.

                          Roger Payne
                          Music Judge
                        • Jack Martin
                          Hi Rog and all, It took a bit of thinking about, but I think you are right about what our judges NOT do! ( That being, making sure we entertain real people.
                          Message 12 of 12 , Apr 2, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi Rog and all, It took a bit of thinking about, but I think you are right
                            about what our judges NOT do! ( That being, making sure we entertain real
                            people. )

                            I think it's difficult to identify all the things our judges do, but it seem
                            to be a measurement of performance against certain criteria, that if done
                            well, will surely result in entertaining those who are dedicated to the
                            Barbershop style. And possibly to those who just enjoy good, well tuned, a
                            cappella, four part music. (real people?)

                            Am I screwed up, or does this make sense?
                            In Harmony
                            Jack Martin

                            Rog says:

                            Of all the wonderful things I think judges do, making sure that we're
                            entertaining to real people AIN'T one of 'em.

                            Roger Payne
                            Music Judge
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.