New judging system? - Page 6 - Bboy World Com

allelement · 03-11-2010, 05:27 PM

thanks dyzee and drops for explaining this system. i have a better understanding of it now. i totally get where you guys are trying to go with this judging system. i do agree if the bboy community is going to branch out to a wider audience we're going to need a judging system in place.

hugo 75 · 03-11-2010, 08:23 PM

I support all the work to make BBoying more transparant.. a system like this surely serves a BIGGER audience and their understanding of the judges choices during a battle.

But on the other hand.
The Hip Hop culture is build around gaining respect from others. That's why we are so unique. We all give judgements, some being positiv, some being negativ about others in the game. In the end all the debate and discussions make us go back to the dancefloor. The solution to our judges results controversies will make the game a lot less interesting.

Afrikaa Bambaataa dropped " Looking for the pefect Beat"

Which in essence means, You will never be done looking for the perfect beat, once you think you found the perfect beat, you will find another. Our Hip Hop culture is an endless journey of looking for the perfect beats, dancemoves, lyrics ...
you simply can't judge new creativity by old standards.

once you think you got it figured out, a new kid comes out and flips the script

EDSMASTER · 03-11-2010, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyzeesnd

Thanks Pan for your comments. And yes, if you are an innovator and truly understand what it means to be dynamic/Technique, then yes you should be able to judge. This only way this system will work is if we are able to get the right judges for each category.

Koreankev
Hey, i know your really curious about the system. Im here in Korea right now and im leaving on the 15th. If you want, Id be happy to meet up and i can answer all your questions regarding the system, how it works and how it came to be.

My number is 010-5811-0523
Thats my temporary korean mobile number

Peace!

Think nothing of it Dyzee, you earned this one brother!

In fact the sooner your score system takes off the more righteous you have made us both and all the other people who have been sports minded and sports effort with Bboying since the begining!

DJ RENEGADE: From your mouth to God's Ears my friend! I agree and love everything you wrote!

Tyquan · 03-12-2010, 07:13 AM

maybe one way to TEST a system is to take footage of battle between crews..have 5 random GOOD relevant judges watch it and score it base on their category with points.... then have another different 5 random GOOD judges watch the same battle and judge it base on round per round...lets see if the outcome of the winning crew is the same between the two system.....i say make these 10 judges judge 10 different battle...let see if there is a consistancy between both system...or if theres an obvious flaw etc....so the points or vote will be emailed by these 10 judges to the test coordinator...then the test coordinator will post up the results with full score or votes of each battle between the two system...i think if a system is in a TESTING development then it must be tested and not really be LIVE just yet cuz people that lost an actual battle at a jam where these system are being TESTED and really thought they got robbed then these people just lost cuz of system thats been in only in testing phase...so thats not really fair..

so again

1. u can test and do comparison etc like i stated above

or

2. for the big next battle get a promoter who is in full support of the system....have the promoter get 8 judges in total....3 judges for round per round system and 5 judges for the point system with the 5 categories....now only the round per round system will officially count cuz thats wat its been done all these years as a standard...now for TESTING have the other 5 jduges judge just as if the point system is in full effect but the result will not count since its only in TESTING phase...now do this for the whole jam...then thats the only way you can truly see which system there is flaw or maybe both system works with the same outcome of the winning crew or to see which system is consistance etc and so on...

just an idea beacuse with any system, you must BENCHMARK it with another system...thats to really truly know which is better or which is a flaw etc.

im all for progression but it have to be just right for the better of the dance and culture..

lets take my brotha from anotha motha, casper for an example...his run in this battle at 1:50....is there a system that can really put a number to his expression to the music at the time at the moment where the dj swtich the music and he just react to whats being played? his round in my eyes is truly expression of one to the music in a way that capture what the dance is really about...now if theres a system that can truly put a number to his OWN "casper's" expression to the music being played....remember this is a dance..so there must be a system that capture these moments...and there are so many examples of these moments that we see in bboyin that we just cant put a number on...like im talkin about the moment where like master bruce lee say "..... honestly expressing yourself. Now, it is very difficult to do. It has always been very easy for me to put on a show and be cocky, and be flooded with a cocky feeling and feel pretty cool and all that. I can make all kinds of phoney things. Blinded by it. Or I can show some really fancy movement. But to experience oneself honestly, not lying to oneself, and to express myself honestly, now that is very hard to do."....THOSE type of moments...wat can we do with those type of moments in breakin?

wheatpenny · 03-12-2010, 07:32 AM

"2. for the big next battle get a promoter who is in full support of the system....have the promoter get 8 judges in total....3 judges for round per round system and 5 judges for the point system with the 5 categories....now only the round per round system will officially count cuz thats wat its been done all these years as a standard...now for TESTING have the other 5 jduges judge just as if the point system is in full effect but the result will not count since its only in TESTING phase...now do this for the whole jam...then thats the only way you can truly see which system there is flaw or maybe both system works with the same outcome of the winning crew or to see which system is consistance etc and so on..."

good idea! potentially expensive and difficult to organize, but it would absolutely be valuable.

anybody down to try to test it out.

and on a related note, why don't judges decisions get recorded on DVDs. i think that would also be useful information to include.

dyzeesnd · 03-12-2010, 07:47 AM

Hey Tyquan, thats a great idea. Infact a very intelligent and fantastic idea. Ill see what I can do to implement that.

Just a thought. lets say the round for round judges pick one side. And the system score declares the other side the winner. What if everyone completely dissagrees with the round for round opinion side, and feels the system was more acurate. Will it be considered flawed because it didnt agree with the round for round side? Or is it possible that the system side could have been correct and the round for round side was flawed? This is just a question before we begin to develope this testing phase.

Also, another thought, how do we pick the three judges for the round for round side. Should it be the promoters picks, or the competitors picks? Or random? Are we only going to pick judges who use round for round and write it down on paper so that we can go back to look at what they scored for the round for round. And is there a way that they can go back and review the footage to explain why they chose between who won their rounds? Just so that we can compare between the two systems of judging?

And the system itself has been tested for years. It first started being developed since 1999. What was being tested at the r16 qualifiers was how the computer program interlinks with the broadcasting networks and with the scoreboard interface. We also needed to see where the administrator console would be placed, and we needed to see how the MC and crowd would interact with a scoreboard in place. We needed to test to see if there would be any unforseen circumstances regarding the set up

Tyquan · 03-12-2010, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyzeesnd

Hey Tyquan, thats a great idea. Infact a very intelligent and fantastic idea. Ill see what I can do to implement that.

Just a thought. lets say the round for round judges pick one side. And the system score declares the other side the winner. What if everyone completely dissagrees with the round for round opinion side, and feels the system was more acurate. Will it be considered flawed because it didnt agree with the round for round side? Or is it possible that the system side could have been correct and the round for round side was flawed? This is just a question before we begin to develope this testing phase.

Also, another thought, how do we pick the three judges for the round for round side. Should it be the promoters picks, or the competitors picks? Or random? Are we only going to pick judges who use round for round and write it down on paper so that we can go back to look at what they scored for the round for round. And is there a way that they can go back and review the footage to explain why they chose between who won their rounds? Just so that we can compare between the two systems of judging?

And the system itself has been tested for years. It first started being developed since 1999. What was being tested at the r16 qualifiers was how the computer program interlinks with the broadcasting networks and with the scoreboard interface. We also needed to see where the administrator console would be placed, and we needed to see how the MC and crowd would interact with a scoreboard in place. We needed to test to see if there would be any unforseen circumstances regarding the set up

dyzee u got skype?...lol...it be wayy easier to talk and share some ideas bro...hit me up...tyquanmzk is my skype brotha...get at me..but yeah the round for round is gotta be OFFICIAL GOOD judges as well as the 5 judges that are testin the 5 category point system...so with that you kno in both system u have good judges beein worked on...so all u have to do is compare...u cant just compare only one battle..it have to be many battles thats why i said the whole jam so every battle results must be looked at by the test coordinator and compiled in a ways that can be bench-marked with each other....so all the results are being compared on a overall basis to see which system is overall more consistent,,,so as a tester one must define what is being consistent and what is not....so i mean if round for round system picked teh crew that should of lost and the point system really show that the crew that lost should of won...and there are many of these examples ...and the more battle being compare the more you see there's a pattern of inconstancy then there u go...just like a judge that judge inconsistent, people can clearly see that judge is a wack judge etc...same with judging system....if you have GOOD judges in place then all u have to worry about is benchmarking the system in testing phase...so overall compare which system is more consistent..

and yea the round for round judge scorecard should b made available for the test coordinator...so for each round their marks and notes must be all given to the test coordinator so he/she can make available to the public to see...also the 1 2 3 and judge vote at the end of the battle can be part of the round per round system so people can see which judges voted for who....and yes if u really are comparing the system the judges of the round for round should give good explanation on why they voted the way they did goin through the battle once again on footage and have them speak about why they voted per each round.......this way theres no b.s..this make judges take good notes as well...lol...this can be a crazyyy time consuming process epsically for the judges and whoever is coordinating these test comparison....but i mean u gotta have sacrifices

i hope you get wat im sayin...man if i didnt make sense then just know its late as hell over here in usa..lol..and my brain is fried...lol...but yeah hit me up on skype one of these days if u got skype since u in korea right now brotha...hope the wifey is good. and life is good over there...pz

DJRenegade · 03-12-2010, 01:05 PM

Dyzee.
I still think u should should increase the score threshold to 10 instead of 5.
The differential is too large right now IMHO.

Tyquan.
Brilliant idea. I hope it gets implemented.
I have no problem with round per round. I've been using it since I started judging big comps around 2000.
But...it has no accountability. Crappy judges with no system, no idea what they are looking at or consistency keep getting booked. The best bboys don't neccessarily make even half-decent judges(we've both seen this).
A system would go far in identifying suspect judges or those who are out of the loop or those that judge for buddies or those that don't watch the battle properly or those that give rounds to obvious horrible crashes or those that....the list goes on.
Then promoters can make an informed choice about who to have judge.
Seriously bro I've seen some calls recently that have sent me grey!!!
Made me wanna stop djing and sit on the floor with my head in my hands.

Kev

dyzeesnd · 03-12-2010, 01:53 PM

Hey whattap Tyquan! Added you on skype! Lets build bro. Id love to Collaberate on some things.

Renegade! Whatsup bro! Your one of those who I wouldnt mind judging without a scoring system. Your views and knowledge on breakin amazes me.
I understand where your comiing from saying that 1-5 may be to small and 1-10 may be better. Ive actually tried doing that, but the reason that I keep it at 1-5 is to eliminate the ability for biasness. Here is why:
First, the numbers 1-5 DO NOT reflect how much the judge "likes" the run according to his category. Rather, it reflects a fact. The judge must ask himself what the entire run's level is (according to his category). Then heor she as a credible judge must distinguish objectivly if the level is PERFECT, or GOOD, or AVERAGE, or POOR, or NONE. If it is perfect, then the score is 5. If it is Good, then the score is 4, if its average, 3, poor, 2 and none is 1. I found that if the score is 1-10, then biased judges will tend to give a slighty higher point to who they favour, or a slighty lower score to someone that they do not favour. For example, lets say its rubberlegz VS the End. Lets say they both do what their amazing at and they both do it well. For the Dynamics/techniqe category, the fact is that the level of their dynamics is PERFECT. Who is anyone to say which one is harder, or better, because they both cannot do what eachother does. Rather, objectively the level they displayed is "Perfect" in terms of their Techniqe.
I found that if the score is from 1-10, then sometimes a judge will give a score higher or lower due to favouratism. For example, lets say The END went out first and the judge gave him a 10. Then rubber legz goes out and the judge mayl give him a 9. Good and pefect are different from eachother. We want to eliminate an in between. I hope your understanding my example and I didnt make it too complicated in my attempt to explain.
However I definately will take into consideration your advice and I will ask the advice of the others who are helping in the perfection of the system. Thank you so much bro

03-12-2010, 04:20 PM

Me and Peter Pan talked about this long time ago a new judging system its nice to see it becoming a reality slowly but surely! Its also great to see heads from many crews working together to get it done within the community for the community!

Allah Akbar

EDSMASTER · 03-15-2010, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyquan

lets take my brotha from anotha motha, casper for an example...his run in this battle at 1:50....is there a system that can really put a number to his expression to the music at the time at the moment where the dj swtich the music and he just react to whats being played? his round in my eyes is truly expression of one to the music in a way that capture what the dance is really about...now if theres a system that can truly put a number to his OWN "casper's" expression to the music being played....remember this is a dance..so there must be a system that capture these moments...and there are so many examples of these moments that we see in bboyin that we just cant put a number on...like im talkin about the moment where like master bruce lee say "..... honestly expressing yourself. Now, it is very difficult to do. It has always been very easy for me to put on a show and be cocky, and be flooded with a cocky feeling and feel pretty cool and all that. I can make all kinds of phoney things. Blinded by it. Or I can show some really fancy movement. But to experience oneself honestly, not lying to oneself, and to express myself honestly, now that is very hard to do."....THOSE type of moments...wat can we do with those type of moments in breakin?

I am on Skype myself: bboypeterpan

I have the answer Tyquan which will fix these problems once and for all. I have had this answer for over a decade... Hit me up for sure...

mantiis_en_zk · 03-16-2010, 12:13 AM

I just came into this thread, so rather than address direct quotes, ill just add my 2 cents in general.

*Note: as usual, I somehow ended up writing a ton. Read it or not, I don't really care, but don't bother responding to snippets without reading the entire thing in context (If it has one lol)*

Like Kev just said, People need to stop panicking about regulation.
That's what all this boils down to, regulation.
The same principle that keeps kids from sucking on toys filled with lead will eventually keep judgments transparent in competitions and will allow our culture to stand in society as "organized" instead of a chaotic mess of wishful thinkers, haters, and stressed out individuals trying to make sense of it all.

What I like to remind people of in conversations on a variety of topics for debate in bboying is that the thing that is of utmost importance is progress... over TIME. Not whether a system exists now that will specifically allow us personally, our crews, or our boys to win or lose a jam, but whether over the course of coming years, decades, and so on, will there will an on going process with consistent tinkerers that will get closer to what we want, which I believe in a lot of ways is validation in society/history by finding consistency within our own community. A few years here and there is just a drop in the ocean of time. I made that comment in the same context about biting, trends, etc. A few decades from now we will likely not be discussing struggles within the community in terms of months or years, but probably is clusters of years. "Oh yea, 2000-2005, shit was one way, then ...oh somewhere around 2010, things began to go this way"

It's about the overall result of what we do now in the big picture. With that said it is important for both those who are trying to develop a system to listen to its biggest critics, but it's also important to understand the difference between critics and haters. Someone who understands fully what is trying to be accomplished by a system of judging and why should be heard if they have a opinion that is relevant, but people that are just taking the "idea" and saying "Yea, well I'm just not down with the idea of bboying having rules, or bboying having a number system, so fuck all that" should in most cases be ignored for being uninformed. (The same applies to things today like critics of healthcare reform who haven't actually read the bills)

As a matter of fact, the parallel is pretty great. Look at Democrats and Republicans on healthcare reform in the USA. You've got everyone saying "we need a system to make this work." For a long time, Democrats had their plan and all we heard from everyone on the Republican side was nonsensical arguments and criticism with no alternative suggestions. It is similar in a lot of ways to this situation. We've got a "plan" and we've got a movement to get it refined. There are too many people putting up roadblocks based on fear and ignorance. Nobody is trying to "cram this down bboys throats" Everyone involved wants to be constructive.

The fact of the matter is bboying will always have a split between it's "street" form and its "professional" form. Just as there is "street ball" and the NBA, there will eventually be a finer distinction between raw bboying and competitive bboying. Nobody is ever going to regulate a cypher. Cats will still be getting down and battling the same way 30 years from now as they did 30 years ago. But competitive bboying already exists. Nobody is really reinventing the wheel here, but there is a lot of work to be done to allow it to grow and be stable enough to withstand scrutiny.

The mistake a lot of haters of a system make is that they are believe it or not, wishful thinkers.
Wishful thinkers because they believe that judging across distance, time, and various people will take on some form of TRUE self regulation. No so. What we see is the averages between many different types of outcomes that people clump into 3 categories:
1. a good jam
2. an okay jam
3. a wack jam.

How is that even decided? between again, another average of the people who attended and their personal opinions and biases.

What really goes on? What types of situations are there when you break shit down?
Some jams, great judging with judges that are meticulous and skilled, who can explain themselves. Good jam.

Some jams, the same great judges, but they can't explain how they arrived at a decision, people feel jerked, the result is a consensus that is was a wack jam.

Some jams, shitty judges, who can't understand their own methods, but by some fluke, the result just happens to be the same as the people in attendance expected it to be. Good jam? (Well only by accident)

Some jams, awesome judges, but they are all using different systems, so when it comes to crucial decisions based on small details, someone feels jerked and when you put together the final picture: Wack jam? Ok jam?

Sometimes you have great judges working under thrown together rules by promoters which throws them off from judging. Wack jam?

What im trying to say is that half the time when shit works out, it's not because the current way "works", it is just because of LUCK. Today we got lucky and everyone is happy. Tomorrow we will crap shoot again and everyone will hate the jam and start boycotting. (Maybe even with the same judging and methods)
Sometimes we have 100% of the elements we need right, but shit just doesnt work itself out.

A system isnt going to "take the soul out of bboying", it is simply going to take what we have and regulate it so that a good jam really is a good jam for a reason, and a wack jam is a wack jam for a specific reason.

If someone gets jerked under a system, at least we can look at the numbers, look at the video, figure out what went wrong. Was it the judges error? was it a fault in the system? We can troubleshoot based on evidence. If you are just going by bias you will never be able to refine or understand anything. Even judges themselves will have a hard time understanding where things go wrong. They are worried about judging, not making sure they are being consistent. The people maintaining the system might even point out hypocritical decisions made by judges based on numbers and footage to either discover a bad judge, or to help a good judge work out his mistakes or bad habits for the future.

A system also allows for research. Example? take old footage from years past. Battles where the winner was undeniable at the time. Now judge it using the video with this system. What are the results? On point? no? why? And then you can actually start to define that "why" and figure out if there are more things to be fixed. The system doesnt have to go forward and make mistakes in order to develop it further. I would say the same research of trial and error can be done in reverse using standing decisions and battles.

The future needs to be protected from scenarios like this:
Worldwide battle, tons of sponsors, lots of coverage, has bboying sold out? Nope. They are allowing it to proceed just like any other battle, except the prize is a huge amount of money, $20million No way you say? Well lets assume there is enough coverage and advertising that it would easily pay that sum to the organizers and in this scenario it is unlike professional sports where people have salaries, its just all one big competition for a pot of $. So the battles progress, and when it comes down to the winner... somehow... everyone feels like "wtf just happened?" and someone takes home the money. A LOT of money. Later... we find out that there were connections, bribes, deals between judges, organizers, competitors, etc...
but its all rumor, and the judges are either silent or don't make sense. Everyone got taken for a ride. But the winners? laughing all the way to the bank. The community? backlashing. The sponsors? bad taste in their mouth. Nobody wants "scandal" and bullshitting, they want consistency, so shit makes sense and people are happy and people keep coming back.

We don't really deal with situations like these (although im sure some of you could name a bunch of smaller scale examples) but without a system in place there could never really be transparency in how decisions are made. It might only come down to how good of a BSer is a crooked judge?

Then again a lot of this dances close to that "bboying becoming a sport and selling out" argument.
The thing there is this: We could keep breaking as pure as we want... it will grow financially if we can establish a following, and that following is consistent. Most forms of entertainment are all part of a giant web of money that deals with advertisers. If breaking was totally accessible, understandable, fair, enjoyable to watch, etc right now, then all it would take is the public to want to see it more than anything else on TV, and then we would be filling choice slots with underground bboy jams, and then advertisers would want slots during it, the networks would be paying the creators of the jams more money for them, the promoters of the jams would be paying the competitors more money to continue to participate, etc.
BBoys in turn could create a union in the sense that they are the product now and want a fair share.

The reason this doesnt work now is there is no package. That is why networks are always creating their own "packages" "Ok... this is how we can show bboying to get people to like it... this is how we can guarantee our investment is safe" It's investing. Nobody will invest money in a product that is unreliable, unstable and in a constant state of argument and flux. That is what our community is. Even if we were to get an outlet for real bboying into the public right now, it would likely die quickly because there would be no sustainable local version of it to maintain the interest of spectators, and new people. The day we create a system that works for everyone in terms of competitions (even one set of rules among many systems that becomes popular with its own name) is the day we can grow consistent jams that spectators understand, follow, get involved with, and don't ebb and flow like they do now. A city can go through periods of great times and dead times in terms of community, jams and public interest, but a lot of that is to do with every jam being essentially different from every other jam in terms of how its run, who wins by how its judged, etc. A spectator or fan simply can't process or follow all that. Hell half of US get fed up with the way shit ebbs and flows, how can you expect someone who doesnt LOVE it like we do to keep up?

All of that crap is why I get pissed when I see huge competitions for things like cupstacking, or the crazy followings that things like rollyderby have. The reason other hobbies, dances, sports etc can maintain a following is because of rules that people can see, process, and understand. A lot of people don't like watching ANYTHING until they understand it.

This all kind of drifts away from the idea that "we" need a system for "ourselves" for fairness etc, but it is all tied together. Once we can be fair with ourselves, everything else will flood together. If you build it, the world will come.

I think what a lot of people also don't see in these arguments is the different place we are all at. A lot of bboys are young, don't work, are under their parents wings, and really don't have a stake in their lives at this point whether we do or don't make a system that works. It's all just fun and games. Hobbies.
Others are in college, on their way to some other life, where they will either continue to work in bboying, or give it up.
Others still are struggling in the realworld, either in shitty jobs just getting by, or in good jobs doing well, but stuck in the cycle of the corporate capitalist world.
Every argument for or against a system of judging should also take this into account. I think any good argument should be heard either way but I would hate to see discussions get held up by a 15 yr old living with his parents who's life really isn't affected by any of this other than how fun his weekends are.

I myself got into bboying when I was just entering college and honestly I put way more into bboying than I did into my future and school. I now work hard at a job that is very tech heavy, but essentially I could have done without college. So now if I were to so choose, I could go on from here to retirement or death working and making more money, etc, but I do not enjoy my work. I do in some sense because I am good at it, but that isn't living. Some might hate on the idea of bboying being regulated and growing financially but let me tell you, as I'm sure many many others can agree, I would love nothing more than bboying to grow an industry within itself so that myself and other bboys who have a lot of unrelated skills could apply our lives to bboying without giving up stability and so we could see those that have amazing skill in the dance itself be able to fully sustain themselves in the real world through breaking without having to hustle day in and day out, and without having to sell their talents for scraps.

I think that developing a system that works is the linchpin of a stable future for the culture. We can love art for arts sake but in a capitalist world, a culture must be economically viable to survive on its own merits. I don't want to see countless bboys waste their REAL talents by having to work shitty jobs to maintain their existence.

I'm drifting far from a coherent argument or point... so with that I'll conclude.

btw I know i didnt address a single damn technical aspect of the current discussion of judging based on dyz's system