Interesting explanation. If I understand you correctly, I believe that the judges' scoring is more subjective analysis based on the opinions and preferences of the judge than it is concrete objective direction driven by policy makers at DCI. Obviously, there is some of both, but I wonder how much of each is at play in judging. Using your BD example, I wonder if BD might not have scored lower because there was a type of evaluation from the judges being exercised that was not reflected in the written objective guidelines. It sounds to me like there is some guesswork involved by the drum corps in understanding what the judges want. As successful an organization as BD is, I would think that they would have been quicker at adapting if the changes were actually stated policies of evaluation.