Looking for something different for judging forms. It would seem that the scoring system typically used; 1 through 10, with five being the the average is kinda boring and really subjective. I recently heard of a tournament held in St. Louis where the forms competitors competed side by side using a bracketing system and scoring with a show of hands. This has been used for tie-breakers for as long as I can remember. I tried this in class the other night at one of my schools, the students who've competed, and their parents seemed to receive it well. If you have an opinion on this, please opine with pros and cons. Thank you
Bracketing System for forms competition
- Thread starter Kwanjang
- Start date
Are you talking about bracketing or scoring? From your question, I would say scoring.
As far as using point cards and hands, I've done both - we are much more likely to use hands or flags (same idea - a double ended flag, blue on one side and red on the other, for the two competitors) for patterns competition than point scoring. It's much faster, and much less prone to mistakes, than numerical scoring, and, in a single-elimination competition, eliminates ties. There are times, however, when it's very hard to choose which competitor is truly better - that's why our scoring panels always have an odd number of judges (usually 5, but sometimes 3, and very rarely, 7).
As far as using point cards and hands, I've done both - we are much more likely to use hands or flags (same idea - a double ended flag, blue on one side and red on the other, for the two competitors) for patterns competition than point scoring. It's much faster, and much less prone to mistakes, than numerical scoring, and, in a single-elimination competition, eliminates ties. There are times, however, when it's very hard to choose which competitor is truly better - that's why our scoring panels always have an odd number of judges (usually 5, but sometimes 3, and very rarely, 7).
Yes we was at that tournament it is was great, the judges just picked the best of the two and then moved on to the next. It eliminated any type of scoring which is great, majority wins not a point tally.
To be honest it is done at GGM Shin's tournament every time. His bracketts are always big no matter what considering his tournaments are always in Clayton anyone. I have seen nothing but a great response from our competitors at the St. L school. However, when doing organizational tournaments and the card system they don't mind that either. However, the fellas who always go to GGM Shin's are really happpy with the winner/loser hand decision.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2005
- Messages
- 10,826
- Reaction score
- 617
I've seen this done at some of the USA-NKF regional tournaments. Effective system, and it cuts down the amount of time needed to complete the division. This can really help, especially if you have lots of people doing long kata, such as Kusanku / Kanku Dai, Gojushiho Sho / Dai, Suparenpei, etc.
At the nationals, they also use the bracket system for the mandatory division (Shitei), but do them one competitor at a time. You cannot do the same kata more than once.
Using the USA-NKF nationals as a model, I see this as a very good format, since it forces each person to be able to perform a wider array of kata, instead of just specializing in one or two. For example, a group of 16 would require that the winner have performed 4 different kata.
Also, it gives the referees a concrete comparison between two particular individuals, instead of each referee trying to remember how each of those 10+ competitors did, and then formulate a numerical score. Let's face it... If you're trying to assign a specific score to someone, it can get rather confusing if your division gets rather large.
Furthermore, it takes away some of the referee bias, since it forces them to evaluate competitors head to head, and not, say, one particular competitor who they may really like, versus the rest.
Equally as important, I believe that such a system also tests the competitors' physical and mental endurance, both of which should be at least respectable at this level.
While everyone is going to have a favorite kata or two, to lock one's self into just those one or two, and to not even explore the variety out there seems rather limiting to me.
At the nationals, they also use the bracket system for the mandatory division (Shitei), but do them one competitor at a time. You cannot do the same kata more than once.
Using the USA-NKF nationals as a model, I see this as a very good format, since it forces each person to be able to perform a wider array of kata, instead of just specializing in one or two. For example, a group of 16 would require that the winner have performed 4 different kata.
Also, it gives the referees a concrete comparison between two particular individuals, instead of each referee trying to remember how each of those 10+ competitors did, and then formulate a numerical score. Let's face it... If you're trying to assign a specific score to someone, it can get rather confusing if your division gets rather large.
Furthermore, it takes away some of the referee bias, since it forces them to evaluate competitors head to head, and not, say, one particular competitor who they may really like, versus the rest.
Equally as important, I believe that such a system also tests the competitors' physical and mental endurance, both of which should be at least respectable at this level.
While everyone is going to have a favorite kata or two, to lock one's self into just those one or two, and to not even explore the variety out there seems rather limiting to me.
In regards to the comment about favorite patterns - I understand completely. At our tournaments, we let color belts choose the pattern they will compete with - but black belts have to do two patterns each round, one they choose and one that the judges choose. Judges can choose any pattern up to the last tested rank of the competitors, which eliminates calling a pattern the competitor might not have learned yet due to having recently testing.
How do you compare two different forms side-by-side? Especially if you're dealing with two or more systems, as well, like in an open tournament?
zDom
Senior Master
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2006
- Messages
- 3,081
- Reaction score
- 110
You are still comparing different forms even if you stay with the tired old system of giving a numerical score.
Criteria is still the same for comparisons, but you are comparing just TWO at a time (and delivering a winner/not winner decision) instead of a sequence of 5 to 15 competitors and trying to give them all a score that represents who was better than who.
When I heard Shin was doing this at his tournaments, I immediately saw how this could improve forms competitions.
To me, it'd be hard to compare two different forms side by side. One form, I could see -- but if the two competitors are using a different timing or flow, then that'd be hard to judge, too. Just because one is faster than the other doesn't mean that they're better or know the form better or have better technique...
Judging forms is hard; it's very subjective, no matter how you do it. Especially in open competitions where you have different styles with different principles...
By looking for things that are consistent across styles: are stances a consistent length each time they are done? Are all strikes to a certain level always to the same target? Can you tell which target the technique is intended for? Is the timing consistent? Are there any inexplicable pauses in the pattern? Things like this can be used to judge patterns whether you know them or not.
When competitors are doing 2 different patterns and you know them both - there's a lot of peripheral vision in use! And sometimes they'll make a mistake and you'll miss it - that's why patterns are judged by a panel with an odd number of participants.
