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

Re: Recent judging questions

Expand Messages
  • Alan Gordon
    ... except to ... or share SCORES, ... terchnical ... To reiterate... - It would be inappropriate to give actual scores, but suffice it to say that SGC s
    Message 1 of 11 , Oct 31, 2007
      --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, JHunna1@... wrote:
      > Hi Charles - I don't have that much to add to the dixcussion,
      except to
      > point out that the huddling has been encoursged NOT to normalize
      or share SCORES,
      > only to deal with levels of mandated DEDUCTIONS - penalties for
      terchnical
      > infractions.
      >

      To reiterate...

      - It would be inappropriate to give actual scores, but suffice it
      to say that SGC's scores were NOT equal from judge to judge. And
      the SNG and PRS scores were still pretty good.

      - If the huddle hadn't happened in order to decide the presence of
      one or two songs (NOT scores) then some zeroes would have appeared
      for the second song, which none of us wants to see.

      Alan
      gotchbari@...
    • Alexander Boltenko
      Rich, I noticed that recently (since last Spring contest) judges are not giving their score sheets to the chorus. Was there a change in policy and where do
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 1, 2007
        Rich,

        I noticed that recently (since last Spring contest) judges are not giving
        their score sheets to the chorus. Was there a change in policy and where do
        these score sheets end up? In the past I was told they were tossed if no
        one asked for them. They were useful to recall a particular judge comments
        at evals. Why do you keep them now?

        On 11/1/07, Rich Hasty <rich_hasty@...> wrote:
        >
        > Chas...
        >
        > Good post. If you were in Denver this past summer, you would have
        > seen the members of the Music category "huddle" every so often. These
        > happened when what was presented raised questions regarding the
        > lowering of scores due to perceived rules infractions. The actual
        > scores were not discussed.
        >
        > I was on that panel in Denver as I was a few weeks ago at the EVG
        > District Fall Convention. In EVG, we also "huddled" from time to
        > time. Again, we DID NOT discuss the amount, if any, to lower a score.
        >
        > As a point of clarification, we discussed this very issue at our
        > category school this past summer (where we spent about 35 hours
        > training together). We now have to denote every single infraction,
        > whether it is 1 point or 20, on our score sheets, on the back of the
        > score sheets that we turn in, and on the front of the score sheets
        > that we turn in. This is new to us, and we are still finding our way.
        > Your patients are much appreciated. The intent, by the spring of
        > 2008, is to have asterisks placed by the total music score on the
        > public score sheets so that people will be better informed of what
        > went into a score.
        >
        > I hope that this helps.
        >
        > Rich
        >
        >
        > --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, "Charles D. Denzler" <justdoit110@...>
        > wrote:
        > >
        > > Hi everyone,
        > >
        > > Coming out of lurk mode to throw something out for your
        > > consideration. Two recent instances of possibly questionable
        > judging (in
        > > JAD and M-AD contests) triggered a thought in my mind.
        > >
        > > I have always assumed that our judges, being so highly
        > trained to
        > > evaluate our performances as we present them on the day of a
        > contest, are
        > > expected to render their judgements as individuals with no outside
        > > influence. Indeed, most of the time their scores are remarkably
        > uniform
        > > and consistent, which is to be expected.
        > >
        > > What was reported in the two instances cited above was that
        > the
        > > judges were observed to get in a huddle, presumably to come to some
        > > agreement as to how to score a particular performance.
        > >
        > > I submit that this huddling may have resulted in a lower
        > final
        > > score for the contestants than what they might have received by
        > simply
        > > adding up individual judges' scores. I further submit that this is
        > > rather unfair to the contestants involved. Just my humble
        > opinion. Chas
        > >
        > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Charles Denzler~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        > > Fiction & Fact from Uncle John's Bathroom Reader:
        > > Each of the Statue of Liberty's fingernails weighs 100
        > > pounds.
        > > ~~~~~~~~~It's great singing with the Bryn Mawr PA
        > Mainliners~~~~~~~~~
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >


        --
        Alexander Boltenko
        aboltenko@...
        VP for Marketing and Public Relations
        KALAMAZOO BARBERSHOP CHORUS
        Cell 269-501-SING
        http://barbershopharmony.org
        Like my domain name?
        Get your ALIAS account from our website!
        Our new CD "The Road We've Traveled"
        Is available at http://barbershopharmony.org/cd_now!.htm and
        Logo merchandise at http://cafepress.com/kalamazoo_music


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • T
        The mere fact that the judges had to huddle indicates a real grey area. When contestants skate near that area they take a risk. Of course, if their performance
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 1, 2007
          The mere fact that the judges had to huddle indicates a real grey area. When
          contestants skate near that area they take a risk. Of course, if their
          performance is nowhere near barbershop, the judges have to decide under the
          new guidelines what is acceptable.

          I understand that the SG set was fantabulous and the audience loved it. I
          understand all the hard work that went into it and trying to make sure it
          would clear the judges guidelines. Well, it didn't work and I, for one,
          can't fault the judges for huddling and ultimately deciding it wasn't
          barbershop, which it wasn't. If you want to win, sing a heartfelt rendition
          of "Sweet Adeline". It will score big time. If you think that's boring, you
          don't belong, Icarus.

          To give you an example, take the Gas House Gang - one of the most
          entertaining quartets ever. When they got in medalist range, they decided to
          bag the jokes, the costumes, the schtick - put on tuxes, sang "Bright Was
          The Night", and won the gold.

          - Tom Campbell
        • plcmat
          I am glad Rich brought this up. My quartet ran into this new MUS category scoring of individual infractions at our district contest this fall. We sang a song
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 1, 2007
            I am glad Rich brought this up.

            My quartet ran into this new MUS category scoring of individual
            infractions at our district contest this fall. We sang a song that
            had been evaluated by a MUS judge at our request in June and given a
            thumbs up, was performed in Denver with no apparent penalty, and yet
            received a 10 point deduction from each MUS judge on the panel.
            (And before anyone asks, we sang the notes that were on the paper as
            far as I know).

            As it turned out it only influenced our placement by one position,
            but what we found alarming was hearing that the International BOD
            went to the MUS category after International and effectively told
            them that they weren't adjudicating the category as written. The
            Contest Administrators were asked to provide a scoresheet where
            individual infractions could be noted. And we learned that some MUS
            judges had never laid eyes on this new scoresheet until they judged
            their first contest this fall. I also witnessed a few of these
            huddles (one after someone sang "Breaking Up Is Hard To Do"!), and I
            am thinking maybe there was one after our performance as well.

            So while the latest C&J manual containing the category descriptions
            is dated April 2007, the de facto rules were changed without the
            knowledge of competitors between Denver and the fall contests. I
            find this situation, and the awkward situation our MUS judges were
            put into, rather disturbing. I AM NOT BLAMING THE MUSIC JUDGES.
            The one we had for our evaluation was incredibly straight and
            forthright about what had happened. If I am wrong about what
            transpired between Denver and this fall someone will set me straight
            I am sure.

            If indeed the umbrella has been narrowed slightly I think denoting
            the individual infractions is a good idea so we can all learn
            together, but I find narrowing the umbrella without telling any of
            the competitors to be pretty upsetting.

            FYI, the song in question was Katie Farrell's arrangement of They
            Say It's Wonderful. You can find Rounders singing it on YouTube if
            you want to hear it, or maybe you heard it in the finals in Denver.

            I was planning to write to the BOD about this and not post anything
            about it on the Harmonet. I will still write the BOD but the way
            this discussion is going I thought this information would be
            pertinent right now.

            Steve Nester
            Sounds of Concord
            Bass, Concord eXpress


            --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, "Rich Hasty" <rich_hasty@...> wrote:
            >
            > Chas...
            >
            > Good post. If you were in Denver this past summer, you would have
            > seen the members of the Music category "huddle" every so often.
            These
            > happened when what was presented raised questions regarding the
            > lowering of scores due to perceived rules infractions. The actual
            > scores were not discussed.
            >
            > I was on that panel in Denver as I was a few weeks ago at the EVG
            > District Fall Convention. In EVG, we also "huddled" from time to
            > time. Again, we DID NOT discuss the amount, if any, to lower a
            score.
            >
            > As a point of clarification, we discussed this very issue at our
            > category school this past summer (where we spent about 35 hours
            > training together). We now have to denote every single infraction,
            > whether it is 1 point or 20, on our score sheets, on the back of
            the
            > score sheets that we turn in, and on the front of the score sheets
            > that we turn in. This is new to us, and we are still finding our
            way.
            > Your patients are much appreciated. The intent, by the spring of
            > 2008, is to have asterisks placed by the total music score on the
            > public score sheets so that people will be better informed of what
            > went into a score.
            >
            > I hope that this helps.
            >
            > Rich
            >
            >
            > --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, "Charles D. Denzler" <justdoit110@>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > Hi everyone,
            > >
            > > Coming out of lurk mode to throw something out for your
            > > consideration. Two recent instances of possibly questionable
            > judging (in
            > > JAD and M-AD contests) triggered a thought in my mind.
            > >
            > > I have always assumed that our judges, being so highly
            > trained to
            > > evaluate our performances as we present them on the day of a
            > contest, are
            > > expected to render their judgements as individuals with no
            outside
            > > influence. Indeed, most of the time their scores are remarkably
            > uniform
            > > and consistent, which is to be expected.
            > >
            > > What was reported in the two instances cited above was
            that
            > the
            > > judges were observed to get in a huddle, presumably to come to
            some
            > > agreement as to how to score a particular performance.
            > >
            > > I submit that this huddling may have resulted in a lower
            > final
            > > score for the contestants than what they might have received by
            > simply
            > > adding up individual judges' scores. I further submit that this
            is
            > > rather unfair to the contestants involved. Just my humble
            > opinion. Chas
            > >
            > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Charles Denzler~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
            > > Fiction & Fact from Uncle John's Bathroom Reader:
            > > Each of the Statue of Liberty's fingernails weighs
            100
            > > pounds.
            > > ~~~~~~~~~It's great singing with the Bryn Mawr PA
            > Mainliners~~~~~~~~~
            > >
            >
          • Montana Jack Fitzpatrick
            Sort of amazing isn t it that the MUS category is now deducting points for stylistic deviations. We haven t seen anything like that since-----well-----the
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 1, 2007
              Sort of amazing isn't it that the MUS category is now deducting points for stylistic deviations. We haven't seen anything like that since-----well-----the arrangement category that had it's unfortunate demise about 15 years ago.
              In addition to deducting points for deviations, they also added plus points for innovations. However, since the category was destroyed and "re-written" (allowing almost every song ever written to "become" barbershop), everything is an innovation---so---no need for that at all.
              Montana Jack, keeping the faith and keeping it barbershop



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Rich Hasty
              Now that s a healthy perspective. Rich Deductor of points for style infractions for seven years. I just never had to explain every point that was subtracted
              Message 6 of 11 , Nov 1, 2007
                Now that's a healthy perspective.

                Rich

                Deductor of points for style infractions for seven years. I just never
                had to explain every point that was subtracted from a holistic score. I
                want to judge the impact of music without having to discourage the
                performer.


                --- In bbshop@yahoogroups.com, "Montana Jack Fitzpatrick" <mtjack@...>
                wrote:
                >
                > Sort of amazing isn't it that the MUS category is now deducting
                points for stylistic deviations. We haven't seen anything like that
                since-----well-----the arrangement category that had it's unfortunate
                demise about 15 years ago.
                > In addition to deducting points for deviations, they also added plus
                points for innovations. However, since the category was destroyed
                and "re-written" (allowing almost every song ever written to "become"
                barbershop), everything is an innovation---so---no need for that at all.
                > Montana Jack, keeping the faith and keeping it barbershop
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • Dave Duncan
                Actually, to perhaps nit-pick a little, I d like to re-visit your statements here. The mere fact that the judges had to huddle indicates a real grey area.
                Message 7 of 11 , Nov 2, 2007
                  Actually, to perhaps nit-pick a little, I'd like to re-visit your statements
                  here.



                  "The mere fact that the judges had to huddle indicates a real grey area.
                  When contestants skate near that area they take a risk." Yup. Couldn't
                  have said it any better. With great risk comes the possibility of great
                  reward OR great disappointment. "Of course, if their performance is
                  nowhere near barbershop, the judges have to decide under the new guidelines
                  what is acceptable." What is Barbershop and what is acceptable are two
                  entirely different issues. A performance can be completely Barbershop and
                  still completely UNACCEPTABLE.





                  By saying "I understand that the SG set was fantabulous and the audience
                  loved it. I understand all the hard work that went into it and trying to
                  make sure it would clear the judges guidelines." I have to infer that you
                  were indeed not present at the performance, but thanks for recognizing what
                  went into creating it. It did indeed "clear" numerous Certified Judges
                  guidelines long before it ever hit the stage.



                  You continue on to say "Well, it didn't work" If you weren't there, how
                  would you know ? If you were there, you would know that it DID work for the
                  audience, EXACTLY as it was planned. " and I, for one, can't fault the
                  judges for huddling and ultimately deciding it wasn't barbershop," I'm glad
                  you assign no fault to the Judges here. The confusion resulted from the
                  presentation not being in the "typical" Barbershop contest format of
                  "applause-song-applause-song-applause" and that resulted in a discussion to
                  determine if one or two songs had been sung. As for the huddle, at no time
                  did any Judge ever decide or say that it was not Barbershop. There was some
                  discussion about song "construction issues" but that's all. In the final
                  analysis, as we already knew, no rules had been broken. Maybe you should
                  stick with their decision instead of rendering your own separate opinion of
                  "which it wasn't."



                  "If you want to win, sing a heartfelt rendition of "Sweet Adeline". It will
                  score big time." A heartfelt rendition of Sweet Adeline can be magnificent
                  if performed well but, if that's ALL we ever sang at contest and there was
                  no innovation, it WOULD be a little tiresome, don't you think?



                  As for "If you think that's boring, you don't belong, Icarus." I belong and
                  have for some 31 years now. The ink on my application is clearly dry. I've
                  been a Certified Judge. I've sung with three different International
                  Champion Choruses and will categorically state this was one of the
                  highlights of my Barbershop "career." Sometimes it's just a matter of
                  perspective and sometimes people need a little shove to change their
                  perspective.



                  Contrary to the wishes of his father, Icarus flew too close to the sun,
                  melted his wings and paid the ultimate price for it, and although we may
                  have flown closer to the sun that we realized, our wings have not melted and
                  we'll be flying again soon, having paid our price and singing Barbershop all
                  the while.



                  Thanks for caring enough to have and share an opinion.



                  DD





                  From: bbshop@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bbshop@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of T
                  Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 9:20 AM
                  To: bbshop@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [bbshop] Re: Recent judging questions



                  The mere fact that the judges had to huddle indicates a real grey area. When
                  contestants skate near that area they take a risk. Of course, if their
                  performance is nowhere near barbershop, the judges have to decide under the
                  new guidelines what is acceptable.

                  I understand that the SG set was fantabulous and the audience loved it. I
                  understand all the hard work that went into it and trying to make sure it
                  would clear the judges guidelines. Well, it didn't work and I, for one,
                  can't fault the judges for huddling and ultimately deciding it wasn't
                  barbershop, which it wasn't. If you want to win, sing a heartfelt rendition
                  of "Sweet Adeline". It will score big time. If you think that's boring, you
                  don't belong, Icarus.
                  To give you an example, take the Gas House Gang - one of the most
                  entertaining quartets ever. When they got in medalist range, they decided to
                  bag the jokes, the costumes, the schtick - put on tuxes, sang "Bright Was
                  The Night", and won the gold.

                  - Tom Campbell





                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.