Unfair Judging

[pygmalion]

In the course of looking for ballroom topics today, I ran across, oh a few hundred discussion topics involving unfair judges. I won't give details -- just go to any major or minor ballroom discussion board and you'll see what I mean.

My question is, is unfair judging really all that prevalent, or is is just the skewed perception of some losing dancers? How does a dancer get a fair reality check of their dancing ability, if not through judging? If there is unfairness out there, is there any recourse for the wronged parties, or is it just part of life in the competitive dance world? Thoughts, anyone?

[peachexploration]

Good topic. As an outsider (not a ballroom competitor), I've seen it where it was either a fixed competition or just outright unfair judgement in a couple of areas. A judgement panel would make it apparent that they did not like a couple regardless of their talent by awarding low scores or there is an political understanding among the dancers about who would win (maybe someone is retiring that year :? ). One area of recourse is probably the rules of whatever the organization they're competing under. The video tape of the performance can be compared against these rules of point by point depending on the dance. But how easy would that be? And who would be the moderator in that scenario?

[Adwiz]

I don't believe that there is an overt unfairness, but I do believe there are good reasons why dancers complain about unfairness.

That sounds like a contradiction, so let me explain.

At the recent Snowball Classic in Vancouver, I watched a Championship Latin competition by a group of juniors. One girl about 10 or 11 years of age was absolutely stunning, so dominating the entire event that there was no doubt she would win. Her partner was great too, but she was the star of the show, to the extent that you couldn't take your eyes away from her. The audience was shocked when that couple came in second.

When I inquired about this, the answer came from someone connected to the competition that the judges (almost all from Europe) were quite conservative compared to North American judges and found it distasteful that a young girl was wearing a slightly revealing Latin costume (they are almost entirely covered up at that age in European comps), and that the routine included things like splits. For reasons like that, all but one judge (from North America) put the couple in second place rather than first despite the obvious superiority of their performance.

Where the judges unfair to criticize on that basis? I talked to the girl the other day and she has a great attitude about it; feeling that you never know what kind of judges you will get. Her approach was that you might just as easily get a group of judges who would award her for the less conventional moves and costume. In any case, she is dancing for what she wants and not purely for the judges and I commend her for that.

Interviews with judges often mention how costumes are important, and here in DF discussions we accept that as being part of the "performance" aspect of dancesport competition. So if a judge feels your costume was improper or negatively impacted your score, is it unfair or just part of the game? I think we have to accept it. Unless we have more consistent rules that are accepted on a worldwide basis we have to grin and bear it when things like that work against us.

I think this issue is what makes DanceSport so difficult as a sport. You have all the political challenges of Figure Skating, but with an international diversity of styles and marking approaches that makes it too subjective to really be scored effectively. Until that is worked out, I can't see it ever being successful as an Olympic sport.

[pygmalion]

Wow, adwiz. That's a great example. It also illustrates that importance of getting to know judge's individual styles and preferences before stepping out on the floor. (Dance Beat has some nice write ups, btw) But, if the judge's conservatism in costume design lowers your marks, then yes, the judging is very, very subjective. I wonder if there's any way (or any desire LOL) to make things more objective. Hmm.

[Porfirio Landeros]

On my lesson yesterday with a recent U.S. pro champion, he said that it can take 4 to 6 moths to break the top placements and prove to the judges you are worthy of overtaking dancers that have been consistently beating you.
Is this unfair, politics, or just judges being conservative by considering past results?
Should you be judged purely on your recent performance or can you be forgiven for a silly mistake, after showing months of good dancing (thereby taking the place of a couple that may have danced better at one event).?

[JohnK]

Porfirio's comment above made me think of NASCAR, of all things. That sport has it's talent pipeline as well, and there is enough "wiggle room" in the system to "manage" the advancement of their rising stars so they don't rise (or fade) too quickly.

Just as NASCAR is as much about marketing as it is about competition, I suspect dancesport judging has evolved to keep competitors in the pipeline (and, uh, paying into the pipeline) for a certain "half life" in order to keep the process relatively stable and relatively profitable. It would be interesting to see some statistics across a few years worth of champions on how long it took them to scale the mountain (and how much had to be invested to get there). Hope this doesn't sound cynical - like any other business, dancesport has to remain profitable to continue to exist.

[pygmalion]

I agree, JohnK. If there was no money in it, there would be no incentive for dance professionals (including comp promoters) to stay in business. *shrug*

[Adwiz]

I'm sure there's some element of that in the system, but that doesn't mean it's a conscious one.

We all know couples who seem to win or place very high even when they don't seem to dance as well as another couple that we aren't as familiar with.

Then there are times that you do see a couple you've never heard of or noticed before come out of nowhere to win an event. The fact that this happens tells me that judges are trying as hard as they can to be honest in their judging.

However, it also seems plausible that given the 10-second time each couple is typically seen by a judge in any heat, judges are likely to miss watching an unknown couple for an extra few seconds because they see another worthy couple that they recognize. This would then show in the results and would thus give the appearance of unfairness.

[Vince A]

There have many times that I question the outcome of finishes, and wonder if it "was fixed" or did the judges favor their students, or students of their peers?

I've heard judges at competitior's meetings say . . . "We only have five dancers on the floor at one time, no matter how many heats it takes. We will see all of you, even if we have to get up and walk around."

After that very same competition, my wife approached two of her judges who were standing around talking, and she asked them "How did I do?" (we are encouraged by our Pros to do this - it helps them to remember you the next time you are in front of them). Anyways, one of the judges said . . . "I gave you lousy scores. Your Pro didn't put you where I could see you. I couldn't see you, so I marked you down." She did not tkae first place that weekend.

Now this response was the exact opposite of what we heard at the competitor's meeting.

I know for a fact, in one competition that I placed second in . . . I literally out danced my closest competitior who took first place. I have no modesty, so I knew that I looked better, danced better, did more more difficult moves, followed the 12-count rule to the hilt, and my basics were right on. Yet . . . I came in second. I later found out that four of the five judges were form his area of the state, and the fifth judge was from the East Coast. Favoritism??? I cannot prove a thing, but I'm sure it happens!

However, I still hope to become a judge someday! :twisted:

[JohnK]

Vince, what is the "12 count rule" you referred to?

[Vince A]

Vince, what is the "12 count rule" you referred to?
In the dance venues that I attend, in most of the dances, there is what is called the "12 count rule," in which you must do at least one basic foot pattern count before you exceed 12 counts of music.

Like in a WCS . . . many of us don't do 1, 2, 3&4, 5&6 . . . some may tap out, or do swivels, or only do a count 1, and hold and wait until an anchor is felt before giving a 1 again this is called "playing." Not doing the basics is basically taking away from the intended original structure of the dance. So judges look for this . . . I got dinged on it once as a Novice. Some dances have other xx-count rules.

[Taita]

Vince, what is the "12 count rule" you referred to?

I thought this was where the referee comes out and starts counting when Vince knocks out the judge..... :wink:

....back to lurk mode....

[pygmalion]

Vince, what is the "12 count rule" you referred to?
In the dance venues that I attend, in most of the dances, there is what is called the "12 count rule," in which you must do at least one basic foot pattern count before you exceed 12 counts of music.

Like in a WCS . . . many of us don't do 1, 2, 3&4, 5&6 . . . some may tap out, or do swivels, or only do a count 1, and hold and wait until an anchor is felt before giving a 1 again this is called "playing." Not doing the basics is basically taking away from the intended original structure of the dance. So judges look for this . . . I got dinged on it once as a Novice. Some dances have other xx-count rules.

Really? That must make it really challenging to put together interesting choreography. Does the rule apply throughout the dance, like the shot clock in basketball?

[pygmalion]

adwiz posted this in another thread, and I think it's worth posting here. Thoughts, anyone?

I have always found judges to work very hard at being fair. In fact, at one comp I overheard a judge hoping that the other judges agreed with her assessment. It occurred to me that the judges are also worried about how they are perceived by their peers. If their marks are wildly different from others, it could potentially impact them negatively.

However, there are issues that no doubt influence how they "see" the floor. If a judge is familiar with a couple, he or she will probably notice that couple earlier or give them extra viewing time or perhaps consider them favorably without really being aware of it. This is human nature. It's also the reason there are five or seven judges and not just three.

I've seen a couple of cases where judges recalled a couple that should never have made the finals. Perhaps their choreography or upper body form or personality made enough of an impact in those few seconds that they got the required number of callback marks. In the end, those couples got last place in the finals and I'm sure the judges were wondering "what was I thinking?" when they looked closer at the technique. But those kind of cases are extremely rare.

[Chris Stratton]

How does a dancer get a fair reality check of their dancing ability, if not through judging?

I think one of the things that works well - regardless of how the judges marked you - is to go over the competition video carefully, and compare what you actually did to your goals. You can check technical issues, presentation, wisdom of choreography and floorcraft decisions - etc. If you feel like it and the camera wasn't zoomed in too far, you can even check these things on the couples who beat you. Though my camera won't do it directly, I've had a few videos digitized by friends, and clicking through them frame-by-frame has been quite informative.

Sometimes the judges saw the same things you discover on the tape, and sometimes they didn't. Sometimes they agree with you about what is important and like your style and presentation, sometimes they don't. I don't think we should dance just for the local panel of judges, nor entirely for ourselves - but find a comfortable balance. I know that I really only consider the announced results half of the feedback from the comp - win or lose, I'm still looking forward to seeing the tape.

[Vince A]

Really? That must make it really challenging to put together interesting choreography. Does the rule apply throughout the dance, like the shot clock in basketball?
Jenn . . . I'm really sorry . . . I missed this one, and your response to it!

Yes, the rule does apply throughout the dance, and you must not exceed those 12 counts before you do a basic, or as we call them . . . "a vanilla."

Yes, indeed it does affect how your choreography is "written out."

[Laura]

But, if the judge's conservatism in costume design lowers your marks, then yes, the judging is very, very subjective. I wonder if there's any way (or any desire LOL) to make things more objective. Hmm.

First of all, the IDSF, which sanctions the Snow Ball, has EXTREMELY STRICT rules regarding costuming for Pre-Teens up to Junior I. The girl being discussed was 10 or 11, which makes her a Pre-Teen B. The IDSF rule book includes diagrams of what is allowed and what is not, so it is quite possible that this girl was marked down because her costume was in violation of the IDSF's very specific rules. USABDA has the same rules, because USABDA is an IDSF-member organization, but the unfortunate truth is that virtually no one enforces the rules and so the kids aren't always prepared when they go to an international competition where someone will actually hold them to the published standard. So, this isn't as subjective as you might think it is.

Second of all, there are also syllabus restrictions under the IDSF rules for the younger age groups, too. Since this girl was a Pre-Teen B, by doing splits she was dancing out of syllabus, and thus marked down as a penalty. Again, syllabus rules are often not enforced in the US, so when the kids go to international competitions they aren't always prepared.

I don't know if the kid in question is American or not, by the way, and if she's not then I apologize for assuming she was. However, given the circumstances described, it was a not-unreasonable assumption.

It seems to me that her coaches and parents should have paid more attention to the rules of the game before heading off to an IDSF-sanctioned competition. It also seems to me that, since USABDA rules have been changed recently to reflect the IDSF rules, that officials in the US have to stop letting things slide on the local level. And MOST OF ALL, clear explanations to the affected dancers as to what rules were being violated and why are needed. If someone had told the girl and her parents and her coach "look, you didn't win because you were violating Rule X in the IDSF rule book regarding child costuming, and because you were dancing splits which aren't in the Latin syllabus, which violates Rule Y" then they would know for sure what to fix and why.

Maybe the judging in this competition wasn't that subjective after all....

[Warren J. Dew]

At the recent Snowball Classic in Vancouver, I watched a Championship Latin competition by a group of juniors. One girl about 10 or 11 years of age was absolutely stunning, so dominating the entire event that there was no doubt she would win. Her partner was great too, but she was the star of the show, to the extent that you couldn't take your eyes away from her. The audience was shocked when that couple came in second.

When I inquired about this, the answer came from someone connected to the competition that the judges (almost all from Europe) were quite conservative compared to North American judges and found it distasteful that a young girl was wearing a slightly revealing Latin costume (they are almost entirely covered up at that age in European comps), and that the routine included things like splits. For reasons like that, all but one judge (from North America) put the couple in second place rather than first despite the obvious superiority of their performance.

I have to be skeptical, unless the answer came from the judges who actually marked the couple down.

One dancer does not a couple make. I think it's more likely that the european judges were watching the boy as well as the girl. And if you "couldn't take your eyes away from her", you don't actually know how well the other couples danced, do you?

[Chris Stratton]

It's rather unclear from the Snowball website that the special dress rules or syllabus restrictions apply to the Junior championship event. There is no link to IDSF rules, though there is one to Dancesport BC rules - which requires junior championship ccntestants to dress in accordance with the included guidelines for adult championship dress (though the costume in question might have violated the adults standards too)

Similarly, although I've heard rumors of USABDA adopting the IDSF junior regulations, I don't believe these changes have made it to the rulebook yet.

I'd also agree that whever possible, rule violations should be explicitly handled as such, and not folded into markings - if marks are affected by a violation, it should be announced for clarity.

[etchuck]

A bit of a change of subject...

I'm not so worried about improper judging. I'm sure it's the exception rather than the norm.

What I am more concerned about is the inconsistencies when it comes to applying certain rules and expectations. Major example: what is a "costume" in one competition is not at another event. Certainly American "syllabus" is subject to a lot of interpretation as for what would be "bronze" and "silver."

Personally I would like competition sets to be longer than just 90 seconds. I'd like two dances of the same style, each lasting 90 seconds, rather than just one set for 90 seconds. Granted, this gets into the problem of how to time the competitions, but I would rather have more than just one opportunity to showcase my dancing.

So at one competition (not dancing), the winners of the heats go into the semifinals, but all those not winning all get a second chance to make the semifinals. Those winners go into the semifinals [18] before the top 6 are selected. So I'm announcing couples OTHER THAN couples ###.... are recalled for the second-chance round of dances.

Again, I'd like to rank every couple in the semifinal round, and make that semifinal and final round last longer (120 seconds for semifinals, 150 -180 seconds for final).

[Chris Stratton]

I've seen college comps run 'consolation rounds' when time permitted. That can be fun. But when you have 100 couples entered in most of bronze, even simply using humane callback sizes takes all morning.

[SDsalsaguy]

Again, I'd like to rank every couple in the semifinal round, and make that semifinal and final round last longer (120 seconds for semifinals, 150 -180 seconds for final).
While I understand where you're coming from with this I have to say that no one (wolrd champions included) can do their best looking jive/quickstep/etc. for three full minutes!

[pygmalion]

Good point, SD. Competition jive for three minutes sounds like a heart attack waiting to happen! :shock: :lol:

On the other hand, a longer judging period might give judges more time to make a fair assessment of people's true skill level -- good points and bad. Hmm. Would that be a good thing? Maybe not, from the competitors' perspectives. *shrug*

[DanceAm]

Longer heats has an endurance factor. One and a half minutes is enough and sometimes at USABDA comps they are longer in the more crowded heats but they don't exceed a maximum. All the judges look for this in the last dance no matter what each style is. But if you notice, they already put the most physically demanding dances last, especially if the style ends with V-Waltz, Quickstep or Jive. I think American Rhythm has the easiest last dance, the Mambo. But American Smooth only has 4 dances and ends with the V-Waltz.

90 seconds is all you've got, if you haven't proven yourself that is it. I see some judges that have no problem choosing the recalls and placements in less than a minute. Then I see judges who have figured out top three or top two then they compare those two couples for a longer period of time and use up the entire heat before making final marks.

I see your point, that it does seem like an awful short time to be judged, but my coaches work on that 90 seconds and make the most each time. They look for bad and fix it and look for good and make it better. If it were longer, we would still do the same thing. Getting noticed on the floor is the biggest hurdle in the early rounds.

[Adwiz]

First of all, the IDSF, which sanctions the Snow Ball, has EXTREMELY STRICT rules regarding costuming for Pre-Teens up to Junior I... so it is quite possible that this girl was marked down because her costume was in violation of the IDSF's very specific rules.

Not for Championship level. Same costume rules apply as for adult age groups.

Second of all, there are also syllabus restrictions under the IDSF rules for the younger age groups, too. Since this girl was a Pre-Teen B, by doing splits she was dancing out of syllabus, and thus marked down as a penalty.

Again, not the case for Championship level, which is an open level. Even if it had been a syllabus event, the judges are disallowed from marking down on the basis of out-of-syllabus steps. That is entirely the responsibility of the adjudicator.

I don't know if the kid in question is American or not...

No, and her family has a long history of IDSF competition from eastern Europe, so they are very familiar with the rules. I believe their assessment after talking to some (though not all) of the judges was reasonable.

One dancer does not a couple make. I think it's more likely that the european judges were watching the boy as well as the girl. And if you "couldn't take your eyes away from her", you don't actually know how well the other couples danced, do you?

Your point is well taken. Her partner may not have been as good as some of the other boys on the floor. However, her dancing was so superior to the others that it was markedly noticeable. And I'm using a figure of speech. Of course I watched all the couples, as did everyone else. I just meant that our eyes were drawn back to her many times because of her superior skill, presence, and energy.

[Laura]

I just looked up the costume rules on the IDSF's web site and it doesn't say anything about exceptions for Pre-teens on Championship level. But then I'm just going by what I've read, so if there's another document I need to also know about and understand please let me know. I work as a Registrar for some events and it's imperative that I know and understand all operative rules, so if I'm missing something I have to learn about it! Anyway, the IDSF document I read does say that Junior II's can wear adult-style costumes, and that if the event is Junior I & Junior II combined, then adult-style costumes are allowed. So, if the kid was a Juvenile (Pre-teen) dancing up into a Junior I & II combined event then I can see how she ended up being able to wear an adult-style costume.

I'd give a direct link to the rules but they're in PDF format embedded in some frames. Curious people can get to them by going to http://www.idsf.net/index2.htm , clicking "Statutes & Rules" in the left-hand column, and then clicking "IDSF Dress Regulations." Also on that page you'll see the "IDSF Competition Rules" which says that there is a restricted syllabus for all juveniles (which is what we call Pre-teen in the US). Again, there is no indication of exception for Championship level, but if the kids were dancing up into a Junior event then they were fine with going out of syllabus. It wasn't clear from the original post if the girl was a 10-or-11-year-old dancing in a Juvenile (Pre-teen) event, or if she was dancing up into a Junior I & II combined event, which has less restrictive rules.

My main point with my post was to illustrate that sometimes it's not unfair judging, but rather misunderstanding of or flaunting of or ignorance of the rules by the competitors and/or spectators that leads to people to think the judging was unfair even when it wasn't.

[Chris Stratton]

Above IDSF link is broken due to a , being included in the link.

The actual files are:

http://www.idsf.net/idsf_comp_rules_barcelona_2003.pdf
http://www.idsf.net/idsfdressregulations.pdf

[pygmalion]

Thanks for the links, Chris. 8)

[kwa445]

I don't believe that there is an overt unfairness, but I do believe there are good reasons why dancers complain about unfairness.

I definitely have to agree with you Adwiz. At several competitions I've been to, spectators have gotten the feeling that the judging was a little unfair. Has anyone heard of instances of people paying the judges?

[pygmalion]

There are many people who see a conflict of interest in people being judged by people who've coached them. Once you get to really high levels, though, I don't know that it's avoidable. The high, high-level coaches ARE the judges, aren't they?

[Chris Stratton]

Indeed, I think it's only possible to seperate the judging pool form the coaching pool at the sort of intermediate level of event where there's enough money to bring in judges from afar, but not yet enough dedication amongst competitors to seek out non-local coaching.

In local competitions (collegiate, USABDA regional, etc) there's probably a 50% overlap between the judges and the competitor's frequent coaches. And at the top of the internatinonal scene, almost everybody has at least tried a lesson with most of the top authorities.

[pygmalion]

Exactly. And I don't think that's going to change anytime soon. Serious dancers and competitors will always seek out the best coaches, wherever they are. If those coaches also happen to be competition judges, well, I guess that's the way it is. :?

[pygmalion]

Oh yeah, and the other thing is (I'm just guessing now) that most judges probably bend over backwards NOT to show favoritism. If there are any judges who get swayed, I bet they're the exceptions, not the rule. People take their reputations very seriously. And you know how deadly ballroom gossip can be.

Did I tell you that my Dad taught at the college I went to? :shock: Oy! My constant nightmare was that I'd get put in one of his classes. I would surely have failed. Thank goodness that didn't happen. I ended up with a veryhigh GPA and at the top of my class. But, if my Dad had been judging, I don't know ...