The Phoenix Network:
 
 
About  |  Advertise
Adult  |  Moonsigns  |  Band Guide  |  Blogs  |  In Pictures
 
the best boston and national bands, best music poll, boston phoenix

Voting irregularities at the Rumble?

It's a staple of message-board griping during Rumble season that the city's oldest and most prestigious battle of the bands is somehow rigged, though in our experience -- going back nearly a decade -- the Rumble has always been conducted in complete fairness, following a tried-and-true system by which five judges rate each evening's bands according to a meticulous point system. In fact, if the judges have ever had a complaint, it's that the Rumble system is almost too rigorous. But it's nothing if not fair and balanced: the Rumble bylaws even attempt to deal with the discrepancy between judges who give higher-than-normal or lower-than-normal scores by stipulating that the single-highest and single-lowest scores are thrown out before calculating the final tally. Fans can argue about whether the "best" band won, but in terms of the actual judges' votes, the Rumble priovides a scrupulous framework that has produced definitive and incontrovertible results for two decades.

At least they did until last night, when the Men were declared the winners of the fourth (of six) preliminary-round matchups.

On Thursday night, when the judges' votes were counted, Clouds were ahead by one point. (They were ahead by slightly more before the high and low votes were discarded, per Rumble rules.) When WBCN's Mark Hamilton (who is in his first year as Rumble guru, having taken over from longtime Rumble kingpin Shred) announced the final tally in the voting room, three of the five judges said that they thought the Men should've won. A fourth judge had the Men and Clouds tied on his individual ballot. (That judge said he would've voted for Clouds to win, but hadn't realized until after he'd handed in his ballot that he'd had Clouds tied with the Men in points. Hamilton didn't let that judge adjust his ballot -- and on that particular point, at least, Hamilton was operating correctly under the Rumble's rules.) After a quick discussion, Hamtilon then decided that since a majority of the judges thought the Men should win, he would declare them the winner -- which is what happened.

Was Hamilton correct to award the night to the Men? It's reasonable to ask what the response would've been if he'd made the opposite decision and awarded the night to Clouds, despite the fact that a majority of the judges felt that the Men were the better band. And it's worth pointing out here that if, after discarding the high and low scores, the Men and Clouds had been tied, then Rumble tradition has it that the judges are polled to declare a winner -- in which case, by rights, the Men would've been fairly awarded the night by a tie-breaking vote of 3-2. One can only assume that the oh-so-close factor -- but for a point -- contributed to Hamilton's reversal of the decision.

Reasonable people will disagree about what Hamilton should've done on Thursday night: but that's precisely the point of the Rumble's meticulous voting structure, which for 20 years has provided an unambiguous method for determining the winners. To the best of our knowledge -- and we'll update if someone has better information -- a band that's won on points has never had their victory overturned, even in a case where the winning band had fewer "first-place" votes (i.e., the highest score on a judge's ballot) than a losing band. The problem with allowing the Men to "win" on Thursday night is not so much that they don't deserve to move on in the competition -- it's that the Rumble has now set a precedent that introduces a giant question mark into what has always been a cut-and-dried vote. The thing the Rumble had going for it was that even when message-board whiners cried foul because their favorite bands didn't win, the judges and the bands could back up the iron-clad integrity of the process. After Thursday night, that may no longer be the case.

At the very least, the right thing for the Rumble to do would be to immediately name Clouds to one of the wild-card slots -- it wouldn't seem fair to strip the Men of a victory that they had no hand in rigging. And going forward, the Rumble could re-assess its voting rules: if "first-place" votes should trump total points, there's nothing wrong with instituting a rule that says so -- just as long as everyone plays by the same rule.

| More

2 Comments

  • Al Gore said:

    This reminds me of the 2000 presidential election, when i won the popular vote but was still robbed the presidency by  W who won the electoral college.

    Love Always,

    Al Gore

    April 12, 2008 3:24 PM
  • Sharona said:

    Don't know or care about these points but .... Will, out of curiosity, how did you come to be a judge Thursday night? You are good friends with Cheater Pint and a known Clouds fan and supporter. Aren't you supposed to judge on a night when you can do so "unbiasedly"? Perhaps "the other free weekly" can do an anon blogflog on this?

    April 14, 2008 4:19 PM

Leave a Comment

Login | Not a member yet? Click here to Join
 Friends' Activity   Popular   Most Viewed 
All Blogs
ADVERTISEMENT
more by Carly Carioli
DOM release new track, "Damn"; continue living in America | July 01, 2011
Can you say DKMMMB? Dropkick Murphys and Mighty Mighty Bosstones to play (part of) Fenway Park.  | June 28, 2011
Review: Taylor Swift at Gillette Stadium | June 27, 2011
Joe Bonni, subject of several Anal Cunt songs, on the death of Seth Putnam | June 15, 2011
Anal Cunt's Seth Putnam dead of a heart attack at 43 | June 12, 2011

 See all articles by: Carly Carioli

Follow the Phoenix
  • newsletter
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • youtube
  • rss
OTD Categories
Out
VIDEO: Arctic Monkeys at the House of Blues
Rare Frequencies
Rare Frequencies: Trouble and treble
Playlists
Lady Lee's Lion's Den Playlist
MP3 of the Week
HOMEWORK: Assignment #2: D-Tension
Hot Tix
Ticket On-Sale Alert: Muse, Mariah Carey, Black Eyed...
Latest Comments
Q&A #1: State Ethics Rules - I have been trying to obtain information of the sale of country wide stock by the first lady Diane Patrick...

By kevin mcgee on 07-02-2011 in Talking Politics

Ask Me Anything Friday 7/1 - Do you have any insight on redistricting? Lynch-Keating? Tierney-Tsongas? Olver? Will someone run for...

By Drew on 07-01-2011 in Talking Politics

Ask Me Anything Friday 7/1 - Do Will Dorcena or Sean Ryan have a snowball's chance in hell at getting elected? Would could change...

By John Boston on 07-01-2011 in Talking Politics

Meet the Mayor: Boston Public Library - Usability. Navigating our Boston Public Library Copley Square buildings, floors, departments, collections...

By thezak on 07-01-2011 in Phlog

Ask Me Anything Friday 7/1 - Is there any historical precedent for the four at-large councilors effectively endorsing each other?...

By Johnny on 07-01-2011 in Talking Politics

Latest Comments from On The Download
Most Viewed
Richard Russo chosen for One City, One Story
[tonight] Love Inks @ O'Brien's Pub :: UPDATE: show canceled
[live review] Movement Electronic Music Festival 2011
Tickets on-sale alert: The National, Lil Wayne, Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, Handsome Furs + more
[tonight @ church] People At Parties (ex-Von Iva, Boyskout), Vanity Theft, Andre Obin
[tonight @ enormous room] Bad Rabbits get FREE + Bodega Girls & Mystery Roar DJ sets
MP3 of the Week: Drummers "Planes II"
Most Viewed from On The Download
Search Blogs
 
Links
Bradley’s Almanac - Lower Allston blogging and bootlegging since 2001
Band in Boston -
Basstown -
Wayne&Wax -
Aurgasm -
Onward Charles -
Compound 440r -
Anti-Gravity Bunny -
Clicky Clicky -
Soul Clap -
Lemmingtrail -
WMBR -
WFNX -
Beginning To See the Light -
Jump the Turnstyle -
Heads Up Boston -
Loaded Gun -
Enough Cowbell -
Vanyaland -
Ryan's Smashing Life -
On The Download Archives
Tuesday, July 05, 2011  |  Sign In  |  Register
 
TODAY'S FEATURED ADVERTISERS
thePhoenix.com
Phoenix Media/Communications Group
Copyright © 2011 The Phoenix Media/Communications Group