BSWC
Scoring

How results are calculated

Judges give you a score from 0 to 10, but your placement isn't decided by adding those points. It's decided by how many judges placed you ahead of the others. This system is called relative placement (the “skating system”), and it's the standard at the biggest Jack & Jill competitions in the world. Here's why, and exactly how it works.

Why we don't just add up the points

Every judge uses the scale differently. One judge's “7” is another judge's “9”: same opinion, different numbers. If we simply add points, the judge with the biggest numbers quietly gets the biggest vote. Watch what happens to the same two dancers:

Adding points
Judge AJudge BJudge CTotal
You7.06.06.019.0
Rival6.55.51022.0

Rival wins by 3 points, even though two of the three judges thought you danced better. Judge C's love of big numbers single-handedly decided the result.

Relative placement
Judge AJudge BJudge CVerdict
You#1#1#22 of 3 say #1
Rival#2#2#11 of 3

Each judge's scores are turned into their personal ranking first. Now the question is simply: who does the majority put on top? You do: 2 judges out of 3. You win. A “10” and a “6.0” count exactly the same when they mean the same thing: “this judge's favourite”.

How relative placement works, step by step

1

Judges score you as usual

Nothing changes on the floor. Every judge watches every dancer and gives a score from 0 to 10. Strict judges stay strict, generous judges stay generous. It won't matter.

One judge's scorecardChiara 8.5Diego 7.0Aisha 6.5Mateusz 6.0
2

Each judge's scores become their ranking

Inside each judge's scorecard, the highest score becomes that judge's #1, the next becomes #2, and so on. This puts every judge on the same scale: their own order of preference. A strict judge's 7.0 and a generous judge's 9.5 can both mean the same thing: “my favourite”.

Same scorecard, as a ranking8.5 → #17.0 → #26.5 → #36.0 → #4
3

The majority decides each place

For 1st place we ask: “does a majority of judges (e.g. 2 of 3, or 4 of 7) have someone at #1?” If not, we widen the question: “…at #2 or better? #3 or better?” The first dancer to convince a majority takes the place. That's the “Top N” you see on the leaderboard. Then we repeat for 2nd, 3rd…

Finding 1st place, 3 judgesTop 1? ✗ nobody has 2 of 3Top 2? ✓ Chiara, 2 of 3Chiara is 1st · Top 2
4

Ties have clear tie-breakers

If two dancers reach a majority at the same level, they're separated in a fixed order, and if they're truly inseparable, the placement is shared (T-4, T-4). The full order is at the bottom of this page.

Tie at Top 4, both with 2 of 3 judgesAisha: rankings 1+5+4 = 10Diego: rankings 4+2+5 = 11lower sum wins: Aisha is 4th

Try it yourself

These are real-looking scores from 3 judges for 6 dancers. Edit any score and watch the placements, the judges' personal rankings (the small #2 under each score) and the step-by-step explanation update live.

DancerJudge 1scores strictlyJudge 2scores generouslyJudge 3scores mid-rangeTotal(not used for ranking)
Valentina Rojas🇨🇴 Colombiatheir #2their #4their #223.5
Mateusz Kowalski🇵🇱 Polandtheir #3their #1their #324.0
Aisha Benali🇫🇷 Francetheir #1their #5their #422.5
Diego Martín🇪🇸 Spaintheir #4their #2their #522.0
Chiara Esposito🇮🇹 Italytheir #5their #3their #123.0
Yudelka Santos🇩🇴 Dom. Republictheir #6their #6their #618.5

Results (updated live as you edit the scores)

RankDancerAdvancesConfirmed atJudge 1Judge 2Judge 3
1Valentina Rojas🇨🇴 Colombia✓ AdvancesTop 2#2#4#2
2Mateusz Kowalski🇵🇱 Poland✓ AdvancesTop 3#3#1#3
3Chiara Esposito🇮🇹 Italy✓ AdvancesTop 3#5#3#1
4Aisha Benali🇫🇷 France—Top 4#1#5#4
5Diego Martín🇪🇸 Spain—Top 4#4#2#5
6Yudelka Santos🇩🇴 Dom. Republic—Top 6#6#6#6

How each place was decided (the walkthrough dancers never get to see, until now)

1stTop 1: nobody has 2 of 3 judges yet, so we widen the window.
Top 2: Valentina has 2 of 3 judges at #2 or better. Locked in.
2ndTop 1 to 2: nobody has 2 of 3 judges yet, so we keep widening the window.
Top 3: Mateusz has 3 of 3 judges at #3 or better. (Chiara had 2, a smaller majority.) Locked in.
3rdTop 1 to 2: nobody has 2 of 3 judges yet, so we keep widening the window.
Top 3: Chiara has 2 of 3 judges at #3 or better. Locked in.
4thTop 1 to 3: nobody has 2 of 3 judges yet, so we keep widening the window.
Top 4: Aisha and Diego all have 2 of 3 judges. A tie.
Tie-breaker, the sum of judges' rankings (lower is better): Aisha = 10, Diego = 11. Aisha takes it.
5thTop 1 to 3: nobody has 2 of 3 judges yet, so we keep widening the window.
Top 4: Diego has 2 of 3 judges at #4 or better. Locked in.
6thTop 1 to 5: nobody has 2 of 3 judges yet, so we keep widening the window.
Top 6: Yudelka has 3 of 3 judges at #6 or better. Locked in.

Same scores, two systems

If we just added points
  1. 1Mateusz24.0 pts
  2. 2Valentina23.5 pts
  3. 3Chiara23.0 pts
  4. 4Aisha22.5 pts
  5. 5Diego22.0 pts
  6. 6Yudelka18.5 pts
Relative placement
  1. 1Valentina▲ +1
  2. 2Mateusz▼ -1
  3. 3Chiara·
  4. 4Aisha·
  5. 5Diego·
  6. 6Yudelka·

2 dancers placed differently under the two systems (highlighted). Every difference is a case where one judge's scoring style, not the judges' opinions, would have changed the result.

The full decision order

1 · Majority at Top N2 · Bigger majority3 · Lower sum of rankings4 · Head judge5 · Widen window6 · Shared placement

The majority needed is always a strict majority of the judges who scored you: 2 of 3, 3 of 5, 4 of 7, 6 of 10. Relative placement is the standard at WSDC events, NASDE and the World Latin Dance Cup.

Ready to see it in action? Check the published results of any qualifier.

Browse qualifiersRead the FAQ