A: Competitive Inertia

[GUARDLING]

"Practice time" and "large set pieces that are essential to the visual design" aren't the same thing. Take away the mirrors, and BD's visual program doesn't have much to work with. Don't get me wrong - I liked them, and how they used them, but there should be some consideration as to whether it's competitively responsible to allow those can afford to purchase and transport big set pieces to have a scoring advantage over those who can't.

At a certain point, it's worth remembering that the rules in any sport are there to restrict the competitors. Whether it's salary caps or rules against holding in football, rules are usually there to promote parity in the actual playing of the game. IMHO, BD's mirrors were SO important to the visual scores they got that they might be considered an unfair advantage over those corps whose budgets might not allow for them to haul around items that large.

I hear what your saying but totally disagree. You are penalizing someone for having the means. Of course without the mirrors the design would be weaker...The show was designed around them and designed for them to be a part of the process.

Why should BD suffer or stifle their creativity because someone else doesnt have the means.

Even in the WGI handbook for winter guards when entering World Class its says there's alot to become a world guard and 1 part is also the financial means ( staff, rehearsal time or whatever it incompases )

Gotta be prepared to play big if you want to be big...JMO

[Bruckner8]

This " theory " only works come Finals if you the believe the judging panels at Semi's got together with the Finals judges and told the Finals judges that " NO WAY ARE YOU GOING TO ALLOW BLOO TO BEAT CAVIES AT FINALS.

The poster here states with a degree of certainty that " Bloo's Finals performance was way better than ther semi' ".

I'm always leary of people that make such claims. For instance, most fans... even long time fans.... have an expertise in perhaps one, or at best 2 captions. For example, a brass musician can tell us if in their opinion, a Corps was " on " regarding their brass playing. Maybe even in Visual and marching. But would they know if the percussion lie was "on " ? No....... if someone plays drums, would they know if the Corps was " on " in Brass ? Or if the Guard performance was " on " ? Of course not . Even a Color Guard judge at Semi Finals could not make the claim that the" Bluecoats Finals performance was way better than their semi's " as this poster does. Even 2 judges on the nite of a competition can not decide even in their own judged caption whether or not the Corps is " better " that nite. They often disagree ( look at Atlanta caption breakdowns) that nite. The suggestion that judges in Finals then would somehow not allow the Bluecoats to beat Cavies because of what another judging panel thought " a week or so earlier " ( or last year ) is just plain silly, imo.

The judges don't have to talk to each other. I'm sure they don't. It's human nature, when doing a difficult job, to use any advantage to make the job easier. It's just easier to give it to the corps that has done it before.

When I speak in absolutes like that, I'm just being passionate about my theory. And until it's debunked, I'm just going to become more convinced, more passionate, more vocal.

Mistakes are made by judges ALL THE TIME. There's a process by which corps can submit tapes to DCI, similar to NFL or MLB sending a video of a bad call. When a judge says NOTHING BAD, and in fact says things like "OMG< this is the best color I've heard all summer" and "WOW, the clarity of all those voices is unparralelled." (Box 5 comments, for sure)...and then puts his number in Box 4...hmmmm...It's a very difficult thing to do, especially with all of the staff expectation/pressure on the judge. Everyone knows everyone. It's just life.

[mobrien]

I hear what your saying but totally disagree. You are penalizing someone for having the means. Of course without the mirrors the design would be weaker...The show was designed around them and designed for them to be a part of the process.

Why should BD suffer or stifle their creativity because someone else doesnt have the means.

For all the same reasons that baseball and football and basketball recognized the wisdom of salary caps.

Putting restrictions on the richest players' ability to buy championships promoted parity in their respective leagues, and, as a result, saw greater fan interest in their sports - and even greater total revenues generated - for every team in their league.

"Creativity" in any competitive activity means utilizing your best intelligence within the parameters of the rules. If there were rules restricting (or handicapping) use of large set pieces, BD's staff would have to simply look for another way to express the same idea, which I'm sure they could have done.

Edited August 16, 2010 by mobrien

[Bruckner8]

How did it apply in 93, when Regiment went from 8th to 3rd? Do you think that corps had ANY inertia as it walked off the field in 92?

Easy: The corps was a lot better...

You don't understand the theory at all.

[Bruckner8]

Or, CI could be a nice way to rationalize why some corps just don't get it done as well as others sometimes. It's always outside forces conspiring to hold people back, lol. CI is all well and good until a particular team scores higher--well, then they #### well earned it, of course! If they score lower or don't move up--well, CI just wouldn't allow it. I think it's funny how just as many people on here will ##### and moan when a corps does jump a place or two at Finals-- because it was rigged, of course!

LOL, which side is one to believe?

That is very true. Rationalization IS part of the process. The people evaluating whether or not CI applied are just as subjective as the judges. Just be sure to notice that I always use trends, prior data, patterns, that lead up to the result. And the pattern is: Whenever it seems to be split 50/50 (even fanbase), the tie seems to go to the corps with higher CI.

I'm waiting for someone to say: "What about [situation X], where there seemed to be consensus that Corps A [higher CI] was clearly better than Corps B [lower CI], but Corps B won [that situation X] somehow."

I don't think it's ever happened.

Oh, and don't forget: We'd have to agree on Corps A and B's relative CI

[GUARDLING]

For all the same reasons that baseball and football and basketball recognized the wisdom of salary caps.

Putting restrictions on the richest players' ability to buy championships promoted parity in their respective leagues, and, as a result, saw greater fan interest in their sports - and even greater total revenues generated - for every team in their league.

And you feel this way about props? ow about a corps that can only afford 2 flag changes verses 6

costume change or not

new shiny drums or older ones

where does your theory draw the line.

JMO just doesnt make sense to me, we'll have to agree to disagree I guess..the nature of Drum Corps lol..and human nature

[BRASSO]

. It's just easier to give it to the corps that has done it before.

The judges had no problem having BK beat SCV earlier this year. One would think SCV would have gotten the benefit of the doubt early, rather than later in the season. Epecially with a BK Corps that had never beaten SCV before. But the reverse was true. BK was able to overcome the perception earlier in the season. But as the season moved along, SCV moved ahead... way ahead of BK. The Bluecoats, on the other hand, rose up right out of the gate this year, and stayed ahead of The Cadets and Crown pretty much all year. The Cadets are a perennal TOP 3 Corps. One would think they'd catch Bloo come Finals. But the judges actually allowed BLOO to expand their lead over Cadets by Finals week. This tells me that the judges would have been prepared for BLOO to beat Cavies at Finals too , if they thought they were better than the Cavies at Finals. The judges certainly found BLOO better than Cavies just a few weeks earlier this year. They were prepared to do so at Finals. But he Cavies appeared to them to be a bit better at Finals,that's all, imo.

Edited August 16, 2010 by BRASSO

[year1buick]

Easy: The corps was a lot better...

You don't understand the theory at all.

No, I think understand it just fine. (I just think you're selectively rationalizing, depending on the circumstances.) Perhaps that wasn't a good example...

How about in 92, when Regiment went from 3rd to 8th? Or, more specifically, 5th/6th to 8th for the last show of the season. We'd held around that range for most of the season (even beat the Cadets in the week prior.) Since there wasn't a clear distinction going in, between us and Crossmen and SCV, shouldn't CI have kept us in the same slot?

[mgarside83]

IMO these corps continue to stay at the top because they have such a reputation of success and image that kids who march other corps use those corps as stepping stones to get to one of the top corps. The hardest thing for a corps to overcome is losing their most talented and experienced players to the top corps. Glassmen for instance, struggles losing their better members to the big guys next year. I doubt that BD has too many rookies who are actually drum corps, or indoor, rookies. Glassmen however, train a good percentage of True rookies. Recruiting is everything. I think the people teaching at the competitive high school level have the hardest jobs. Teaching BD would be easy, the players can do whatever you ask them to. It's not like Scojo is teaching a kid how to hold a stick for the first time, or how to read music. It's simply detailing their technique and understanding their responsibilities.

And I am very proud of Nate Hawk, the center snare of Gmen, who stayed with his corps for 3 years, thorugh his age out, when he had all the talent he needed to march wherever he wanted to. If more students would place the same loyalty to their corps, there would be a lot more competition for the top spots.

At the same time, I do recognize that some of the middle to lower end World Class corps could do more to sell their brand to potential membership. I think Troopers are doing some good things on that line, hopefully that continues.

[formerBDbari]

one thing i can say is...

consistency is KEY.

Consistency in the entire organization, staff, directors, techs, arrangers, whoever...

also in BD's case, it doesn't hurt to have a slew of Hall of Famers on your staff.