Bushsop89

The first time a corps lost in prelims and went on to win finals was 1984. Reading won prelims with a 91.20 and Hawthorne won finals with 92.40 The next time it happened was 1986. Hawthorne won prelims with an 89.65 and Bush won finals with a 92.45 In 1988 Sun won prelims outright with a 94.00. Then Bush and Sun tied with a 96.36. This is an interesting one, as the winner of preliminaries did go on to win a championship It didn't happen again until 1996 When Hawthorne won prelims with a 95.40 and the Westshoremen went on to take finals with a 96.90 The following year in 1997 Syracuse won prelims outright with a 96.00. Finals produced a tie between Empire and Syracuse with a 96.30. (Similar to what happened in 1988) And finally, 2014. Hawthorne took prelims with a 96.85 and Reading took finals with a 97.55

Here is what I was able to find. If any of my numbers are off, please correct me. The first DCA perliminary competition at finals was 1967. The Hurricanes won both the perliminary competition and the championship The first time a corps lost in prelims and went on to win finals was 1984. Reading won prelims with a 91.20 and Hawthorne won finals with 92.40 The next time it happened was 1986. Hawthorne won prelims with an 89.65 and Bush won finals with a 92.45 In 1988 Sun won prelims outright with a 94.00. Then Bush and Sun tied with a 96.36. This is an interesting one, as the winner of preliminaries did go on to win a championship It didn't happen again until 1996 When Hawthorne won prelims with a 95.40 and the Westshoremen went on to take finals with a 96.90 The following year in 1997 Syracuse won prelims outright with a 96.00. Finals produced a tie between Empire and Syracuse with a 96.30. (Similar to what happened in 1988) And finally, 2014. Hawthorne took prelims with a 96.85 and Reading took finals with a 97.55 If there are any errors or omissions, please correct them.

I would like to know how many times at finals, a group has leapfrogged another to win it all. That's a great trivia question in honor of the 50th anniversary.

The fact that groups competing in different parts of the country on the same night with little or no head to head competition could be within mere tenths of one another, astounds me! It must be that these DCA judges are so well trained and the rubric for adjuticating shows so well defined, that any other outcome would be improbable if not impossible. #### I miss DCA!

I think an East Coast/West Coast, Biggie vs 2Pac show would be very interesting.

Can someone tell me the last time that a corps failed to win prelims and went on to win finals? I am having a debate with a friend and we cannot find the answer.

2003?

This really depends on how you define the word "best." Having marched that 2000 Bush show, I would certainly say it was relentless. Is relentlessness a criterion of greatness? I'm not really sure.

I'm confused. Have you thrown in the towel already? You're counting on them?????? Aren't you marching in a top five corps? You still have a shot.... 2nd place is still up for grabs. Maybe I'm too old school..... or just too competitive. Forgive me.

Surprise? Hmmmm..... let me think about that.... I think it would be a surprise if there was a corps within 10.00 points of Reading in Wildwood.

Bush started using Bb horns in 2005. Most of the guys in the line wore boxer briefs. In lieu of using G bugles, the girls all wore G strings. It was required. So there was some respect for tradition there.

Okay, we had a thread going about 2006 DCA championships and why Empire came closer than anyone else to beating the Bucs over the past four years. My contention was that it was programming. That the Bucs simply put together better shows than other groups. (And that isn't to say that they didn't execute. Certainly they have had excellent everything... guard, pit, horn lines, and especially drum lines.) I started to go off on a tangent about what is "effect." How do we define it? I think this could turn out to be an interesting debate. Are you turned on by musical surprises? Does sheer volume get you going? Is it technical proficiency? Or, do you like to leave the arena whistling a great melody that you just heard played by a good horn line? It is my guess that this debate will create two separate camps; those who are on the "technical" side. (ie. people who are turned on by a group doing something exceedingly well) And those who tend towards the "entertainment" side. (And I am in no way saying that the two are mutually exclusive. So don't jump down my throat with that argument) And finally, how do we believe the judges consider it? How do the judges define "general effect?" I'm interested to see how this shakes out. So please, your opinions are welcome.

I agree. DCA is a lot like college football. It's fun to argue about this stuff. But I would say, that barring a few minor exceptions, the best corps has won over the last several years. And certainly more often than not. When the Brigs were winning, they were undeniable. The Bucs have been undeniable the last four years. Yes, GE must be very difficult to adjudicate. That's partly why I feel things should be more so weighted towards execution than effect. I mean, how do you gauge what is effective? GE is too subjective. For me, what really hardens my nipples is to hear a hornline attack a note together, in tune, at a soft volume level with no pit or battery playing. Many casual listeners might dismiss that as easy, or simple, but I think it's one of the toughest things to achieve in this activity.... to do it well that is. That's why we have trained adjudicators out there on the field and in the box. They are suppose to know what's difficult to achieve, and what is effective. Anyone who has played a brass instrument since an early age knows how easy a chromatic or diatonic scale is. Yet when a line plays a chromatic or diatonic run, the audience oohs and ahhs. (Again....if it's done relatively well) We all know that's easy ####. And the audience reaction shouldn't facilitate a better GE score, or should it? (Perhaps this would be better as a whole new thread. I am going off on a tangent I didn't intend) I am going to start a new thread... "How do you define GE?"

I agree with you, but that's not how the sheets are set up. Execution should carry more weight... definitely.

The score shouldn't have been that close, the Buccs should have won by a lot more. The Buccaneers have been winning because of lots of reasons. (I believe we discussed this ad nausea on another thread... preparation, efficient rehearsals, organization, recruiting, etc.) But they have also had the best programmed shows in recent years. And this was certainly the case in 2006. The Buccs, based solely on GE, probably should have won that show by a full point. The sheets are set up so that GE trumps execution. That's how you can win a few captions and come in third. (well, that and for the most part, the drum judges are the only ones with the cajones to put adequate spreads up there. So if you take drums and GE you're pretty much a lock.) The Buccs very smartly, and effectively program their shows to win. They grab as many of those GE points that are out there. And that's not to say they don't execute. They certainly do. But they don't have to win horns, guard marching etc to win. They just have to be good enough in those captions. It's been the strength of their shows that's won them their championships. And as cool as the moving piano was, it just wasn't on the level of Buccs' show.