Grading of bands

Discussion in 'The Rehearsal Room' started by critic, Nov 1, 2009.

  1. critic

    critic Member

    In my opinion there are too many bands that are playing in the championship section that are not of that standard likewise the first section as not done the job it was intended to do.
    The all system needs a complete overall but like everything else at the moment we carry on with our heads in the sand. The sad thing is that nobod seems to care.


    So what would you do? Go back to the way it was before? Or try something new?
  3. DublinBass

    DublinBass Supporting Member

    Would you prefer a system that ranks bands in sections based on a set level of performance, rather than how they compare to other bands?

    Under this scenario if a band does not have a championship level performance at the areas, then they would get sent down (rather than having to beat x# of bands)?
  4. stevetrom

    stevetrom Well-Known Member

    to have a competition you need to have competitors.

    should the Premier League be reduced to 8 teams because the rest are not "Premier League " standard?

    I do think there should be a limit to the size of sections, and a less strict use of geographival boundaries. There are some very small sections in some areas and very large ones in other areas.
  5. may be scrapping the 3 year point rule?? on the other hand that might wreck bands? eg pre qualifide for nationals and just turn up to areas, as seen with preveius contest results.
  6. Anno Draconis

    Anno Draconis Well-Known Member

    Yes, it should.

    I'd be surprised if there are more than 40 genuinely competitive championship bands in the UK, but there are upwards of 80 actually graded as such. The championship section should be a small elite section for the very best bands, with everybody else spread evenly over the remaining 4 sections.
  7. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    Erm, how would you determine how a band gets promoted to or relegated from this elite section?
  8. Anno Draconis

    Anno Draconis Well-Known Member

    Initially, 2 down 1 up each year to reduce the overall size of the section. Then 2 up 2 down as now, I don't see why that needs to change.

    Having said that, I might be tempted to tinker with relegation from the top section so that it's based on results over 1 or 2 years, or even possibly rankings points. Top section status should, imho, be rock hard to attain and equally rock hard to maintain, requiring consistently good performances year in year out*. Promotion from section 1-4 (and relegation within those sections) should still be based on best aggregate area results over the last 3 years as it is now; I can't see any way of improving on that without introducing other flaws. It'll all be in the manifeso...;)

    *incidentally I'm aware of the argument that one or two bad results could result in an unfair demotion, possibly with subsequent adverse effects on player retention. Tough, I'm afraid. That's life. If a band's survival is entirely dependent on maintaining top flight status then that band has deeper issues to contend with. Tongwynlais have shown this year what can be achieved by a band prepared to take relegation from the top section on the chin, stick together and fight their way back.
  9. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    Ooo-errr! Is it not just better to slice the top section after 2 to 3 years (averaging results). The top bands would be the most consistent over such a period.
  10. Anno Draconis

    Anno Draconis Well-Known Member

    No, because you would have to rebalance the number of bands in each lower section at the same time. Doing it gradually over three or four years would be less aggravation. In any case, any bands that felt they were unfairly demoted would have an opportunity to prove their ability that at the next area contest by winning it - plus they could have a bit of a pot-hunt in a lower section for a year or so to build up the morale and momentum of the band.

    Anyway, we're splitting hairs a little here. Ain't gonna happen!
  11. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    That might be a better proposition. Reduce the number of lower sections to three and I believe that many criticisms about the present setup may disappear.
  12. Anno Draconis

    Anno Draconis Well-Known Member

    No I don't agree. Where I think the current system went wrong was when the 1st section was introduced between 2nd and Championship. IMO what should have happened is the top 40 or so bands in the country should have been hived off into a new Championship section, and the remainder balanced between the lower 4 sections. There are too many bands that can manage promotion to the top flight but don't stand a chance of getting near Dyke, Cory etc. - these bands should be in the 1st section, and the only bands that get promoted from the first section should be those capable of nudging the prizes in the top section on a good day.
  13. JPCoulson

    JPCoulson Member

    Are we talking local or national gradings?!
    Why not make the local gradings how they should be and not keep putting the first and championship sections together? Not that it would ever happen but make some of the "elite" bands actually turn up for local contests and not just a one off at the area qualifiers??
    Leave first section bands competing in first section at contests etc.
    While there is no easy solution to any of the gradings issues, I personaly don't see the point, at local contests at least, of having first section bands. Newly promoted local second section bands competing in the first/championship section often have a tough time of it and soon get demoralised. Nationally is a different argument because of the contests that are run.
  14. Anno Draconis

    Anno Draconis Well-Known Member

    National - different gradings for local contests are a whole other can of worms, and for what it's worth I think they're nonsense too. At Fleetwood recently I conducted Coppull and Standish (a 4th section band) in the 3rd section where we came third behind Eccleston and Hoover (both 2nd section bands). How daft is that? At the same contest in 2007 Middleton were required to enter the Championship section the week after winning the 3rd section finals. It's bonkers. Far better to have section A, B and C at local contests - section C for 4th section and ungraded, section B for 2nd and 3rd section with a prize for highest 3rd section band not in the main prizes, and section A for 1st and Champ with a prize for highest 1st section band not in the main prizes.
  15. markh

    markh Member

    I disagree completely. How many fine bands at the Nationals, Open, Spring Festival, etc can say they stand a chance of being in the top 2?

    I'll admit upfront that I am biased. I play in the championship section who are proud to be ranked joint 4th in our area but we know that realistically we will never be in the prizes at the Nationals.

    Would people also advocate (going back to the footballl analogy) that we limit the premiership to 3 teams? I have quickly looked at the podium places for the last 10 years Nationals and those 30 spots are taken up by just 10 bands, one of which is no longer in the championship section and another I am not sure about (Ransomes).
  16. markh

    markh Member

    Sorry - i should have added at the end. If this arguement goes to it's logical conclusion we should ahve championship section of 10!
  17. Sop_Or_Bass?

    Sop_Or_Bass? Member

    Get rid of 3 year average, as bands change personnel.

    Top 2 go up, bottom 2 go down in each section each year.

    Got to keep consistent then.

    Should also have to attend your local association contest to be able to compete at the Regionals.
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2009
  18. JPCoulson

    JPCoulson Member

    Using the football analogy, what do you want to play in?
    Champions league or the UEFA cup? Seems like the top flight have it all sown up so get used to the UEFA then.
  19. critic

    critic Member

    Thats a good idea there shoud be no more than ten championship bands in any area plus the other sections would be more competetive as well.its worth a thought and also it gets people thinking what ever there views
  20. stevetrom

    stevetrom Well-Known Member

    sounds a bit like some people want a nice little elite contest for the 'top' bands and the rest can put up with massive sections.

    If there are only 40 'genuine' championship section bands in the country, how many 'genuine' 1st section bands are there, et , etc.?

    The top section in each area is already restricted to 12 (I think), so if you are one of the best 12 bands in your area then you are a 'genuine' championship section band.

Share This Page