2011 CBBF Bodybuilding Nationals OFFICIAL THREAD

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' studying organic chem right now and even this made my brain hurt more than the chem! lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve_d

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.

---

Oh, and by the way...Something like this actually happened while I judged a show - without judge inconsistencies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by natenator

The people dissing of coverage was directed at those organizations that make money off this sport and anyone with half a brain knew that is what some meant by these comments. I've never encountered ANYONE on a forum who complains about random folk who try to update the forum membership as to what is going on. I'm pretty certain we all appreciate it when people are willing to do so, so again the dissing was not of regular folk trying to provide information to forum members - it was directed at revenue generating organizations who stand to make $ from this sport in Canada.



Oh and agree with you - huge props to Salim. Two years, two pro's. Maybe now we can all get off Darren Oliver's nut sac

---

This is exactly what I meant I thought it what pretty clear when I wrote it......

Comprehension of what people write on message boards is a big problem. Sometimes you have to take a step back and read before you fire off. Yes, the way we write something does impact other people. If what is being said is about them directly and specifically. Mine was about the photo coverage not about the information that was being relayed.
If you volunteer your time on your own you should be doing it because you want to do it. Not so you get a slap on the back and have people praise you to the gods!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by natenator

I' studying organic chem right now and even this made my brain hurt more than the chem! lol

---

lol...trust me, this used to make my brain hurt, and I am a senior biostatistician. But the proof is there. I will be honest, my example may not actually apply to this situation, because in order for it to be true, it means the 2nd place competitor and the 3rd place compeitor in the weight class would have to have a score BOTH in between 8 and 14...And the way I worked the numbers, it might actually not happen this way no matter how you filled in the rest of the competitors scores...But keep in mind, I did this fast to illustrate a point. And the above example would be enough to show how one can be 1&2 then switched to at least 3&1.

But even with that said. I doubt there was total consistency for Steve's case. But quite possible in Joanne's case.

How bout u get off the boards and get serious again.. I'm coming baby!! Secrets are out, magic is flying..lol

Well its too late to change anything. In 23 years of competing I've never complained about the judging. I understand the sport is subjective and in the end we take what is given us. The Masters Light and the Welterweight divisions were both high caliber classes. This was by all accounts a tough year and I do have empathy for the judges dealing with these classes and and the abundance of competitors with argueable very close but very different physiques. I could list 10 reasons why I feel I should have won both classes and I could also come up with a few reasons that I should have won nothing. It was that tough.
I will always be at a loss as to how I drop 3 places to the same competitors. My callouts in both classes were consistant with a top 3 finish so I just dont get it. I guess when I see the score cards I will have my answer. I just hope that answer is something legit and not a manipulation of scores in order to improve a certain persons placing to a podium finish at the expense of someone else from a different province. If that is the case then there is a deep problem with the juding of our sport at the national level.
Not making any accusations. Just confused and looking for an answer.

Steve

I hope for consitency sake you at least get something similar to my example above. At the very worst, I would hope a judge did not alternate placings within a judge by more than 1 spot.

I will also admit that as a judge I have done this once (changing my vote). However, it was a local level show, and in fact I truly stood by my decision to switch placings. Again, this was a local level show, and within 2 hours, the individual must have been told how to improve his stance in a number of poses, as there was a clear change in the way he looked on stage. forgetting to flex legs for example is a big mistake often seen by first time competitors. I don't judge on potential, I judge what I see. If they change what they flex from 1 round to the next, I am not going to keep my original votes just to make the judges look good....I am as fair to the athletes as possible.

BUT, at a national show, there likely is no excuse (such as above) to change the way you see things - at least not in a couple hours. Usually at this level the athletes will not make rookie mistakes that can change the way they look in an hour, ex posing - or drinking a gallon of water & chips.

I would definitely make it a point to get the score sheets.

Woof just spend 30minutes digesting all this .
Just compete no expectations eventually things will go your way

Btw steve I think Greg could have dieted and taken LHW he looked solid when we spoke at the show.
Tell him get on stage 2012