The Top Half/Bot Half System Sucks

[tastiestbiscuit123]

After having it at the State level for two years, the UIL implemented the Top Half/Bot Half system at the Area level last year, and it is the dumbest thing to ever happen to Texas High School Marching Band. Not only does it partially publicly announce Prelims results when those are supposed to stay confidential until the conclusion of the contest, but it makes it nearly impossible for bands to jump what I call "the barrier:" this invisible wall separating the top half bands from the bottom half that very few manage to overcome. Nowadays, almost every single competition uses the Top Half/Bot Half System, even Previews and Invitationals, and it has killed the joy of contest for me. In the past, I would eagerly wait to see which bands made it to the finals and blew the stadium away, jumping four or even five places, or even moving up just a few, passing into the threshold for State. But now? When a band jumps, it must be one of their undeniably best performances. The band needs to jump at least three places, no more 7th to 6th or 6th to 5th, and no more 5th to 6th or 6th to 7th, either. Now, these falling bands also change three or four places. I only pay attention to Prelims now, and then I stop, because the results won't change dramatically like they used to. It's a cancer, and it needs to be cut off at the source.

For proof, let's look at some statistics. Before the addition of the official barrier, at the Area level, in 2021, out of the 33 Area contests, 16 saw bands pass the 'barrier' between Prelims and Finals (of the other 17, 4 only had a Prelims round, 6 had a 7-band Final, and 7 did not see a band pass the barrier). 42 bands passed the barrier, with 21 moving up and 21 moving down, meaning that some areas had more than 2 bands pass. The biggest jumps were in 4A-E (down, Pearsall from 4th to 11th) and 6A-G (up, Edinburg North from 8th to 2nd).

In 2022, out of the 34 Area contests, 16 saw bands pass the 'barrier' between Prelims and Finals (of the other 18, 6 only had a Prelims round, 7 had a 7-band Final, and 5 did not see a band pass the barrier). 42 bands passed the barrier, with 21 moving up and 21 moving down, meaning that some areas had more than 2 bands pass (3A-E had 6, 3 up and 3 down). The biggest jumps were in 3A-D (down, Troy from 1st to 9th) and 3A-E (Lyford, from 11th to 3rd).

In 2023, out of the 34 Area contests, 14 saw bands pass the 'barrier' between Prelims and Finals (of the other 20, 2 only had a Prelims round, 7 had a 7-band Final, and 11 did not see a band pass the barrier). 34 bands passed the barrier, with 17 moving up and 17 moving down, meaning that some areas had more than 2 bands pass. The biggest jumps were 3A-E (down, Jourdanton from 3rd to 9th) and 5A-G (up, Brownsville Lopez from 12th to 4th).

And in 2024? The year this system was forced upon the masses of the bands? Out of the 33 Area contests, THREE saw bands pass the barrier between Prelims and Finals (of the other THIRTY, 4 only had a Prelims round—3 due to weather and 1 due to the number of bands present—6 had a 7-band final, and the other TWENTY AREAS did not see a SINGLE band pass the barrier). 6 bands passed the barrier, with 3 moving up and 3 moving down, meaning no area saw more than 2 bands pass. These areas were 3A-E, 4A-E, and 5A-C. The SMALLEST jumps were 4A-E (down, Grulla from 5th to 8th) and 3A-E/5A-C (up, Santa Gertrudis from 6th to 3rd and Lakeview Centennial from 7th to 4th, respectively). In the past, bands used to jump from State Alternate to State Qualifier by one place and vice versa—no more. The smallest jumps across the barrier were by 3 places, not 1 or 2 like in the past.

The State lineup is no longer decided in Finals; it's decided in Prelims. Bands no longer get a 'second chance.' Those bottom bands are just exhibitions at this point, wasting their time, money, and energy on the false hope of advancing. It's robbing those kids of a chance to play in the dome when they may rightfully deserve it.

Also, why did the UIL decide this was a successful way of running the contest? It's not like it's worked at the State level, either.

The Top Half/Bot Half system was implemented at the State level in 2022, and we can see the same trend:

In 2017, years before the creation of the barrier, out of the 4 State contests, 2 saw bands pass the 'barrier' between Prelims and Finals (of the other 2, both had a 7-band Final). 4 bands passed the barrier, with 2 moving up and 2 moving down. The biggest jumps were in 5A (down, Prosper from 3rd to 7th; up, Mesquite Poteet from 8th to 5th).

In 2018, out of the 3 State contests, 2 saw bands pass the 'barrier' between Prelims and Finals (of the other 1, it had a 7-band Final). 4 bands passed the barrier, with 2 moving up and 2 moving down. The biggest jumps were in 4A (down, Fulshear from 4th to 10th) and 6A (up, Leander from 8th to 5th).

In 2019, out of the 3 State contests, 2 saw bands pass the 'barrier' between Prelims and Finals (of the other 1, it had a 7-band Final). 6 bands passed the barrier, with 3 moving up and 3 moving down, meaning one contest had more than 2 bands pass. The biggest jumps were in 5A (down, Lone Star from 6th to 12th) and 3A (up, White Oak from 10th to 4th).

In 2021, out of the 6 State contests, 3 saw bands pass the 'barrier' between Prelims and Finals (of the other 3, 2 had a 7-band Final, and 1 did not see a band pass the barrier—the only instance of this in all 4 years). 6 bands passed the barrier, with 3 moving up and 3 moving down. The biggest jumps were in 3A (down, Grandview from 5th to 10th) and 3A/6A (up, Atlanta from 8th to 4th and Marcus from 7th to 3rd, respectively).

And in 2022? The year the UIL introduced the system to the League? Out of the 3 State contests, NONE saw a SINGLE band pass the barrier between Prelims and Finals (1 had a 7-band Final).

In 2023? Out of the 6 State contests, NONE saw a SINGLE band pass the barrier between Prelims and Finals (2 had a 7-band Final).

In 2024? Out of the 6 State contests, ONE saw bands pass the barrier between Prelims and Finals (2 had a 7-band Final). This was 6A, and it saw Pearland and Coppell switch places between 7th and 8th.

In the four State years that had both Prelims and Finals rounds preceding the creation of the Top Half/Bot Half system, out of 10 eligible contests, 1 did not see a band pass the barrier. In the three State Contests since its creation, out of 10 eligible contests, 1 DID SEE bands pass the barrier. This should not happen. This system also promotes bias from judges and spectators. They may think they're free of bias, and some judges do have their rankings spread out throughout all finalist bands, but almost every single one ranks the bands in their respective halves (we can clearly see this, as there is VERY MINIMAL switching). Additionally, spectators used to be incentivized to stay and watch the entire Finals round to see the mix of bands spread throughout. Now, unless you're someone who is explicitly there to watch every band, or your child's band is performing, the seats are empty for the first half of Finals compared to the second half. The point of performing a marching show is to entertain the crowd, not impress the judges. When there is no crowd to entertain because you've been purposefully separated from the better bands, what is the purpose of marching band then? What do you think that does to a child? To think 'We're good, but not good enough. No one wants to watch us because we're not like them.' Some may take the challenge and work to improve the following year, but most will be less drawn to band and performing, comparing themselves negatively to others, thinking they only get rewarded with attention if they're the best, not if they tried their hardest and clearly earned it. I'm not preaching for a 'participation trophy' system, THESE KIDS CLEARLY EARNED THEIR SPOT TO BE ADVANCING TO AREA FINALS AND STATE FINALS.

Additionally, bands barely move, even within their halves, anymore. Last year, in 2024, while 7 bands did move around in 3A, the biggest jump was only 2 places (Redwater from 1st to 3rd, Holliday from 6th to 8th, Clifton from 8th to 6th); only 2 bands moved in 4A, switching between 9th and 10th place; only 2 bands moved in 5A, switching between 10th and 11th place; while 7 bands did move around in 6A, the biggest jump was only 2 places (Round Rock from 11th to 13th). Out of 46 bands, only 20 moved—more than half really stayed the same? Only 4 of those 20 changed by more than 1 place? Excluding 1A and 2A, in 2017, 15 out of 20 bands moved, and the biggest shift was by 4 places (Prosper from 3rd to 7th). Excluding 2A, in 2018, 18 out of 22 bands moved, and the biggest shift was by 6 places (Fulshear from 4th to 10th). Excluding 1A, in 2019, 14 out of 22 bands moved, and the biggest shift was by 6 places (White Oak from 10th to 4th and Lone Star from 6th to 12th). Excluding 1A and 2A, in 2021, 28 out of 44 bands moved, and the biggest shift was by 5 places (Grandview from 5th to 10th). Notice that most of these shifts are from some top half band falling because their run wasn't as strong? That doesn't happen anymore, even when it should. In 2022, China Spring went from 2nd to 5th, and San Antonio Reagan went from 3rd to 6th, and in 2023, Sulphur Springs went from 2nd to 5th. In all three instances, they fell to the bottom of their half, not dipping into the bottom half, even when they would've in the past.

I don't know what the UIL claims, but the Top Half/Bot Half system was created to set up bands for failure, and it does that perfectly. At this point, there is no use in having a Finals round for either Area or State; just have a Prelims round and announce State Qualifiers and State results there. OR, we can return to the old system, when performance order was decided entirely randomly, not based on Prelims performance. We can give these kids a chance, let them believe, and allow them to put their all in that next performance, in the hope that they may make it big. The UIL needs to live up to its purpose statement, "...that such opportunities are best provided through properly conducted and equitably administered competitive activities..."

[tubapop]

This is a compelling post, and it adds to the frustration resulting from the inertia of "blue blood" band programs versus up-and-comers. The very system that enabled the current blue bloods to become blue bloods is being decimated, and the ladder is being pulled up to prevent the newer contenders from moving up. 

I can imagine the retort would be that bands that think they deserve to be in the top half need to have a lights-out prelims performance. Instead of having to kill it during finals, just kill it during prelims. But that negates the meaning of the finals and, as you pointed out, renders it an exhibition for the bottom half of bands. 

[hsbandnerd212]

6 hours ago, tastiestbiscuit123 said:

After having it at the State level for two years, the UIL implemented the Top Half/Bot Half system at the Area level last year, and it is the dumbest thing to ever happen to Texas High School Marching Band.

I have a lot of thoughts on this, but I'm just going to post some thoughts below for now and maybe I'll add more later.

Quote

Not only does it partially publicly announce Prelims results when those are supposed to stay confidential until the conclusion of the contest...

Having a prelims and finals (or also semifinals in the middle of those two, like in the case of BOA Grand Nationals) format for a marching contest already literally announces a partial amount of the preliminary results, regardless of whatever formula is used to choose the finalist bands and what order they perform in finals. I guess you could argue that you know more about what placement range the finalists landed in with top half/bottom half split for finalist performance times, but even then, that's only slightly more information for the public until after the contest is over.

Quote

In the past, I would eagerly wait to see which bands made it to the finals and blew the stadium away, jumping four or even five places, or even moving up just a few, passing into the threshold for State. But now? When a band jumps, it must be one of their undeniably best performances.

Question for you: what actually goes into making a band jump up in placements between prelims and finals? Did the band have a better performance in finals? In the case of UIL 4A/5A/6A State, was the visual individual judge at the right place at the right time to not spot certain visual errors (some of which may or may not have been present in prelims, finals, or both), and was that enough to even influence the overall score for the band? Did one music ensemble judge in prelims have a bias in focusing on specific aspects of the musical performance compared to another music ensemble judge in finals (if this isn't how this works at UIL State these days, correct me if I'm wrong), and was that enough to even influence the overall score for the band? How experienced were each of the judges overall? What about their experience with each caption/subcaption?

In my opinion, ANY of these factors in combination with each other (along with a host of numerous other factors) could be at play. In my non-expert view (just from a high school band alum and fan here), adjudicating the marching arts is trying to make something that is both objective and subjective into something that appears to be fully objective on a thin surface, but is still subjective (and objective) to a degree. Add on top of the fact that each high school marching band has a season that, for each group, include anywhere from a few to numerous contests and is filled with numerous other non-judged performances and countless rehearsals, all for one "product": a show that, by default, likely doesn't change dramatically between prelims and finals in one contest. Obviously, that has not always been reflected been reflected in the scoring in UIL contests, but that begs the question: what goes into a band's placement beyond what's on the adjudication sheet?

[tastiestbiscuit123]

19 hours ago, hsbandnerd212 said:

Having a prelims and finals (or also semifinals in the middle of those two, like in the case of BOA Grand Nationals) format for a marching contest already literally announces a partial amount of the preliminary results, regardless of whatever formula is used to choose the finalist bands and what order they perform in finals. I guess you could argue that you know more about what placement range the finalists landed in with top half/bottom half split for finalist performance times, but even then, that's only slightly more information for the public until after the contest is over.

Right, initially, these bands wouldn't know if they were 1st or 10th, but now they've got the assurance that they're 6th through 10th (I'm also ignoring BOA because there is no advancing structure like Region, Area, and State, just singular contests, and it's a national organization, not state). I can see your argument about it being just slightly more information, but I personally still feel like as little information as necessary should be shared with the public (we can, of course, agree to disagree on this matter).

19 hours ago, hsbandnerd212 said:

In my opinion, ANY of these factors in combination with each other (along with a host of numerous other factors) could be at play. In my non-expert view (just from a high school band alum and fan here), adjudicating the marching arts is trying to make something that is both objective and subjective into something that appears to be fully objective on a thin surface, but is still subjective (and objective) to a degree. Add on top of the fact that each high school marching band has a season that, for each group, include anywhere from a few to numerous contests and is filled with numerous other non-judged performances and countless rehearsals, all for one "product": a show that, by default, likely doesn't change dramatically between prelims and finals in one contest. Obviously, that has not always been reflected in the scoring in UIL contests, but that begs the question: what goes into a band's placement beyond what's on the adjudication sheet?

You are 100% correct in saying this, that judging the marching arts will never be entirely objective, and there can be differences in biases between judges. This can cause a change for a few bands, but the numbers don't lie. After the implementation of the Top Half/Bot Half system, going from 14 or 16 Areas having so many bands jump around, and quite a few by as many as 8 or 9 places, to just 3 Areas, and all 6 bands moved around by 3 or 4 places, no more and no less? And at the State level, once again, a lot of movement and, on numerous occasions, by 6 places, to only a few instances of movement, and the largest is by 2? If this had happened only once or twice at the State level, and we had gone from 14 Areas seeing significant movement to 12 or 13, or even 10, then this system could be written off as being effective, but the drastic changes, and the fact that these numbers are consistently proving the adverse affects of the Top Half/Bot Half system is not a fault of outside factors, such as the quality of a performance or a judge's place on the field, but a fault of the system itself. It causes further bias and makes the adjudication process even less objective.

I come from a band where the absence of the Top Half/Bot Half system made them who they are today. Going from 5th (top half) to 7th (bottom half) at Area made us take a step back and realize we were in a changing band world, and we had to change with it. Then, the following year, our Area Prelims run was really bad, like, really bad, but we still made finals, in the bottom half, of course. In finals, we snuck into the top half, and that year was a snowball effect that led to the State Finalists they are today, but if the system were in place, we wouldn't've made State, and that one year wouldn't've led to the mass growth that has happened since.

[TexasStrangers]

Great post and very interesting information you presented. I have attended several Area Competitions and also several State Championships and you make a valid argument but I would also point out that really hasn't been many bands who can made an argument about moving up so much. Almost every single Area/State Competition I have been you can see the gap between Bottom Half and Top Half. In fact the scoring is not even close in several instances. 

[stix]

Here’s my hot take on top and bottom half.

Let’s be honest, the top-half/bottom-half system isn’t really about fairness; it’s about optics. If true fairness and objectivity were the goal, different panels of judges would naturally reach similar results without needing a structural safeguard. But when the panels change between prelims and finals, this system doesn’t correct bias or subjectiveness, it preserves it. It keeps bands roughly where they were initially ranked, whether that first ranking was objective or not. So instead of ensuring fairer results, it ensures consistent-looking results. It’s less about improving judging integrity and more about protecting the appearance of stability.

[lost]

It’s funny to think about but the catalyst to this was Hebron losing the national title in 2015 to Broken Arrow which made BOA make the switch, which eventually trickled down across most marching bands circuits.

I won’t share my opinion on this because honestly I’m still forming my opinion since there’s huge downsides to both systems.

However….I will say I think Broken Arrow would’ve beat Hebron in any performance order that night. Hebrons semifinal performance was lights out and finals returned back to their regular albeit stellar quality, which wasn’t enough to beat a lights out performance from Broken Arrow.

I guess that’s to say there’s not really a right or wrong answer here from my opinion.

I’d probably welcome if at least the champion of the preliminary round is rewarded with at minimum not having to go on first.