A: Competitive Inertia

[BRASSO]

8 hours ago, Bruckner8 said:

Sorry, BRASSO, I knew someone would ask for that, but I really don't have the time to find the exact show. It was somewhere where the top 4 at the time were 1,2,3,4 in lockstep, so BD, SCV, Crown, and Bloo must have all been there.

 I saw a a bit more volatility in the sub captions than you saw, thats why I asked which shows you were referring to. I did not look at a lot of shows however... maybe 6-7... you very well might have seen what you saw in the shows I had not looked at. Thats what I think occurred here. It is fascinating what you saw though, no doubt about it.

Edited August 17, 2017 by BRASSO

[ouooga]

12 hours ago, HbRJgdZHsbc said:

You forgot to mention a few extra things needed to win:

• Stars have to align
• Fairy dust and happy thoughts
• Sacrifice three virgins to the drum corps gods (got that done this year!)
• Oh, and BD has to bring out a substandard product so they'll get 2nd.

 

It's crazy how accurate that fourth bullet is. 

[cowtown]

Something I’m curious about, may have been covered as I didn’t re-read this thread but what about Punitive Inertia? I often feel that when a corps wins on GE and then the videos show a bit of slop, they get nailed the next year. Of course, I’m not excusing the lessor designed shows but do feel they get beat up more than they should; Regiment 2009, Cadets 2012, Crown 2014 and Bloo 2017. Could make a case that all of those shows dropped a placement or so more than they might have otherwise. Sort of a give back

I also feel a part of CI can be a make up call for a prior year which, would follow and are just corollaries of CI. That CI down the ranks works too and is based upon tiers of 8^th, 12^th, 13^th, 15^th and 17^th.

[HbRJgdZHsbc]

17 hours ago, cowtown said:

Something I’m curious about, may have been covered as I didn’t re-read this thread but what about Punitive Inertia? I often feel that when a corps wins on GE and then the videos show a bit of slop, they get nailed the next year. Of course, I’m not excusing the lessor designed shows but do feel they get beat up more than they should; Regiment 2009, Cadets 2012, Crown 2014 and Bloo 2017. Could make a case that all of those shows dropped a placement or so more than they might have otherwise. Sort of a give back

I also feel a part of CI can be a make up call for a prior year which, would follow and are just corollaries of CI. That CI down the ranks works too and is based upon tiers of 8^th, 12^th, 13^th, 15^th and 17^th.

With respect to the possibility that the correlation exists, I just can't get behind this notion.  I know you didn't cite judges specifically, but saying "Sort of a give back" implicates the community. There is a supposition of intent, and the only ones doing the giving are the adjudicators.  I think it's absurd to suggest that any judge in the activity would not judge the show of the night.  And it's further ludicrous in my mind to suggest a judge (or the whole system?!) would try to balance a result from a previous year by misapplying the philosophy in a subsequent season.

What could exist:

• The drum corps won a championship because it had an inordinately experienced drum corps, and therefore lots of age outs.  Maybe that leads to a really inexperienced corps the year after.
• Some members take years off before they age out due to the expense of the activity, thereby removing vets from the corps.
• Maybe these members decide having one championship is enough and they'll get back to the activity another time.
• Maybe a design team either jumps the shark with a concept or tries to recreate its success by doing a show so similar to the previous year it's redundant instead of creative.  (Or they do Christmas.)

These are all hypotheticals that can't be proven about the above mentioned years.  The variables are numerous and then compounding when you consider all combinations and permutations.  Far more likely than any "Punitive Inertia" is the possibility that the championship was the exception and the previous/subsequent placements are the tendencies.  As you pointed out, winning on GE instead of performance is about the emotional response (hard to repeat).  That's why BD and now Crown currently have staying power - they have the skills to back up even the weak shows. When they hit a home run they're unstoppable except by each other.

[cowtown]

5 hours ago, HbRJgdZHsbc said:

With respect to the possibility that the correlation exists, I just can't get behind this notion.  I know you didn't cite judges specifically, but saying "Sort of a give back" implicates the community. There is a supposition of intent, and the only ones doing the giving are the adjudicators.  I think it's absurd to suggest that any judge in the activity would not judge the show of the night.  And it's further ludicrous in my mind to suggest a judge (or the whole system?!) would try to balance a result from a previous year by misapplying the philosophy in a subsequent season.

What could exist:

• The drum corps won a championship because it had an inordinately experienced drum corps, and therefore lots of age outs.  Maybe that leads to a really inexperienced corps the year after.
• Some members take years off before they age out due to the expense of the activity, thereby removing vets from the corps.
• Maybe these members decide having one championship is enough and they'll get back to the activity another time.
• Maybe a design team either jumps the shark with a concept or tries to recreate its success by doing a show so similar to the previous year it's redundant instead of creative.  (Or they do Christmas.)

These are all hypotheticals that can't be proven about the above mentioned years.  The variables are numerous and then compounding when you consider all combinations and permutations.  Far more likely than any "Punitive Inertia" is the possibility that the championship was the exception and the previous/subsequent placements are the tendencies.  As you pointed out, winning on GE instead of performance is about the emotional response (hard to repeat).  That's why BD and now Crown currently have staying power - they have the skills to back up even the weak shows. When they hit a home run they're unstoppable except by each other.

I don’t disagree with you

But, more of a perception comparing them to the year prior and coming up short so the year prior does matter

And, a few years back judges were fiddling with the numbers to keep the spreads close and generate excitement as per DCI. We had some thread on it;  Garfield or a search will provide more info and specifics

[mingusmonk]

46 minutes ago, cowtown said:

I don’t disagree with you

But, more of a perception comparing them to the year prior and coming up short so the year prior does matter

And, a few years back judges were fiddling with the numbers to keep the spreads close and generate excitement as per DCI. We had some thread on it;  @garfield or a search will provide more info and specifics

^  heh

[BRASSO]

2 hours ago, cowtown said:

a few years back judges were fiddling with the numbers to keep the spreads close and generate excitement as per DCI. 

 A curious practice to say the least, but an undeniable instruction given to the Judges per DCI. From a purely pragmatic standpoint it seemed to work as intended too. DCI then followed that up with the public's denial to access to the show's recaps...( since rescinded.)

Edited August 18, 2017 by BRASSO

[HockeyDad]

• Bruckner's Competitive Intertia theory + Cowtown's corollary on CI makeup call from the previous year  =  a big win for SCV in 2018!

[HbRJgdZHsbc]

On 8/18/2017 at 9:52 AM, cowtown said:

And, a few years back judges were fiddling with the numbers to keep the spreads close and generate excitement as per DCI. 

Will the prosecutor please enter the evidence into record?

[garfield]

Hey Bruckner - 

Having come off a benign thread regarding a judge's viewpoint, it occurred to me:

Can there be "Judging Inertia" related to attainment within the judging ranks?