This serves as a follow up to the article in which I first advocated a shift in judging systems from the High/Low Min/Max System to the RANKING System as it relates to the judging of calypso locally. This article makes the case for the use of the RANKING System while providing a rationale for that recommendation.
The High/Low Min/Max System presently in use in calypso circles here in Anguilla has not served us well, but besides the fact that it has not served us well, what this system aims to do to my mind goes contrary to what we should be trying to achieve when judging calypso. The High/Low Min/Max System of judging aims to reward the competitor with the BEST AVERAGE score when in fact we ought to be aiming to identify and reward the MOST OUTSTANDING performer on the night not the one with the so-called best average. It is for this reason that the RANKING SYSTEM would get us closer to the justice that is desirable – justice for all – over and above any other system.
A judging system which relies on the elimination of scores which in itself can have the effect of changing a competitor’s final position is not a just system irrespective of its dependence on statistics. We are well aware that statistics can be manipulated to derive the results one wishes to derive. Indeed it is usually said facetiously or otherwise that there are three types of lies – “Lies, dam lies and statistics”.
The RANKING SYSTEM does not require that any scores be eliminated. Bias is dealt with by the sheer numbers of judges involved in the process, in that should there be a judge who scores in a manner deemed ‘outrageous’ that one result is neutralized by the other judges who would have judged in a manner deemed acceptable.
HOW THE RANKING SYSTEM WORKS
Each criterion being assessed is assigned a certain number of points; this governs the assignment of scores by each judge. Each judge is required to assign a score to each criterion as per the guide, the sum total of which becomes the participant’s total score. The total score is then used to rank each participant. Raw scores in the RANKING SYSTEM, therefore, are part of the PROCESS in getting to the PRODUCT which is the RANK. Once that product, the RANK, has been attained the raw score is of no more significance.
At the end of round one of the competition all participants based on their scores are ranked in order from first, to whatever number, based on the number of participants. It must be pointed out that judging is a comparative exercise. With this set of ranking having been secured, the same exercise is repeated after round two. The winner is then determined by simply adding up the number of first place rankings, second place rankings, third place ranking to the very last rank.
In the event of a tie. Let’s suppose two persons ended up with the same number of first place rankings. To break the tie the number of second place rankings that each of them receives is resorted to. The winner in this instance being the person with the greatest number of first plus second place rankings and the pattern follows. There ought not be any difficulty. This is as easy as alphabetizing or, as we sometimes, as easy as ABC.
So while I hear what the experts say about the RANKING SYSTEM being difficult to manage, since when do we choose an option simply because it is easier? The RANKING SYSTEM is the system capable of delivering the fairest results, and ought to be the system employed in the judging of calypso in Anguilla at all levels. We’ve been doing it wrong all along. It’s time to rescue the process and restore credibility to the judging of calypso.
