This identical situation happened to Powerhouse at the SoCal competition in 2012. What is important is to clearly communicate how the scores will be tallied beforehand, and make that information available to all directors prior to the event (so they can agree to it when they register). Assuming that this was the case, the results just are what they are.
That being said, you shouldn't use two different scoring methods (points AND ranks) for one competition or stuff like this can happen. The event organizers are a bit to blame - at least for the resulting confusion and frustration - because they chose to run the competition in this manner.
Here are how the six judges ranked Mitchell compared to Sioux City East. While the scores indicated MItchell was the better group, the ordinal system gave Sioux City a score of 10, and Mitchell a score of 11. The lowest score wins, and the ordinal system was the score used to determined the winner.
Mitchell (2, 2, 1, 2, 3, 1) final score of 11
East (1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 3) final score of 10
I don't know about how the points broke down, but they must have been pretty close in all categories.
This isn't correct either. Total points were converted to ranks. Therefore Mitchell most likely edged East out of vocals and choreo by a slim margin. East, then, must have beaten Mitchell by a greater number. There is no 'flaw' at work. This isn't the consensus judging as used in the past.
My apologies I intended to put "could have" instead of "must have." Either way is possible, you just cant know unless you look at the sheets. I just wonder why you wouldn't have both scored the same. Either do placement on both or rank on both. Maybe it would keep results a little more consistent. I'm still a big fan of doing it Olympic Ice skating style where you take the highest score, the lowest score, and completely ignore them, and then average the points. That way biased can be eliminated a bit more. You can go to a competition and receive 4th place from one judge 10th from another and then maybe consistent 5ths and 6ths. So obviously results are going to be skewed. Why can't we eliminate the outliers?
Honestly, you guys can make up a million reasons as to why 'Mitchell should have won'. We all just need accept the facts that MITCHELL DID NOT WIN. Obviously more than half of the panel believed Headliners were better. Also, the panel had 10+ judges on it.
Um, I think the bottom line is that Mitchell should have won because they were better.
Honestly, you guys can make up a million reasons as to why 'Mitchell should have won'. We all just need accept the facts that MITCHELL DID NOT WIN. Obviously more than half of the panel believed Headliners were better. Also, the panel had 10+ judges on it.
My Facebook, Twitter, and text messages are all blowing up because of these results, which I expected and also agree with.
But honestly, I can't really say that I am completely surprised that this happened. The scoring system (no matter how flawed) at Westwood is not a secret. Directors know about it. Spectators know about it. Performers know about it. Especially since it has had some public ridicule in the past (2009 Lewis Central over Mitchell, the Cedar Rapids Xavier debacle, etc). Everyone knows the situation when they sign up for this competition. Westwood has tweaked their scoring system over the years to try to please the masses but obviously it still isn't doing that.
Also, the topic of 'subjectivity' has been huge this season surrounding show choir. It is mentioned in many, many topics on this site. Individual judge personal preference is, currently, at the highest level I believe it has ever been, mainly because the evolution of show choir is occurring so quickly that many people cannot keep up. There are so many different styles out there that did not exist just five, ten years ago. And it is taking its toll on competitions.
Westwood tonight, and other competitions to a less shocking extent, are good examples of this. Especially when you combine a scoring system like Westwood's with the issue of judge subjectivity. I was not there to witness the shows tonight, but based off my prior knowledge I would say that I do not necessarily agree with these results. But am I surprised? Not at all. Show choir is becoming more and more difficult to judge without a bias of some sort, and when you use a rankings system like Westwood does, you're going to get really funky results.
To the Sioux City East kids who are going to read through this topic/Twitter/etc and feel like complete sh*t about themselves because of the people discrediting their hard work: ignore them. You guys obviously gave one hell of a performance. Congratulations on your grand championship.
To the Mitchell kids who are going to read through this topic and feel like complete sh*t about themselves because of the people saying they should have won when they didn't: I hope that you don't join in on this, and instead be gracious. After all, show choir is not supposed to be about winning, but instead about being with people you love doing what you love. This competition does not define your season. You still have an amazing show and have so much to be proud of.
This is a huge rant that you can ignore or thumbs down or whatever. I just hate when people are frustrated by something like final results and they end up taking it out in a way that the teenagers/fans who are in/associated with the groups will be hurt by it.
This isn't correct either. Total points were converted to ranks. Therefore Mitchell most likely edged East out of vocals and choreo by a slim margin. East, then, must have beaten Mitchell by a greater number. There is no 'flaw' at work. This isn't the consensus judging as used in the past.
This still doesn't make sense. Most score sheets only account band for 10-15% of the final score. If this was judged purely by scoring, Mitchell still should have won.
Just wanted to say congrats to all the groups, and especially SC East. Regardless of what people say & the scoring method, you competed with some of the best out there tonight & did very well.
I can't say who should have won but I do know one thing: the Headliners rock!
It is the ordinal system. Placement was determined by rank, while BC and BV were by points. Although I do think that it does not make sense either, a judge must have had Mitchell very low, and then Sioux City East was consistently high dragging their "rank" down even though their points may be more. Think what you will of it, but it's just how the competition is run
This isn't correct either. Total points were converted to ranks. Therefore Mitchell most likely edged East out of vocals and choreo by a slim margin. East, then, must have beaten Mitchell by a greater number. There is no 'flaw' at work. This isn't the consensus judging as used in the past.
This competition is absolute, and utter GARBAGE. Always has been. Congrats to East, but it's unfortunate that Mitchell had to lose the way they did. What a robbery.
This response is rude and completely uncalled for. I understand your frustration at the results and the scoring system that this competition uses, but to call this competition as a whole "absolute, and utter GARBAGE" is ridiculous. You can ridicule the scoring system all you want, and I would join you, but do not discredit the hours, days, weeks, and even months of effort that the students, parents, faculty, and alumni of Westwood put into running this ordeal.
As a spectator, Westwood is almost always one of my favorites to attend. Mr. Gerking and company put on a great show. So please do not take away from their efforts.
However, the scoring system, continue to bash away at will.
This competition is absolute, and utter GARBAGE. Always has been. Congrats to East, but it's unfortunate that Mitchell had to lose the way they did. What a robbery.
I wouldn't go as far as calling this competition "garbage". It's just an unusual way of ranking choirs. Some people may not agree with it, but it's the way it is.
5RU Lewis central
4RU Gretna
3RU Kennedy
2RU Papillion South
1RU Mitchell
GC East
BV Mitchell
BC Mitchell
BB East
Male performer Kennedy
Female performer Papillion South Emily Tencer
Ordinal system was used so Mitchell won by captions by points and East took GC by points used in the ordinal system. This is the same situation but was avoided at Elkhorn South where Titanium would've won by ordinals, but Wetside would've swept points wise. That's life/show choir! thanks to Westwood for being fantastic hosts and having a great competition!
This competition is absolute, and utter GARBAGE. Always has been. Congrats to East, but it's unfortunate that Mitchell had to lose the way they did. What a robbery.
I just heard Mitchell got Best Vocals, Best Choreo, and 1RU. I need an explanation. How is this even possible??
It is the ordinal system. Placement was determined by rank, while BC and BV were by points. Although I do think that it does not make sense either, a judge could have had Mitchell very low, and then Sioux City East was consistently high dragging their "rank" down even though their points may be more. Think what you will of it, but it's just how the competition is run
5RU Lewis central
4RU Gretna
3RU Kennedy
2RU Papillion South
1RU Mitchell
GC East
BV Mitchell
BC Mitchell
BB East
Male performer Kennedy
Female performer Papillion South Emily Tencer
Ordinal system was used so Mitchell won by captions by points and East took GC by points used in the ordinal system. This is the same situation but was avoided at Elkhorn South where Titanium would've won by ordinals, but Wetside would've swept points wise. That's life/show choir! thanks to Westwood for being fantastic hosts and having a great competition!
Best Soloist: Lewis Central
2RU Lewis Central
1RU Bishop Heelan (BC)
GC Sioux Center (BV)
Thanks, it has been posted. I'm assuming that third place was "Titan Force" (as Lewis Central had two middle school groups competing in this division), but I want to make sure.
Westwood Jubilation 2014
thanks to Westwood for being fantastic hosts and having a great competition!