Thanks Steve!
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve_d
Thanks Steve!
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve_d
How does a woman take 1st in one class then place behind a girl in the Open that she beat in the Masters? Joanne Williams...
Womens Masters Heavy
1 - Lisa Giesbrecht BC
2 - Joanne Williams ON
3 - Tananavire McGowan ON
4 - Nancy Richard PQ
5 - Heather Manuel NL
6 - Debbie Fury NS
7 - Wendy McMaster ON withdrew
Womens Heavyweight
1 - Fabiola Boulanger PQ
2 - Tara Silzer AB
3 - Joanne Williams ON
4 - Lisa Giesbrecht BC
5 - Nancy Clark BC
6 - Sharon Mould ON
7 - Dawn Alison BC
8 - Tananavire McGowan ON
9 - Heather Manuel NL
10 - Wendy McMaster ON withdrew
Have to agree! But every time it comes back east they hold it in Montreal. Just proves its just a money maker and the athletes come second!Quote:
Originally Posted by Delt King
I explained a similar outcome in the other thread. 1st and 2nd got reversed to 4th and 1st...and even that was explainable.Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyO
assume 7 judges. Cancel high and low..
Weight Division:
Competitor A places 1st, Competitor B places 2nd
Masters:
Competitor A places 4th, Competitor B places 1st
How is this possible without judging inconsistencies.
Masters:
Judge Rank_A Rank_B
1 2 1
2 1 2
3 1 2
4 3 2
5 3 2
6 2 1
7 3 4
Weight class:
Judge Rank_A Rank_B
1 2 1
2 1 5
3 1 5
4 2 1
5 3 2
6 2 1
7 1 6
If you cancel high low, above, A will get 11 points, B will get 9 points for the masters class. If you do the same thing in the weight class example, A will have 8 point, B will have 14. Complete consistency within the judges, but a different outcome. In fact the scores are similar to what happened in Steve's case. The big part responsible for this is judge 2,3, and 7, where you see competitor B had low scores even though consistent. But how did that happen? In this example, it implies in the weight class there were extra compititors who squeezed there way in between A and B, which resulted in B score driven down relative to A in those 3 judges.
So the end result is it is possible, even when judges are not out to lunch. Whether or not this happened, would require seeing the judges score cards.
I honestly don't think that is what happened in this case, as I was looking at the scores, and the scores didn't really allow for any type of scenario like this.
I could go on and on about this, but the way the scoring system is - (ranks) it will always be possible for this to happen. The only way to avoid it would be to give scores for each competitor (say out of 100). That way close individuals get similar scores. The ranking way always assumes an equal distance between 1st to 2nd, 2nd to 3rd, 3rd to 4th...But we all know that isn't the way it goes.
I should write a paper on this someday.
Steve d,
It all depends on the number of girls in each comparison. If the top 3 girls are compared and then the next 3 are compared and that's it then there is no way that a "next 3" girl could be a "top 3" girl. I would seriously like to see the scores. I'm also pretty sure there are rules against judges who score a girl 5th when she is awarded 1st for example. There is no way they should be judging. Especially at the Nationals!
Judges are supposed to be given notice of the dual class competitors so that this thing doesn't happen. Unfortunately, it did. Were they given notice? Looks like they weren't. Pretty sad especially at the National level. I would be forwarding a complaint to Manion if it happened to me. Total joke. Really goes to show you what happens when the organization is so far removed from actually competing that they forget or don't even know what it's like to compete. The CBBF had better focus on the athletes instead of themselves or they will lose the confidence of its members.
There was lots to ponder with the judging i didnt wanna think about my class too much it was just a mysteryQuote:
Originally Posted by Sean Summers
the NA format is best they bring out groups of 7 or 6 do the quarter turns and mandatory, then you come out each for 30 second free posing(this where you can shine) then third round call outs. It actually goes faster and gives guys a chance to present themselves especially when you trying to cram 30 guys on a stage.
My example was not for the women class. This was for a seperate class. And it was to illustrate a point to not always throw down the judges when this happens, as it can and will always happen time and time again. Sometimes for the right reason, sometimes for the wrong reason.
The top 3 girls to next 3 girls is also a great example as to why this would happen. I don't think this is what happened though in this case, but this always happens especially at the longer shows (such as nationals)...if you don't make call out your screwed. But really - how is that fair. Another flaw in the judging system...but hard to overcome due to time constraints. In a perfect world, the top competitor from the 'next 3' would be brought into the mix and at minimum compared to the last girl of the 'top 3'.
Its subjective, and that's fine. People just need to accept that it is subjective, funny things can also happen because of the system, and that it is likely the best system that we can have. Nothing is perfect
I think i saw a bus heading down to pity city.....jeeeeze......Get a grip on reality kid!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dryvrgrl
was it a short bus? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by ironwill