Judging Bias Against The Scouts?

[mad_scotty]

Other corps did harder things better than the Scouts. Period. I have no doubt that Scott Stewart believed that his direction was the best, but it eventually caught up to the corps. They're trying to make their identity click today, and they're making progress, but there's no bias.

And I thought Scouts didn't care about scores?

i think its a lot more accurate to say that scouts don't make scores their number one priority. madison always played to the stands, in my day we would frequently talk about the fact that we, as a group, preferred to play to a stadium full of screaming corps fans and not just to 9 green shirts. the other corps disagreed, and as a result we now have more judges than ever, even double ge panels, and half as many shows with ticket sales dropping year after year since dci's peak in the mid-late 90's.

i wonder, if the modern dci board could do it over if they would still go to war with the scouts and push for judging that rewards less exciting design and kills anyone who does the simpler stuff that audiences have always gone nuts for?

[dckid80]

What good does this type of thread do anyone?

The past is just that.

[mad_scotty]

What good does this type of thread do anyone?

The past is just that.

i think dci is experiencing a lot of turbnulence right now, people are questioning the direction of the activity, adn some are even worrying about its future viability (and honestly, the numbers are bleak, less corps, shows, and fans are a consistent trend over the last decade). if, like me, you're concerned about the activity you need to understand what drum corps was, and is, and how we got here from there. then and only then do you have a good fundamental basis for discussing future plans, and little conversations like these help us to shape our opinions about future considerations. thats what good it does me, at least, and why i'm game to talk on a thread like this most days.

[rudi man]

Well the one thing can tell everyone This drum corps no matter if the judges were bias or not years ago which

in my opinion shouldn't matter anymore are making a tremendous come back ! Thanks to all of the Madison kids

for putting such wonderful show in Toledo last night you were fantasticl !!

[caliquads]

I remember hearing a story about scouts sending a couple of Japanese

(read no english) kids in to do critique in the late 80s. Anyone know if this is true?

I thought there was a schism between judges and Madison on where the activity should go, not just simply a bias. I imagine it was a two way thing.

[mad_scotty]

I remember hearing a story about scouts sending a couple of Japanese

(read no english) kids in to do critique in the late 80s. Anyone know if this is true?

I thought there was a schism between judges and Madison on where the activity should go, not just simply a bias. I imagine it was a two way thing.

that was in the 90's, but yeah, it happened. and the corps, when i marched, usedto destroy the critique tapes in the parking lot after shows. i never heard a single judges tape when i marched madison.

there was a schism between the judges and madison, and between scott stewart and the board of directors on the direction the activity should go, and it was a two way street, and it resulted in madison shows getting hammered by the judges even when the audiences loved them.

in terms of judging it was a stylistic thing. madisons style was a loud, in your face hornline but playing at a very high level on very challenging books, combined with a marching style that was extremely fast and aggressive for its era but contained essentially very old school design elements. judges didn't really take level of difficulty into consideration in brass scoring in the 90's and the judges felt madisons marching style, while extemely clean and aggressive, wasn't edgy and modern enough so the visual scores stayed flat. the drumline ran into some of this too, drumlines in that era were judged by one criteria--cleanliness, basically a tic system. madison always had big lines with hard parts, were never as clean, and lagged badly in scoring. basically, madison was trying to be the biggest, baddest, loudest thing in dci every year, while maintaining an extremely high level of difficulty and classic drum corps design elements at a time when judges wanted what they felt were more sophisticated design elements and were willing to smack anyone who deviated from their idea of what corps were supposed to do. that type of thinking is why every time we have a "best show ever" conversation 95 scouts and 93 star get mentioned more than every other show combined, but the judges refused to reward them with scores. both corps were punished for failing to accomodate the judging communities sense of taste.

the rift between scott stewart was a totally different thing, and centered on a fundamental philosophy of what drum corps was supposed to be. stewart wanted the roots vision, corps that existed primarily to present young people with an opportunity to learn adn grow, with audience placed second in the priority line, and competition a very distant third. part of his commitment to member experieonce were his voluntarily adopted rules limiting rehearsal to 8 hours a day in every days and on tour, requiring 3 full meals with full meal breaks and a snack every day, and requiring 8 full hours of sleep a night, with bus hours counting as 1/2 time for a max of 4 hours. a couple of times we spent 9 hours on a bus, 4 on the floor, an hour for breakfast, an hour for visual, an hour for lunch, an hour of ensemble, then supper and off to the show. no other corps would do that, ad several corps directors reacted to scott stewart with the same incredibly bitter anger and spite i've seen directed at me on dcp when i brought up these rules.

additionally, scott was, well, lets just say fiscally conservative. and saying that is like saying pres. bush isn't popular in san francisco. accurate, but doesn't begin to do it justice. this was good for madison. scott wouldn't buy fancy props for the field, and the judges killed madison in ge for years for being too conservative, but he left the corps with over 600k in the bank. sal salas gave the judges what he wanted, but the corps nearly folded last year, at one point they were considering not touring because the money was all gone and there was a pile of debt. scott stewart saw the musical pageantry as what it turned out to be, a financial plan that would force most of the sorps into folding. as we all know the supercorps idea of 10-12 corps performing near pro level broadway style productions was an intentional and largely succesfuul plan set on by dci in the 90's (one that coincided with less corps, less shows, and less fans). stewart was the guy fighting on the other side, and this fight became more bitter through the years. i don't doubt that it also impacted scores, by the late 90's the dci board of directors and the judging communities were bitterly at odds with madison. the fact that the audiences clearly wanted madison style shows wasn't really a consideration with dci, it never really is. this was basically a fight between a very small handful of people in a private country club over who gets to pick the catering menu at the annual golf tournament. stewart and madison were on the minority side, and dci, well, it is what it is, supercorps with superbudgets playing shows written for green shirts beating anything aimed at the ever shrinking audiences.

[megadrive]

that was in the 90's, but yeah, it happened. and the corps, when i marched, usedto destroy the critique tapes in the parking lot after shows. i never heard a single judges tape when i marched madison.

there was a schism between the judges and madison, and between scott stewart and the board of directors on the direction the activity should go, and it was a two way street, and it resulted in madison shows getting hammered by the judges even when the audiences loved them.

in terms of judging it was a stylistic thing. madisons style was a loud, in your face hornline but playing at a very high level on very challenging books, combined with a marching style that was extremely fast and aggressive for its era but contained essentially very old school design elements. judges didn't really take level of difficulty into consideration in brass scoring in the 90's and the judges felt madisons marching style, while extemely clean and aggressive, wasn't edgy and modern enough so the visual scores stayed flat. the drumline ran into some of this too, drumlines in that era were judged by one criteria--cleanliness, basically a tic system. madison always had big lines with hard parts, were never as clean, and lagged badly in scoring. basically, madison was trying to be the biggest, baddest, loudest thing in dci every year, while maintaining an extremely high level of difficulty and classic drum corps design elements at a time when judges wanted what they felt were more sophisticated design elements and were willing to smack anyone who deviated from their idea of what corps were supposed to do. that type of thinking is why every time we have a "best show ever" conversation 95 scouts and 93 star get mentioned more than every other show combined, but the judges refused to reward them with scores. both corps were punished for failing to accomodate the judging communities sense of taste.

the rift between scott stewart was a totally different thing, and centered on a fundamental philosophy of what drum corps was supposed to be. stewart wanted the roots vision, corps that existed primarily to present young people with an opportunity to learn adn grow, with audience placed second in the priority line, and competition a very distant third. part of his commitment to member experieonce were his voluntarily adopted rules limiting rehearsal to 8 hours a day in every days and on tour, requiring 3 full meals with full meal breaks and a snack every day, and requiring 8 full hours of sleep a night, with bus hours counting as 1/2 time for a max of 4 hours. a couple of times we spent 9 hours on a bus, 4 on the floor, an hour for breakfast, an hour for visual, an hour for lunch, an hour of ensemble, then supper and off to the show. no other corps would do that, ad several corps directors reacted to scott stewart with the same incredibly bitter anger and spite i've seen directed at me on dcp when i brought up these rules.

additionally, scott was, well, lets just say fiscally conservative. and saying that is like saying pres. bush isn't popular in san francisco. accurate, but doesn't begin to do it justice. this was good for madison. scott wouldn't buy fancy props for the field, and the judges killed madison in ge for years for being too conservative, but he left the corps with over 600k in the bank. sal salas gave the judges what he wanted, but the corps nearly folded last year, at one point they were considering not touring because the money was all gone and there was a pile of debt. scott stewart saw the musical pageantry as what it turned out to be, a financial plan that would force most of the sorps into folding. as we all know the supercorps idea of 10-12 corps performing near pro level broadway style productions was an intentional and largely succesfuul plan set on by dci in the 90's (one that coincided with less corps, less shows, and less fans). stewart was the guy fighting on the other side, and this fight became more bitter through the years. i don't doubt that it also impacted scores, by the late 90's the dci board of directors and the judging communities were bitterly at odds with madison. the fact that the audiences clearly wanted madison style shows wasn't really a consideration with dci, it never really is. this was basically a fight between a very small handful of people in a private country club over who gets to pick the catering menu at the annual golf tournament. stewart and madison were on the minority side, and dci, well, it is what it is, supercorps with superbudgets playing shows written for green shirts beating anything aimed at the ever shrinking audiences.

Extremely well written and compelling post. Thank you.

[Pinwiz]

basically, madison was trying to be the biggest, baddest, loudest thing in dci every year, while maintaining an extremely high level of difficulty and classic drum corps design elements at a time when judges wanted what they felt were more sophisticated design elements and were willing to smack anyone who deviated from their idea of what corps were supposed to do.

And that's great. Like I mentioned above, I truly believe that Scott Stewart followed his philosophy to the letter. It was evident on the field, it was evident in the stands, and I do believe that it would still be a Finalist-caliber show today. What led to Madison's fall from Finals was bad show design in general, not the philosophy.

Madison had a great niche, and they deserve all of the accolades that they've received in the past. I understand why people are passionate about the Scouts, even though it drives me crazy. I just wish that they would find their "modern" style already, because it's been hard to watch the transition. I know that I'm very (very very very very) hard on the Scouts, but there are some moments in this summer's program that really work. This year feels like the Scouts again, and for that I'm grateful. It's going to take some more work to try and reconcile the wants of the alumni with the realities of the competitive landscape.

Just don't sit next to me when they perform this weekend. I'm snarky in the stands, like the rest of my group, and we're going to have tons of fun with Madison's performances. That doesn't mean that they're bad, just that I'm evil.

[jonnyboy]

Extremely well written and compelling post. Thank you.

I agree, but you don't need to quote the whole post.

As far as a judging bias against a particular corps? No Way.

[mad_scotty]

I agree, but you don't need to quote the whole post.

As far as a judging bias against a particular corps? No Way.

a judge with an axe to grind giving one corps a lower score than they feel they earned because of a personal conflict with a staff member? doubtful.

but a judge feeling they have a vision of what a drum corps should be, and scoring higher to corps who match their world view, and lower to corps that don't, well, i think thats really a confirmed fact. scoring and judges have shaped show design ever since i started watching this activity.