Piper Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 This isn't figure skating where every judge is judging the same thing. They all have their individual responsibilities. I'm quite sure that a perc judge couldn't care less what the hornline or guard is doing (unless they were about to run him over). Ditto for the others. They have no control over the final tally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbc03 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 2006 whiners "Wah wah wah the scores are too predictable. You know who is going to win any given night before the scores are announced" 2007 whiners "Wah wah wah the scores are too close. Make a decision already!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medeabrass Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 2006 whiners "Wah wah wah the scores are too predictable. You know who is going to win any given night before the scores are announced"2007 whiners "Wah wah wah the scores are too close. Make a decision already!" Well, I was whining about the same thing last year. I'm a whiner but atleast I'm a consistent whiner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euponitone Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Well, I was whining about the same thing last year. I'm a whiner but atleast I'm a consistent whiner. And i'll give you at least some props for that... :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Scott Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Why do you assume that because spreads are small that judges lack courage? The point of scoring is not to create spreads, but to accurately reflect the relative quality of corps performances. Maybe they really are all achieving at a very similar level. I would bet that those judges are wishing there was more separation between them, because when they're that similar it's really hard to find distinctions. I think you hit the nail on the head. If we moved to an ordinal system, people would then complain about not being able to see the raw scores. I don't think it's alack of hoo-haws to score corps consecutively by 1/10th's. I think it's numbers management, and making sure that the the judges (subjective) opinion ranks the corps where he or she thought they would be. Besides, in 4th, being 2/10's out of the hunt is not a bad place to be. :) But, this is teh intarweb. If you feel like it's such a travesty, do your time, become an apprentice, shadow some circuits, judge some local shows, then judge some regional competitions, and then maybe you can call the shots your way. Either way, that my corps of choice may not win every competition (that my chevron-shaped glasses sees they deserve :P ) doesn't mean that the system is utterly and completely broke. What this really means is +1 to my post count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TastyWaves Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 I just peeked at the Murfreesboro recap and, as usual, I see the same thing.Top corps gets an 18.3, next corps gets an 18.2, next corps gets an 18.1 and, look out for the BIG drop to fourth...a 17.9. The same spreads are listed just about down the sheet. Only one of the Vis judges had the courage to widen it out a bit (three tenths! almost scandalous!) What ticks me off is the lack of real courage in the judging community. No judge wants to "decide the show", but, at the end of the day, one rogue, who actually thinks outside the box (literelly, the "box" on the back of the sheet) and emphasizes true comparative achievement (the purpose of a CONTEST!) will decide the show. WHO WAS BETTER? Corps A. BY HOW MUCH? A tenth. REALLY? Coulda gone either way. AND WHO WAS THIRD? Corps C. BY HOW MUCH? Another tenth. That is just crap. Is it that hard to say Corps A was better than corps B? How can I, the customer, the fan, the person in the stands make heads-or-tails out of a 0.3 spread from FIRST PLACE to FOURTH PLACE? What is this judge telling me other than he or she DIDNT MAKE A DECISION? If ya got some insight...please share. The judges do make a decision. Look at the Caps.... They clearly put things in order i think. And since were not measuing "Apples to apples", i think its possible to have hundredths of a point spreads or even (GASP) ties! I know its unpopular, but i do beleive that unit A and Unit B can be just as good in every way.... Oh well! lol This is fun! Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wishbonecav Posted July 14, 2007 Author Share Posted July 14, 2007 Thanks to those of you who provided a reasoned discourse. The talking points were appreciated. Here's an idea: How's about we widen the boxes in order to provide more room for "numbers management?" I say there's 100 points to work with....the box really says that there isn't. Would giving the judge more room within the upper boxes ALLOW them more flexibility to make a decision instead of managing numbers and ordinals? If managing tenths is the unspoken norm, that gives ONE judge the right to decide a show...especially a GE judge who "on any given night" can pull a 5/10 spread out of his or her bum and offset the "tenth game" being played by 4 other judges (literally, HALF the panel!) (Here's another point: if the 1/10 spreads are in captions that are divisible (both circuits have a GROSS score for certain captions melded into broader caption scores in MUSIC, VIS and PERFORMANCE) that means that 10ths arent really 10ths...but 1/2 tenths. So one GE judge can offset the WHOLE panel. Literally, one judge making a decision BASED ON A DIFFERENT PERSONAL STYLE or PERSONAL numerical INDEX , mind you NOT an "incorrect" decision, just a "different" decision can deliver a result inconsistent with the others on the panel....and sway the outcome. Think of how many championships have been decided by 0.1 (or tied). Did "they" get it right? Or, because of inflexibility, poor number's management or differing adjuducation style, was the outcome the result of a systemic shortcoming?? It's a question, not an inference. Please add your comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geluf Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 People seem to forget that a judge actually gives out TWO scores and they combine into ONE caption. So, for example, the Brass judge has to give out 2 scores...but he only has 10 points to work with in each sub-sub-caption. Thats not a lot people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnytuba Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 ...year after year after year after year......caption after caption after caption after caption... Is it really possible for all the judges to decide their "winner" by a tenth? Why yes! It is! They just did it again! It is a systemic lack of true comparative evaluation. 11 minutes of performance by 135 members in each corps. Yeah...a tenth oughta do it. Lame. If Drum Corps still scored on the tick system, scores would probably be separated more, because the corps were scored differently. It's much more difficult to score objectively than it is to score subjectively, especially when many of the caption heads and even the section instructors are now professionally trained (musically) and have teaching and performing backgrounds (visually). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DebateGuy Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 (edited) It seems to me that this is the very reason that some people favor moving to an ordinal system of placements. It prevents one judge from having a different enough process of numbers management from having their caption skew (sic) the show results. I really don't much care, but I think it would be hard to argue that an ordinal system wouldn't prevent a single judge from being able to dictate the outcome of a show. edited for grammar Edited July 14, 2007 by DebateGuy 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.