I am curious.....

hehehe> These comments are in no way a criticism of the adjudicators,> who do a great job. I'm just interested in sparking a discussion.> I was going to try and organise a preFinleys live chat, but couldn't> find the time.this could end up being Pandora's box :)My views on the awards (as opposed to the night itself - which is great idea!) are known to a few people. Feel free to stop reading here if you're fed up with hearing me whinge about the awards :)*steps onto soapbox*I was delighted to see that so many adjudicators' certificates awarded. These recognise what the adjudicators consider to be outstanding achievements throughout the year. The awards are discussed and debated amongst the adjudicators before being decided on.I like this system. It recognises that the opinions of the adjudicators are subjective and encourages them to justify and debate their choices with each other. It appears to me from the range of areas that they have chosen to present certificates in that a great deal of careful consideration was given. Well done!However, personally I think the notion of presenting an overall award for the "best" in theatre and musicals is a nonsense. The system used to arrive at the result is even worse than the notion itself.The recent Finley adjudicator's training session adequately demonstrated what i consider to be the hopelessness of trying arrive at a reasonable consensus on the quality of a performance. The Guild Of Drama Adjudicators marking system is great for arriving at and justifying an individual score - but does nothing to narrow the gap between individuals.As part of their training, the team of potential adjudicators attended the same performance and then gave it marks ranging from 33 to 75 out of 100. Surely, no amount of statistical wizardry can massage any sense out of figures like this - not on a tiny sample of three or so adjudicators attending each performance for the Finley's. The best you can hope for is some notion that some shows belong at the good end of the spectrum and others at the not-so-good. I can't help feeling that any suggestion that you can conceivably rank shows differentiating between 1st, 2nd, 3rd... according to these types of results is a pretense.It doesn't matter how experienced, skilled, knowledgable, fair or otherwise you adjudicators are - if you only ask three people to rank the best movies of the year, you can't claim the results are representative or authoritative.I've been roundly and justifiably criticised by a few friends for trashing the awards system and not offering a constructive solution. I'm afraid i'm no closer today than i was five years ago to being able to offer any suggestions.But i commend the ITA for highlighting the participation of the clubs in the evening's entertainment and for encouraging the presentation of so many adjudicator's certificates.*steps off soapbox*Who's next?:)CheersGrant