The Black Dyke Conspiracy

Discussion in 'The Adjudicators' Comments' started by DublinBass, Oct 16, 2005.

  1. DublinBass

    DublinBass Supporting Member

    It seems this topic should be addressed since every contest Black Dyke has entered and not won in the past two and one half years must be due to either a conspiracy or poor adjudication, right?

    Granted the band has been playing very well as of late, but how many of you are willing to admit that when you here them at a contest, the sight of Peter Roberts, Roger Webster, Dave Thornton, Brett Baker on the ends of the rows and Nick Childs in front, the nice slick uniforms and storied tradition, might just possibly (however so slightly) bias what you are hearing to like it just a little more than if you couldn't see them like the adjudicators.

    What I'm referring to is the same bias that allows you to always believe your footie side should've gotten the penalty they deserved and that the referees are obviously favouring the other side, or that your own band wuz robbed at the contest you were it.

    It can be very difficult to be impartial even if one tries, no?

    I am willing to admit, when I like a band or support them I can be a bit biased against other bands if I know who's playing. Anybody else willing to 'fess up?
  2. brassneck

    brassneck Active Member

    What about the other conspiracy theory that Leyland hadn't won the National Finals before because the competition was run by Besson and they played Yamahas? :eek:
  3. Will the Sec

    Will the Sec Active Member

    And obviously, Redbridge, Newha/Aveley/Alliance/Zone One etc will never have a chance anymore becuase they play in the Kapitol.

  4. backrowbloke

    backrowbloke Member

    Of course people will have a bias - that's why at nearly every major contest the hall has more people in for the major bands than for the others. Music being subjective, rather than a science, will also have its effect - one persons like is another persons dislike
  5. ronnie_the_lizard

    ronnie_the_lizard Active Member

    >>>the nice slick uniforms and storied tradition, might just possibly (however so slightly) bias what
    >>>you are hearing to like it just a little more than if you couldn't see them like the adjudicators.

    That would certainly be the obvious suggestion as to why 4BR were so convinced that Cory were a long way ahead of the previous band (Leyland) when in fact they were very close with Leyland the winners.

    [our top three at the half-way point.
    1. BAYV - by a sizeable margin.
    2. Leyland - should hang in there - it deserves it.
    3. Faireys - a good length behind Leyland though.]
  6. eckyboy

    eckyboy Member

    Did you write that for 4Bars Ron as that was what was written - excuse my ignorance.
  7. dyl

    dyl Active Member

    Errrm, I think Ron's point is actually directed towards's comments!
  8. ronnie_the_lizard

    ronnie_the_lizard Active Member

    Yes - sorry perhaps should have made it more obvious but the bit in [....] is a direct quote and link to 4BRs page

    (and to be fair to them with this one exception they were pretty damn good with their predicted placings this time)
  9. this whole thing about blazers, has any1 seen the hebden bridge bright green with red collars?, they are so bright i swear the adjudicators can see us through the see-through material they use for those boxes, it feels like some results are fixed on hebden sometimes coz we had 3 top 6 performances according to 90% of people we've asked in the audiences, a lot of those being top musicians and adjudicators themselves, just not assigned to the particular contest, the dundee final was a total sham, most people put us as winners, it was 1 of the best contest performances hebden have produced in recent years, and we knew that on stage, and we got 8th.

    point is, i feel for some reason or another, some bands can be recognized by the guys in the box/es in some way or another, either by themselves or by some assistance from people sitting near the boxes, whats every1elses view on this?
  10. Di

    Di Active Member

    My view is you're insulting the integrity of judges everywhere if you're trying to say their results are influenced by knowing who is playing.
  11. geordiecolin

    geordiecolin Active Member

  12. andyp

    andyp Active Member

    Indeed. I would say most adjudicators have a reasonable idea of who's playing anyway. Even in lower sections. Typical example, Fleetwood a fortnight ago, third section, only two bands played A Gallimaufry Suite, because they'd been to Harrogate the week before. If the adjudicator's seen the entry list (and I would think they would have) it's no great leap to figure out that one's us and the other's Trinity Girls. Quite often bands play the same test piece at more than one own-choice contest, so there's another giveaway.
    In top section it must be even easier, I'm a pretty long way from an expert but I could tell you if Peter Roberts was playing straight off, just from the sound.
    I'd be surprised if most top section adjudicators couldn't tell you at least who the first ten bands in the results were without looking, and wouldn't be in the least surprised if they got all of them!
  13. Straightmute

    Straightmute Active Member

    You'd be surprised! In my experience, an adjudicator is far less concerned with placing the bands in a certain order, than in sorting out the performances he hears. The adjudicator normally doesn't see the entry list, particularly in the smaller local contests where the list doesn't appear in the BB or on tMP, and in any case, knowing who the bands are would be a bit of a distraction (hence most adjudicators prefer to be in a box).

    Although the two bands which played Gallimaufrey in the third section at Fleetwood gave the best performances, the band which played it in the fourth section did not. It certainly isn't a case of 'here's a National finalist, better put them to the top of the list'; more likely that all the sectionals and extra rehearsals for the finals paid off!

    Anyway, are you complaining???


  14. andyp

    andyp Active Member

    I wasn't trying to say that the adjudicator at Fleetwood had favoured anyone in particular, I was just using it (admittedly not very well!) as an example of how an adjudicator could, if they wished, tell who certain bands are in a lower section contest. (whereas in top section it is "easier" to tell) Even if they know who's playing, it certainly doesn't follow that it influences their decision, they judge the performance there and then.

    No, I'm definitely not complaining! :)
  15. Pythagoras

    Pythagoras Active Member

    Do you reckon adjudicators can pick out the 20+ bands in midlands 4th all playing the same piece at the areas? Doubt it!
  16. tubafran

    tubafran Active Member

    Good heavens Daniel you've changed your tune. A thread about "conspiracy" and you post a comment confirming that they can't know who's playing. You will be remindered of that after next year's areas.:wink:
  17. Anglo Music Press

    Anglo Music Press Well-Known Member

    I'm amazed so few people are aware that bands win because they have bribed the judges. It's quite common (if you are in the box) to get phone calls the week before a major contest negotiating how much you need to put band x first.

    I think this should become generally known, as it explains all questionable results and we can all stop speculating.
  18. Charmed

    Charmed Active Member

    Do you think every contest should be open audjudication to stop any conspiracy theories??

    My thinking here is:-

    If the audience know that the audjudicators know which bands are playing, then after the results (dubious or otherwise), the audjudicators know that the audience know that they knew which band was playing.

    This would solve the question of 'did they know which band was playing?' 'could they see the band that was playing?' 'was there a hidden id to let them know which band was playing?'

    If everyone knows who is playing, and everyone knows that everyone knows who is playing, then the results should be based purely on the performance and the interpretatation the audjudicators are looking for!

    Get my drift??? :confused:
  19. Charmed

    Charmed Active Member

    This comment was made while I was making my last comment, However, this statement from someone of this standing blew my mind!!!!

    Honest, truthful, but my god, WHAT A CAN OF WORMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  20. Darth_Tuba

    Darth_Tuba Active Member

    Tongue firmly in cheek me thinks?

Share This Page