Audience/fans influencing judges

[mithu]

After talking to a couple dancer form the last 2 competitions I went too, the judges told them that the audience played a huge roll in placing. I know there are multiple threads about this, but point is couldn't you avoid this by simple having all judges wear noise canceling headphones which are plugged directly into the sound board? <div>
</div>

 

[mrchicity]

Why? Teams don't just dance for judges, entertainment for the entire audience matters too. Judges should take into account the audience reaction, but only to a certain degree . Obviously teams from the comps area will have a bigger crowd response, but similarly if a team fails to generate much excitement from the audience, that should resonate with a judge.

 

[Arjun Barua]

couldn't you avoid this by simple having all judges wear noise canceling headphones which are plugged directly into the sound board?

Lalkaare (the enthusiastic cries and shouts of the dancers) are also a factor in judging. You can't make judges deaf to these sounds.

 

[yraparla]

Why? Teams don't just dance for judges, entertainment for the entire audience matters too. Judges should take into account the audience reaction, but only to a certain degree . Obviously teams from the comps area will have a bigger crowd response, but similarly if a team fails to generate much excitement from the audience, that should resonate with a judge.

I would say the relative comparison between teams is unfair, but that we could judge the impact moments/choreo within a single performance. If you have a gimmick and people stop clapping I think it's fair to say that gimmick failed

 

[mrchicity]

Why? Teams don't just dance for judges, entertainment for the entire audience matters too. Judges should take into account the audience reaction, but only to a certain degree . Obviously teams from the comps area will have a bigger crowd response, but similarly if a team fails to generate much excitement from the audience, that should resonate with a judge.

I would say the relative comparison between teams is unfair, but that we could judge the impact moments/choreo within a single performance. If you have a gimmick and people stop clapping I think it's fair to say that gimmick failed

Yeah, that's what I meant. Also even if a team doesn't get any hype from the audience, a good judge shouldn't need to rely on crowd response to determine a routine's quality.

 

[Shahrukh]

I dont let the audience reaction influence my judging on any team, if you are a good judge with loads of dancing experience you can form your own opinions and assess the teams performance without being influenced by hootn and hollerin. Also the head phones thing is no good, hearing if a team is doing lalkaare or not is something you need to take into consideration when judging, and you cant do that if you have head phones on.

 

[faizan]

There is a distinction to be made between audience reaction and the impact on the audience.

Audience reaction is the actual ovations and sound level of the reactions (this should be irrelevant).

Impact is whether or not the team connects with the audience, whether or not the audience is engaged and entertained.

I think audience impact should be a factor, albeit not a huge one, but still it should be considered.

 

[Arjun Barua]

There is a distinction to be made between audience reaction and the impact on the audience.

Audience reaction is the actual ovations and sound level of the reactions (this should be irrelevant).

Impact is whether or not the team connects with the audience, whether or not the audience is engaged and entertained.

I think audience impact should be a factor, albeit not a huge one, but still it should be considered.

That seems to be a very fuzzy distinction, Faizan. Could you explain 'impact' a little better perhaps? Moreover, how is a judge to assess audience impact without hearing/seeing audience reaction? Unless you meant to suggest 'impact on judges' as the criterion to be considered.

 

[faizan]

At the end of the day, it's fuzzy.

Audience reaction is an element of impact on audience, but it also includes the connection created by dancers via their nakhra. Does the nakhra create a sense of connection? This can be gauged by observing dancer nakhra and keeping an eye on the audience in terms of their body language and engagement. It's really just intangible stuff at the end of the day. Judge's with experience can pick up the "vibes." But, it's probably safe to keep all audience related matter out of the rubric.

But, what happens when VCU comes to a competition in California, has no fan support, and yet the audience LOVES their set and swag. Shouldn't VCU be rewarded for winning the audience over? Shouldn't their ability to connect with a room full of people who are there to support OTHER teams be recognized? What do you think arjun?

 

[mrchicity]

At the end of the day, it's fuzzy.

Audience reaction is an element of impact on audience, but it also includes the connection created by dancers via their nakhra. Does the nakhra create a sense of connection? This can be gauged by observing dancer nakhra and keeping an eye on the audience in terms of their body language and engagement. It's really just intangible stuff at the end of the day. Judge's with experience can pick up the "vibes." But, it's probably safe to keep all audience related matter out of the rubric.

But, what happens when VCU comes to a competition in California, has no fan support, and yet the audience LOVES their set and swag. Shouldn't VCU be rewarded for winning the audience over? Shouldn't their ability to connect with a room full of people who are there to support OTHER teams be recognized? What do you think arjun?

VCU going to a Cali comp and winning over a cold audience would be a great story, but that's not something that should give them extra consideration or points from a judge. If a set is entertaining (something that should transcend any folk vs modern debate), then it should arouse a good response from both audiences and judges, but judges shouldn't need to be cognizant of a crowd's response to understand the quality of the set. If a team brings a set which receives a huge audience response but fails to evoke a similar response in the judges (say a team jacks moves from SGPD/NJ/NYPD which the audience has never seen before but judges know that the team is byting), the judges shouldn't feel compelled to award extra points just because they were swayed by an audience. Maybe I'm relying too much on the assumption that most judges know their shit about bhangra, but that's how it should be ideally.

 

[rajkaran]

At the end of the day, it's fuzzy.

Audience reaction is an element of impact on audience, but it also includes the connection created by dancers via their nakhra. Does the nakhra create a sense of connection? This can be gauged by observing dancer nakhra and keeping an eye on the audience in terms of their body language and engagement. It's really just intangible stuff at the end of the day. Judge's with experience can pick up the "vibes." But, it's probably safe to keep all audience related matter out of the rubric.

I think it's better to keep the audience's reaction, particularly the cheering, out of the rubric. How is a judge to know if the audience is biased? Any team can easily plant supporters next to a judge and have them scream their heads off.

Regarding the intangible stuff like "connection" and nakhra- I always appreciate the comps that allow judges to put in a score factor of subjective appeal at the end of the rubric. A good judge won't abuse that power.