Scenario - SMALL competition: 7 judges total available at competition. Three couples on the floor have taken coaching lessons with ALL 7 judges among them. So, under your proposed rule ALL 7 judges are to be recused. Who judges?
I don't find that so simple to resolve. But I'm interested in hearing ideas.

Clary.If the rule was made that no judge will be allowed to judge their own pupils. Then they would have to make up their mind wether they want to be a teacher or a judge.
I dont think some of you guys know what goes on. One of the top coaches when it was made known he would be judging. Within a few hours he hadn't got one available hour left on his calender. When he said that he would be available, but only after the next competition . The responses was the same every time. I'll get back to you later..
The best one I ever heard was a judge who marked a couple who wasn't there. They hadn't turned up even though they were numbered in the program. Unlike Blackpool where the judges have a card with each competitor numbered in that heat. Here we do not. The judges have a blank card. So this guy popped the number they would have had down on his card Just for your information out of say nine judges to get through to the next round three ticks would probably be enough.

ThreeWiseMen,
Is there enough money in judging ballroom competitions that someone could choose to be ONLY a judge? Is there enough money in judging ballrooms competitions that enough people would choose that option so that there is a big enough pool of judges to attend competitions? Or would it mean that entry costs increase for competitors and spectators in order to support that kind of system?
If making people choose to coach or judge doesn't cost competitors more money, maybe there is a possibility for that - but, at present, I've gotta say, I'm not yet convinced.

Clary. A direct question. Do you beleive that the judging system as it is today is fair. Does the system make it easy for a crooked judge to be dishonest. I would expect you to know that only a few throught the world hold an Internation Licence to judge. My former teacher does and in a Professional World Champioship held in Austria last year she was invited to judge, which meant travelling some 12,000 miles each way. Expences paid and well looked after. Not one of the competitors had ever had a lesson from her.
You are aware that in most ordinary competitions. The travell for the judges plus other expences are out of their own pocket. So ask yourself. Why would they bother to go. The answer is fairly obvious isn't it
I say again . No judge should be allowed to judge his or her own pupils.
One more thing. How does a judge live with themselves after not marking a couple who should be assured of a place. Easy. They dont even look at them. Its as if they are not on the floor at all. as the couple pass, they the judges looks the other way. They literally do not see how well this couple may be dancing compared to the others.

Three Wise Men,
Whoops, my last posting got away from me - sorry about that.
You had mentioned that, in your experience, judges pay their own travel and lodging expenses. I've run across competitions where the organizers DO pay for judges/scrutineers travel/lodging (and put up with some grumbling if the judges are asked to share rooms).
As to your question: Is judging always fair? Of course not - and I beleive that I wrote in an earlier post that "life isn't fair."
But I don't think that ALL judges are ALWAYS unfair just because they judge their own pupils.
What do you make of this: If a judge has taught ALL six finalists, one of them has to be first and one has to be last, and some have to be in the middle. In that instance then, you might be happy to think that they are all squabbling among themselves as to favoritism and so in the end they get what they deserve.
But in my life, ballroom judging and its imperfections just isn't going to keep me awake at night with worry.

Clary. In all these years I have never met one person who is willing to say that as it is at present and in the past the system of our judging is fair.
Are you going to be the first to say Yes I beleive it is fair.
It doesn't stop with just the judges.
Wally Fryer former top dancer told me that he and Vi used to stand at opposite ends of the floor when judging a comp where they were the sole judges. That was untill one day after judging the first round of a comp .As the recalls were being called Wally is saying to himself. How could Vi have possibly marked some of these couples. Vi Barnes at the other end of the floor was asking the same questions about Wally. When they got their heads together there were people on the floor who neither of them had marked.

I have NEVER ,in all my yrs of adjudicating, had to pay for any expenses incurred ( in the UK and abroad ).... the same was true for when I examined

I have a paper written by Harry Smith- Hampsire Reprinted from the Dance News Vol 1750. The present System of allowing the Membership qualification of a recognised Teaching Association to be accepted as that is all that is necessessary for judging a competition.This was first acepted several decades ago only as a temporary measure. ( Thats intersting )
Over the years i have found that many competition coaches and judges may only have an imprecise concept of what the Technique of Ballroom Dancing really embraces.

On what do you base that assumption ??

ONLY a FEW hold a Licence ?? and what would that licence be ??..Where do you get this info from??

The current requirements for adjudicating are well established ,and if you are refering to Championship events, then a Fellowship in the div. one is to judge, is ALL that is needed, and there are THOUSANDS of qualified people world wide that hold that qualif... normally past Champions ( and past ranked dancers ), at the world class events,are chosen , but not necessarly so...

A Members is acceptable for many other style comps (Local, state etc).. and even in some cases, the Assoc. level..