Best in the North Competition - Heat 1 [Archive]

Gus

12th-January-2005, 01:23 AM

This Saturday (15th Jan)we’re having a very special event at this Saturday’s Freestyle (from 8pm to midnight) at Northich Memorial Hall. Following in the footsteps of the renowned ‘Jive masters’(tm), we are running the Northern equivalent. We have selected top 6 couples in the North (based on competition success and public perception) to compete for the ‘Best in the North’ title.

3 couples each are competing in the North West and North East heats. The heat for the North West will be held this Saturday, running between 8.20 to 9pm (approx). The winner will go through to meet the winner from the North East Final. The principle is simple, each couple will dance on their own to two tracks of music, (one slower, one faster) and the audience will judge who they think is the best. To be able to take part as a Judge, please be in the venue by 8.20 to pick up a voting form.

The 3 couples are;

Pete Meredith & Paula Chaloner
Lynne Smith & James Rowe
Steve Wong & Donna Lloyd

Between them these dancers have amassed the following titles;

1st Ceroc Intermediate 2003
1st UK Champs Intermediate 2001
1st Bristol Advanced 2000
1st Ceroc Scotland 2001
2nd UK Champs Lucky Dip 2003

Should be fiun ... would be great to see you there! :waycool:

Will

12th-January-2005, 12:07 PM

Stevie Wong????

It would appear Gus is rolling out the "Big Guns" early on! Can anyone really stop him?

David Franklin

12th-January-2005, 12:29 PM

Stevie Wong????

It would appear Gus is rolling out the "Big Guns" early on! Can anyone really stop him?Rolling out the bacofoil, maybe...

Dave

Gus

12th-January-2005, 01:16 PM

Stevie Wong????

It would appear Gus is rolling out the "Big Guns" early on! Can anyone really stop him?I must admit the Wongster has been looking pretty good ... but then again so have the other competitors. Hopefuly events like this will start getting the Desolate North some credit for being able to dance...... Any chance of Will being repatriated to his homelands?

Geordieed

12th-January-2005, 03:41 PM

Stevie Wong????

It would appear Gus is rolling out the "Big Guns" early on! Can anyone really stop him?

Yeh but Will, it is probably the only chance that someone wearing with a Scouse accent like that will have any chance of lifting any silverware this year. :cheers:

Will

12th-January-2005, 03:49 PM

Yeh but Will, it is probably the only chance that someone wearing with a Scouse accent like that will have any chance of lifting any silverware this year. :cheers:
Well, without nicking it anway....

Ste

12th-January-2005, 09:26 PM

Yeh but Will, it is probably the only chance that someone wearing with a Scouse accent like that will have any chance of lifting any silverware this year. :cheers:

Ed may your dreams be constantly be filled by YEADING YEADING YEADING!

Dance Demon

12th-January-2005, 10:50 PM

Hopefuly events like this will start getting the Desolate North some credit for being able to dance......

Would that be Northern UK then Gus :wink: :devil: :devil:

Dreadful Scathe

12th-January-2005, 11:04 PM

Would that be Northern UK then Gus :wink: :devil: :devil:
from Berwick Upon Tweed and up ? :)

Gus

15th-January-2005, 02:53 PM

So ... tonights the big night! Can The Wongster emulate the success of his greatest fan (Will) and get through to the glory of the final .. or will Pistol Pete make his mark ... not forgetting the challenge from Newcastle! I know at least a few forumites will be there .... will be good to see you.

Jive Brummie

15th-January-2005, 03:39 PM

Tell you what,

That's a proper tough heat :sick:

Wish i was there to watch...Looking forward to hearing the result.

Hope it goes well Gus :worthy:

James..

Gus

15th-January-2005, 04:32 PM

That's a proper tough heat :sick: .Well ... it is all supposed to be a bit of fun before the JiveMasters later this year ... but I'm sure it wont seem like fun to the competitors ... and I know they have put a lot of hard work in.

Hopefully the ones that do well will get invited to the Jivemasters Northen Heats ... we have been 'promised' we will get a heat this year. Anyone know when the heats are likely to be?

Dance Demon

16th-January-2005, 01:15 PM

So......it's 12.15pm....where's the results then? C'mon C'mon C'mon...we wanna know........where's the impatient foot tapping smilie?

TheTramp

16th-January-2005, 02:50 PM

So......it's 12.15pm....where's the results then? C'mon C'mon C'mon...we wanna know........where's the impatient foot tapping smilie?
Apparently Pete and Paula won....

Gus

16th-January-2005, 04:59 PM

Sorry Guys ... didnt get till past 1 and was shattered.

Right ... great battle, superb dancing by all comeptitors and very good support. What was really nice to see was how supportive each of the couples were and it was also clear that they have all invetsed a lot of time in preparing for the event ... even if the Wongster STILL managed to wear a cherry red bacofoil top :sick:

Yup .. the winners, in a close fought match, were Pete and Paula. They now go forward to meet the winner of the N East Heat, being held at Sue Freeman's Tadcaster freestyle on Saturday 29th.

Not sure where or when the final will be, but probably after the C2D Champs.

Bill

16th-January-2005, 09:09 PM

Apparently Pete and Paula won....

Escellent news ... a great combination. Pete is a terific lead and a lovley dancer and Paula is superb .... a pity I haven't been down that way for a while but would be delighted to have a dance with erh when I do get back.

And I'm sure there will have been a little encouragement from our own sparkly Laura :grin: :cheers:

Gus

16th-January-2005, 09:36 PM

Escellent news ... a great combination. Pete is a terific lead and a lovley dancer and Paula is superb .... a pity I haven't been down that way for a while but would be delighted to have a dance with erh when I do get back.:Shouldnt have too long to wait ... I think that both Pete & Paula and Wongster & Donna are entering the Blackpool Champs (dont know about James and Lynn). Pete wil be trying to add the Advanced title to his Intermediate title ... but as niether Wongster and Donna are teachers they of course can enter the Intermediate category :whistle:

DavidY

17th-January-2005, 02:01 PM

It was a good night ...Gus even played Gwen Stefani... :wink: :wink:

Tiggerbabe

18th-January-2005, 08:55 AM

It was a good night ...Gus even played Gwen Stefani... :wink: :wink:
Brilliant :clap:, and I remember the night he played Avril Lavigne :D

Gus

18th-January-2005, 12:27 PM

It was a good night ...Gus even played Gwen Stefani... :wink: :wink:Yup ... still don’t like it but its pretty fair dance floor response ... nearly as many as when I play "Call on me". :whistle:

On a more serious note I was interested to review the ballot papers to see how the scoring was built up. For the most part the scoring for each coupe was within a few points of each other (3 sections to score, max 5 points for each). What I did find curious though were a significant number of cases where the judge saw there was a big difference between the dancers. The following examples illustrate the point (the scores are for couples A,B,C)

5,15,10
6,13,6
8,15,11
5,12,14
8,6,14
These seem very skewed against couple 1 and in one case against couple 2 and couple 3. The range of these marks, and the clear bias on some ballot sheets, does cause me to question how impartial people were. I find it worrying where any couple is given a 5 (a perfect mark) in each of the three sections ... I don’t think any couple would have said they were prefect in Presentation, Musical Interpretation and Technique. So ... it does leave me with a real doubt about the basis of allowing Jo Public to vote .. good job it was all just for fun! :waycool: (Having said that I thought the end decision was the right one)

Daisy Chain

18th-January-2005, 01:07 PM

Yup ... still don’t like it but its pretty fair dance floor response ... nearly as many as when I play "Call on me". :whistle:

What I did find curious though were a significant number of cases where the judge saw there was a big difference between the dancers.

... does cause me to question how impartial people were. I find it worrying where any couple is given a 5 (a perfect mark) in each of the three sections ... I don’t think any couple would have said they were prefect in Presentation, Musical Interpretation and Technique. So ... it does leave me with a real doubt about the basis of allowing Jo Public to vote ..

(Having said that I thought the end decision was the right one)

Well, Gus, it's the first time I've ever "judged" a dance competition and it was really hard. I tended to rely on the overall impression and number of mistakes that I spotted!

It would have been easier for me to rate the couples in first, second or third place rather than assigning points. I admit to adjusting my points for couple A after seeing couple B - until one sees more than one couple, one doesn't know how to pitch it.

I agree totally with the result. Pete and Paula were a joy to watch :worthy: and seemed to have the same style and looked so harmonious together and seemed to interpret the music without any effort . The couple from the NE will really have to be something else to beat them in the final. Saying that I'd love to see a better couple! Imagine...

Daisy

(A Joe Public Flower)

Bill

18th-January-2005, 01:26 PM

So ... it does leave me with a real doubt about the basis of allowing Jo Public to vote .. good job it was all just for fun! :waycool: (Having said that I thought the end decision was the right one)

Always an interesting debate - can any member of an audience be completely impartial? Given that you'd always want your friends or ancers you know to do well there's almost bound to be a temptation to award them an extra point - maybe because we are likely to watch those couples we know and so miss what others might be doing.

I do think the majority would at least try and be objective rather than go in knwing who was going to get their vote before anyone danced. I wonder if the 'prfessional' judges are any different?? :whistle:

David Franklin

18th-January-2005, 01:34 PM

The range of these marks, and the clear bias on some ballot sheets, does cause me to question how impartial people were ... it does leave me with a real doubt about the basis of allowing Jo Public to voteI think you will always get some people, albeit a small minority, just voting for their friends, rather than judging fairly. The way you score things becomes really important then. As Andy will no doubt confirm, adding the scores is a really bad idea. Since most 'honest' judges will usually score everyone fairly closely, even a few people 'cheating' can make a big difference if they mark their favorites at 100% and everyone else at 0%. Whereas if each person only creates a placement, it's much harder for a few to obtain undue influence...

Dave

DavidY

18th-January-2005, 02:05 PM

On a more serious note I was interested to review the ballot papers to see how the scoring was built up. For the most part the scoring for each coupe was within a few points of each other (3 sections to score, max 5 points for each). What I did find curious though were a significant number of cases where the judge saw there was a big difference between the dancers. The following examples illustrate the point (the scores are for couples A,B,C)

5,15,10
6,13,6
8,15,11
5,12,14
8,6,14
These seem very skewed against couple 1 and in one case against couple 2 and couple 3. The range of these marks, and the clear bias on some ballot sheets, does cause me to question how impartial people were. I find it worrying where any couple is given a 5 (a perfect mark) in each of the three sections ... I don’t think any couple would have said they were prefect in Presentation, Musical Interpretation and Technique. So ... it does leave me with a real doubt about the basis of allowing Jo Public to vote .. good job it was all just for fun! :waycool: (Having said that I thought the end decision was the right one)As a matter of interest how did you get to the final result? Did you add up the scores? Or did you work out each voter's ranking of each dancer?

For instance I think my totals were all in the range 10-12 (out of 15). Not necessarily in the right order, my marks were 10,11 and 12.

However it's all so subjective - I was thinking more about which one had "won" so I could easily have ranked them in the same order by giving them marks 8,9 and 10.

But then my top placed couple would have the same points as someone else's last place. It's very tricky to judge when you have no absolute scale to measure against. In fact it's very tricky to judge full stop!

Gus

18th-January-2005, 02:13 PM

As a matter of interest how did you get to the final result? Did you add up the scores? Or did you work out each voter's ranking of each dancer?Our view was to simply just add up all the scores ... simplest and fairest. I do wonder when one couple gets 6 points and another gets 15 ... there was NOT that big a difference between the couples. Overall, the marks fell as I expected .... the key things is that a far greater number of club dancers have now seen a good standard of competiton (and now may want to compete or go to comeptitions to spectate) and also many more people now have an idea of how hard it is to judge dancers.

PS. a BIG thanks goes to Chance to Dance for putting up two free tickets to the Blackpool Champs!

David Franklin

18th-January-2005, 02:40 PM

Our view was to simply just add up all the scores ... simplest and fairest. The general consensus of people who do a lot of this kind of thing is otherwise... Simply adding the scores makes it far too easy for a few people to bias the results; even without ill-will, it gives far to much weight to the judges who mark everyone at extremes. Do you really want 14 people voting 15:14:14 being outvoted by one person voting 0:15:0? Converting scores into ordinals isn't exactly complicated...

Dave

Bill

18th-January-2005, 04:15 PM

Do you really want 14 people voting 15:14:14 being outvoted by one person voting 0:15:0? Converting scores into ordinals isn't exactly complicated...

Dave

Probably not ...but what if the 14 are all close friends of a couple and the 1 'odd' result is from an objective observer ??? Maybe makes no difference but my maths stops at simply adding up all the scores :whistle: :sick: Don't think ordinals and I would get on very well........

Maybe a new criteria could be added too each score - how well do you know the couple ..... score 0 if partner , 1 if very close friend ...to 15 for never met them :D :rolleyes:

David Franklin

18th-January-2005, 04:27 PM

Probably not ...but what if the 14 are all close friends of a couple and the 1 'odd' result is from an objective observer ??? Basically, you're fcuked... Seriously, if you think 90+% of your judges are cheating, you can't expect anything else.

Ordinals is just what they did for the JiveMasters finals - each person ranks the couples 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc...

Dave

Will

18th-January-2005, 04:34 PM

The general consensus of people who do a lot of this kind of thing is otherwise... Simply adding the scores makes it far too easy for a few people to bias the results; even without ill-will, it gives far to much weight to the judges who mark everyone at extremes. Do you really want 14 people voting 15:14:14 being outvoted by one person voting 0:15:0? Converting scores into ordinals isn't exactly complicated...

Dave
Of course David is quite right. However, this floor in the voting system facilitated me ensuring that Mr Wong didn't win by actually DEDUCTING marks for his costume!

Gus

18th-January-2005, 04:39 PM

Of course David is quite right. However, this floor in the voting system facilitated me ensuring that Mr Wong didn't win by actually DEDUCTING marks for his costume!That explains it ... I was wondering how the Wongster actualy managed to achieve a negative score....

Bill

18th-January-2005, 04:49 PM

Ordinals is just what they did for the JiveMasters finals - each person ranks the couples 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc...

Dave

Oh right..... I think there was a long thread ages ago about this but isn't the problem with ordinals that they don't really measure the 'gap' between couples? And maybe it's not important - in the final at JM I think many folk might have decided who their favourites were and then made sure the marks were 'correct' and then marked the others in the order they wanted them rather than award marks and then see what the totals were.

Or maybe I'm wrong. I know the folk I was sitting beside awared marks at the end of each dance and then added the score and weren't really sure who had won till they looked over all their scores

TheTramp

18th-January-2005, 05:13 PM

On a more serious note I was interested to review the ballot papers to see how the scoring was built up. For the most part the scoring for each coupe was within a few points of each other (3 sections to score, max 5 points for each). What I did find curious though were a significant number of cases where the judge saw there was a big difference between the dancers. The following examples illustrate the point (the scores are for couples A,B,C)

5,15,10
6,13,6
8,15,11
5,12,14
8,6,14
These seem very skewed against couple 1 and in one case against couple 2 and couple 3. The range of these marks, and the clear bias on some ballot sheets, does cause me to question how impartial people were. I find it worrying where any couple is given a 5 (a perfect mark) in each of the three sections ... I don’t think any couple would have said they were prefect in Presentation, Musical Interpretation and Technique. So ... it does leave me with a real doubt about the basis of allowing Jo Public to vote .. good job it was all just for fun! :waycool: (Having said that I thought the end decision was the right one)

At one heat of the jive masters, I helped collate the scores, and there were 5 scorecards in a row that awarded one couple (who didn't actually win) 20 out of 20 (5 out of 5 in each category). Was quite interested to see that! Although, of course, we all know it happens (and probably for a number of couples who brought friends and family) at most (all?) heats and in the final too.

In the rounds (no idea about the final) of the Jive Masters, the scores were changed to ordinals - ie, couple with the most points got 1, couple with 2nd most points got 2 etc. And then the couple with the lowest overall average went through. I think that this was about the fairest way of collating a large number of scorecards as quickly as possible, and while didn't reflect the gap between the couples really, did at least mean that having friends and family automatically marking their choice with a very high score, had the least possible impact....

David Franklin

18th-January-2005, 05:16 PM

Oh right..... I think there was a long thread ages ago about this but isn't the problem with ordinals that they don't really measure the 'gap' between couples? And maybe it's not important - in the final at JM I think many folk might have decided who their favourites were and then made sure the marks were 'correct' and then marked the others in the order they wanted them rather than award marks and then see what the totals were.The 'problem' with ordinals is a feature, not a bug! The truth is that the scoring for 'honest' voters is usually quite tight - you only really get a huge gap if someone is cheating... I was with a group of 4, and we discussed our marking afterwards. We had a large amount of agreement on the results and the scoring - typically a winning couple would get 16 or so marks, and the last place couple 12 or 13. Allegedly, some people were marking their favourites with 20 and everyone else as 5. Each person who did that affected the results by about as much as our group of 4. Not good...

Dave

Daisy Chain

18th-January-2005, 10:24 PM

Probably not ...but what if the 14 are all close friends of a couple and the 1 'odd' result is from an objective observer ???

:

I've had another thought. This time about the fairness of the judging in the final. There is a finalist from the NW and there will soon be one from the NE. The home team for the final may well have an unfair advantage as Joe Public cannot be relied upon to vote fairly (look at SCD, Pop Idol and X-Factor). I'd rather see a fair match on neutral ground but I don't want to have to travel miles to see it!

Hmmmmmmmmm.................. Praps there should be 2 finals (ie one at each venue with the same finalists) with the scores from both added together? Then maybe biased voting from the home crowd might be minimalised?

Daisy

(A NW Flower)

Gus

19th-January-2005, 12:16 AM

Bill

19th-January-2005, 03:10 PM

I've had another thought. This time about the fairness of the judging in the final. There is a finalist from the NW and there will soon be one from the NE. The home team for the final may well have an unfair advantage as Joe Public cannot be relied upon to vote fairly (look at SCD, Pop Idol and X-Factor). I'd rather see a fair match on neutral ground but I don't want to have to travel miles to see it!

Hmmmmmmmmm.................. Praps there should be 2 finals (ie one at each venue with the same finalists) with the scores from both added together? Then maybe biased voting from the home crowd might be minimalised?

Daisy

(A NW Flower)

Well, you could make the same comment about Jive Masters being held in London. Does that give all the London dancers an unfair advantage??? Or equally put all the other dancers at a disadvantage??

I did joke about televising the JM final and relaying it to the areas the competitors come from. There was a big party in Aberdeen on the day of the final so if 200 plus dancers there had seen me and Denise and James & Melanie dance would that have made a difference?? Same goes for all the others.

The final has to be somewhere and the only way of being 'fair' would be to find a venue in an area none of the finalists belong to or dance in :whistle: :rolleyes:

under par

19th-January-2005, 03:18 PM

The final has to be somewhere and the only way of being 'fair' would be to find a venue in an area none of the finalists belong to or dance in :whistle: :rolleyes:

How about Spain :flower:

Gus

19th-January-2005, 03:22 PM

The 'problem' with ordinals is a feature, not a bug! The truth is that the scoring for 'honest' voters is usually quite tight - you only really get a huge gap if someone is cheating... Allegedly, some people were marking their favourites with 20 and everyone else as 5. Each person who did that affected the results by about as much as our group of 4. Not good...Given some thought about the suggestion of using ordinals ... .and think its probably a better way to go ... so will use this approach for the future rounds/final. Thanks for the feedback ... much apreciated.

Andy McGregor

19th-January-2005, 05:14 PM

Given some thought about the suggestion of using ordinals ... .and think its probably a better way to go ... so will use this approach for the future rounds/final. Thanks for the feedback ... much apreciated.
:yeah:

Phew! Thank goodness I don't have to go on and on about the faults and imbalance of using raw scores.

Well done Gus, good decision, have some rep :flower:

Bill

19th-January-2005, 05:55 PM

How about Spain :flower:

Sounds good ...... as long as the trip is free :D

Gus

24th-January-2005, 07:57 PM

This Saturday (29th Jan) we will be hosting the North East heat of the 'Best in the North' competition. The venue will be Sue Freeman's Tadcaster Jive venue (The Riley Smith Hall in Tadcaster) ... see http://www.uk-jive.co.uk/org-details.asp?OrgID=222 for more details.

The 3 competing couples are;

Chris Baker and Sarah Evans-Platt (Leeds-ish)
Paul Dodds and Anne Purcell (Ceroc Newcastle)
Joe Barrow and Edna Downes (Blitz Newcastle)
Sarah, Paul, and Anne are all Forumites and it would to be have as many forumites there as possible to cheer them on.

The Freestyle starts at 7.30, with the competition being run from 8pm to 8.30pm. The winning couple go through to the final against Pete & Paula.

under par

24th-January-2005, 08:21 PM