If there is a fallout over scoring from a contest, the "unusual" score can easily be related to a specific judge. If it is an honest "taint", the judge has to live with that stigma.
The argument you're making is purely subjective. I'm having a hard time believing that any director with a shred of self-respect would fix a score.
And, the judge you previously mentioned has far too much integrity to resort to score manipulation.
I never said David Fehr has ever manipulated a score in the past, present, or will in the future. It's the perception that is bothersome. This subject has been discussed extensively on this site and I am not bringing up anything new.
There are many music teachers, professors, or even college students majoring in music/dance who can be asked to judge performances without having any connection to the choirs they would be judging.
Los Al deserved their win at Nationals. Did they deserve 4th in SoCal or should they have been placed higher? The judges said no but I don't believe for a moment that Los Al members thought they had lost to the three groups who placed ahead of them. "Judges preference" as one poster wrote is the reason. But should a "judges preference" result in such a disparity in placement over different competitions?
Show choir competitions need to start to make their judge selections less family and more professional. That's all I'm saying.
It's really sad that HIGH SCHOOL show choir is resorting to conspiracy theories to explain losses. Every single one of the kids that gets up on those stages works so hard to be the best that they can be. Why take that away from them? What's done is done. Congrats to everyone who had the courage to get up on stage and do what you love regardless of placements. It's been a great year. Let's leave it at that.
The judge takes what fall? The only result is that a deserving choir loses and the winning choir has the taint of a fixed score.
If there is a fallout over scoring from a contest, the "unusual" score can easily be related to a specific judge. If it is an honest "taint", the judge has to live with that stigma.
The argument you're making is purely subjective.
And, the judge you previously mentioned has far too much integrity to resort to score manipulation.
Kalcoh, if you don't have judges who are directors of competitive show choir, who do you have judge? I think it is perfectly legitimate to have a "rival" director judge. If their scores do end up wonky, that judge takes the fall.
The judge takes what fall? The only result is that a deserving choir loses and the winning choir has the taint of a fixed score.
Kalcoh, if you don't have judges who are directors of competitive show choir, who do you have judge? I think it is perfectly legitimate to have a "rival" director judge. If their scores do end up wonky, that judge takes the fall.
Mr. Fehr is a professional. Additionally, national rankings are complete BS, and everyone knows that. Well, anyone that is really informed knows that. That's quite a bold statement you are presenting there "kalcoh."
It is not really a bold statement. First, show choirs do want that top rank no matter how much in public they say it is BS. I haven't heard of any choir that was ranked #1 turn down the ranking, have you?
Show choir competitions don't seem to have a problem with the judges relationship with the choirs they are judging. However, the viewing public looks at it as not being kosher. Perception is the point. I doubt having Phil Jackson of the Lakers being the referee during a Laker game would look fair even if Phil was the most honest ref in the world. Having directors of choirs act as judges in a show where they are judging choirs they compete against looks okay to you? Having choreographers act as judges where the choirs they choreographed are performing at the competition look fair to you?
I split up the songs as you can see... and they are now in 16:9 aspect ratio so there is no black on the side of the video and it fills the whole screen.
Chula Vista SoCal Performance Show Choir Invitational (Day Two) 2010
