A simple scoring method change

[drumcat]

OK, simple idea. In order to de-emphasize GE, and re-emphasize what the kids accomplish, let's change scoring to an average of all 8 categories.

All categories are scored to 100; judges may award up to halves, i.e. "65.5". (Total remains 200 gradients.)

All 8 categories are averaged to 100.

(two perc judges get averaged before; their score may reach point-two-five)

Effect is simple; instead of 40/30/30, every category is 12.5 pts. This means GE=25, Ens=37.5, Execution=37.5.

Simple, basic change. What do you think?

[Dominath]

I like that. Then you'd hear less complaining about "X Corps used X prop(s) to win, and that's not fair, because A-P corps don't have the money to do that!"

If I lost because another corps played and marched better than me, I can't really complain.

[MikeD]

OK, simple idea. In order to de-emphasize GE, and re-emphasize what the kids accomplish, let's change scoring to an average of all 8 categories.

All categories are scored to 100; judges may award up to halves, i.e. "65.5". (Total remains 200 gradients.)

All 8 categories are averaged to 100.

(two perc judges get averaged before; their score may reach point-two-five)

Effect is simple; instead of 40/30/30, every category is 12.5 pts. This means GE=25, Ens=37.5, Execution=37.5.

Simple, basic change. What do you think?

Part of the effect score is the performance of the members.

[cowtown]

I generally agree with what you are trying to achieve but I don’t know, don’t really have a better idea myself but I would like to de-emphasize scoring the design staff

and to follow up mike's comment, are you sure you want 8 captions

[drumcat]

Quickly... Yes, members do have a GE effect, but it's impossible to suggest that the staff of a corps has nothing to do with GE. They simply are a part of the score, so I'd choose to reduce it. I want more of the score to rely on what the kids on the field do than is currently used.

As for 8 captions, we have that now. No change there.

[faramirtook]

OK, simple idea. In order to de-emphasize GE, and re-emphasize what the kids accomplish, let's change scoring to an average of all 8 categories.

All categories are scored to 100; judges may award up to halves, i.e. "65.5". (Total remains 200 gradients.)

All 8 categories are averaged to 100.

(two perc judges get averaged before; their score may reach point-two-five)

Effect is simple; instead of 40/30/30, every category is 12.5 pts. This means GE=25, Ens=37.5, Execution=37.5.

Simple, basic change. What do you think?

I don't like it. The "GE is king" philosophy keeps drum corps from getting to be too much of an artistic expression. Which is not to say that artistic values and drum corps can't be married; it is to say that at the end of the show, I should still want to break things.

[drumcat]

I don't like it. The "GE is king" philosophy keeps drum corps from getting to be too much of an artistic expression. Which is not to say that artistic values and drum corps can't be married; it is to say that at the end of the show, I should still want to break things.

Funny; I would find that the reverse... It's GE that's forcing corps to be overly artistic and less powerful...

[Jofus]

General effect is exactly what it sounds like. VAGUE. I think it needs to be reduced as well. Execution, then GE.

[bawker]

I don't like it. The "GE is king" philosophy keeps drum corps from getting to be too much of an artistic expression. Which is not to say that artistic values and drum corps can't be married; it is to say that at the end of the show, I should still want to break things.

I disagree. If anything the overemphasis on GE in marching music scoring (especially in circuits like BOA...where it accounts for even more of the score) has put us more towards intellectual psuedo-"depth" and less towards "breaking stuff".

[field_ninja]

The biggest problem with a system that uses averages is that at some point you either lose number accuracy, in which case the judges opinions aren't directly carried over to the final score, or you end up with the scores being carried out to six decimal places (how would it feel to lose by 5 hundred-thousandths of a point).

The only change this would make in last years placement is that SCV would drop to 7th, moving Crown and Bluecoats up a position respectively. The placements stay the same, but the spreads change depending on how and where you round out your numbers.

Blue Devils 97.94

Cadets 96.72

Cavaliers 96.19

Phantom 95.00

SCV 94.09

Crown 94.19

Bluecoats 94.13

Blue Knights 90.22

Boston 89.31

Colts 86.06

Glassmen 86.00

Spirit 84.81