DCI Scoring methodology

[MikeN]

22 hours ago, cowtown said:

I think it’s almost as strange as when a 10th place score gets 10^th place in all captions…and then you see that pattern for most placements.

I think I still have the spreadsheet somewhere.  In 2008, SCV finished 7th.  That entire season, they did not beat a corps that finished 1-6, and did not lose to any corps that finished below them.  I didn't look at the caption level, but overall score fidelity based on final finish was like 98% accurate.  Phantom (and to a lesser extent, Blue Stars) upended the apple cart on that - the numbers had them in solid 3rd all but the last two shows.

Mike

[MikeRapp]

29 minutes ago, MikeN said:

I think I still have the spreadsheet somewhere.  In 2008, SCV finished 7th.  That entire season, they did not beat a corps that finished 1-6, and did not lose to any corps that finished below them.  I didn't look at the caption level, but overall score fidelity based on final finish was like 98% accurate.  Phantom (and to a lesser extent, Blue Stars) upended the apple cart on that - the numbers had them in solid 3rd all but the last two shows.

Mike

And by 98% accurate, you mean 98% unchanged from day 1 of the season. Some might not call that accurate, but rather suspiciously predictable.

[BRASSO]

On 7/30/2017 at 11:14 AM, MikeRapp said:

 

There is no doubt the current system has yielded an environment in which there is a wider range of show ideas, and imho much more compelling performances for the audience. That, ultimately, is the goal of dci, or has become the goal. But content should not be defined by a judge's knowledge of what you are trying to do, imho. Content should be objective, achievement should be subjective.

 Everything has changed. At one time every marcher marched in the show, and was scored on their marching. Then we put half the Percussion sections out front, and the FE were not judged on their marching. Now we have ( for just one example ) 9 member choirs that are out front that " park and bark ". Not for a segment of a song. But for the entire show. Rather than " park and bark " in brass however as in years gone by but, its now done in Voice, not Brass. The essential difference however is that this rather large Corps section are not subjected to Visual demand, nor visual scrutiny as the Brass " park and bark " performers once were in their other marching requirements in their performance.. They are not even part of the Guard. They are a  standalone section. Figuratively, but also... literally. They stand and perform in place the entire show. If such Corps utilizing such are rewarded in high marks in GE Visual and other Visual scores, we can expect future Corps to adopt other similar type of stand in place and perform sections in their future show designs as well. Thats just logical and natural evolution taking place here it seems to me. It is easier to generate points with a talented choir that need only demonstrate the skill of voice, than to find musicians ( or guard ) that have to demonstrate multiplicity of skills of ( for example ) not only voice or brass playing but also have to march/ dance/  around an entire field for 12 minutes of high demand drill. What judges reward ( and do not reward ) clearly will have a future impact on what show designs Corps put out in future years regarding content, achievement, visual demands on performers, GE visuals GE Music, etc and so forth. Same as it ever was, actually, in this respect.

Edited August 2, 2017 by BRASSO

[Bachstrad]

1 hour ago, BRASSO said:

 Everything has changed. At one time every marcher marched in the show, and was scored on their marching. Then we put half the Percussion sections out front, and the FE were not judged on their marching. Now we have ( for just one example ) 9 member choirs that are out front that " park and bark ". Not for a segment of a song. But for the entire show. Rather than " park and bark " in brass however as in years gone by but, its now done in Voice, not Brass. The essential difference however is that this rather large Corps section are not subjected to Visual demand, nor visual scrutiny as the Brass " park and bark " performers once were in their other marching requirements in their performance.. They are not even part of the Guard. They are a  standalone section. Figuratively, but also... literally. They stand and perform in place the entire show. If such Corps utilizing such are rewarded in high marks in GE Visual and other Visual scores, we can expect future Corps to adopt other similar type of stand in place and perform sections in their future show designs as well. Thats just logical and natural evolution taking place here it seems to me. It is easier to generate points with a talented choir that need only demonstrate the skill of voice, than to find musicians ( or guard ) that have to demonstrate multiplicity of skills of ( for example ) not only voice or brass playing but also have to march/ dance/  around an entire field for 12 minutes of high demand drill. What judges reward ( and do not reward ) clearly will have a future impact on what show designs Corps put out in future years regarding content, achievement, visual demands on performers, GE visuals GE Music, etc and so forth. Same as it ever was, actually, in this respect.

One only need observe the sudden lack of headgear in 2017 to validate said theorem exercise listed above. 

[Tad_MMA]

21 hours ago, snare_guy_83 said:

At what point is the scoring system re-imagined? The current one has been in place for 18 years now. Programs aren't the same now as they were in 2000. 

They re-imagine it frequently. The numbers stay the same--- 10 + 10 = 20 for ALL judges, which is greatly consistent. Gone are the Visual Ensemble, Music Ensemble (both now Analysis like in the OLD days) and Visual Performance (Proficiency) captions. We used to have one drum judge---then two---then one---again two. It's Field and Ensemble again. It used to be Visual judges only doing Visual GE; ditto for Music. Now it's supposedly a mixed bag, though they CAN lean toward their field.

The 1994-1999 system was very inconsistent from area to area. GE Visual was 20 pts; Ensemble Visual was 15; Field Visual was 10. The change in 2000 made the subcaptions far more consistent.

[cowtown]

21 hours ago, Stu said:

 

Are you saying that the Tic definition just mentioned is false, and that the aspect of the judge's observational evaluation, opinion, on what did and did not rise to the level of a Tic was objective not subjective?

To an extent it was objective, some judges use to map out the music and mark the tic relative to it’s position and assigned to the section. In after show breakdown our caption head would be ‘that’s where you blew this part’. We could line a lot of tics with our performance

Not prefect for sure, but you a good idea of where you lost points. Corps designed shows around not tic-ing, it’s not as mysterious of some like to pretend

[cowtown]

20 hours ago, Stu said:

You want the designers’ aspirations to be creative and free from restrictions on design, then have a GE adjudicator evaluate and rate them.  Okay, you be the GE Music judge in this challenge: Your job is to evaluate the musical creativity and musical content aspects of the following three extremely influential pieces that came out around the same era and rate/rank them in order of 3-2-1. The music of Rodeo by Aaron Copland that influenced all film music for western movies thereafter, the composition Billie’s Bounce which paved the way for the music we call BeBop, and the composition of 4”33” by John Cage which helped propel the Post Modern Artistic movement.  Alrighty, the Music GE judge, you, has concluded that the Bronze goes to….?  The Silver goes to….? And The Gold with the Ring goes to……?

 

I have no idea of what you’re event trying to say here but the example you provided are very easy for me to rank on musical content, Cage is bronze

[Stu]

4 hours ago, cowtown said:

To an extent it was objective, some judges use to map out the music and mark the tic relative to it’s position and assigned to the section. In after show breakdown our caption head would be ‘that’s where you blew this part’. We could line a lot of tics with our performance

Not prefect for sure, but you a good idea of where you lost points. Corps designed shows around not tic-ing, it’s not as mysterious of some like to pretend

Tics were errors observed by a human and determined by that human to be in enough variance from perfect that it becomes a Tic.  And because it is based on human observation, what is and is not a Tic is 100% purely subjective not objective.  Here are a few examples:

A) In base ten mathematics 2+2=4 is always objectively correct; any other answer will be objectively in error.  However, a marching performer who is supposed to be 2 steps from the yard line and another who is supposed to be 2 steps from there (4 steps total), that cannot be objectively measured even with a measuring tape on the fly in a performance; so if they are in reality 1.9 and 1.8 respectively apart for that moment in time, the error may or may not be observable and therefore may or may not be determined by opinion of the human adjudicator as being a Tic.(subjective call)

B) According to an oscilloscope a brass instrument played with a wave of 438 hertz is objectively out of tune with A440.  However, one judge with perfect pitch may catch that by just listening and call it a Tic, another judge may not hear that variation and determine there is no error.(subjective call)

C) And in both cases, even if the error is noticed, it may or may not be warranted as a Ticable because a human judge knows that other humans are not perfect and therefore they will always give some variance in error prior to calling it a Tic. (subjective call)

Edited August 2, 2017 by Stu

[cowtown]

um yeah, it was context. A horn line can be out of tune yet tuned together but if one horn is out of tune to the horn line, tic. Same with dressing a form or a real cow example, we had a call and response. I was they only one on the response, so many tic scratched out because they tic'ed me but we did it twice in a row and twice in the show

[Stu]

5 hours ago, cowtown said:

I have no idea of what you’re event trying to say here but the example you provided are very easy for me to rank on musical content, Cage is bronze

Creative communication in content can be restricted to the Western Philosophy of art in the ordering tones and sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships to produce music having unity and continuity;

However, Creative communication in content can also be expanded to include the Eastern Philosophy of art where the designer can place the subject in a situation where the surrounding and internal ambient sound produces the musical moment, which allows for a communication that is both deeper and more profound as it applies to the aspects of creative communication content from the artist to the observer;

You claim that you want DCI show designers to have more freedom of creative expression, yet through your opinion and response just now you also apparently want DCI to have a restricted set of criteria based in Western thought by totally disregarding and dismissing the Eastern Philosophy; this is shown to be likely true because in your opinion you placed 4’33” last, bronze, on your creative and content list.

Question: How are you really advocating for more freedom of artistic expression in DCI if you as an adjudicator just placed Western musical thought above Eastern musical thought?

Edited August 2, 2017 by Stu