justice in judgement.

first thing first.. this is a topic on the judges.. so please stick to it.. feel free to post ur views as long as its related to the post..kindly do not bring in ur favourites... and kindly do not go around bashing those u dont like... a healthy debate is welcome.. 😊

since the first episode of this season, the judging in jhalak has raised many questions.... and not just questions from the viewers or supporters, but from the contestants themselves.. a few instances are

in the second week, all the girls complained that the judges were being very lenient in marking the boys and had higher scales for girls..to which the "teen deviyaan", replied that because the girls r already good, they felt they could do better..

later, in one of the episodes, after mohinder amarnath danced, juhi asked what is the criteria for judging.. hard steps? or clean performance?
to which saroj replied that even if it is a simple performance, keep it clean and neat..lifts r not so important.. within the next 2 weeks, she gives karan singh grover a 6, only because she felt the lifts were nothing great..

anand raj anand, went on to say in 1 episode that the judges have to be clear in what they want, because they r confused, and confuse the audience further..
hard kaur also echoed similar sentiments where she and savio said on camera that the judges give brilliant comments, but they never translate into brilliant marks... and i couldnt help but notice that they got their first 30 only after that confrontation..till then, despite incorporating the same brilliance and novelty in their performance, they did not cross 27..

moving on, the final blow up was on the wild card entry round where toby and bhagyashree heaped alligations on the judgement, leading to a major blow up from the judges..

so, are all these people wrong.. and the complainers r not people who are sore about getting low marks..its people like hard kaur, genuine good performers, who get goos scores.. in fact, the lowest scorers, r yet to utter a single word of complaint, despite having the right to do so on many occassions but lets not go there.. 😃

this shows that there have been discrepancies in the judgement.. its not always been fair.. there are a few reasons for it that i see..
1) the all ladies panel.. bad idea.. in any panel, u always have members of both genders.. this is the basic requirement... ladies tend to get swayed by emotions and judge based on that.. we have seen examples of that in jhalak also..

2) these 3 judges form opinions on contestants, which is a taboo for any judge.. a judge should see the performance, and judge on that basis and not see who is the best dancer, who is the person who has no connection with dancing, who is the most laid back etc.. their criteria has to be, how were the dances on that particular day, and how did the person X, fair against the rest... period..

3) and finally, the most important factor which i feel has contributed to the judging this year.. out of the 3, only 2 are dancers, as in people in the dance profession.. the other 2 are "choreographers".. hence, they concentrate more on the choreographer, and the choreography.. as a result, a viewer feels on many occassions that, the judgement has been made more, on the basis of the choreography, than the contestants actual performance.. this may not be really wrong, if it were not for the fact that this is dancing with the "stars". not dancing with the "choreographer", or the choreography.. deducting marks for bad choreography is understandable, because until the choreography is bang on, the contestant cannot showcase his dance.. but awarding marks for the concept of the act, or the choreographers work in it, is not really done...the only criteria is how far has the choreography lived upto the particular theme's reqquirement, and how well has the contestant performed on it.
it might have been better if the judging panel had 1 choreographer and 1 dancer..

cant think o9f anything else right now.. 😆 .. ur welcome to add anything else.. and sorry for the long post... it was too late by the time i realized the length, and now, im not upto editing it. 😆 😆

Agree to you as far as concept is concerned, but differ you in some. I think if choreography is to be pinalized for being shoddy so should be the appriciation both in words and marks for good work. Also a good choreography is good only if carried of well. I agree to the fact that some of the contestants have made complaints, but then all the answers are related to a context, see if a performance is simple and clean, it should get more marks than a performance that is not that clean but a performance that is tough should get more marks than an easy performance, so the first step is to have a clean performance and second is bring in as much level of difficulty that can be carried off without the performance suffering. Also it has been seen in almost every field the judgement is not totally unbiased a person who is giving good performance day in and day out, if some day goes bad for him, it has got much more chances of being less penalised than a person who is not usually performing and that holds true in every field, on the other hand if a person who is percieved to be weak, if he performs exceptionally, he tends to get much more appriciation than one who is percieved strong, so this is something which is bound to happen.

Originally posted by: kaushikbasu

I think if choreography is to be pinalized for being shoddy so should be the appriciation both in words and marks for good work. Also a good choreography is good only if carried of well.


appreciate ur POV a good choreography deserves appreciation only based on the performance of the contestant.. also, if the performer is dancing alone, then the onus of performing well, falls on him..however, with the concept in jhalak, a stalwart performance from the choreographer can easily sway the attention away from the contestant, and influence the judgement.


on the other hand if a person who is percieved to be weak, if he performs exceptionally, he tends to get much more appriciation than one who is percieved strong, so this is something which is bound to happen.

perception is a luxury awarded to a viewer.. what we see, and how we perceive, and what actually is the truth, are 3 different variables... the luxury of judging based on perception is not something a judge can expect.