Jump to content

Why I Love Recaps (And Occasionally Miss Ticks)


Recommended Posts

Like many of the "old-timers" (a membership of which I definitely include myself) that peruse these boards, I was involved in This Thing Of Ours through DCI's evolution away from the tick system. I will never dispute the intelligence in doing away with ticks, as what this did for the emergence of creativity, artistry & risk-taking can never be measured. However, as somebody who has loved reading the recaps since I was a little little boy, the one thing that was eliminated was the WILD swings a corps could encounter from one caption to another, from one night to the next.

One of the "historical factoids" that has become part of drum corps lore is that of the 1977 Oakland Crusaders winning percussion at prelims while not making finals. In looking through some of the recaps from the earlier DCI prelims, I've found a few more interesting little nuggets:

The 1972 Madison Scouts had a perfect Music Analysis score at prelims, but didn't make finals (14th).

The 1972 Bleu Raeders were 14th in marching, 15th in brass, and 13th in GE. The strength of a 7th place finish in percussion (combined with Garfield's 1.8 penalty) helped them get into the Night Show.

The 1973 Argonne Rebels were 17th in marching, 22nd in drums, 14th in GE, and 1st in Brass!!

The 1973 Osage Precisionaires were 39th in percussion with a 9.4 out of 20, but finished 2nd in GE percussion with a 9.1. Their GE drum score (worth half as much) almost equalled their total execution score.

The 1974 Muchachos finished 1st in GE, 3rd in drums, 7th in brass, and 18th in marching. Overnight, they jumped to 6th in marching and 2nd in brass.

The 1975 Polish Falcon Cadets finished 5th in drums and 32nd in brass. Must've made for some interesting musical ensemble rehearsals!

The 1979 Crossmen were a legit Top-6 corps that didn't make finals. It never occurred to me until reading the recap that the .4 penalty they got in prelims could've been as much of a reason for not making the Night Show as anything (.3 separated 11-13 at prelims that year). If they had been penalty-free, they would've been in.

1980 Santa Clara: People reacted to watching a show where the primary focus was taken "off the 50 yard line" in a manner I've always imagined similar to the first viewing of Stravinsky's "Rite Of Spring" in Paris, 1913. 'THIS IS THE RUINATION OF DRUM CORPS!!!" As a 13-year old kid, I thought is was wicked cool!! As all of the historians know, this was the first season in the DCI era that SCV dropped out of the Top 3, but yet, with the "destruction of the marching art" as we knew it, their 2 highest-scoring captions that year were M&MX (4th), and M&M GE (4th).

So...what does all of this mean? Not a heckuva lot, but I've found this kind of stuff interesting!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also have always liked looking over recaps. There are some UNBELIEVABLE things that happened in the old American Legion recaps of the '30s and 40s.

I've mentioned many of these in my DCW column over the decades.

Still one of my favorites was from the '72 U.S. Open, when the small class Southern Tier Grenadiers beat the eventual DCI champion Anaheim Kingsmen in musical analysis. Both classes used identical scoring protocol in those days, so it was quite an accomplishment for a "small" corps.

Edited by Northern Thunder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like many of the "old-timers" (a membership of which I definitely include myself) that peruse these boards, I was involved in This Thing Of Ours through DCI's evolution away from the tick system. I will never dispute the intelligence in doing away with ticks, as what this did for the emergence of creativity, artistry & risk-taking can never be measured. However, as somebody who has loved reading the recaps since I was a little little boy, the one thing that was eliminated was the WILD swings a corps could encounter from one caption to another, from one night to the next.

One of the "historical factoids" that has become part of drum corps lore is that of the 1977 Oakland Crusaders winning percussion at prelims while not making finals. In looking through some of the recaps from the earlier DCI prelims, I've found a few more interesting little nuggets:

The 1972 Madison Scouts had a perfect Music Analysis score at prelims, but didn't make finals (14th).

The 1972 Bleu Raeders were 14th in marching, 15th in brass, and 13th in GE. The strength of a 7th place finish in percussion (combined with Garfield's 1.8 penalty) helped them get into the Night Show.

The 1973 Argonne Rebels were 17th in marching, 22nd in drums, 14th in GE, and 1st in Brass!!

The 1973 Osage Precisionaires were 39th in percussion with a 9.4 out of 20, but finished 2nd in GE percussion with a 9.1. Their GE drum score (worth half as much) almost equalled their total execution score.

The 1974 Muchachos finished 1st in GE, 3rd in drums, 7th in brass, and 18th in marching. Overnight, they jumped to 6th in marching and 2nd in brass.

The 1975 Polish Falcon Cadets finished 5th in drums and 32nd in brass. Must've made for some interesting musical ensemble rehearsals!

The 1979 Crossmen were a legit Top-6 corps that didn't make finals. It never occurred to me until reading the recap that the .4 penalty they got in prelims could've been as much of a reason for not making the Night Show as anything (.3 separated 11-13 at prelims that year). If they had been penalty-free, they would've been in.

1980 Santa Clara: People reacted to watching a show where the primary focus was taken "off the 50 yard line" in a manner I've always imagined similar to the first viewing of Stravinsky's "Rite Of Spring" in Paris, 1913. 'THIS IS THE RUINATION OF DRUM CORPS!!!" As a 13-year old kid, I thought is was wicked cool!! As all of the historians know, this was the first season in the DCI era that SCV dropped out of the Top 3, but yet, with the "destruction of the marching art" as we knew it, their 2 highest-scoring captions that year were M&MX (4th), and M&M GE (4th).

So...what does all of this mean? Not a heckuva lot, but I've found this kind of stuff interesting!

shows ya how bad the tic system was and how random judging was and even more subjective than today.Although there still are those who believe it wasn't..lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone from this era I can see where some of this came from. What some younger folks might not realize is there were two different methods of judging and there was a brick wall betwen the two. For GE (General Effect) it was "how difficult is what you are doing and how well are you doing it". This was not a tic-able area and IMO this is (kinda) like todays system. For the other piece M&M/X (Marching and Manueving/Execution) it was catching actual screw ups and was the tic area. IOW calling the whole thing the "tic system" is misleading as only part of the judging system consisted of tics.

So how do we have such a difference in a corps:

1) Very well designed show presented very well but...... Holy #### is it dirty! False starts, blown notes, snare #2 threw in an extra beat, etc. Not enought to really throw off the show up top but that judge right in front of the marcher caught it... tic.... (IOW Osage example up top is my guess)

2) Show marched and played very well (well eXecuted) but..... (to use todays terms) show design sucked and/or just did not come across to the crowd.

3) One part of the corps is head and shoulders above or below the rest of the corps. IE: 1975 Yankee Rebels (Sr) won high drums at DCA but came in around 6th. Drum line had the talent, instruction (John Flowers) and design and had been winning high drums all season. Rest of corps was OK but just OK. Never saw Argonne but understand brass staff was top notch...

(IMO) we threw out the individual exection part of judging and just looking at the entire group.

Not advocating going back to tics but I don't see the OP as showing that the tic system is totally at fault.

Edited by JimF-LowBari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

shows ya how bad the tic system was and how random judging was and even more subjective than today.Although there still are those who believe it wasn't..lol

Having been in drumlines during the tic era I completely agree. I can remember getting ticced for things that were dead on clean - confirmed by the tape, and not getting ticced on things we knew that we f-ed up as soon as it came off our sticks.

Any type of competition that relies on the perceptions of human beings is always going to be subject the judges' fallible eyes and ears. Maybe the tic that was given for a bad snare attack that was actually clean was in reality a rifle snap that the judge heard in the background and thought it was a snare. Maybe that fuzzy roll on the left side of the tenor line that he missed was because he had a cold that night and his ear on that side was congested.

While I don't always agree with the scores/results I give major props to the judges. I think overall they do a very good job and think they get it way more right than they do wrong. Kinda like NFL refs - make a call in a split second that you think they blew but when you see it on super slo-mo you see that they got it right more often than not.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone from this era I can see where some of this came from. What some younger folks might not realize is there were two different methods of judging and there was a brick wall betwen the two. For GE (General Effect) it was "how difficult is what you are doing and how well are you doing it". This was not a tic-able area and IMO this is (kinda) like todays system. For the other piece M&M/X (Marching and Manueving/Execution) it was catching actual screw ups and was the tic area. IOW calling the whole thing the "tic system" is misleading as only part of the judging system consisted of tics.

So how do we have such a difference in a corps:

1) Very well designed show presented very well but...... Holy #### is it dirty! False starts, blown notes, snare #2 threw in an extra beat, etc. Not enought to really throw off the show up top but that judge right in front of the marcher caught it... tic.... (IOW Osage example up top is my guess)

2) Show marched and played very well (well eXecuted) but..... (to use todays terms) show design sucked and/or just did not come across to the crowd.

3) One part of the corps is head and shoulders above or below the rest of the corps. IE: 1975 Yankee Rebels (Sr) won high drums at DCA but came in around 6th. Drum line had the talent, instruction (John Flowers) and design and had been winning high drums all season. Rest of corps was OK but just OK. Never saw Argonne but understand brass staff was top notch...

(IMO) we threw out the individual exection part of judging and just looking at the entire group.

Not advocating going back to tics but I don't see the OP as showing that the tic system is totally at fault.

See thats the point. We all believed that the tic system was actually looking at mistakes and wasn't subjective. I was not that at all. It was just as subjective and back in the day judges had alot less accountability. Judges were at times very arrogant ( ok today too...lol ) BUT if you questioned them all you got was the famous " I called it like I saw it" ughhhhhhhhhhh that doesn't fly now. I marched, taught and even slightly judged under both and although todays still has many flaws it was way worse then. IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all of us believed tic system wasn't subjective. There was more than one Sr circuit during my time and the level of what was tic'able varied a lot. DCA was very hard on execution and RCA would pass over a lot of things that DCA would hit. Comparing placings of corps that did both circuits you can tell who concentrated on execution (corps that wanted to break into DCA IOW). To put it in a sound bite, at what point did something less than perfect be considered a "mistake". For example is a slight hesitation before a move a mistake/tic or not? How much hesitation should there be before it is a mistake/tic. Then there are those (in)famous company fronts BITD. How many inches should someone be off before.... 'tic'.... I was told if judges were 100% hard nosed, then even the best corps would be zeroed out in execution, especially marching....

My point was there could be explanations besides "tic system sucked" for the differences. Especially when GE and X rankings were very different.

PS - don't understand "that's the point" as I wasn't talking about tic system being subjective.

Edited by JimF-LowBari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all of us believed tic system wasn't subjective. There was more than one Sr circuit during my time and the level of what was tic'able varied a lot. DCA was very hard on execution and RCA would pass over a lot of things that DCA would hit. Comparing placings of corps that did both circuits you can tell who concentrated on execution (corps that wanted to break into DCA IOW). To put it in a sound bite, at what point did something less than perfect be considered a "mistake". For example is a slight hesitation before a move a mistake/tic or not? How much hesitation should there be before it is a mistake/tic. Then there are those (in)famous company fronts BITD. How many inches should someone be off before.... 'tic'.... I was told if judges were 100% hard nosed, then even the best corps would be zeroed out in execution, especially marching....

My point was there could be explanations besides "tic system sucked" for the differences. Especially when GE and X rankings were very different.

PS - don't understand "that's the point" as I wasn't talking about tic system being subjective.

My point was that bitd the randomness and many of the reasons for varied placements night to night. Very little accountability. Now with that said the tic system as you actually did point out as far as when does something become a mistake thats another point the " mistake " so to speak was also subjective and that goes for execution captions also.When it really comes down to it you mentioned RCA as well as DCA well by a DCI standard DCA most certainly looks like the easier judged circuit. so it's ALL subjective..lol

YES youare right though, there can and are other reasons but the tic system DID add to alot of confusion, randomness, no accountability , IMO and a total lack of consistency I also wouldnt agree about the GE areas not being " Tickable, so to speak ) often judging a GE caption , because an effect doesn't work many times because of lack of technique, execution of something can certainly make or break an effect.

Edited by GUARDLING
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK understand better now. If the OP had been about differences night to night or different judges I would have agreed. LOL was looking at an old post the other night and saw one of our least favorite horn judges being mentioned. Forget if we didn't like how he concentrated on one area and ignored others or just seemed to judge non-top 10 corps harder. "xxx is on tonight, watch the releases/blend/<whatever it was>".

As for GE, yes if marched bad enough it shows up in the sheets. I just didn't want younger people to get the idea that GE scores were based on tic marks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really happy to see the lively discussion that has arisen from my OP. On its surface, I was simply musing about score disparity that occurred once upon a time that never occurs anymore, and the most logical explanation would be how the execution judges plied their craft. In the Stone Age, and execution judge's tools of the trade were simply a judging sheet, a clipboard, and a pen. No tape recorders for the tick judges. In many cases (I'm not sure how frequently - if there are any Old Tyme judges in the audience, they might be able to shed some light on this), the tick was put on the sheet without explanation, simply a tick. However, I've also seen X sheets from BITD where the judge would specify the offense, i.e., "Tenor, roll release, drum solo." If an instructor had a taste for conspiracy theory, it would be easy to say, "15 more ticks than last night? Judge so-and-so just had it in for us tonight!"

With evolution came the tape recorder, and more accountability. Judges could then describe the nature of the tick in real time, but the question of what was acceptable and what was a tick never really went away. Back in the '80s, I taught with some former judges who judged during the tick era, and more than once, I listened to stories about what they would call "D&R Shows", with "D&R" standing for "Dump & Run". Without wanting to read into such a description, it's hard not to read into such a description.

I also remember having a conversation with an old DCA judge who judged back in the '70s, when DCA corps tended to play with a certain....shall we say.....enthusiasm. I asked him about how he would evaluate that approach, and his response was, "Sometimes, it gets so loud that you just let the ticks go right on by."

As with the modern system, it would be impossible for a judge to not allow personal taste or school of technical thought to not creep into an evaluation, even on a subconscious level. Method of attack, method of release, and all of the other basics of technique could be interpreted very differently from Judge A to Judge B.....just like they can be today.

However...because the OP was simply about wild swings in scores from night to night, let me give you one more that DIDN'T involve ticks....

1973 DCI Prelims

Hawthorne Muchachos

GE M&M - 9.1 (5th)

GE Perc - 9.1 (2nd)

GE Brass - 9.1 (8th)

Total GE - 27.3 (3rd)

1973 DCI Finals

GE M&M - 8.9 (8th)

GE Perc - 8.1 (7th)

GE Brass - 8.7 (8th)

Total GE - 25.7 (9th)

1.6 lost in total GE overnight (1 point in percussion alone). A big reason why they dropped from 5th overall in prelims to 8th in finals.

As I said in my OP: What does it all mean? Not a heckuva lot. However, it does make for interesting discussion!

Edited by doublc
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...