Enough Judging Conspiracy Theories

[HockeyDad]

18 hours ago, DeusExGreenMachina said:

What can I say to you to stop asking me these questions?  This is what, number five?  Getting kind of tiresome @Stu.  I've obviously triggered something.

What you triggered was some very logical and simply stated questions from Stu that you seem incapable of answering. But you do reply with plenty of arrogance, so there's that. 

[ContraFart]

3 hours ago, Cappybara said:

I can't speak for OP's intentions. However, I can speak to what I think his intentions were. 

Whether on DCP or elsewhere, there IS an undeniable sentiment that the judges are in bed with certain corps, particularly the Blue Devils. This sentiment was at its peak in 2009-2012. And it still exists now, just check out the 2015 finals thread. 

Whether you want to be a pedant about whether this qualifies as a "conspiracy," I honestly couldn't give two sh*ts about that, but I do think there is a general sentiment that the judges are getting it wrong often, and that these errors are purposeful rather than on accident. 

I attribute that to a misunderstanding on the way the sheets and the judges work, or just pure ignorance in general. Just take a look at @ContraFart's complaints in this thread regarding the point swing in the colorguard caption. One poster actually does some research (thanks @Chief Guns) and finds that the Devils actually led in that caption most of the season, and the complaining poster immediately shut up about it. 

In the same vein, I think Machina is just trying to provide some perspective and insight so that there is a little less ignorance or misunderstandings regarding judging. 

But yes, no matter what, people will doubt a judge's scores due to person disagreements on what should be rewarded. 

I didn't just shut up about it. I didn't see the tag then I had my sons 1st birthday party, but yes I stand corrected. BD won head to head more this season. Happy now?

Edited August 20, 2017 by ContraFart

[ContraFart]

4 hours ago, Stu said:

As a ‘fan’, there is no problem if you love the sounds from DMB over the others.  But if you cannot sit aside that bias as much as humanly possible, and you ‘judge’, that is a huge problem.   For example: I personally love in order: Jazz, Fusion, Funk, Progressive Rock, and place Opera way down there on the list just above Country Music.  But allow me to become familiar with the adjudicating criteria, and I can place my love-list aside as much as humanly possible; whereby I can fairly evaluate if this Opera performing Stockhausen’s Licht Cycle is doing better at Opera than that Jazz Band is performing Ellington’s A-Train in the realm of Jazz.  And subsequently I would then have no problem at all in scoring and ranking the Opera performance ahead of the Jazz Band performance even though I love Ellington’s music way, way, way, way more than Stockhausen’s.

 

I understand what you are saying, but I think the difference in performance level between the top corps is so slim its almost negligible. So then I think it becomes a values issue.

[ContraFart]

6 hours ago, Chief Guns said:

If you are referring to the CG caption between BD and SCV, which i think you are (please correct me if wrong) BD was 10-4 head to head against SCV in guard all season. I did not count Allentown since they performed on different nights, but if we count that one, BD beat SCV 18.80-18.65.

Ok I stand corrected. My point is however is that I can see variances in scores when the head to head happens less then once per week with the TOC shows having the random draw and various additions and changes are added to the show, but I do not understand how there can be that much of a difference on consecutive nights when the level of performance and the content does not significantly change. This is the second year in a row that BD was in second on both prelims and semis night, then won on finals night by a comfortable margin. That unexplainable to me.

[Chief Guns]

4 minutes ago, ContraFart said:

Ok I stand corrected. My point is however is that I can see variances in scores when the head to head happens less then once per week with the TOC shows having the random draw and various additions and changes are added to the show, but I do not understand how there can be that much of a difference on consecutive nights when the level of performance and the content does not significantly change. This is the second year in a row that BD was in second on both prelims and semis night, then won on finals night by a comfortable margin. That unexplainable to me.

I am not going to even pretend i can answer why BD won by a comfortable margin. Maybe they put together their best run, maybe SCV was off idk. I wish we could hear the judges tapes from all three nights for BD and SCV. 

 

But most importantly, happy 1st bday to your son. Being a dad myself, that is more important than any scores and placements.

[Ediker]

Bravo, @DeusExGreenMachina on starting one of the most active threads!  I love what you are doing to educate us about what happens in the booth and on the sheets.  Thanks for your efforts.  Judging is not an easy task, and explaining it appears to be equally difficult and thankless.  So, thank you :)

[Stu]

57 minutes ago, ContraFart said:

I understand what you are saying, but I think the difference in performance level between the top corps is so slim its almost negligible. So then I think it becomes a values issue.

What if I told you that it is possible for two completely qualified judges to come to two different conclusions in the same caption based on the same performance? This can happen! How? If they happen to be looking at different sections of the ensemble at different times during the performance. And when the levels are as close as they are in WC by Finals, this plays a huge role in scores and placements. This is all based on observational subjective evaluation where a judge is only seeing snapshots throughout the performance and gauging those snapshots to the sheets.

[DeusExGreenMachina]

1 hour ago, HockeyDad said:

What you triggered was some very logical and simply stated questions from Stu that you seem incapable of answering. But you do reply with plenty of arrogance, so there's that. 

And "snarkiness" I've noticed, but I've been called much worse things after I've put down a number.

It's not that I'm incapable of answering his questions, but that I am absolutely unwilling.  I am not going to name drop for obvious reasons and reasons stated.

[DeusExGreenMachina]

1 hour ago, ContraFart said:

Ok I stand corrected. My point is however is that I can see variances in scores when the head to head happens less then once per week with the TOC shows having the random draw and various additions and changes are added to the show, but I do not understand how there can be that much of a difference on consecutive nights when the level of performance and the content does not significantly change. This is the second year in a row that BD was in second on both prelims and semis night, then won on finals night by a comfortable margin. That unexplainable to me.

When panels change, so do opinions.  There are different people seeing different things.  If it's justified according to the sheets, it's not wrong.

 

57 minutes ago, Ediker said:

Bravo, @DeusExGreenMachina on starting one of the most active threads!  I love what you are doing to educate us about what happens in the booth and on the sheets.  Thanks for your efforts.  Judging is not an easy task, and explaining it appears to be equally difficult and thankless.  So, thank you :)

Thank you.  A surprising number of directors really value my feedback enough to play it back to their staff and students.  But yes--it's typically thankless.

[Stu]

38 minutes ago, DeusExGreenMachina said:

And "snarkiness" I've noticed, but I've been called much worse things after I've put down a number.

It's not that I'm incapable of answering his questions, but that I am absolutely unwilling.  I am not going to name drop for obvious reasons and reasons stated.

No names needed, again no names, just cite examples of DCI scoring and ranking where archaic designs finished in the top 7 above any new artistic designs in any caption.