Triple Forte Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Ok all....this idea maybe really unpopular but here it goes. Currently...the caption awards are decided by averaging the scores in the captions over the course of all the shows during championship week. So..using world class as an example...the best hornline award goes to the corps that has the best average hornline score from Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights shows. If there is a tie..the award goes to the highest scoring hornline on Saturday night. so.... to prevent any renegade judges....should the same be applied to the overall score/results? It just seems silly to me that if corps are really close in scoring..that an individual judge or judging panel has so much control of the overall final results to the seasons competition. What if a particular corps is in first going in to finals night...and their weakness is visual...and a judge that historically scores this particular corps low in visual is on the panel...how fair or right is that? Thoughts? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cappybara Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 I definitely think it's fair and a good suggestion. I agree that some judges sway things way too much and averaging scores can help combat it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortAndFast Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Like anything, it's a tradeoff. If you average 3 panels, you won't have any one judge calling the champion or distorting the outcome too far. On the other hand, you'll never again have a Phantom 2008 or SCV 1999 where a red-hot finals performance takes a championship. You can also easily get a situation (as happens all the time with caption trophies) where the winner is mathematically inevitable after semis. Given how exciting it was to be there in 1996 or 1999 or 2008, I'd prefer that finals alone decides the winner. If you're really worried about That One Judge, I think it'd be reasonable to double all the captions for finals rather than just GE. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cappybara Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Like anything, it's a tradeoff. If you average 3 panels, you won't have any one judge calling the champion or distorting the outcome too far. On the other hand, you'll never again have a Phantom 2008 or SCV 1999 where a red-hot finals performance takes a championship. You can also easily get a situation (as happens all the time with caption trophies) where the winner is mathematically inevitable after semis. Given how exciting it was to be there in 1996 or 1999 or 2008, I'd prefer that finals alone decides the winner. If you're really worried about That One Judge, I think it'd be reasonable to double all the captions for finals rather than just GE. That's actually really true I didn't think about that. It would take some excitement away like the excitement we have this season. Doubling all captions sounds like a better idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 no Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Maybe what might make things more interesting would be to have a "Season Champion" based on averages, or some point system where you get a point for each placement you receive (winner = 1, second = 2, third = 3, etc), then that number divided by number of shows to give a more fair average, and the corps with the lowest score at the end of the season wins the Season Championship: this can be announced, given out a Prelims. Then have a "Tournament Champion" which would essentially be the winner of Finals night (i.e. what we do now). This is what the NHL and MLS do, and it might add some extra excitement throughout the season: corps might be more likely to come out of the season with a complete show knowing that each show matters, no more talk about "these early shows don't mean anything until the first Regional," it might motivate corps to have more performances in order to give themselves a better average, etc. If we want to get wacky we can add fan voting into this mix as well. Finals week, seeding via Regional placements, etc. wouldn't change. It would just add another 'Champion' (potentially - it could mean awarding the Champion twice), as well as awarding consistency. I think the way DCI does Finals now is pretty awesome, and my idea wouldn't really change that format: it would just kind of add something to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liahona Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Ok all....this idea maybe really unpopular but here it goes. Currently...the caption awards are decided by averaging the scores in the captions over the course of all the shows during championship week. So..using world class as an example...the best hornline award goes to the corps that has the best average hornline score from Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights shows. If there is a tie..the award goes to the highest scoring hornline on Saturday night. so.... to prevent any renegade judges....should the same be applied to the overall score/results? It just seems silly to me that if corps are really close in scoring..that an individual judge or judging panel has so much control of the overall final results to the seasons competition. What if a particular corps is in first going in to finals night...and their weakness is visual...and a judge that historically scores this particular corps low in visual is on the panel...how fair or right is that? Thoughts? Some things are best left alone... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Rott Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 (edited) Ok all....this idea maybe really unpopular but here it goes. Currently...the caption awards are decided by averaging the scores in the captions over the course of all the shows during championship week. So..using world class as an example...the best hornline award goes to the corps that has the best average hornline score from Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights shows. If there is a tie..the award goes to the highest scoring hornline on Saturday night. so.... to prevent any renegade judges....should the same be applied to the overall score/results? It just seems silly to me that if corps are really close in scoring..that an individual judge or judging panel has so much control of the overall final results to the seasons competition. What if a particular corps is in first going in to finals night...and their weakness is visual...and a judge that historically scores this particular corps low in visual is on the panel...how fair or right is that? Thoughts? Is part of the caption scoring this way to allow for lower overall corps to win a caption...actually,,,has any corps ever won a caption but missed finals? In 2004, my daughter marched with the Lehigh Valley Knights Guard (Div. III)...they had the highest guard score in prelims & semis (and pretty much all season), but their overall score was too low to perform in finals, so someone else...not as good as them...won the guard caption award. When I marched All Age corps in 1983, the Rhode Island Matadors killed everyone in guard that season, but their overall score was too low to move into finals. DCA expanded finals one spot so the Matadors could perform and get their guard award....which is fair? As for the overall scores...I'm kinda liking what TOC did...average the whole season and add the finals score to that. Edited August 7, 2013 by G-Rott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slingerland Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 (edited) ...actually,,,has any corps ever won a caption but missed finals? Yup. 1977 Oakland Crusaders won percussion in Prelims, but failed to make Finals. I can make an argument for both sides of week averages vs night of performance, but if I had to choose, I'd say the TOC approach seems the most reasonable balance of giving some weight to earlier contests while allowing the final run to have the greatest overall impact. So take the Thurs and Fri night numbers, average them, then make them 40% of the Finals number. The number is still skewed by the fact that judges inflate their numbers over the course of the week anyway (regardless of whether a performance is genuinely any better or not), but it lessens the chance of any of the Finals judges being able to determine the Season results on their own by being an outlier in a caption. It would also serve to add some excitement to Finals week, since there was the understanding that there more variables coming to play in Finals placement, which increases the fan interest, vs now, when most of us can predict, with maybe one or two mistakes, what the exact Finals placement will be. Edited August 7, 2013 by Slingerland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barigirl78 Posted August 7, 2013 Share Posted August 7, 2013 Like anything, it's a tradeoff. If you average 3 panels, you won't have any one judge calling the champion or distorting the outcome too far. On the other hand, you'll never again have a Phantom 2008 or SCV 1999 where a red-hot finals performance takes a championship. You can also easily get a situation (as happens all the time with caption trophies) where the winner is mathematically inevitable after semis. Given how exciting it was to be there in 1996 or 1999 or 2008, I'd prefer that finals alone decides the winner. If you're really worried about That One Judge, I think it'd be reasonable to double all the captions for finals rather than just GE. The idea is also "Finals focussed". How about getting into Finals? The Crossmen made it in semi-finals last year based on a sizzling performance that pushed them into 12th. 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.