For the record, this was not golf scoring, but consensus ranking, so the explanation above is incorrect. The simple addition of the points is not how final placements were determined. In reality, Carmel and Findlay were tied for first. They each had the same number of first place votes. As stated in the rules, the tie breaker was vocal scores.
Well, yeah, that's why I asked. These are discussion boards after all! I didn't know whether it was like a "hey, it's weird seeing Carmel in Tier II since they're a top notch choir" or a "this classification system of number of singers is weird." But really Max's response was "just didn't know," so essentially he used "weird" just to say "ok" which in and of itself is a weird way to say ok.
I think this is why finals should just be tier 1 only; it will solve this problem reaaaally quickly. Either that or just have separate finals for the different divisions, which seems to be a popular trend this year. I guess I'm down with it for the girls, but I don't think we really need this many tiers in the first place...
I blame Ohio schools. For some reason naming winners of different classes is popular. I've always thought that if you are going to separate them, then separate them. No offense, who cares who wins class A, B or C when you are all advanced mixed groups?!?
It is kinda weird for me, but not for the same reasons as max. For this particular competition I don't think tiers really mean anything considering how they are decided. To basically all the competitions I have attended, Tier II consists mainly of prep groups with no consideration of how many singer dancers they have. For example if my group were to be going to this competition, we would be Tier II, but we always compete advanced mixed or tier I. If they were to only make finals tier I and had tiers based on number of s/d, an amazing group like Carmel would not make finals at this particular competition. Having individual finals for tiers is just a lot and I cannot imagine the organization that it takes to do that, so I commend all competitions that do that as so many have started to do. I firmly believe that competitions WITH finals should yes, have advanced mixed , prep, and Single-Gender tiers, but for all of them to be judged the same and get placed in their tier in prelims, but whoever scores high enough to make finals, makes finals, not just make one or two tiers eligible. In addition, for whatever tier they compete in to be up to the discretion of the director like it is most of the time. However, personally, I have grown to love no finals. One and done, quick and easy, and I go to bed the same day I started the competition! lol
If they were to only make finals tier I and had tiers based on number of s/d, an amazing group like Carmel would not make finals at this particular competition.
That's exactly the point. Carmel shouldn't be in Tier II, and I would bet you that if only Tier I was finals eligible, they would make sure they were up in the advanced division.
I firmly believe that competitions WITH finals should yes, have advanced mixed , prep, and Single-Gender tiers, but for all of them to be judged the same and get placed in their tier in prelims, but whoever scores high enough to make finals, makes finals, not just make one or two tiers eligible.
I guess the point is why even have divisions if you are just going to judge everyone the same? The ultra-purist would probably say throw everyone into one pot and then whoever scores in the top six makes finals. I like divisions, however, because I believe that there are schools who don't have the same resources or numbers to compete at the highest levels, and they shouldn't be penalized for that. There are also many schools with different tiers of groups at the same school (i.e., advanced and prep) and the secondary tier shouldn't be competing against the most advanced groups. That's why it is nice to have a separate tiers so that choirs can compete at their appropriate level. But then to turn around and say Tier II is then eligible for finals seems silly - because if they can hang with the best of the groups, why aren't they competing against them in the first place?
This kinda all goes back to the endless discussion of how to separate choirs - based on school size, choir size, or skill level. I maintain that skill level is the best method because while school and/or choir size absolutely can have an affect on a choir's ability, it doesn't always. Carmel in Tier II is obvious proof. But however groups are sorted, I think they should just be judged against their respective competitors - otherwise it really just says that at the end of the day, divisions don't really serve much purpose.
Many times divisions mean nothing in Ohio and I believe that is how it is here. They evenly split the divisions based off of school size and you are assigned one. The divisional awards only matter for extra trophies. I think we all agree that they should mean something.
I guess it is just really up to the competition and those going to the competitions. Like Chatham, or like Troy this year for example, have like my example of different competing tiers, but all eligible for finals. There are separate tiers, they compete separately in prelims, but then any group at the competition is eligible for finals. It works, they are placed in their own divisions, but are competing against more than just those in their division. The perfect example of competing in a different tier, but hanging with big groups is how Carmel's girl group won their division, and placed 7th overall at chatham, points away from making finals! However, this doesn't really do anything for my point, as it just makes more questions about divisions. So I really don't know. This might just be an inconsistency among competitions that is not gonna get solved. It's just fun to see how different competitions address tiers!
I absolutely agree with this. My personal belief is that divisions should exist and be divided by skill level of a choir (decided by the director of the choir or the host of the comp) but every tier should be eligible for finals. That way, the smaller or newer programs get the recognition they deserve in their tier, but aren’t locked out of finals by virtue of being a small or new program. Also with this system, awards in every tier have a meaning and purpose. Instead of saying “oh wow a shiny trophy” they say “you did this the best out of everyone else in your skill level, and you should be proud”
I don't agree that choirs should be divided up by "skill" because that's completely subjective..In addition, just look at some of the comments posted by people, and no offense to Max, but it can easily be interpreted that by saying Carmel is such a great group, why is it in tier 2, its degrading to all other choirs and their work. By diving them up into different categories, it can really be disheartening. It's like saying "youre in the crap division, youre in the meh division, and you're in the best ever division." Plus this year has seen some really "meh" choirs overtake powerhouses. These subjective divisions overestimate the big groups and underestimate the small ones.
This discussion is why I'm a firm believer that there should be NO tiers or classes, UNLESS a school has more than one group and one can be designated advanced, the other, prep etc. Anything else falls into the "everyone gets a trophy" mindset. (But, hey I also shed a tear when Indiana adopted class basketball, the last state to do so; even made NPR with that story that day. Sue me, I'm old.)