VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 15:11:46 11/27/24 Wed
Author: No name
Subject: Let’s take a look at why cheating, at least at our Oireachtas, is statistically nearly impossible…

1. Judge Selection and Scoring Process

• 20 Adjudicators: There were 20 judges total, with only 5 randomly selected for each round.
• Random Panel Selection: Panels were selected live, in full view of the audience and on FeisTV. This process ensures complete transparency and removes the possibility of pre-selecting judges for any particular dancer.
• Panel Rotation: Each round had a new, randomly drawn panel of judges. Dancers couldn’t know who would be judging them, and judges couldn’t know which dancers they would see.
• Dropped Scores: In each round, the highest and lowest scores from the 5 judges were dropped, leaving only the three middle scores to count. This reduces the impact of any outlier score, whether biased or accidental.
• Three Rounds: All championship dancers competed in two preliminary rounds (hard shoe and soft shoe). Half of the competitors were recalled to dance a third set round. Scores from all three rounds were tallied to determine placements, making it impossible for any one judge—or even one round—to have a decisive influence.

2. Strict Anonymity of Dancers

• Rotating Numbers: Dancers were assigned new numbers for each round, and the starting position rotated. Judges had no way of knowing which number corresponded to which dancer before or during the round.
• No Phones or Communication Devices: Judges were prohibited from having phones or smartwatches, eliminating the possibility of external communication or coordination during the competition.

3. The Impracticality of Identifying Dancers by Their Dresses

Some claim that judges could identify dancers based on their dresses or school “identifiers.” However, this is highly unlikely for several reasons:
• Similarity of Dresses: Many dresses are similar in style, design, and color, making it easy for judges to confuse one dancer with another. In a competition with hundreds of dancers, relying on memory to distinguish between dresses is highly error-prone.
• Resale and Borrowing of Dresses: Dresses with school-specific embroidery or identifiers are often sold or borrowed by dancers from other schools. A judge attempting to use these details for identification could easily make a mistake.

4. Statistical and Logistical Barriers to Cheating

For someone to manipulate the results successfully:
1. They would need to bribe a majority of the 20 judges (likely 12 or more) to ensure consistent bias across the competition.
2. These judges would need to coordinate their scores across randomly selected panels—a difficult task since no one knows who will judge each round.
3. Their high or low scores might still be dropped as part of the scoring system, negating their influence.
4. Even if a judge managed to identify a dancer by their dress or school identifier, they could easily make mistakes due to the similarity of dresses, borrowed dresses, and changes in dancer numbers.

This level of coordination, secrecy, and precision—under live public scrutiny—is statistically and practically impossible.

5. Built-in Safeguards Ensure Fairness

The entire competition process is designed to prevent manipulation:
• Randomized Panels and Numbers: These ensure no one knows ahead of time who will be judged by whom.
• Dropped Scores: This neutralizes the impact of outlier scores, whether biased or accidental.
• Live Transparency: The panel selection process was conducted live, leaving no room for premeditated panel manipulation.

Conclusion: Cheating is Nearly Impossible

For cheating to occur:
• Judges would need to identify dancers based on vague or unreliable cues like dresses or school identifiers, despite similar designs, resale of dresses, and the rotation of numbers and starting positions.
• Judges would have to guarantee their influence despite score-dropping and randomized panel assignments.
• Coordinating such an effort across multiple judges and rounds—under strict rules and live scrutiny—is simply not feasible.

The system is designed to protect the integrity of the competition. Raising unfounded accusations undermines the hard work of the dancers and the credibility of the adjudicators, who adhered to a rigorous, transparent, and fair process.l

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Login ] Create Account Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
 * HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (optional):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

Type your message here:

Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.