World of Pageantry
http://worldofpageantry.com/forums/

Predictions?
http://worldofpageantry.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=20113
Page 3 of 4

Author:  Hybrid_Johnny [ Tue Apr 03, 2012 1:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Georgie, thank you for noticing elk grove. We respect the judges' scores and placements 100%. All we can ask our students to do is their best, and that's really all we can ask of ourselves as well.

Author:  newguy [ Tue Apr 03, 2012 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Mr. Plowman- I thought that your scores were actually very consistent. A 25 point spread, to me, doesn't seem unreasonable for two groups that are somewhat comparable in skill.

It is when we see 100+ point spreads between 1st and 2nd place that I have very real concerns.

Like I've been saying I thought the percussion judging was pretty consistent, except in a few specific instances. I mostly had trouble with the difference in placement within certain captions.

Are judges instructed to watch for different things at Championships? Example, Music 1- Battery, Music 2- Pit??? Otherwise if the judges are watching for the same thing how do we end up with such different comments and rankings? Is it just subjective? If it is how do we as instructors go about objectively instructing the various subjective preferences of different judges?

Again, I thought the GE scores were very consistent (especially yours for the division I am affiliated with) so I have no qualms with you at all. I'm only asking because I respect your opinion and you are a judge openly posting on the topic here on this forum. Thank you for your input!

Author:  vinnieangelo [ Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

newguy wrote:

Are judges instructed to watch for different things at Championships? Example, Music 1- Battery, Music 2- Pit??? Otherwise if the judges are watching for the same thing how do we end up with such different comments and rankings? Is it just subjective? If it is how do we as instructors go about objectively instructing the various subjective preferences of different judges?


Judges should be evaluating based on a consistent criteria (what the sheets say) ALL SEASON LONG...regardless if it's the first, or last show of the year. Also, the double panel should have no baring on the judges "perspective" (meaning, if I know I have a second judge in my caption, I approach the contest NO DIFFERENT than if I was alone; I don't focus on the battery, while the other guy watches the pit). If there is a judge who gives commentary that is too focused on one musical section, it is probably one of two reasons: 1). He is a battery guy, whose ears naturally tend towards that section. 2). It is the GE guy, who by nature, will be taking in more of the visual, which means, less front ensemble specific comments.


Regarding the sheets/numbers:

In general, the NCBA sheets make it difficult to be consistent - from a numbers management standpoint. Without a clear distinction between classes (having one number-scale that is linear, and not re-setting between classes), and without an interval differential between numbers (e.g., 1-3 points = very similar; 4-8 points = somewhat similar; etc), the spreads are merely relative numbers. Therefore, in the current set up there is no significance of a 5 point spread to a 45 point spread between ensembles (like in the WGI sheets have distinguished for the past few years).

I do, however, want to qualify my statements, in that I have not judged a NCBA event for the past 2 seasons. So if there have been modifications to the sheets/criteria, I apologize.

Author:  Georgie [ Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Couple of follow up comments...
Vinnie - I figured you could only hold out for a bit! Regarding your comment "in the current set up there is no significance of a 5 point spread to a 45 point spread between ensembles...", I would agree and disagree in this way: I agree that there is no significance between a 5 point to a 45 point spread between ensembles, EXCEPT if three groups are within 5 points and a fourth is 25 points behind them. That judge is stating that the first three groups are very similar, and that fourth group is significantly below the first three. The sheets don't say it, but the numbers don't lie.
Mr. Plowman - 25 points is a lot.
To all - seems conversation seems like deja vu all over again.

Author:  Shannon [ Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Georgie wrote:
Couple of follow up comments...
Vinnie - I figured you could only hold out for a bit! Regarding your comment "in the current set up there is no significance of a 5 point spread to a 45 point spread between ensembles...", I would agree and disagree in this way: I agree that there is no significance between a 5 point to a 45 point spread between ensembles, EXCEPT if three groups are within 5 points and a fourth is 25 points behind them. That judge is stating that the first three groups are very similar, and that fourth group is significantly below the first three. The sheets don't say it, but the numbers don't lie.
Mr. Plowman - 25 points is a lot.
To all - seems conversation seems like deja vu all over again.


Official response to it: "Par for the course, I'm afraid." And that's that.

Author:  vinnieangelo [ Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Georgie wrote:
Couple of follow up comments...
Vinnie - I figured you could only hold out for a bit! Regarding your comment "in the current set up there is no significance of a 5 point spread to a 45 point spread between ensembles...", I would agree and disagree in this way: I agree that there is no significance between a 5 point to a 45 point spread between ensembles, EXCEPT if three groups are within 5 points and a fourth is 25 points behind them. That judge is stating that the first three groups are very similar, and that fourth group is significantly below the first three. The sheets don't say it, but the numbers don't lie.


I agree that there is a bit of an "obvious" difference in how the judge sets up his spreads. But the point I am making is that there is no inherent/objective difference between spreads (per the sheets); only a subjective difference. In a sense, the current system does not allow the judges to function at the highest level.

One of the best things that happened in my ability to "manage numbers" occurred about 4 years ago when circuits (WGI/WBA, etc) began adopting a system that actually clarified the interval that was given to a group. This is not only good for the judge (in that it clarifies and provides accountability in the spreads that are given), but more importantly, it allows the instructors to have a clearer understanding in how "close" they actually are to neighboring ensembles.

To also give one more qualification (as someone who has judged in the NCBA since 1999), the current sheets were a GREAT IMPROVEMENT over what was used prior (when there was no GE/MA distinction). However, while the activity is changing every year, the sheets must also be looked annually, to make sure we stay current with the amazing things that happen on the court!

Author:  olledowerdna [ Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

I'm with Vinnie!

Author:  Steven [ Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Georgie wrote:
When looking at this, it is pretty obvious some judges are not looking at it as 1000 points ... they are thinking 100 points.


Just to clarify, we are looking at it as 300 + 300. (500-200) + (500-200)

Mr. Plowman had 7 scholastic groups spread across 36 points. That's less than 3 points average spread between sub scores (2.57). Seems odd to complain about that.

Author:  JCYS [ Wed Apr 04, 2012 9:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Shannon wrote:
Georgie wrote:
Couple of follow up comments...
Vinnie - I figured you could only hold out for a bit! Regarding your comment "in the current set up there is no significance of a 5 point spread to a 45 point spread between ensembles...", I would agree and disagree in this way: I agree that there is no significance between a 5 point to a 45 point spread between ensembles, EXCEPT if three groups are within 5 points and a fourth is 25 points behind them. That judge is stating that the first three groups are very similar, and that fourth group is significantly below the first three. The sheets don't say it, but the numbers don't lie.
Mr. Plowman - 25 points is a lot.
To all - seems conversation seems like deja vu all over again.


Official response to it: "Par for the course, I'm afraid." And that's that.



Really? As I seem to recall, I am not on the NCBA board nor have I been for some years. You will not get an "official response" from the NCBA. However, I SHARE your concerns re: scoring consistency.

Author:  newguy [ Wed Apr 04, 2012 10:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Steven wrote:
Georgie wrote:
When looking at this, it is pretty obvious some judges are not looking at it as 1000 points ... they are thinking 100 points.


Just to clarify, we are looking at it as 300 + 300. (500-200) + (500-200)

Mr. Plowman had 7 scholastic groups spread across 36 points. That's less than 3 points average spread between sub scores (2.57). Seems odd to complain about that.



I must have missed someone complaining about that... (not saying someone isn't- complaining is just so FUN!)
I think the big complaints were mostly directed at the Intermediate Music Judge 2... 110+ point spread between the top two groups... 10 or 11 point sub score
That seems pretty natural to complain about.

Author:  Georgie [ Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

MY SINCERE APOLOGIES TO MR. PLOWMAN ... no matter how I played with your spreads for the NCBA Scholastic class, I could not justify my statement that you cost Elk Grove the championships. In fact, after looking at the ordinals for that class, something interesting popped up [memo to NCBA ... put ordinals on recaps-they speak volumes very quickly]. Looking at the ordinals from judge 1-4 [Music 1, Music 2, GE1, GE2], Elk Grove placed 3,2,3,5 - Mr. Plowman's placing of 5th was not out of line compared to the others on the panel ... they obviously were not the "champs" that day, so again my apologies to Mr. Plowman! Now, Pleasant Grove [champions] finished with ordinals of 2,1,2,1!!! But check this out, JFK finished 1,5,1,2 .... yikes, it's the return of Music2 again!!!! And the 5th place was 18 points behind Pleasant Grove ... game, set, match!

Author:  Powerhouse08 [ Wed Apr 04, 2012 8:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

easy fix: WGI, CVGPC, CCGC, or SJVCGPR.....take your pick. lol

Author:  mrbrianplowman [ Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Georgie wrote:
MY SINCERE APOLOGIES TO MR. PLOWMAN ... no matter how I played with your spreads for the NCBA Scholastic class, I could not justify my statement that you cost Elk Grove the championships. In fact, after looking at the ordinals for that class, something interesting popped up [memo to NCBA ... put ordinals on recaps-they speak volumes very quickly]. Looking at the ordinals from judge 1-4 [Music 1, Music 2, GE1, GE2], Elk Grove placed 3,2,3,5 - Mr. Plowman's placing of 5th was not out of line compared to the others on the panel ... they obviously were not the "champs" that day, so again my apologies to Mr. Plowman! Now, Pleasant Grove [champions] finished with ordinals of 2,1,2,1!!! But check this out, JFK finished 1,5,1,2 .... yikes, it's the return of Music2 again!!!! And the 5th place was 18 points behind Pleasant Grove ... game, set, match!

Thank you Georgie.

Author:  pittech [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

Powerhouse08 wrote:
easy fix: WGI, CVGPC, CCGC, or SJVCGPR.....take your pick. lol


Is it time to look at and motion to adopt WGI style rules and sheets for NCBA (yet/again)?

Author:  Powerhouse08 [ Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Predictions?

pittech wrote:
Powerhouse08 wrote:
easy fix: WGI, CVGPC, CCGC, or SJVCGPR.....take your pick. lol


Is it time to look at and motion to adopt WGI style rules and sheets for NCBA (yet/again)?


In high school my line competed in NCBA. Even back then they felt stuck in the past.....and that was over 10 years ago. Now a days, while WGI and those like it have adapted to modern changes and looked toward the future, NCBA still feels behind. The biggest problem everyone has, obviously, is the judging, but despite everyone's plea for help, it seems like things will stay the same. Fall competition is fall competition, we don't really have a choice but I don't have a problem with judging then. Winter however......the options are there. I know budgets are tight, but better options are out there. CVGPC is decent, SJVCGPR (Fresno) in my opinion is the best. With judges like Ralph Hardimon, Scott Johnson, Jeff Lee, Vinne Angelo, etc, Fresno is the best bang for the buck. I grew up in NCBA, but grew out of it a long time ago. I want the best for my groups during winter and have always felt that wasn't possible in NCBA.......

Page 3 of 4 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/