mjoakes

Any idea if that kind of thing June 20 gets to be a crowded event? As in, you need to be there especially early?

Or it's a really dark, Dark Horse, and just a fun thing to think about right now with no shows yet even in competition.

Was at the Scouts camp yesterday as a volunteer on the food crew. I can initiate a big reveal to everyone here that pans used to bake pasta are tough scrubbing if you let them sit for a while. I am in no position to evaluate intelligently the music and drill I saw during evening rehearsal. I liked moments of the music, but it was chopped up quite a lot because it was a rehearsal focusing on specific, short sections of the show. (Although, I'm also a bit old school, always hopeful for a recognizable melody - or at least a tune I can remember.) There was some very interesting movement on the field that appeared to avoid (thankfully) prancing. More interesting to me was how impressively rehearsal was managed. The staff-mm interactions were professional, respectful, and, as far as I could tell, productive. Staight-forward recognition of good things and calm explanation of errors and how to improve. Maybe all corps are like this. And if so, good. But I was glad to have observed this in the Scouts. Really looking forward to their resurgence this season.

Wait. Was this a ruse to get us to state on social media when we would not be in our homes?

Indy Evansville Muncie Minneapolis San Antonio Prelims Semi Finals

All in good fun, yes. Thanks for getting this kind of sentiment out there. For my tastes, there's too much of a sort of a serious challenging of people on their predictions. Despite so much uncertainty and an almost absurdity of trying to pick specific placements for August. For predictions generally, it isn't a bad thing to build in some surprises and low odds placements. (See NCAA bracket.) So good for BoaDci dropping out The Academy and bumping up Madison. I disagree with him, however: Madison is clearly at 8 or above!

If I recall correctly, the intermissions in San Antonio are long enough for good breaks without missing any of the shows. Keep the sunglasses handy if you step outside.

Nice recovery by the end. It's those old kids in the school play commercial with a WGI context.

Top 3: SCV or Cavies. 4 thru 7: No idea; biggest dark horses (= surprise) might be medalists from last year dropping down 8 thru 12: Scouts

I'm gonna check out the Vegas odds first. But my gut says someone from the field.

Very interesting. And also very helpful - to me, at least. Thanks for posting the detail. It wasn't too much detail. It was helpful explanation.

Thanks for suggesting something. It's not the way I want it to end up, so you can't possibly be right. Also - and serious now - thanks for going out to #23. I'm afraid I often overlook so many of those other corps, even though I also often really enjoy their shows and the talent on display.

As I mentioned in an earlier reply, I think I learned some things so far. But the gymnastics analogy described here is quite good. Watching a show, what kinds of things might I look for, or listen for, that would improve - even if a little - my ability to understand a good performance from a medium from a not so good?

Anyone know if the public is welcomed at Westfield High School to watch from the stands?

Are the judges paid fees? Decent fees for what they do? Put up in JW Marriott suites with room service picked up by DCI?

I use rubrics for case studies. It's just there's still some subjectivity, and I tend to me more rigid earlier rather than later. All this is educational. For me, anyway. I suspect I'm learning I will just continue to watch and enjoy the shows. It also means I am likely to dismiss some of the snap judging done in the stands when those around me talk as though they can precisely evaluate the likely scores more than is probably possible. Dismiss might be too strong. I like the commentary of the fans. It's the assumed precision of knowledge that I don't pay much attention to.

So would a number be jotted down in an official way for each corps when the performance is over? That matters, I think, if scoring is anything like evaluating a set of case studies. My early scores are always a bit tougher than my later scores. I even go back and update a few - to improve consistency - after I've finished the lot of them.

Three weeks from today, DCP will have its first postings after we have seen actual performances. In prep for that, anyone interested in offering up a brief - brief - tutorial on how judging works? I’m not a doofus, but also not qualified (nor even interested) in the details necessary at the judge level. Rather, I’d like to be a little more intelligent about what I am seeing and hearing with respect to how scores are determined. Primarily, I want to enjoy the shows. So “be a little more intelligent” is an important qualifier. To put this in context, here is this: I’m a long-time university professor. I know the difference between student work that is (say, for example) 87/100 vs. student work that is 93/100. But the difference between 87 and 86 or 88? I’ve no clue. Or a student scoring an 89 gets a B+ and one scoring a 91 gets an A-. That’s how it works. But honestly, in so many cases, the quality of what either of those students can accomplish is essentially indistinguishable. In 2016 Coats were 97.650 and BD 97.250. Crown 97.088. Is that just the way the numbers shake out and everyone knows that? Or is there some sense that qualified people really can determined the Coats were 0.41131% - yes, that’s less than 1/2 a percent - better than the Blue Devils? (BD was 0.16685% better than Crown.)

I recognize this as one of those objective truths. Go Scouts. And speaking of diverse cultures, doesn't the Scouts show graphic look a little Klingon like? I think so. The Scouts are taking cultural diversity galaxy wide. Good for them for thinking so forward. http://www.madisonscoutslive.com/mainsite/2017/04/last-man-standing/

This make good sense, even if there is an obviously politically-incorrect weight on Western things. Other cultures have bright as well as dark elements to their cultures, too. One could do something non-western without it being dark or tragic. Sources of cultural things can get pretty fuzzy, too. This is no place to debate cultural development, but didn't much science and math come to Western Europe from ancient Greek sources largely sustained (and some further developed) by Middle Eastern societies?

This is a fine topic for discussion here. chris7997's original post did not indicate any judging of the shows, performances, or talent. And he anyway replied a couple of times that he is only looking at the themes and not the shows. Of course, a dark-theme might turn into a heck of a show this summer. And yes, our reaction to themes is at least in part a matter of personal tastes. Are we now not supposed to comment on DCP based on personal tastes? Good grief. I don't have a big problem with the dark themes. Some seem pretentious - if not preposterous - to me. But I am not going to get too worked up over what must be a tough task between designers, directors, and their attempt to appeal to their members and fans. Because I am not so worked up over it doesn't mean chris7997's perspective isn't a legitimate one to toss out here. More interesting to me would be some intelligent study of how these dark themes align with the backgrounds and demographics of many of the millennials or compose the mms. No, that study isn't at all worth it. I just mean to say I'm curious about it.

Thanks for the info, George. It that was widely know, or communicated elsewhere here on DCP, I obviously overlooked it.

Anyone have updated information about this show for the 2nd season?

Thanks. I had lost track of the idea that this was the Predictions space. Academy at #8 is on the bold side. But good predictions lists need something like that. I worry the d--- word in the Coats explanation is only going to prompt someone to prolong our agony.

It's a good question for a discussion forum. Success during the season is a result of an awful lot of factors interacting in complex ways. I'm skeptical of arguments that assign too much weight to any one.