Cappybara Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 8 hours ago, friendwhale said: I want there to be more shows like BAC 2014. I'm a sucker for dark and provocative stuff, though I can see why other people fell differently I think you're gonna like Phantom 2017 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snare_guy_83 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) 38 minutes ago, jimthetuba said: I mean unpopular yes, but as I have said on this thread before this is not too unrealistic. On a different day crown may have won, scores were pretty close. Not when the closest Crown got to Bloo in GE was 0.35 behind (semis). Sure, Visual was within 0.1 all 3 nights, and Music was as well except for Prelims (Bloo up 0.3875) The 2 matched up 18 times, and these are Bloo's records... GE: 16-0-2 Visual: 8-7-3 Music: 12-6-0 Total: 17-1-0 Edited May 23, 2017 by snare_guy_83 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 On 5/18/2017 at 8:52 AM, cowtown said: I'm so triggered Last years’ hiding of the recap from the judges, a measure approved by all but one corps (if I recall correctly), tells me there is at least the perception that judges are following some sort of herd mentality, scoring corps in spite of their performance. The fact we have recaps back again, doesn’t dispel the notion that that wasn’t the case. I see it more a product of fan reaction and not being able to fully hide the recaps Judges don’t want to be the outlier as it could reflect poorly on their performance so yes, they do watch the scores. Judges have also been released from DCI for being the outlier score too often which could mean they are a bad judge or broke from the herd I feel the herd mentality is defined by DCI to push the overall direction of the shows, it pushes trends, kills variety and is more artistically limiting than any rules against amps, woodwinds, synth or other toys ever could be It was discovered after the experiment to hide previous scores from judges that the judges still tended to independently score and rank the corps in the same manner that they did if even if they had access to see the previous scores. A person could believe that last summer the judges got together secretly each week in some sort of conspiracy to thwart the experiment. Or.... this experiment showed that the judges do not necessarily have a herd mentality but instead it showed that DCI tends to secure judges who all have similar philosophies and DCI also does a good job at training them to view the sheets in an equitable consistent manner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 3 hours ago, Cappybara said: I think you're gonna like Phantom 2017 Are they back to killing people again? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobias Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 42 minutes ago, Stu said: It was discovered after the experiment to hide previous scores from judges that the judges still tended to independently score and rank the corps in the same manner that they did if even if they had access to see the previous scores. A person could believe that last summer the judges got together secretly each week in some sort of conspiracy to thwart the experiment. Or.... this experiment showed that the judges do not necessarily have a herd mentality but instead it showed that DCI tends to secure judges who all have similar philosophies and DCI also does a good job at training them to view the sheets in an equitable consistent manner. I'm sure they never "talk" to one another. I had drinks with a judge the other day and when I questioned her about my "herd" mentality theory, , she said the sheets are so structured as to criteria that must be satisfied, the scores/rankings can sometimes deviate from what spectators feel but that she like all judges think very hard about number assignment but that it is very subjective and a judge may opt not to be a lone wolf. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tobias said: I had drinks with a judge the other day and when I questioned her about my "herd" mentality theory, , she said the sheets are so structured as to criteria that must be satisfied, the scores/rankings can sometimes deviate from what spectators feel but that she like all judges think very hard about number assignment but that it is very subjective and a judge may opt not to be a lone wolf. I believe the gender should never be used in these types of posts. To me, using "them" makes it tougher for others to find out who is being mentioned, because those close to the poster may know who they know, what caption is their specialty, etc. Just trying to play Columbo I guess and protect the "them". Edited May 23, 2017 by Ghost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 1 hour ago, garfield said: Are they back to killing people again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobias Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Ghost said: I believe the gender should never be used in these types of posts. To me, using "them" makes it tougher for others to find out who is being mentioned, because those close to the poster may know who they know, what caption is their specialty, etc. Just trying to play Columbo I guess and protect the "them". Seriously? You're so precious with your policital correctness. Just a precious little thing. Edited May 23, 2017 by Tobias Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 2 hours ago, Tobias said: I'm sure they never "talk" to one another. I had drinks with a judge the other day and when I questioned her about my "herd" mentality theory, , she said the sheets are so structured as to criteria that must be satisfied, the scores/rankings can sometimes deviate from what spectators feel but that she like all judges think very hard about number assignment but that it is very subjective and a judge may opt not to be a lone wolf. Sure people talk over coffee and other libations. However, the operative phrase at play here for adjudicating is not ‘herd-mentality’ but ‘like-minded’. Let’s say that the Jazz Foundation of America decided to hold numerous academic Jazz competitions around the United States culminating with a Final contest. The sanctioning organization would collect together some of the best jazz musicians as adjudicators, instruct them on how to interpret the rubric sheets, and have them go judge the performances. While the pro judges would likely partake of libations together and chit-chat on their own throughout the contest season, their scoring and rankings of the various ensembles would not be based on that chit-chat or ‘herd-mentality; their scores and rankings would be close, with a small + or – here and there, based on their ‘like-minded’ musical philosophies combined with the instructions they received from the Foundation on how to interpret the rubric sheets. And if some Cat was way off scoring base from the rest, that person would not be considered an ‘independent-thinker’ but likely someone that at best was not following the instructions on how to interpret the rubric sheets, or at worst just not that competent at jazz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobias Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Stu said: Sure people talk over coffee and other libations. However, the operative phrase at play here for adjudicating is not ‘herd-mentality’ but ‘like-minded’. Let’s say that the Jazz Foundation of America decided to hold numerous academic Jazz competitions around the United States culminating with a Final contest. The sanctioning organization would collect together some of the best jazz musicians as adjudicators, instruct them on how to interpret the rubric sheets, and have them go judge the performances. While the pro judges would likely partake of libations together and chit-chat on their own throughout the contest season, their scoring and rankings of the various ensembles would not be based on that chit-chat or ‘herd-mentality; their scores and rankings would be close, with a small + or – here and there, based on their ‘like-minded’ musical philosophies combined with the instructions they received from the Foundation on how to interpret the rubric sheets. And if some Cat was way off scoring base from the rest, that person would not be considered an ‘independent-thinker’ but likely someone that at best was not following the instructions on how to interpret the rubric sheets, or at worst just not that competent at jazz. Well I'm kind of saying you were right and I was wrong in a way. They're following the same "scoring instructions" but are not oblivious if they are way off the trend. That's all I said. SO, you were correct and I was not. Can we be friends now? We can hug at a show if you'd like but no kissing. (Although after a few drinks, I can't guarantee that). Edited May 23, 2017 by Tobias 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.