Second Place
Musicianship
Showmanship
Most Outstanding Wardrobe
Outstanding Male Performer (John Cutone)
Favorite Moment of SoCal (Gold Explosion)
Sweepstakes
I doubt anyone will answer this but how was it possible for Burroughs to lose to Burbank if Burroughs won sweepstakes?
If I'm remembering correctly, the Sweepstakes Award combines both the Advanced Mixed and Advanced Women's scores so it's more of a vocal program award than it is an award for an individual choir.
QUOTE (..AnimeKiti4Christ.. @ May 25 2012, 01:57 AM)
Here a link to the photos I took on Day Two. Feel free to tag people and share them with others. Unfortunately I wasn't able to at Day One due to details I wasn't able to sort out in time. But yea, I hope you guys like them!
Awesome, thanks Susanna will definitely tag my mates! :D
Here a link to the photos I took on Day Two. Feel free to tag people and share them with others. Unfortunately I wasn't able to at Day One due to details I wasn't able to sort out in time. But yea, I hope you guys like them!
I don't think many people are aware that there was an error of the placements for the double A division. Our director from Mt. Eden told us a week ago that we actually placed third since we placed higher than Bonita in ranking points. He also told me that he (Mr. Atienza) would let other directors know.. and send a third place trophy along later..
Competitions don't provide the participating groups with a list of rules ahead of time? Around these parts one of the first things you get from a competition organizer is a detailed break down of the rules.
Granted there are always situations where an unforeseen circumstance arises and you have to fly by the seat of your pants,, but something as basic as how the winner is determined needs to be addressed ahead of time. I wouldn't attend a competition where the only rule was "rules are shared with participants on a need to know basis."
You are misunderstanding how rankings work. Judges don't score, then arbitrarily assign a ranking. The tabulators take the individual judges scores and determine a ranking based on those scores. If a judge gave Burroughs 286 and Burbank 281, the tabulator would rank that judges scores as Burroughs - 1, Burbank - 2.
The discrepancy at SoCal occurred because the tabulators only used rankings to determine first place and not showmanship and musicianship as well. Had they done it correctly, Burbank would have won show (because more judges gave Burbank higher show scores, regardless of the number of total points) and Burroughs would have won music (more judges gave Burroughs higher music points, regardless of the total number of points).
Did the rule book clarify this? Did it state the captions would be determined by rankings or did it state points? If it didn't state at all, then there is nothing that's correct or incorrect, but definitely something that needs to be addressed in the contest rules.
In the midwest (at least around this area.) you see scores converted into rankings to determine placement and then captions based off of straight points all the time. You also see judges "voting" on captions. Rarely, however, do I see the breakdown of choreography and vocals broken into rankings.
Thank you for clarfying that.
That was the whole reason behind my post was that I wasn't understanding something and I appreciate you setting my confusion straight.
Let's just say one judge scores Burroughs with 286 and Burbank 281 yet he ranks Burbank 1st and Burroughs 2nd. Why? Score wise you have Burroughs first. That is where my confusion stems from.
You are misunderstanding how rankings work. Judges don't score, then arbitrarily assign a ranking. The tabulators take the individual judges scores and determine a ranking based on those scores. If a judge gave Burroughs 286 and Burbank 281, the tabulator would rank that judges scores as Burroughs - 1, Burbank - 2.
The discrepancy at SoCal occurred because the tabulators only used rankings to determine first place and not showmanship and musicianship as well. Had they done it correctly, Burbank would have won show (because more judges gave Burbank higher show scores, regardless of the number of total points) and Burroughs would have won music (more judges gave Burroughs higher music points, regardless of the total number of points).
The two judges who ranked Burbank in first didn't know what the third scored or what kind of point differential he used. They shouldn't know what the other judge was scoring. They should be independently deciding what they think the points are even if they know it will be converted to a ranking. Arguing that they should have used the points to ensure the result they wanted by scoring a wider margin makes no sense to me. In my opinion manipulating the scores to make things turn out the way you think they should verges on unethical.
.
Let me clarify what I was saying earlier. And please know I have no dog in this fight. I no longer direct show choir and I don't work for any of these show choirs or anything like that. I love all the choirs that participate, honestly.
Tkae one judge for example and I know he doesn't know the scores of the others etc.
Let's just say one judge scores Burroughs with 286 and Burbank 281 yet he ranks Burbank 1st and Burroughs 2nd. Why? Score wise you have Burroughs first. That is where my confusion stems from.
Again my intention is not to disrespect or offend anyone. I am simply stating my personal opinion as others have and stating where my confusion comes from in terms of this new ranking versus scoring that wasn't around when I was directing show choirs.
Avoid the problem by having a minimum of 5 judges so no one judge can skew the results. 20% of the vote makes it more balanced then 33 1/3% of the vote.
Using scores to determine ranks forces the judges to justify their ranking. They don't get to just say "I thought this group was first" they have to say "I think this group is first because...."
The two judges who ranked Burbank in first didn't know what the third scored or what kind of point differential he used. They shouldn't know what the other judge was scoring. They should be independently deciding what they think the points are even if they know it will be converted to a ranking. Arguing that they should have used the points to ensure the result they wanted by scoring a wider margin makes no sense to me. In my opinion manipulating the scores to make things turn out the way you think they should verges on unethical.
The judges should score the sheet honestly with no regard for the points OR the ranking the other judges are determining. One judge should definitely not get to decide the outcome all by themselves just because they scored a wider point margin.
Forgive as I mean no disrespect to anyone, directors, groups, students, etc., I am just a but confused.
So the only thing that determined the placing was the rankings? Then why have scroes at all? It is like in politics that the popular doesn't always win out over the electoral vote (though it should). So one school score wise places higher, wins musicianship AND showmanship but didn't win because the judges didn't rank them this way, well I think they did, their own scores ranked them that way, if the judges didn't want Burroughs to be first then they should have given them lower scores. It just really doesn't make sense to me.
As for the division A, AA, AAA stuff. I have primarily had novice groups and a couple had intermediate. I have never had the numbers of Burbank and Burroughs etc. Several years I couldn't even afford a live band. I couldn't compete with those groups not just because of my size but because if skill level, and let's face it...money. My students worked hard fundraising their butts off but they were from a REALLY poor area (and I won't name the particular school that I taught for those two years as they are still competion (no not Serrano)). So this school I am referring to rarely wanted to compete beause there are hardly any novice divisions etc. (This was before the A, AA, AAA stuff started). So numbers shouldn't be the only reason. I could have 50 kids, and not have enough money for costume changes, a live band, a choreographer even (myself and the kids choreographed the numbers and we are NOT choreographers), or song arrangers. It was difficult for us to fundraise because of the poverty area we were surrounded in and we had to pay for all of our busses ourselves. Parent support and invovlment was minimal at best. I am glad to see them still competing and not giving up.
But as I said again, numbers shouldn't be the only reason because it isn't the only factor going into what division a choir should be going into. It needs to be up to the director but unforunately in the past there have been directors who haven't put their kids in the right division for the sole purpose of winning a trophy. (I won't mention names) There are also innocent schools who have no choice but to put their second choir (no matter how good they are) into an intermediate division because they already have a choir in advanced. So you need to look at what goes into a choir going into a certain division and it isn't all about the numbers.
Again I mean no disrespect, I haven't directed show choir in about 4 years and I realize things change.
Congrats to all those who put in the hard work this year, from directors, choreographers, students, parents, bands, and any other crew that I am leaving out.
Chula Vista SoCal Performance Show Choir Invitational (Day Two) 2012
