Scott Hines did the same scoring a week later at Los Al. He just doesn't like West Coast style of show choir, based on his scoring.
I don't think that's necessarily evidence that Scott Hines doesn't care for West Coast style show choir (unless of course he's physically said this to you) - he scored everyone the same as Michael Orland at Los Al and was actually a lot closer in point totals than Michael.
Very confused about this as well. I'm thinking the tie was broken by taking the choreo scores from prelims but still the tie breaker should've been announced.
I only received total scores for the individual categories, not ranks, so perhaps the tie was broken by how many judges had Waubonsie in first in visuals compared to Carmel?? I've seen that be the tie breaker a couple of times over the years for captions, just a thought though.
I'm confused why the Best Choreo tie wasn't announced...
Very confused about this as well. I'm thinking the tie was broken by taking the choreo scores from prelims but still the tie breaker should've been announced.
Seeing Burroughs finals performance live I honestly have NO IDEA how a judge could have had them in 4th.......
Going off of this, seeing Burroughs' prelims performance live, I couldn't see how a judge could've had them in first in the day round
Consensus is the same as Olympic ordinals. It just takes away point or rank swings so judges can judge how they see and hear it without worrying that they are changing the outcome of the competition by themselves and directors understand no one judge can swing the competition by themselves. Hopefully it leads to talk about the elements that lead to better shows and not about individuals.
The final positions are based on the fact that 3 out of 5 judges had NN over Carmel. Fehr Fair is the best possible system. It makes each judges vote exactly equal. Some dislike it because it is harder to understand and apply, but it is the fairest system.
Not sure I'd agree it is the fairest system. It has it's pros and cons as does every system. I like that it does make everything equal and does simplify it (even though some do think it is harder to understand and apply). At the same time the score sheets and points would show that one group is better in every category, then that group should be rewarded as so regardless of what the judges think about the show itself.
Although I also understand that if you just take raw scores you could have a group that the judges may all agree is the second best group, but by fluctuations in scores that group could end up winning the competition.
I don't think there is a "fairest system", just different ways to look at it. No matter what each system will have its flaws. Like Brock stated, as long as the competition spells out exactly what system they are using and how it works then it is fine.
I don't think I'm quite understanding how the Fehr Fair system works.
The final positions are based on the fact that 3 out of 5 judges had NN over Carmel. Fehr Fair is the best possible system. It makes each judges vote exactly equal. Some dislike it because it is harder to understand and apply, but it is the fairest system.
The final positions are based on the fact that 3 out of 5 judges had NN over Carmel. Therefore the results are correct. the Rankings in the individual categories are for captions.
I think the most important thing is that competition to be transparent about which system(s) they are using and WWS absolutely was.
Exactly. The rules are clear and everyone attending knew them. I don't think that it's fair to say that the raw rankings are the "real results", because it discounts all of the hard work that so many people put into their sets (like NN).
In the end, show choir is about sharing music with people, and WWS was an incredible opportunity for so many talented schools to do so. I am super proud of how my group performed and all the other groups too; it was some of the best show choir I will probably ever see.
I've never been a huge fan of ranking systems myself - and we've had them work in our favor (WWS) and not in our favor (Danville, where we had the 2nd highest score, but got 3rd in ranks) this year alone.
I think every system has its flaws. I think the most important thing is that competition to be transparent about which system(s) they are using and WWS absolutely was. There were 8 pages in the director's handbook about which systems were being used in which rounds and an extremely detailed outline of how this consensus ranking system works.
It's the Fehr Fair system. It goes by consensus of which group got the most votes to be in a certain position. Using that Naperville got the most 3rd place votes, so they are the 3rd place group. I technically understand the logic, but not sure if I agree with it. I don't really like the ranking system in general and am I big proponent of just raw scores... but that is a different discussion for a different day.
Wheaton Warrenville South Choral Classic 2016
