Anonymous. Originally the discusion was about Latin and Cha Cha in particular. If you remember It was three judges with three couples on the floor. Two of the judges each had a pupil dancing. Those two couples danced out of time and were not dancing together.One of the judges, a complete stranger afterwards made a point of finding the couple who came last and telling them that he didn't know how they didn't win, and that he had marked them first. He also said the other two couples both danced out of time.
Tragiclly this is not an isolated case.And what is even more tragic it will continue unless something is done about it.
I told the young lady. If you are not going to become part of one of the studios and wish to compete for the fun of it. Why not enter into events that you know you cannot win. For example if you are in the over 50's then dance in the under 50's in as high a grade that is allowed. If you are over 35 then dance as an adult which is under 35 instead of the Senior events.. And if you are under 35 which makes you the Adult level then enter way above your grade.You must study the system and use it to your best advantage.

"It was three judges with three couples on the floor"

"And what is even more tragic it will continue unless something is done about it."

And the obvious thing to do about it is to hire more than three judges! And not just bodies, but people who are real experts with standing in the community.

This is pretty much a universal requirement for any sanctioned competition. If you want to hold an informal, low-budget local competition with only three judges, that's fine. But you'll get what you pay for - the opportunity for a lot of fun, but marks that don't necessarily mean much.

Anonymous. There were nine judges there. It would have been a simple proceeder to ensure that none judged their own pupils.
Terence or lluv2dance would be able to tell you that they have been in many competitions where their were only two judges, usuall the couple giving the demonstration. And sometimes there was one who was the Lecturer that evening. In this one studio I was with others judged by Guy Howard. I mention this because he not only judged. He did his own scrutinizing. And even recalled the couples he had chosen himself. Can you think why he did that in this particular studio.

"There were nine judges there."

Then they should have used them.

Of course nine is not enough to have full panels on duty and give reasonable breaks.

If you want to run a real competition with respected results that is going to last more than a few hours, you need to hire two panel's worth of respected judges.

"It would have been a simple proceeder to ensure that none judged their own pupils."

This would make scheduling very difficult as you'd need to change judges quite often as you move from event to event.

"Terence or lluv2dance would be able to tell you that they have been in many competitions where their were only two judges"

Which would not be sanctioned competitions, as the sanctioning organizations have rules about panel sizes. You get what you pay for.

Anonymous. I'll have a look later. I'm sure that in a major Grand Prix the IDSF have six judges. If that is so it must be within the rules of Ballroom Dancing.

Six in attendance, maybe.. six on the floor ?

"Anonymous. I'll have a look later. I'm sure that in a major Grand Prix the IDSF have six judges."

And six is twice the number of opinions as at the little 3-judge informal event you were complaining about.

The IDSF minimums for various categories of couples competition are 7 and 5.

Personally I think that's not enough, but then I disagree with the IDSF on many things.

Anonymous. Which as nothing to do with should a judge , judge their own pupils in a competition. Whether there be one judge or eleven is irrelevant and should be disregarded by the jury.
The question remains is it fair for a judge to judge their own pupils.

"Anonymous. Which as nothing to do with should a judge , judge their own pupils in a competition. Whether there be one judge or eleven is irrelevant and should be disregarded by the jury."

On the contrary, it is quite relevant. The more judges, the less the importance of each opinion.

"The question remains is it fair for a judge to judge their own pupils."

As long as it is allowed by the rules, it is permimtted. I don't think that anyone believes it to be ideal - we'd all much prefer to have expert judges who don't have a history with the competitors.

But given the frequent practical need to choose between experts who coach some of the competitors in the event, and dancers who are not expert enough for any of the competitors to have any interest in taking lessons with, I'd much rather go with those that the competitors respect enough to study with.

Anonymous. Your last pharagraph points us to a Catch 22 situation. If the adudicators are not in a class that we would have lessons with and our own teachers are in a class way above the others. What do we do. What would make it fairer in a competition would be if nobody new not even the judges themselves which events they will be judging. That would put a stop to loading up with lessons, which is another side of the story. It was pointed out ages ago on this site that in South Africa in a major comp there were five judges two of which were changed after each dance. That is as it is written. At the end of the Waltz two dropped out and were replaced by two others for the Tango. This was from the first round right through to the final.