[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Tiebreak ruling at the Masters

To: <brass-band@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Tiebreak ruling at the Masters
From: "Marc Robbins" <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 23:22:31 +0100
Importance: Normal

I think looking at the explanation given by the organisers suggests that
rather than using 1 adjudicator as the "tie break judge", they are in effect
discounting his vote when deciding places for bands on level places.

The reasoning is this - For a tie break situation to come into place the
bands must have an equal aggregate from the 3 adjudicators.

For the tie break judge to be utilised, the other 2 adjudicators must have
combined to place the bands equal.

If the 2 adjudicators have done that, then be definition the 3rd adjudicator
will split the 2 of them since he cannot give level placings.

Does anyone else see this or am I missing something?


--


	NJH Sheet Music, bandsman.co.uk/music.htm,
	Prima Arts, quality music for quality bands, www.prima-arts.co.uk,
	Toot-Sweet, instrument repairers, www.toot-sweet.co.uk,
	Free e-mail address with spam and virus removal, bandsman.co.uk/mail.htm

this list, send a plain text mail to listproc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with the following
body (not subject):

Follow-Ups:
- RE: Tiebreak ruling at the Masters
  - From: Graeme McPhee

Prev by Date: Re: Re: Wild Conductors
Next by Date: RE: Tiebreak ruling at the Masters
Previous by thread: Re: Re: Wild Conductors
Next by thread: RE: Tiebreak ruling at the Masters
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread