JUDGE ANALYSIS
Lakeview
Flight II - MCBA State Championship Preliminary Contest · Oct 31, 2026 · Flight II
THE PANEL AT A GLANCE
Historical panel outlook: Generous
Factoring in the judges' histories with Lakeview, the panel averages +1.159 percentage points versus this band's other-judge benchmarks.
7 of 9 assigned judges have comparable history.
Provisional: some judges have limited or missing history.
Each judge counts once, with equal weight, using the overall-history column below. Missing history is excluded, not treated as Fair. This is a historical outlook, not a predicted score.The assigned panel's historical scoring tendencies towards this band. Overall uses all categories; the category column uses only the category listed under that judge.
| Judge / assigned category | Historical vs band — overall | Historical vs band — category |
|---|---|---|
| Boswell, B.Percussion | Not enough comparable history 0 matched scores · 0 competitions | Not enough comparable history 0 matched scores · 0 competitions |
| Burgan, J.Visual - Individual | Historically Strict -1.696 percentage points5 matched scores · 5 competitions | Historically Strict -3.432 percentage points4 matched scores · 4 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. |
| Cross, StephenGeneral Effect - Music | Historically Fair +0.875 percentage points2 matched scores · 2 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. | Historically Strict -1.250 percentage points1 matched scores · 1 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. |
| Prout, B.Penalty | Not enough comparable history 0 matched scores · 0 competitions | Not enough comparable history 0 matched scores · 0 competitions |
| Robinson, M.Auxiliary | Historically Generous +3.167 percentage points2 matched scores · 2 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. | Historically Generous +1.333 percentage points1 matched scores · 1 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. |
| Stice, MarkMusic - Individual | Historically Generous +1.198 percentage points4 matched scores · 4 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. | Historically Generous +2.222 percentage points3 matched scores · 3 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. |
| Collins, S.Visual - Ensemble | Historically Generous +8.125 percentage points1 matched scores · 1 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. | Historically Generous +8.125 percentage points1 matched scores · 1 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. |
| McGarr, P.Music - Ensemble | Historically Strict -3.250 percentage points1 matched scores · 1 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. | Historically Strict -3.250 percentage points1 matched scores · 1 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. |
| Walsh, D.General Effect - Visual | Historically Fair -0.306 percentage points3 matched scores · 3 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. | Historically Strict -2.250 percentage points1 matched scores · 1 competitions Small sample: fewer than five matched scores or two competitions. |
Each score is compared with this band's other-judge average for the same season, flight, category, measure, and maximum at other competitions. Differences are normalized to percentage points of the measure's maximum. Generous means above +1; Strict means below −1; Fair means within ±1. Missing comparable history receives no label.
Only scored performances before this competition's date and no later than today are used, across all prior seasons. This competition and later results cannot influence its analysis. Overall-only live totals, exhibitions, penalties, and unattributed scores are excluded. A judge covering multiple categories appears once per assignment. Judge links open the full historical comparison page.
These are historical tendencies, not predicted scores or a determination of fairness. Show development, contest conditions, and small samples can affect the comparison.