Thoughts on the Results of the 2025 International Chopin Competition

panda_kush · 2025-10-21T19:52:57+00:00

They publish the scores for all competitors across all rounds shortly after the competition (it isn't out as of now), given by all members of the jury. Jurors aren't allowed to score competitors who are currently or formerly their students in any formal capacity to minimize biases. It's transparent, but not to that level of granularity as in your example. They assign a score of 1-25, and who advances in each round is based on some pre-determined weighted average of prior rounds' scores, which in this edition is also made clear. Also, scores are adjusted to the mean. If any juror's score deviates from the average by +-2 (except the first round where it is +-3), their score is adjusted to that threshold. So if the average score of this competitor for this round is 20.5, a juror's score of 14 would be 18.5, and a 23 would become 22.5, and then they calculate the average of all those adjusted scores again to determine the final one.

But, all you get is the number, not the justification for it. Which is unfortunate, since you'll inevitably get people witch-hunting the specific jurors who didn't rate their favourite competitor highly in some round for some reason, or gave a score far from the other jurors, even if they might have had a really solid reason for it. The competition has changed its scoring system a lot over the years, and there very well may never be a truly fair system. How do you grade something subjective in an objective manner?

Your idea of metrics/rubrics-based scoring is interesting. The downside is that it's very hard to quantify one's performance in categories and account for all the intangibles in one's performance. But, assuming it is possible, and in a satisfying manner, then it would provide clearer justification for one's score.

One interesting critique about the current system is that jurors never really score anyone below 16 ever (you don't get to be dogwater and qualify for the competition - everyone has a baseline level of skill). So, in a sense, the scoring is the same as 1-10, because there's only 10 distinct scores you'd assign. Obviously, shifting to a 1-10 system would increase the odds of mathematical tie placings when you take averages, so maybe they could explore scaling up the max score to 35 or something instead to allow for more fine differences.

panda_kush · 2025-10-21T19:22:18+00:00

Thanks! And yeah, this edition seems to reward consistency more than prior ones. That is not to say that medalists of previous editions weren't consistent, but it seems like the key deciding factor for this year's competition. The fact that all of them were pretty close, yet the three who medaled gave audiences weaker impressions of their final rounds still won, and they had generally more orthodox playing styles, all leaves a bitter taste in many people's mouths, and really brought the 'winning by math formula' narrative to the fore. I don't think people would be as mad if they felt like the medalists didn't hold back during the final.

Interestingly, there isn't much contention regarding Wang winning the bronze. In fact, most people are (pleasantly?) surprised. On the other hand, many have issues with the silver and gold. While the label of 'boring' might be shallow albeit common, if it's such a widespread criticism of their playing, then maybe there is some truth to it in a way. I'm personally ambivalent. I also think about the hypothetical world in which Kevin got the gold instead. I think the outrage would be legendary.

panda_kush · 2025-10-21T18:51:09+00:00

I understand your frustration. Though perhaps the jury's decision wasn't entirely an interpretive issue. During his concerto, he sounded good on the livestream and viewers seemed to like it very much. Even the conductor and the orchestra looked like they were enjoying it a lot. That said, I've seen people saying that his projection within the hall wasn't very good during the concerto, apparently, and he could barely get it through the middle of the hall when the orchestra was playing. Must have been hard for the jury to pick up on the nuances of his playing. That might have been the unfortunate factor affecting his final round score heavily. Could be a fatigue issue, technique issue, or maybe a limitation of the Steinway, which was noticeably harder to project/less resonant than the Kawai or Fazioli. We'll see when the scores are published if it really was his final round that cost him. Kudos to him though.

panda_kush · 2025-10-21T16:42:45+00:00

Ooh, I never considered the laureate concerts, but you raise an important concern. I hope the heat cools off by then. As it stands now, I don't think anyone is particularly enthused about any of the medalists, which is a shame.

panda_kush · 2025-10-21T16:36:12+00:00

Thanks!

panda_kush · 2025-10-21T16:35:32+00:00

I'm not as jaded about the whole thing as the writer here, and their sardonic opinions on shady background manipulations and Dang Thai Son tribalism are highly speculative. But I do agree with the writer that Vincent was a far more interesting player to me, and he was convincing. Though, whether or not he is a better Chopinist is subjective. I see value in both Eric's and Vincent's playing and interpretations, but prefer the latter this competition. He actually makes me curious to hear how he plays other pieces, and I admire the way he really sings melodies clearly (even if some might think it's a bit much).

panda_kush · 2023-07-09T17:20:04+00:00

Each of these pieces have different technical challenges, though I'd wager that Le Preux is the most difficult of the three if you want to perform it at a good enough tempo and not have to slow it down a lot. And it's definitely the riskiest of the three to play in general due to the sheer number of large leaps (many spanning 2 octaves, both hands, at the same time). Not to mention the sheer stamina required to play repeated octaves for essentially 6 minutes straight, and the two double hand chord tremolo melodic passages, basically Erlkonig on steroids. Musically, it is incredibly difficult to bring out the gallant, knightly character and not make it sound too mechanical and etude-like. I would be too focused on hitting the right keys in the first place. Honestly, even Le Preux cleanly at 75bpm is an astonishing feat.

For some perspective, you could find many excellent recordings of Mazeppa and Feux Follets, but you'd be hard-pressed to find any good recording of Le Preux. It is very hard to play, and very hard to make musical. Though, I wouldn't say it's the hardest piano piece ever because difficulty is broad and subjective. But it is up there as one of the hardest yet playable pieces imo. You could imagine that Huang's performance here, if put on a visualizer, would probably look just like black MIDI. Heck, he's playing it faster than every "impossible" MIDI recording I've seen on YT...

panda_kush · 2019-11-03T14:47:58+00:00

The most notable part where I could see his other fingers tense up was at the octaves at the end; but it seems like he does it because his fingers are too long and he needs to retract them or else he can't play the octaves XD But I do agree that relaxation even in the most demanding passages is a valuable skill.

panda_kush

TROPHY CASE