It is a shame that the most prestesious competition in the world uses such a biased and unqualified jury to decide the fate of the Jupiter winners, It is more than clear that the Italian and USA shows were not even in the same league as Australlia and HongKong they were unmistakingly superior and it is a travesty that personal bias on the jury pool has locked them out when they were the most qualified to get jupiters, I will agree that Canada did deserve to be in the running but Australlia and Hong Kong were deffinatly stinkers, and Italy and the USA were robbed due to either lack of knowledge or plain bias focused on Quebec personell involved in the three that were picked, I beleive that this is a black eye to the Mondial SAQ and will not be forgotten and will greatly dimminish tne integrity of the nature of the competition, There are a lot of grumblings in the loop and many many people all over the world feel the same way, It might be time to seek a jury of professionals that really know what they are looking at or the competition may loose all of its integrity in the pyro world.

plain bias focused on Quebec personell involved in the three that were picked

I'm afraid you shoot yourself in the foot with this argument. What "Quebec personell" were involved in the Australian show? If you knew anything at all about the background and composition of the teams then, by your logic, Italy would have won Gold Jupiter for this reason alone.

Having spoken to some people "in the loop" I have been informed that a jury of "professionals" would almost be guaranteed to be biassed - imagine being judged by one of your main commercial competitors.

It's amazing how people moan when they don't see their favourites rewarded. The fact is there were six displays at a Jupiter level, but, of course, only three could finally make it onto the podium. There are reasons the top three ended up the way they did, and I can absolutely guarantee it has nothing at all to do with any of the allegations of bias that have been made here.

Paul.

Wow! Things are getting more interesting after the competition than before! Here is a suggestion; Instead of saying "this one was better than that one" Why don't you talk about the shows you've personnally seen from the grandstands, at la Ronde?

Tell us, in technical terms, why you feel some shows were better than other ones, and still didn't get top three. Where the angles more exact? The show wider or narower? What about the selection of effects? Did it match the music well? Did you see something that was never done before in Montreal?

You are telling us that USA and Italy weren't even in the same league as Hong Kong or Autralia, Can you tell us why?
I have seen Italy, Hong Kong, France, Canada and U.K., myself and I tend to agree with the Jury's decision. Too bad I cannot comment on the American show, not having seen it.

As for the Italian show, here is my comment: I think it had the most beautiful shells in the competition. Those multi breaks, studatta's and tarfellas were amazing! Did it beat any of the top three? I don't think so. Even though the product was gorgeous, I think all of the top three entries presented a show more in tune with what the jury wanted to see.

At the end of the day, isn'it what it boils down to? What the jury wants to see? This jury is made up of ordinary folks, recruited locally in a contest. They go through a formation to help them evaluate the shows but they are not professional of the industry. And isn'it the best way to recruit a jury? I mean, fireworks displays are meant to be seen by ordinary folks and their opinion is the most important one, no?

Like I told you before, I didn't see the American show, but out of the shows I did see, I agree with the Jury's decision.

You don't agree with me? Good! Let's start a constructive discussion about the shows we've seen , on site.

Regards

Finally, an intelligent and well-reasoned post on this topic. The view from the grandstands at La Ronde is very different from any other spot - even the position within the grandstands makes a difference, especially this year.

In the past, I've sat in the VIP section, which is to the extreme right of the grandstands and the view there is substantially different from that offered in the silver section which is where I sat this year. Also this year, the wind direction was such that most of the smoke and debris headed over to the VIP section and my friends who sat their had a vastly different opinion than I did.

As the poster above mentions, these displays are meant to bring enjoyment to "ordinary" people and it makes sense, therefore, to have a jury composed of such people. Despite what many think, this is not a jury of rank amateurs though since membership of the jury requires that an entry form be completed and various questions answered, plus an interview. The "ordinary" people in the audience in Montreal must be some of the most sophisticated connaisseurs of fireworks anywhere in the world, being witness to so many amazing quality displays over the years. We get to see things on a regular basis which others rarely, if ever, get the chance to see, except perhaps at the PGI convention.

The quality this year was very high so it is the subtle differences and details which determined the final order. You really had to see all of them from the same location to fully appreciate (a) how good the quality was this year and (b) the subtleties that made the difference between winning and being merely an excellent display.

My personal choice was as much biassed by how much I could enjoy the display versus taking notes and how much time I spent talking to the designer, since this latter information gave me an unfair insight into the display which the jury were not party to. I would have been happy with any set of three from the top six.

Paul.

Je suis d'accord avec la position de Paul. À mon avis, la formule du jury populaire est la plus appropriée pour obtenir une évaluation similaire à celle de l'auditoire auquel la pyrotechnie s'adresse et qui ne soit pas influencée par les relations entre les appréciateurs et les concurrents.

Le processus menant à la constitution du jury est laborieux et permet aux organisateurs de choisir des individus qui, sans être des experts, démontrent une capacité à évaluer de façon juste les spectacles. Afin d'ajouter une pièce d'information au débat, vous trouverez ci-dessous une copie du règlement du concours ayant conduit à la formation du jury 2003, règlement publié sur le site web du Mondial SAQ au printemps dernier.

À ces règles, j'ajouterai que chaque membre du jury doit obligatoirement prendre des notes relativement exhaustive et évaluer quantitativement les feux après chacun d'eux. Ces notes doivent être remises aux personnes responsables du jury avant de quitter le site, afin d'éviter qu'elles soient égarées. Les documents sont remis à chaque membre du jury au début de la soirée suivante. Si les notes prises ne sont pas suffisamment exhaustives, l'une des personnes responsables rappellera le membre du jury à l'ordre.

Cependant, j'émettrai une réserve concernant la valeur du choix du jury. Actuellement, le jury est constitué de 13 juges et 2 substituts. Jusqu'en 2001, il était plutôt composé de 25 juges et 5 substituts. La taille du jury a été réduite de moitié à compter de 2002, suite à des compressions imposées par Six Flags. Je pense qu'il s'agit d'une mauvaise décision. Parce que le jury est formé d'amateurs plutôt que de professionnels, je crois qu'il est préférable que le vote d'un membre ait le moins de poids possible, afin d'atteindre un meilleur équilibre. Je serais heureux que le jury retrouve éventuellement sa taille d'antan.

Frédérick


JURY 2003
RÈGLEMENT DE PARTICIPATION

Comment participer
1. Il suffit de remplir le bulletin de participation ci-dessous, de répondre à toutes les questions et de le soumettre au plus tard le 16 mai 2003.
2. Les participants, dont les coordonnées seront incomplètes, seront considérés inadmissibles. À cet égard, la décision du comité de sélection sera finale et sans appel.
3. Une participation par personne et par adresse de courriel est acceptée.

Disponibilités requises
4. Les candidat(e)s devront être disponibles pour participer à une journée de formation le 14 juin 2002 ainsi qu’à chacune des dix (10) prestations pyrotechniques.

Sélection des membres du jury
5. Au total, treize (13) personnes se verront attribuer le rôle de juge officiel et deux (2), le rôle de substitut.
6. Deux hommes et deux femmes seront sélectionnés dans chaque catégorie d’âge et compléteront le jury de 13 personnes :18 à 34 ans, 35 à 50 ans, 51 ans et plus.
7. Trois autres personnes seront choisies pour être substituts (sans égard à la catégorie d’âge).
8. Un tirage au sort (devant témoin) de dix (10) noms par catégorie, sera effectué par le comité de sélection le 19 mai 2003 au bureau administratif de La Ronde.
9. Le comité de sélection choisira ensuite un maximum de quatre semi-finalistes dans chaque catégorie selon la réponse à la question : Expliquez-nous ce que les feux d’artifice représentent pour le public montréalais?
10. À l’étape suivante, les semi-finalistes seront contactés par téléphone ou par courriel pour planifier une entrevue. Les candidats devront démontrer leur bonne foi à effectuer les fonctions de juge ou substitut avec professionnalisme et à se conformer aux règlements de ce concours.
11. Par la suite, le comité de sélection choisira les membres du jury parmi ces candidats.
12. Les quinze (15) finalistes recevront une lettre de confirmation.
Note : Le comité de sélection se réserve le droit de procéder à des tirages supplémentaires ou de modifier la composition du jury s’il y avait un nombre insuffisant de candidats admissibles dans une catégorie donnée.

Règlements
13. Toutes les personnes sélectionnées devront confirmer leur engagement en signant le code de déontologie du jury.
14. Les quinze (15) membres (juges et substituts) devront obligatoirement assister à tous les feux en compétition afin de voter pour les Jupiters. Un membre du jury qui s’absente (pour quelque raison que ce soit) et n’assiste pas à un spectacle pyrotechnique, sera automatiquement éliminé du jury et perdra alors tous ses droits et privilèges. Un juge sera alors remplacé par un membre substitut. Par contre s’il s’agit d’un substitut, ce dernier ne sera pas remplacé.
15. Par sa participation, chaque membre du jury autorise, si requis, les organisateurs du Mondial SAQ à utiliser son nom et/ou sa photographie et/ou son image et/ou sa voix à des fins publicitaires et ce, sans rémunération.
16. Sauf pour les récompenses (deux billets pour chacun des spectacles, incluant le vôtre, le stationnement gratuit pour une voiture, les souvenirs et les rabais spéciaux) tous les autres frais ou dépenses seront assumés par les membres du jury (ex : repas, déplacement, hébergement, etc.)
17. Les droits et privilèges octroyés au jury devront être acceptés tels que décernés et ne pourront être transférés à une tierce personne, échangés ou substitués contre une somme d’argent.
18. Cette offre s’adresse à toute personne demeurant au Québec âgée de 18 ans et plus, à l’exception des employé(e)s et des représentants de La Ronde, de leurs compagnies affiliées et de leurs commanditaires.
19. Ne peut participer, toute personne ayant été membre du jury (juge ou substitut) en 2000, 2001 et 2002 puisque 3 ans doivent s’écouler avant de pouvoir poser sa candidature à nouveau.
20. Une personne ne peut participer à la compétition comme juge ou substitut plus de deux (2) fois.
21. La Ronde et ses employés n’assumeront aucune responsabilité de quelque nature que ce soit dans tous les cas où leur incapacité d’agir résulterait d’un fait ou d’une situation hors de leur contrôle ou d’une grève, lock-out ou tout autre conflit de travail dans leurs établissements.

I feel the smae way.

The judges were trying to be as fair as possible, this competition is lot more difficult to win just by judging who was better than who. There are many factors that must be taken into consideration, such as choice of music, the quality of products used, the lake as well as synchranization. With these factors in play it is very difficult to judge. With some countries so close to each other, there is bound to be dissapointment.

As I was saying with Paul, the U.S and Canada were very close, one having an advantage over the other and vice versa, this is a good example because these particular 2 countries were very close. Paul had mentioned that Canada made better use of the lake, where the U.S, for most people, had a better choice of music.

And yes, I highly agree with Paul, there were 6 great displays, all deserving a Jupiter and yes it is very sad that the fact that only three can win.

As I said before, I do think that the judges were doing everything in their power to be as fair as possible and to come with a distinct final decision.

Sometimes we must expect the unexpected.

Trav.

Actually i think this debate underlines, that you (as Trav mention) can't predict the result of a competition, because it can be completely different criterias the jury is judging the displays by than the "general public". And this is also an advantage in one way, because it is not possible for the participants to do a show solely intended to please *only* the jury...

Therefore the result of a competition can be described as what the current jury this year liked the most. Other persons can have a diffent oppinion - but how do you make it more "fair"?! I don't have the ultimate answer

A possibility would be to crown the shows as the most thematic, technically advanced, emotional, intense etc.
But then - which of these criteas are then most important? Again it is subjective and someone will disagree...

Anyway - i believe the jury is doing anything possible to make as fair a judgement as possible... As Paul mention in his annual statement it is difficult to be a judge, due to the high standard of the competition.

Regarding last year. I agreed in Feux Royal should recieve the Gold jupiter. The Silver jupiter surprised me a bit. Someone probably believe the show from Atlas PyroVision should have won that because of the high technical level, the amount of material and the quality of material. Anyway the jury liked the well-themed "Romeo & Juliet"-show from Australia better and you just have to respect that

I think it is vital to have "ordinary" people judging rather than professionals, who probably judge after different criterias, which might be irrelevant to the public.

Lars,

Like last year, we can expect quite a bit of disagreement for this particular competition, especially taking into consideration that there's only one prize, the platinum Jupiter.

Of course, this is natural because of such high rankings and standings, which therefore creates this psychological effect for many people.

This is a very unique and honorable year for the Mondial SAQ and because of what's at stake and, most importantly, crowning 20 years of the competition. Every firm representing their countries are going to do everything in their absolute power to reach success. I know, and have a fair idea, of how long some of these firms worked and put a lot of effort into their displays for this year's competition. Quite logical reasoning for intensity this year. In essence, we'll be guaranteed to hear all sorts of arguments as of why some firms didn't win.

As for what's decided by the jury, it really depends on what appeals to them. Like you say, theme or music is usually a big criteria for the jury to decide according to their preferences. I also think that another important factor is how well the fireworks are synchronized with the music and pretty much the choice of music used with the fireworks. I usually pay attention to that.

One final statement about the jury is that we need to respect their decision. I say this because it extrememly difficult for them to come up with it, especially with a calibur of a year like this. They're the ones with all the work and decisions.

I guess we can feel what it's like to have a jury deciding on 8 possible shows all deserving the platinum Jupiter! It's really remarkable, and I'm eager to see how they plan to go about deciding the winner this year.

Like I said before, the judges are being as fair as possible.

Regards,

Trav.

Hi Trav

I can't disagree with you on that one - Of course their oppinion is as good as anyone else's. And because they reward one it doesn't mean they didn't love the other shows - how can't they

Like our guru Paul mentioned in the final line of his Marutamaya-report: "I'm glad i'm not a judge"

Lars

I can see why he said that! After reading Paul's reports, you can really tell that it's hard to judge.

Like you said, their opinion is no better than our own and remember, fireworks excites everyone in unique and different ways, so some people may enjoy it a lot, while others feel the opposite. It's always like that, especially at the Mondial SAQ! There's always debate!

Regards,

Trav.