Thank you for the dvd info...i printed the sheet off cuz i plan on ordering a dvd...is there no shipping and handling cost? Just the plain $15 for the finals dvd...no more?
Thank you for the dvd info...i printed the sheet off cuz i plan on ordering a dvd...is there no shipping and handling cost? Just the plain $15 for the finals dvd...no more?
The only things I can decipher based on the Fehr Fair system are:
1st- Kennedy
2nd- Troy
6th- Prairie
9th- North
The rest of the rankings are just all over the place and there's no way we can get a judges concensus on the placings. Here are the placements I got by simply adding up the rankings:
1st- Kennedy
2nd- Troy
3rd- Jefferson
4th- Washington
5th- Xavier
6th- Prairie
7th- IC High
7th (tie)- Linn-Mar
9th- North
There was no way to get a judges consenses on the results and this is why I think the points system works best. Also, with the points system the crowd/SCC favorite, Linn-Mar, makes finals, and using any kind of placings system, it looks like they wouldn't. Then y'all would be mad that they didn't make finals and would STILL complain about the judging at this competition (and others).
BTW- thanks for the video information!
Wouldn't it have been?
1st - Kennedy
2nd - Troy
3rd - Jefferson and Washington
5th - Xavier
6th -Praire
7th - Linn-Mar and IC High
9th - North
But Jay...you are obsessed with Great River and need to move on haha
Well as we saw here, all three of the judges' daytime sheets were so different from one another. Linn-Mar had a #9, a #7, and a #1. Wash got some medium-to-low scores as well as a #1. Heck, we got a #2 as well as a couple middle scores. I would agree that especially in situations like that, judges' rankings should be used instead of points, so one judge doesn't in effect get a larger share of the outcome than the other judges.
Well, let's see who would be in finals based off the Fehr Fair system and just based off rankings:
The only things I can decipher based on the Fehr Fair system are:
1st- Kennedy
2nd- Troy
6th- Prairie
9th- North
The rest of the rankings are just all over the place and there's no way we can get a judges concensus on the placings. Here are the placements I got by simply adding up the rankings:
1st- Kennedy
2nd- Troy
3rd- Jefferson
3rd (tie)- Washington
5th- Xavier
6th- Prairie
7th- IC High
7th (tie)- Linn-Mar
9th- North
There was no way to get a judges consenses on the results and this is why I think the points system works best. Also, with the points system the crowd/SCC favorite, Linn-Mar, makes finals, and using any kind of placings system, it looks like they wouldn't. Then y'all would be mad that they didn't make finals and would STILL complain about the judging at this competition (and others). I don't mean to sound obsessed. I just thought it was interesting when I took a look at it.
For some reason, I really want it to be "Fair Fehr" instead of "Fehr Fair".
I realize that makes no sense, especially when we're talking about it and not writing about it, but nevertheless- I am imploring all of you to change your ways to please me.
Our decision to use the "Fehr Fair" system came about after realizing that at our previous competitions, we had instances where one judge scoring vastly different than the other judges affected the outcome of the event. After extensive discussion with other directors, including David Fehr, I became convinced that what we really want to know from a judging panel is, "what order should these groups finish in." Points are used initially to develop each judge's rankings. The rankings of all judges are then analyzed to determine the final placement of groups. This eliminates the possibility of one judge have undue influence on the outcome of an event, by making each judge's contribution to the result have equal weight.
We used this ranking system in placement of groups and in determining caption awards at our abreviated contest last Saturday. I genuinely believe it is the fairest system out there.
1. Kennedy 445.5
2. Linn-Mar 431
3. Washington 428
4. Iowa City High 421.5
5. Troy 413.5
6. Jefferson 410.5
Movement-
1. Troy 358.5
2. Kennedy 357
3. Washington 351.5
4. Linn-Mar 344.5
5. Jefferson 343
6. Iowa City High 333
Other-
1. Kennedy 356
2. Troy 348.5
3. Linn-Mar 346.5
4. Washington 344.5
5. Iowa City High 340.5
6. Jefferson 338.5
Also,
3 of 5 judges placed Linn-Mar higher than Troy
3 of 5 judges placed Washington higher than Linn-Mar
4 of 5 judges placed Troy higher than Washington
In the vocal category:
2 of 5 judges placed Linn-Mar ahead of Washington
2 of 5 judges placed Washington ahead of Linn-Mar
1 of 5 judges had them tied.
3 of 5 judges placed Washington over Troy
2 of 5 judges had Washington and Troy tied
5 of 5 judges placed Linn-Mar over Troy
In choreography:
3 of 5 judges had Troy ahead of Washington
3 of 5 judges had Washington over Linn-Mar
4 of 5 judges had Troy above Linn-Mar
In "other":
4 of 5 judges placed Troy over Washington
3 of 5 judges placed Troy over Linn-Mar
3 of 5 judges placed Linn-Mar over Washington
In other words... Troy, Linn-Mar, and Washington were extremely close to each other. No judges had the same placings as another, and those three especially had different strengths and weaknesses. Troy was comparatively lacking in vocals, Linn-Mar comparatively lacked in choreography, and Washington was just about the same in all categories.
Btw what is included in this "Other" category??? It sure has a lot of point value for just being "other".
Yeah well if you look at the points...you see soo many ties or that they were really close together. Just a matter of points from judge to judge the only thing that really stood out though was that Washington had a 10 pt Vocal lead while everything else was pretty close together by placement. It was pretty much like 8 groups all in about the same playing field.
Plus rankings don't separate people from being ahead, like I'd rather have a 50 pt lead than a placement.
I would agree that perhaps points tell more about what the judges are thinking than rankings, but the evidence from Great River suggests that the rankings would have just as easily given the Grand championship to the winning choir.
I just felt the judging from this competition was very odd (not wrong, just different), and that is why I have tried to analyze their results. To have all of the judges have such diverse opinions, I wonder what they were all looking at to determine their scores.
Well as we saw here, all three of the judges' daytime sheets were so different from one another. Linn-Mar had a #9, a #7, and a #1. Wash got some medium-to-low scores as well as a #1. Heck, we got a #2 as well as a couple middle scores. I would agree that especially in situations like that, judges' rankings should be used instead of points, so one judge doesn't in effect get a larger share of the outcome than the other judges.
The whole purpose of having points is to take off for things that aren't as good. It isn't meant to be for placement purposes until after the points are added together. That's why people get mad, because they think of it as being 1,7,9 when really it's just what that judge saw wasn't a perfect performance. It's based off opinion just like how certain athletic competitions like the olympics...you get a 9.2, 8.7, etc. It isn't oooh I got the highest score from this judge and 3rd from this one so I should get a silver medal. I prefer the points system, I think it is the most fair compared to rankings or olympic scoring. Cos I mean there would have been like 9 groups in finals at Great River, cos there were so many placements by judges in top 6. Plus rankings don't separate people from being ahead, like I'd rather have a 50 pt lead than a placement. That's just me though......
Davenport Great River Show Choir Invitational 2007
haha
