Third Section

         BANDS 2015 2016 2017 Total Position
Stourport on Severn 9.5ap 2 6 17.5 1
Ifton Colliery 1 15 2 18 2=
Rolls Royce (Derby) 4 13 1 18 2=
Shirland Welfare 9.5av 9ar 3 21.5 4
Cubbington Silver 9.5av 9ap 5 23.5 5
Trentham Brass 5 11 9 25 6
Wellington Telford 12 10 4 26 7
Arrow Valley 8 9 10 27 8
Resdev Market Rasen 11 6 11 28 9
Towcester Studio 10 12 8 30 10
Audley Brass 9.5av 9ap 12 30.5 11
Brackley & District 9.5av 9ar 13 31.5 12
Matlock 9 16 7 32 13
Amington 9.5ar 7 16 32.5 14=
Long Eaton 9.5av 9ar 14 32.5 14=
City of Birmingham 7 8 18 33 16=
Stamford Brass 13 5 15 33 16=
Melton 17 3 17 37 18
No.of Bands (Playing) 18 17 18    
Average Position 9.5 9 9.5    
No.of Bands (Prog) 18 17 18    

NOTE – (*) – Band did not play at the Contest


Please note that in accordance with the Grading Rules of the National Brass Band Championships of Great Britain, the 2017/18 Gradings for the Third Section are produced in the Table above. Accordingly –


are promoted to the Second Section from the 1st January 2018



are to be relegated to the Fourth Section from the 1st January 2018


As Grading Rule (r) states, any band who has a complaint under the grading rules has the right of appeal to the Regional Administration. Any such appeal must be submitted to the Regional Secretary, in writing, by 21st April 2017


Yours sincerely


Lesley Bentley

21 Gables Lea, Sutton Bonington, Leicestershire LE12 5NW

Regional Secretary – 077866 04552



7 thoughts on “Third Section

  1. Looking at these results the grading system becomes a nonsense. To my mind the reason for a grading system is that bands compete against bands of a similar standard, therefore to demote a band that has finished 4th in the third section down to play against bands in the fourth section is ridulous. They have proved, this year, that they are of a superior standard on the day to 11 third section bands. How can it be justified that they should be relegated. The old, and much fairer, system of relegating the last two bands and promoting the top two bands each year should be re-instated. Dai Francis South Wales Wales

    • Thanks for the feedback Dai,
      The grading system is not controlled by the Area Committee, but nationally, so the Area Committee have no control over this method of promotion and demotion.
      I believe that in a survey undertaken by the British Federation a few years ago, bands were asked about this. The overwhelming majority voted to retain the 3 year average method currently in use

  2. Can anyone please let us know why the grading tables haven’t been updated to reflect the pre contest standing?

    • As stated elsewhere on this site, I am not a part of the MABBC committee & I can only load the infromation that I am given. This site contains the most up to date grading tables that I have been given by the committee.
      Ordinarily, the tables are accurate as I am passed them post contest and post appeals, however I understand that soem bands were re-graded AFTER the tables were published. I have not received any ammended tables from the committee.
      Please pass any correspondance to the organising committee via the contact pages or via your bad secretary

  3. I don’t understand why last years extra promotions to reduce the size of the fourth section are this year being cancelled out by the relegations?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s