Tim K Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Obviously in all years the show with the highest score is the champion, but there are some shows that have a certain "it" to it, something that can't be defined as much as felt. Star in 1991 has been mentioned. There were brilliant moments in the show, no doubt, and overall it was a masterpiece, but it also had a certain feel to it. The same holds true with many other great championship shows: Crown in 2013, Cadets 2011, Phantom 2008, SCV 1989. However, championships are but one night. The shows that had this feel also made noise throughout the season, even when they did not place first. In 2013 I did not see Crown until Allentown and while they placed second that night, it was pretty obvious it would not be second the following week. For me, it's the music first and foremost. At this point I listen to the MP3 downloads of corps long before I see them live or watch Fan Network, with the exception of the corps that compete in New England in late June/early July. The music has to draw me into the show. I want to see the emotion of the musical performers--brass that is immersed in the show, percussion with both grace and attitude. I want a busy front ensemble. If the music does not captivate me, the greatest design in the world will be a waste. I want a clean show. Equipment does not fall to the ground. If there's dance moves involved, don't miss a step. Championship shows can use props and electronics, but if the props and electronics are not used, the show still has merit. If you were at the Cadets show in 2012 at Metlife Stadium where props and electronics were not used due to safety concerns after a thunderstorm (the show was not judged), each performance still had integrity. Finally for me a championship show has to reflect the personality of the corps and the marching members. I've often said that shows cannot be repeated by other corps or even the same corps years later because the corps works as a team and the personalities are crucial. BD could never do Crowns 2013 show, Crown could never do BD in 2012 or 2014. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 You had to be "that guy", huh? well thats because i wasn't here yet to say it LOL however....it means a show has been designed and performed to be a seamless, flowing body of moments, connected by great transitions. The key isn't just the big moments, but the journey to get to them...thats what sets those moments up to be so incredible 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Pretty easy concept here: the show that scores the highest on Finals night: the show where all the caption scores add up to be the highest score closest to 100 That's taking the easy way out. That's more conventional than principled thinking ( $1 to Kohlberg). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sideways Posted December 10, 2014 Author Share Posted December 10, 2014 Obviously in all years the show with the highest score is the champion, but there are some shows that have a certain "it" to it, something that can't be defined as much as felt. Star in 1991 has been mentioned. There were brilliant moments in the show, no doubt, and overall it was a masterpiece, but it also had a certain feel to it. The same holds true with many other great championship shows: Crown in 2013, Cadets 2011, Phantom 2008, SCV 1989. However, championships are but one night. The shows that had this feel also made noise throughout the season, even when they did not place first. In 2013 I did not see Crown until Allentown and while they placed second that night, it was pretty obvious it would not be second the following week. This is a good point and Santa Clara in 1999 was a perfect example. You just knew they had that show all season but it was just too difficult visually and they were not achieving at the level to put them over the top. Then they performed finals night in Madison and when they finished I don't there was any doubt in the stadium that the champion had just performed. That was the most intense and spontaneous reaction I had ever seen to a live performance. I remember turning to the people next to me and saying there is no way BD can beat that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwillis35 Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Every year is different. What Jeff Ream said is probably the closest to the "IT" factor. A seamless and logical string of events, transitions, themes, ideas, and drill, all added to great performance is likely what pushes a corps to the top. We've had years where the top 3, top 5 have been weaker. There have been years where performance alone was the real distinction between the best corps. There have been years where seamless design was not strong. The advent of the slice, splice, bop, chop, and copy/edit/paste era in the mid 1990s caused a lot of corps to copy others who were applying gobs of demand (for the sake of demand) and drill that changed formations faster than you could actually see the formation. There was a sense at that time that flash, motion, and demand, with short, choppy musical phrases (which allowed performers to move faster and play less) was the way to go. There have been years where the best designed shows have been in the top 5, with the best performed of those winning. In most cases this is what we want, providing those well-designed shows do have box 5 demand and logical flow. I often refer to Star of Indiana 1991 as one of those shows that had everything. Great and powerful theme, logical flow, seamless transitions, amazing performance levels...Oh, and it had a George Zingali drill. It's almost unfair that anyone had to compete against that. So was it one thing that put them over the hump? No. It was everything. Not that this is always true, but if you're on staff somewhere and you think to yourself "we just need that one thing to put us over the hump," then, to me, you need more than ONE thing. The one exception I can think of in this regard is Cavaliers 2010. In my opinion, 2010 was a weak design year. Blue Devils were good and deserved to win, but not the best overall designed show, although I loved the mirrors personally. But after BD, Cavies, Bluecoats, Crown, Cadets, SCV, Phantom, etc. all had some major design flaws. MAJOR! What pushed the Cavaliers to 2nd place was the "This is my rifle" segment. They performed well, but no better than Bluecoats or Crown. They simply had one super-high GE moment that gave them the nod over some very mediocre shows. I'm being somewhat overly critical. All of those top 7 shows had some "moments," but the poor flow of the shows made sure that only their performance levels and demand would push them to their final placement, whatever that was. And when all else is roughly the same in performance quality and show design, as it was with the 2-5 corps, then moments like "This is My Rifle" stand out. And it was a moment in which the corps did not play their brass or march a ton of drill, but it was genius for that show. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sideways Posted December 12, 2014 Author Share Posted December 12, 2014 1997 and 2001 were very interesting years. Arguably three corps had the "it" factor but differed on their content. 1997 - BD was solid in all captions and just that much cleaner. Cadets had content up the wazoo but not quite clean enough. SCV had more of the "it" factor and maybe the best closer ever but just felt a step behind in performance. 2001 - Cavies - stellar content and of the charts GE....barely clean enough. BD was probably their cleanest corps ever and some incredible moments...others parts just felt sterile. Cadets solid in all captions and wow did this odd show work. 1997 judges awarded clean but by 2001 content and GE carried the day. Amazing what a four year swing makes in the sheets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted December 12, 2014 Share Posted December 12, 2014 SCV had more of the "it" factor and maybe the best closer ever but just felt a step behind in performance. As for their closer, I'd say not really . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted December 12, 2014 Share Posted December 12, 2014 (edited) I think we need to keep in mind that the championship show may not be the show we see on finals night. In most cases it is, but not always. While I'm sure I can think of a more contemporary example, I am reminded of 1980 with two corps that had, in my opinion "it": 27th Lancers and Blue Devils. Both had largely undefeated seasons. Both met for the first time at CYO Nationals. Blue Devils won (in my opinion it was 27th's show), but BD was on fire. 27th won at DCI East a few days later, with a performance that many believe was 27th's greatest performance. Now if you watch the Legacy DVD, neither 27th nor Blue Devils had the show of their lives. Both were good, and I still feel 27th should have won in this ever so close show, but in both cases the "it" show was not the finals performance. I suppose if I were to use more recent examples, the "it" performance for BD in 2012 would have been prelims. In 2013, Crown's finals performance was something special, but semi's had a certain feel to it and in my opinion was a less jittery show. Edited December 12, 2014 by Tim K 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTNK Posted December 12, 2014 Share Posted December 12, 2014 How about 2005 Cadets for an example? Great "moments" throughout, but tons of less flashy but just as impressive content too. I'm thinking of "Liquid," their second number (or first after the "Zone" intro). Almighty brass hit followed by a flawless Mikey Terry solo, then building to a satisfying climax, but what about all the mezzo-piano technical stuff with difficult drill at a high tempo in the first half? I think that's the kind of thing the OP is talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted December 12, 2014 Share Posted December 12, 2014 1997 and 2001 were very interesting years. Arguably three corps had the "it" factor but differed on their content. 1997 - BD was solid in all captions and just that much cleaner. Cadets had content up the wazoo but not quite clean enough. SCV had more of the "it" factor and maybe the best closer ever but just felt a step behind in performance. 2001 - Cavies - stellar content and of the charts GE....barely clean enough. BD was probably their cleanest corps ever and some incredible moments...others parts just felt sterile. Cadets solid in all captions and wow did this odd show work. 1997 judges awarded clean but by 2001 content and GE carried the day. Amazing what a four year swing makes in the sheets. A few things to always keep in mind: 1) judges are evaluating one puzzle piece of a large production, and then the scores added/averaged for a total score/rank. That is obviously well-known, but as fans seeing the entire show we often think of the entire puzzle, instead of focusing only on one piece for the entire 15 min. Obviously the GE judges look at the whole show, but even then they're a little limited in scope as to what they are focusing on. So just because we think of the bigger picture it's easy to forget that the scores/rankings of any given night are accumulated by 11 judges looking at a fairly narrow scope/piece of the performance 2) as far as clean vs GE, remember that these judges are human, and get caught up in a show just as much as we do. A lot of times the judges are also fans who want to see the corps' members rock a great show, and it's not uncommon for judges to get caught up in the emotions and excitement of a performance. I'm not saying judges think with their emotion only and make wrong calls, but that can have an effect on numbers/placement to a degree 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.