DancesportInfo.net

All Forums Dance politics

Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ???


webminder Joined on 13 Nov 2008 Total posts: 46	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Saturday, 09 May 2009 13:12 Olympics ? Sport ? How can a competitive activity be taken seriously if the following are allowed: 1. Teacher judging their own student(s) - some judges hired by those they will adjudicate just a day before a competition. 2. Teacher allowed to adjudicate a field where their students participate after being heard saying: " I would never place my own student worse than 3rd place, am I crazy ?" 3. Judges discussing / promoting their students to other judges prior to competitions 4. An invited IDSF judge asking a local judge immediately, just prior a competition: " Who should I be marking ?" 5. Judge protecting own students by marking down couples who could threaten them: a) Placing own student 1st in all dances ( most dances) while all ( majority ) of judges place the couple in the bottom or last b) Placing own students 1st and marking those receive top places by the majority ( even win the competition ) last in the final, in all ( or in the most dances ) c) With no scrutineer questioning such obviously unfair markings 6. Judges collaborating by making 'secret' agreements ( well not so secret if you look at the marks ) to help each other in promoting / marking their "chosen" couples/students ( do not underestimate the power of the extra 10 recalls in the first rounds of a large international competition, do not underestimate the extra 10 recalls in the final rounds ). 7. Competitors performance, technique, musicality, floor skill is expected to be determined within less than 10 seconds in each dance 8. No accountability for adjudicator's markings, where judges markings cannot be challenged, because : "We the judges are professionals, we mark fairly, we mark the way they see it, any review and challenge is nonsense and unnecessary- besides, even if some unfairness exists there are many other judges, it all evens out at the end...." 9. Teachers who are not invited by an organizer of an event to judge prohibit / discourage their students to support/anticipate in the event 10. Teacher agrees to support an event organizer, enters and brings along (many) of his/her own students with understanding the organizer would "show appreciation", some of which could be the introduction of specific students to the happy to be invited judges... _______________________ The solution: i) Use extra 2 adjudicators, discard one top and one bottom mark in each dance in each round ii) Judges would be required to circle ( highlight ) marks of their own students -those who took 5 or more private lessons, or belong to his/her club. iii) Responsible scrutineer must question marks which cry out of the score sheet for review: The champion of a competition being placed last in one or more dances by a judge while receiving 1st places by majority and opposite, the dancer receiving last places by majority being marked a Champion- a winner by a judge in one , even more dances. iv) For a nominal fee ( to discourage abuse ) anyone can challenge "fairness" of marks. v ) Introduce penalty and make judges accountable for the work they are hired and paid to do. If necessary publish the names of corrupted, repeated offenders. Dancesport associations should discourage use and employ of such individuals ________________________ Dance competitors train hard, and many use judges marks as a feedback to identify weaknesses in their dance which helps them to make corrections and to improve. Dancers enjoy competitions and thrive on improvement and recognition. The same dancers are discouraged, disappointed, turned off and repeatedly sickened by seeing the unfairness.... Dancers and those who are around them - be it the fans, friends, the parents, the coaches and teachers know unfairness exists in dancesport - they excuse it by saying: " Judging is subjective ". Subjective ? Yes Is there a future ? Suppose so, IF YOU PLAY THE BALL, CLOSE THE EYES, SUPPORT THE SYSTEM, DO NOT MAKE WAVES, your turn may come - if you do not - FORGET IT, no matter how good you may be. Such is the local/regional and unfortunately even the IDSF dancesport way. Does that mean "dancesport results measurement" = judging need be unfair, and the process allowed to reward corruption, while discouraging many of potentially great dancers from getting involved in dance - but instead turning to golf, tennis, or just " social dance" ? How can we expect dancers to enter the floor, and perform with joy, fully focused on dance, their partners filled with expectation of the best if they recognize judges who will never "mark them", or, who will again mark them down - based on past history ? It is a shame and shame has no place in the Olympics.
gabriela_S Joined on 09 May 2009 Total posts: 6	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Saturday, 09 May 2009 23:20 Exactly webmaster. The reason why my partner and I stopped competing. You must be prepared to play the game and put up with all the BS and average the results, close the eyes to the injustice, which everyone knows about but is resigned to and prepared to ignore . But it does takes lots of joy from the dance. It is upsetting to dancers and to spectators. There are a few, definitely not all, judges who judge by the depth of their clients ( students ) pockets, very much motivated by personal benefit and gains. They are often blamed for promoting and helping their students, which is a mistake. It has often very little to do with helping dancers. They are helping themselves. They expect a financial " thank you" in return for their undeserved recall, or a mark in a final. It is everywhere in dancesport not just within IDSF. Dancesport is both, sport and art, and art cannot be measured. You either like art or you do not. There is no justification to personal preferences. Good excuse for the incompetent and the corrupted judges.
keggs Joined on 24 Dec 2005 Total posts: 406	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Sunday, 10 May 2009 09:22 very rare post from me now. Just wanted to say that I couldn't agree more with both of you.
think of me Joined on 05 Aug 2005 Total posts: 288	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Sunday, 10 May 2009 11:09 In another words judging dancesport is a popularity contest. The most popular ( whatever the reasons ) get the marks. Might as well have the audience declare the winners by waving numbers in the air from the front lines. Some "judges*)" get away, and are allowed to get away, with a murder now a days . By their actions these corrupted judges have disqualified themselves from being "judges", they simply became selfish idol / champion makers, promoters and businessmen who abuse their authority, who let down their employers and those who enjoy sport of dance. But do not underestimate the intellect of the dancers. They are not so naive. They know, they talk amongst themselves, they analyze the score sheets, they shake their heads in disbelieve how the less able can get ahead of them. The dancers have the right to dance or not to dance, to support the 'bull #@! or not, and many are selecting NOT. Very appropriate thread.
onyourtoes Joined on 12 Feb 2007 Total posts: 657	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Sunday, 10 May 2009 15:41 Interesting 3 very unhappy Canadian members. It seems that when the Canadian DanceSport Federation were extolling the virtues and benefits of CADA/CDF/IDSF Adjudicators the Canadian dancers do not see things quite the same way. http://www.canadiandancesportfederation.org/articles/newsletters/NEWSLETTER%202008.pdf webminder can I just comment having 2 extra judges and dropping the highest and lowest marks will make no difference at all and cause the organiser wasteful expense. Under the skating system which has its faults but is still the best around it is a majority opinion. On a Panel of 5 it is the marks of 3 who will decide. On a panel of 7 it is 4 who will decide. On a panel of 9 it is 5 who will decide and so on. One judge marking their pupil cannot change the result. One or even 2 judges marking a 6 when the majority are marking 1 achieve nothing but can damage their reputation. The reality is that it is not always that simple and many times one has to go to 2nds and better and even 3rds and better to get the result for one dance. What I would like to see reviewed is the result being decided by the addition of dance placings. For instance is 2 2 2 2 1 Total 9 and 1st place better than 1 1 1 1 6 Total 10 and 2nd place. Take a panel of 5 get 3 corrupt judges to give you the desired result and then attack the 2 honest ones for being out of line with these 3 seems to be what yis being suggested. The other alternative is that what you intended was judges must mark only on past placings and past form and not what is happening on the floor in front of them. Anyone going against "form" must be punished . I do hope that we never come to this and that judges will mark what they are seeing right there. It was precisely this which caused the Bizokas/Demidova partnership to burst through and finish 2nd in their first major championship and was a surprise to many people. I must also advise that a Scrutineer has the authority to draw to the attention of the Chairman any discrepancies and errors that they discover (a number not dancing but getting marked or the same number twice or more couples recalled than should be are 3 examples) they are not empowered to question the placings of any adjudicator. Most scrutineers are hard at work with markings and not watching the dancing and therefore can make no comment on numbers on a sheet of paper no matter how great a variation. Scrutineers need not have dance qualifications. It is wrong to try and place an obligation for judging on scrutineers. Investigation is the responsibility of the Chairman of Adjudicators . I could make a few more comments about some Chairman but will refrain. Competitors worry more about improving your own dancing and less about judges. In the main truly OPEN events the results will come. Choose where you dance if you are noting unscrupulous/dishonest judging. WDC Amateur League offers a good alternative. I smiled when I read the comment about a judge having 10 seconds. If this were true and it is what couples believe why waste 10/15 even 20 seconds whilst the music plays and they do not dance but "preen" and hop from foot to foot , forwards, backwards. sideways or just "wiggling". The reality of adjudicating is just a little different.
bulldog Joined on 22 Mar 2009 Total posts: 19	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Saturday, 16 May 2009 19:12 Lets see, a song lasts about 90 seconds. There are 12 couples on the floor. 10 secs / couple X 12 couples = 120 secs 90 secs / 12 couples = 7.5 secs per couple However it takes minimum 2.5 secs to find and mark the couple on the score sheet so in reality the adjudicator has 5 seconds for each couple, unless he/she spends 30 seconds studying his/her own student and has just 60/11 = 5.4 seconds/pair to mark on the score sheet the rest of the round . Advice to worry more about improving own dancing and less about judges has ineed led to better dancing but not at all addressing the underlying problem of fairness, nor changing the fact the judging fairness is very much affested by a handful of corrupted judge who do not seem to give a damn. Majority opinion counts ? 1 or 2 judges make no difference ? In larger competition where couples with same number of recalls often share 5 placements , where a single recall can make a difference of a half dozen placements ? Exaple given of two conspiring/"cooperating" judges - assisting each other in promoting each others couples ? That makes 10 extra recalls and certainly a much higher placement.. This is not a surprise. Fairness of dancesport judging had always been a suspect and nowadays it is worse than ever and seldom fair. The worse the economy, the greater the motivation to try your best to keep own dance student happy and for a long term. As a judge/teacher you can place greater effort to teach better, but that places too much pressure on your student; it is so much easier to clear the route to success for your student during a competition and simply mark them high - you may even reel in dancers who measure their success by number of recalls and see your recalls can be bought. Certainly it is up to the Chairman to straighten the judges who need be accontable for their markings. It is also up to the dancers if they wish to accept the abuse. No one can force dancers to take part in the events ...Organizers would quickly lean that presence of certain judges result in lower attendance and fewer dancers who want to be judged fairly.
onyourtoes Joined on 12 Feb 2007 Total posts: 657	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Sunday, 17 May 2009 08:13 As I wrote previously the reality of adjudicating is very different to each couple having an alloted period of seconds in which to be assessed. This theory is a "dancing myth". bulldog in your calculations you forgot to deduct the the 15 seconds or so that the couples "preen" to the music rather than dance!! 90 seconds less 15 seconds = 75 seconds 12 couples means 6.25 seconds. 2 couples down already with no marks !! Then of course if you deduct your 2.5 seconds for the actual marking on the score sheet that means as an example in waltz each couple will be evaluated and compared against 11 others over less than 6 beats if the theory were valid. It is a tragedy if when during the couples supposed 6.25 seconds their choreography has been rudely interrupted and they are "readjusting" hold, body position etc etc or , the ladies shoe has dropped off and the couple are standing still, it would be unfair if the judge gives them some other couples time or a recall mark. What about if in their allocated "seconds" the choreography is taking them all against the line of dance and they are banging into and wrestling with other couples in the process. No recall marks for that. Just imagine how many seconds the judge wastes as he searches the 12 for the 7 or 6 or 5 etc he has not yet evaluated. In Latin seconds can be wasted as the judge decides which lady the man actually dances with and then heaven help the couple who in their 6.25 or even 10 seconds the man does not turn so the judge can see the number!! Zero marks I guess! 2 judges "colluding" makes 10 marks and 10 marks is not going to get a recall if the couple is being ignored by the other judges because they are simply not good enough for a recall. When you examine this claim you frequently find that couples are quite happy if it is their coach marking them and possibly "colluding" it is only wrong when its "the others". Have you ever heard "my coach is judging so I refuse to compete it is not fair to the other couples". We all know that there are unscrupulous judges and in some countries in particular the situation (we have read the complaints here at frequent intervals) is bad that is not a reason to claim that it is the same everywhere and every event and attempt to condemn Dancesport judging as a whole. Anyone who watches ice skating, diving,ski jumping, gymnastics, boxing, etc etc etc where human judging is involved knows that there is never uniformity. At a comp like Blackpool when it comes to the final 90 it is possible to make a case for every couple to gain marks and reach the 48 and in the 48 to the 24. What is strange to my thinking is how IDSF events there are Chairmen who do not hold an Adjudicators licence. I often smile at the thought of Mr Freitag demanding that Mr Maxwell or Mr Kimmins or Ms Pearson explain their markings to him and he deciding he will discipline them if he decides they do not know what they are talking about.
webminder Joined on 13 Nov 2008 Total posts: 46	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Monday, 18 May 2009 14:40 sorry for interrupting your train of thought... what's your point ? That judges have less than the 6 seconds per couple to determine if they are worthy the recall ? That they have insufficient time - and it would be unfair to mark a couple because they happen to readjust their hold, are bumped by less "floor craft" able dancers, happen to be blocked in the corner where they cannot be seen, what the [precious seconds it takes to wait for "gentleman" to turn his fabulous behind to see his starring number ? Would one, after a long speal and a monologue agree that dancesport cannot be expected to be seen in Olympics, as it suffers of an element of lack of fair and equitable measurement ? That in fact, short of dancers sitting the dance out, the measurement is based primarily on the dancers past performance, perceived knowledge and skill of dance, having paid " the dues", playing the ball withing the dancesport structure - financially supporting the B#@! , cause no dancers who refused to support the B #@! were ever rewarded by bucking the "accepted standards" ? The question posed was: Does it need to be bull #@! ???? Can anyone give an example of dancesport competitors who from the start refused to put up with unfairness and bull #@! and within the #@! system they strive and reached many finals and acknowledged to be the great dancers ? Don't bite the hand that feeds you, is the saying. In this case it is the dancers / dancesport competitors who feed everyone around them - clubs, dance teachers, dance promoters, dress makers, IDSF and WDC officials, judges ( same as teachers as no judge can make a living by just judging ) etc. Since the saying is valid - proven by many years of experience - not cencuries, longer, it follows that the dance teachers / judges would not bite the hand that feed them and as as result cannot be impartial, and provide fair and expected service for which they are recruited and expected to provide. #@! goes on ! Can it be anything else ? No need to distract the fact by pointing out unfairness in boxing, sync. swimming, free style skiing , lets deal with dance or simply rejest all sports which cannot be measured using time, distance, units, or count measurements . Just because other places have problems is not an endorsement or approval of what is occuring and becoming more prevelent in dancesport. Mentioned were a few names of IDSF adjudicators. Yes, why should not Mr. C. F. reqest review of "his" members performance, whuy should he not attemyt to clean the house if the evidence of wrongduing and/ or unfair practices are presented. The data is availavle, the recall sheet are properly documented and available. Is there n " forensic" IDSF/ WDC expert who ic able to plot a ew graphs, compare the trends and call " Wolf !!!!" ? It is not just Gabriela who allegedly has quit competing and withel her support of the suggested bull#@! just see the many great looking dancers, able dancers, dancers actually smiling and having fun, are you competitors ? Inadvertantly the answer will be, we used to be , now we are just havig fun, there is just too much of , and this is where we would differ in our expression of displeasaure ....
onyourtoes Joined on 12 Feb 2007 Total posts: 657	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Monday, 18 May 2009 17:00 webminder -what's your point ? Would one, after a long speal and a monologue agree that dancesport cannot be expected to be seen in Olympics, as it suffers of an element of lack of fair and equitable measurement ? ---- Why the personal attack and insulting comments? webminder -"what's your point ? " My point is that no adjudicator ever judges by giving each couple an allotted time span. This theory is a myth and if it were adopted would be unfair. webminder - "Would one, after a long speal and a monologue agree that dancesport cannot be expected to be seen in Olympics, as it suffers of an element of lack of fair and equitable measurement" . No "one" would not agree this is the reason. "Dancesport " will not be in the Olympics because out of 205 NOCs only 63 recognise dancesport and many have no competitors. "Dancesport" will not be in the Olympics because the true sports persons do not consider it sport. "Dancesport" will not be in the Olympics because the major sponsors are not interested in such a minority activity. If you are in favour of the equal amount of time aspect then you should agree each couple must have a reasonable period of time approx 1 minute per dance per round which would make competitions over long and very very boring. Just imagine an event with 32 couples and the first round last 160 minutes!! Calculation 32 couples x 1 minute per dance = 32 minutes x 5 dances = 160 minutes. Just imagine Blackpool one event 340 couples and a 23 hour first round
webminder Joined on 13 Nov 2008 Total posts: 46	Re: Does it need to be bull #@! ??? Tuesday, 19 May 2009 15:51 Look at the positive side. This would be a great thing for Blackpool. Imagine the rents which during Blackpool double and triple to suck oiut the pockets of the arriving "rich" dancers. Now imagine dancers having to stay extra 2 weeks