QUOTE(Orbie @ Mar 31 2008, 09:39 PM) [snapback]431417[/snapback]
Honestly,
the BEST show choir competition i have ever competed in/seen.
Everyone should be proud of what they put out on stage, like i said before, AMAZING performances from everyone. It is amazing to see what ordinary high school students can do, truely truely amzing performances from everyone.
Congrats to all the groups and thank you for such a WONDERFUL competition!!!
Statement of the day. Throughout my 6 years in show choir so far, I have been continuously blown away by the talent and passion teenagers are capable of putting on stage.
Honestly,
the BEST show choir competition i have ever competed in/seen.
Everyone should be proud of what they put out on stage, like i said before, AMAZING performances from everyone. It is amazing to see what ordinary high school students can do, truely truely amzing performances from everyone.
Congrats to all the groups and thank you for such a WONDERFUL competition!!!
Haakon, I didn't bother quoting your entire post, but thank you, you are always so well versed, and I agree with what you said, just thought I would say that I am happy and proud to be your friend =)
p.s. I hope your flight gets off soon, hope to see you back in So Cal.
QUOTE(amysinthenavy @ Mar 31 2008, 05:53 PM) [snapback]431386[/snapback]
I got home about an hour ago, and wow, what a trip this was.
This was such an occasion for Sound Sensations (yes, it IS plural!)! It was the first time that we have made finals. We were in tears over how satisfied we were with our best performance in two years. It's nice to hear that those of you not as fond of women's choirs (they're almost as common as mixed ones) enjoyed our set and our ballad, especially. That ballad was the hardest song I've learned yet. Kudos to Jon King!
This raises another question...
Why didn't they announce the winner of the Single-Gender division at the competition?
And, Haakon (I don't know how to do the sideways colon over the a. I'm sorry.), it was nice seeing you again. Thanks for taking pictures, eating pizza, and supporting show choir with us.
Everyone else was amazing, and I'm so happy to have been able to participate in this competition.
:]
" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> this made me laugh!
come to think of it, neither do I! any help anyone?
I got home about an hour ago, and wow, what a trip this was.
This was such an occasion for Sound Sensations (yes, it IS plural!)! It was the first time that we have made finals. We were in tears over how satisfied we were with our best performance in two years. It's nice to hear that those of you not as fond of women's choirs (they're almost as common as mixed ones) enjoyed our set and our ballad, especially. That ballad was the hardest song I've learned yet. Kudos to Jon King!
This raises another question...
Why didn't they announce the winner of the Single-Gender division at the competition?
And, Haakon (I don't know how to do the sideways colon over the a. I'm sorry.), it was nice seeing you again. Thanks for taking pictures, eating pizza, and supporting show choir with us.
Everyone else was amazing, and I'm so happy to have been able to participate in this competition.
this in no way is deals with the judging controversy, but i was just wondering...
can someone put up what the judging sheets looked like, like how many total points there were in each category. just the scoresheet, not how each group did in them. that would be appreciated
QUOTE(FAMEfestivals @ Mar 31 2008, 03:29 PM) [snapback]431375[/snapback]
As is evident by the posts here, there is some confusion on results of the competition. After careful review FAME events can assure you the results are correct and stand as awarded at the competition. There WERE two errors in the calculation/scoring; HOWEVER NEITHER of them affected the overall outcome or group placements.
Great,
Thank you for the reply!
P.S. Pretty much all of us agreed that FAME would make a Lot of money if competitions like this were Live Feed on the internet... I mean it would be incredible if it was free! but i have a feeling anyone would have paid 10 bucks to watch this competition live. Anyway, Just hoping! lol
Thanks to all who made FAME Chicago such an exciting event, no doubt it is one that will be talked about for a long time come. Congratulations to each and every group in finals, the 6 performances turned in for the finals were no doubt worthy of all the "buzz" leading up to the event. Each group was fantastic and thoroughly entertaining.
As is evident by the posts here, there is some confusion on results of the competition. After careful review FAME events can assure you the results are correct and stand as awarded at the competition. There WERE two errors in the calculation/scoring; HOWEVER NEITHER of them affected the overall outcome or group placements.
A full detailed explanation and photo spreadsheets will be up and available on our website soon.
As has been mentioned several times in this forum, we certainly hope that the energy, enthusiasm, talents of the performers, and incredible performances turned in this past weekend in what was (arguably) one of the most exciting and most watched events in recent history is what people will remember. Our sincere and heartfelt congratulations to EVERY group who participated in this momentous occasion.
QUOTE(Häakon @ Mar 31 2008, 02:00 PM) [snapback]431329[/snapback]
An increasing problem in show choir today is that judges are routinely only using the 10% of any given scoresheet. No one wants to give 6s for groups who don't match the quality of the highest standard in a given area, so we end up with the highest-achieving groups getting 9s and 10s, and the ones below them getting 8s and 9s. The result of this is a tiny point spread between top ranking groups (like we see here and almost everywhere else these days) and a much greater chance for the likelyhood of ties. How many times have we seen now, "the second place group was only behind the first place group by three tenths of a point!" I don't have the FAME scoresheets in front of me, but I would be surprised if anyone was awarded a 4 or a 5 in a particular category. If you've got 10 points, use them... that's what they're there for. People are too sensitive these days...
I agree with this. Why don't they use the entire score sheet. If a group is mediocre at diction why do they get a 7.5 instead of a 5? Where did difficulty go? Let's truly look at difficulty... should "armography" get the same amount as a tap number? It seems as it's an overlooked area. Nothing against judges because I couldn't do it but I really wish they all would look into the full scoresheet. Also, not all judges judge like this but it seems to be very common.
QUOTE(pkrplyr2004 @ Mar 31 2008, 08:49 AM) [snapback]431292[/snapback]
That is so true, That would have been even more horrible if the issue was regarding the Grand Champion. It really is a shame that after probably the best night of show choir for the 2008 season a possible scandal or error for 2nd and 3rd place is being discussed rather than the incredible jobs these incredible choirs did.
I think this is probably one of the best posts in this entire 49-page topic. Regardless of this latest scoring controversy, one consistent vibe that I'm getting from all of these replies is that everyone recognizes how amazing a job EVERY choir did here on Saturday. A lot of times that kind of thing is just lip service; we all want to be nice and supportive of each other. But at FAME Chicago 2008, I really do believe that all of the groups in the finals are handily among the best in the nation. I was not dissapointed by a single performance. It is strange that a group like Waubonsie Valley can get a 333334 rating and then not be awared third place, but that's why math is math. No one should be discouraged by the placements or the ranking they were given; all too often we get caught up in the winning and this back and forth is already starting to overshadow the amazing performances which took place at the event. I have my own plans to remedy this, but for now - until we hear some official word and response from someone at FAME (multiple individuals at their company have SCC accounts) - let's not be too quick to point fingers or jump on any bandwagon. I'm sure things will settle themselves in time.
One thing I would like to address as it relates to this whole fiasco, however:
QUOTE(Wocttocs @ Mar 31 2008, 08:55 AM) [snapback]431293[/snapback]
I'm just amazed at 4.1 points between 1st and 4th!!! thats crazy close... lol.
An increasing problem in show choir today is that judges are routinely only using the 10% of any given scoresheet. No one wants to give 6s for groups who don't match the quality of the highest standard in a given area, so we end up with the highest-achieving groups getting 9s and 10s, and the ones below them getting 8s and 9s. The result of this is a tiny point spread between top ranking groups (like we see here and almost everywhere else these days) and a much greater chance for the likelyhood of ties. How many times have we seen now, "the second place group was only behind the first place group by three tenths of a point!" I don't have the FAME scoresheets in front of me, but I would be surprised if anyone was awarded a 4 or a 5 in a particular category. If you've got 10 points, use them... that's what they're there for. People are too sensitive these days... judges are apparently afraid of upsetting directors... directors are afraid their kids are going to say the wrong thing on SCC... more people are worried about percentages of a point than taking the time to appreciate the unblievable amount of work that goes into creating, learning, and executing these incredibly complex shows. I think as a community, we need to take a deep breath and re-examine our priorities... for this was probably the best year of show choir I have seen in a long time, and I know shows like these will only propel groups to strive for even better next time. While there was a clear winner at this competition, I don't think anyone is out for the count.
I also must say that I give FAME the benefit of the doubt, and from Damon Brown's explanation of the way the judges were instructed, it sounds like they handled that part of the competition extremely well. I was not aware that the judges had no idea of the afternoon placements before finals - as they absolutely shouldn't - but hearing the breakdown from one of the judges himself this shortly after the competition is really commendable. Damon himself is not responsible for any error in the tabulation, so we shouldn't be critical of him for this. When the scores are so ridiculously close and humans get involved in the calculation process, mistakes always seem to happen.
Congratulations to Powerhouse on your Grand Champion honors; with a 111112 overall ranking, you did what many thought was impossible - and while the point totals were close, you were clearly the solid favorite throughout the day. I am so proud of each and every one of you and am blessed to have such amazing friends.
QUOTE(Jorge @ Mar 31 2008, 12:19 PM) [snapback]431314[/snapback]
Why not, Iowa? Hart, CA came to Sullivan, IL... and let me tell you... Sullivan is a bit more far removed than Davenport is. Big name/Big City groups come to small high school competitions increasingly. Burbank traveled to Franklin Central a few years back. Why not Burroughs, Clinton, Waubonsie Valley, and North Central in Iowa? Clinton has made the trip to Iowa before. It was their first time competing here. My motto is and always has been... first the worst, second the best.
While I don't deny it would be fun for them, I personally do not find Iowa a fun vacation spot
obviousally.
It would be a big treat to have everyone come to Iowa though.
I'm guessing you meant to switch Clinton and NC's rank scores, giving Clinton 16 and North Central 17? Not trying to be a smartass and point out your mistake, I just don't want anymore people to be confused .
QUOTE(tscott @ Mar 31 2008, 11:22 AM) [snapback]431315[/snapback]
This is a real shame.
With the focus this competition had, not to mention the tens of thousands of dollars spent by choirs to attend, FAME really needs to address this; give the facts of what happened, announce what the actual and official results are, as well as explain what's being done to assure this doesn't happen again.
Well yeah, I definately agree.
That was my point earlier... That Groups are spending between 20 and 40 THOUSAND DOLLARS to come to a competition like this. Thats not including Air fare and things like that for the california groups and south jones. I can't imagine being a director and spending that amount of the students money and then this kind of stuff happens? Silly stuff like that, that could easily be avoided but in the end causes a lot of damage. I mean any way you have it, burroughs won free and clear! But what about Clinton, WV, and North Central? How must that feel, that you either Actually placed lower than you were told and have your moment taken away... OR you placed Higher than you were told and didn't even get to HAVE the moment?
It's just a ridiculous little thing that shouldn't happen, but because we're all human it does...
It IS a real shame though.
Oh, and i just read Jorge's post... Clearly he's right thats what happened lol. Now that we know what happened does anyone know what fame has to say about it? or have they been contacted about the error?
QUOTE(Cody Mac @ Mar 31 2008, 12:06 PM) [snapback]431312[/snapback]
You're very close on all this, but still a little bit off.
Ranking scores were calculated by adding up all of a group's judge-given ranks (pulled from original scores). Though Burroughs had a higher score than Clinton, an error was made when entering ranks into their system. By that, I mean that, despite the lower score, "Attaché" was given a false 1st place rank, and Burroughs was given a false 2nd place rank. Had it been entered correctly, it would've increased Clinton's rank score by 1, immediately removing the tie in place with North Central, and giving North Central 2nd place without a tie-breaker.
Also, with the ranking system, Waubonsie and NC were not tied. North Central had the lower ranking score.
Here's what I mean.
Below you will see that there is a tie between NC and "Attaché", but only because of the tabulation error.
The ranks as they read on the original scoresheet were as follows:
Group - 6 Judges Ranks (Rank Total) Clinton- 4,1,2,4,2,3 (16)
North Central- 1,4,4,2,4,1 (16)
Burroughs- 2,2,1,1,1,2 (9)
Waubonsie Valley- 3,3,3,3,3,4 (19)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, same ranks, with the corrected Attache/Burroughs ranks.
Group - 6 Judges Ranks (Rank Total) Clinton- 4,2,2,4,2,3 (17)
North Central- 1,4,4,2,4,1 (16)
Burroughs- 2,1,1,1,1,2 (8)
Waubonsie Valley- 3,3,3,3,3,4 (19)
With that said, if FAME had used this ranking system that they said they'd used, the results would have been:
GC: Burroughs
1RU: North Central
2RU: Clinton
3RU: Waubonsie Valley
and so on.
Where you run into the issue with WV and North Central being mixed up is when you say that raw scores were used to determine placing (which, judging from what was said earlier, is FAME's story to this point, saying they switched to this method instead of using their original ranking system).
If they actually had used the raw scores to determine placements, the results would have been as follows:
GC: Burroughs
1RU: Clinton
2RU: Waubonsie Valley
3RU: North Central
Unfortunately, with either path FAME takes, two groups actually placed differently than what was called out on Saturday night. It's just going to come down to what FAME believes is the best, most fair way to go.
Oh, Cody... I am very angry at you for not finding me at FAME! We've spoken for how many years now and couldn't take the time to find your dear old friend?! It's ok I guess... you can call me again whenever the next time you forget South Jones aux. percussion music and sticks at a nationals competition. ;)
You too are very close on this... but are missing what FAME says, and still off.
FAME states in their rules... and I do quote...
"FAME FINALS scorings takes the raw scores of a comprehensive finals sheet and converts them to rank. Lowest rank total wins, however the majority rule clause outlined in both your director's manual and the final instructions will apply. In the event there may be a tie due to SIX finalist judges, the raw point totals from the Finals Score sheet will be tie-breaker."
North Central's three 4th place ranks over-rides their two 1st place rankings. That's why the system was created... so majority rules, and not one judge throws things way off when one group (in Davenport Central's case at Southeast Polk this year) received four 1st place ranks and then a 5th and has the other group (Dowling Catholic) receive the Grand Championship with their four 2nd ranks and one 1st. So... with that being what FAME said...
The outcome indeed would have been-
Grand Champion- John Burroughs
1st Runner Up- Clinton
2nd Runner Up- Waubonsie Valley
3rd Runner Up- North Central
FAME Chicago 2008
" border="0" alt="laugh.gif" /> this made me laugh! 
No one should be discouraged by the placements or the ranking they were given; all too often we get caught up in the winning and this back and forth is already starting to overshadow the amazing performances which took place at the event. I have my own plans to remedy this, 
