Judging Bias Against The Scouts?

[Jeff Ream]

Got you - but what would be wrong if they did bring back some of the music they are famous for? Would the world end? No.

no. but a problem therein exists...how can you top some of the amazing performances of Scouts past? Can you top 88 Malaguena? 99 JCS? Rememberance 98? Slaughter 75? Ice Castles 80?

trying to redo classics is tough, and risky...why do you think Cadets only redid WSS once and have avoided App Spring?

look at 92 SCV or Crossmen when they redid Puma/Rain Forest.....everyone expects the legend and they never got it

[atlvalet]

how is that spitting in the face of the judges? Maybe Madison decided that what Madison and the crowd wanted was more important than what the judges wanted? Granted, that won't help your scores much, but maybe that just didn't matter to Madison at the time...

This might sum up the Madison staff thoughts, as one staff member mentioned this while we taught together...

"If the judges tell us something we don't know, then we're already in big trouble."

Edited August 7, 2008 by atlvalet

[Shannon98]

I am torn as read through all of the post about whether or not judging in DCI is bias. I do believe that DCI does a good job in placing corps in the general area in which a corps belongs. i.e. phantom, BD, crown, cadets, and cavies, being top 5 then SCV , blue coats, 6 and seven, and so on through out the rankings. but I do believe that a judge can be bias in placing one corps over another close corps on any given night. Judging is subjective and always will be because it placing the judgement into the hands of human interpretation. As we all know is human interpretation changes from person to person. pretty much similar to any competition that is judging on performance such as ice skating, gymnastics, etc.

As for the scouts, there have been times I wondered why they didn't place higher. 97 being the most obvious to me. 95 not so much for me because that was an incredible year for many corps. And ranks as one of my favorite years in general.

But here is the thing, if we took the old formula of the scouts and placing it in todays system it does not work anymore. It is the same reason that we can not take the 89 SCV, 87 Cadets, 88 Scouts and expect them to win today. Corps' in general are playing more challenging music, designing more challenging and artistic drill, and the guards are spinning faster and throwing higher tosses. To think that what has been done in the past is the way to go is the wrong mentality. They can bring the music back like phantom this year but they need to update it like phantom this year. People seem to believe that if the scouts bring back the mid 90's shows they will be great again and that is not the case. besides there are other corps (i.e. crown, and phantom) that seem to have found that loud sound that Madison once had but they are adding other dynamics that are allowing them to move forward. I do enjoy the loud passion of the Madison Scouts but their is much more to DCI than just loud there is the fast drill, a team of guard members throwing sixes and sevens and catching them in unison, the passion of a great ballad, the drum lines ripping off great solos, and so on.

Men of Madison keep your passion and fire that has made you great but please step up the game. I hope the designers can figure out a way for them to bring in both.

[khoutler]

“So let me ask you a question: Can you name an example of where the results were not fair and honest? I keep asking this, and no one responds with a concrete example. Name an instance where someone didn't win/make Finals/make Semis because of this kind of bias. Give us an example for debate.” – Pinwiz

“But I haven't seen one specific example of a year and a caption when judging bias placed Madison lower than they deserved.

As soon as somebody offers one, I'm certainly going to watch those shows on FN and see what I think. Sometimes you do see a show totally differently when you watch it 10 years later, and maybe that'll be the case here.

So, any examples?” – ShortAndFast

I don’t believe that I ever took a position on the existence of a judging bias regarding Madison. What I did propose was the idea that if the judging community, either individually or as a tool of their dci masters, did use scoring as a mechanism to effect the direction of the “activity” then that would constitute unfair and dishonest behavior on their part.

Even in the absence of concrete and specific examples I do think that it would require a breathtaking level of naïveté to believe that there have never been judges who have allowed their biases to interfere with their ability to judge a show fairly and honestly or allow for the possibility that it even happens on a regular basis. The real question is not if bias enters the judging equation but how often it occurs and if one particular corps has suffered disproportionately because of it. Unfortunately for this discussion judges who act according to their biases rarely declare themselves publicly so here we are flailing around trying to come to some reasonable conclusions based on anecdotal evidence and our own, admittedly biased, understanding of drum corps history.

[byline]

no. but a problem therein exists...how can you top some of the amazing performances of Scouts past? Can you top 88 Malaguena? 99 JCS? Rememberance 98? Slaughter 75? Ice Castles 80?

trying to redo classics is tough, and risky...why do you think Cadets only redid WSS once and have avoided App Spring?

look at 92 SCV or Crossmen when they redid Puma/Rain Forest.....everyone expects the legend and they never got it

Very good point, Jeff.

[rut-roh]

not saying there is a bias just the scouts shows are not what the judges are looking for. i just bought the scouts 94-01 dvd and it's better every year! for me maybe not so much of the judges. is there a bias? see "scott stewart".

What's silly to me is that if you look at it objectively, the judges gave the Scouts some GREAT numbers during those years. That 1995 show is a great example. The corps finished 4th with a 95.4. They were 3rd in visual performance, 2nd in brass, 2nd in GE music, and 2nd in ensemble music. The only ordinal they had less than 4th place was percussion which finished 6th. Those are excellent numbers many corps would KILL for! And looking at it objectively, I think those numbers and placements are pretty accurate. Excellent show, very exciting stuff, one of their finest hornlines, but the show also had some deficiencies in comparison to its closest competitors. The drumline WAS weaker in comparison to other sections of the corps. The drill WAS, at times, not as dynamic or cohesive as it could have been. Yet at other times, it was brilliant.

This is just a theory on my part, but I think there are simply some fans (and perhaps alums) who think that because the audience loved them so much and cheered so loudly, it must have meant that they marched the best, played the best, spun the best, and drummed the best. That's just not how it always works. They might even be using all of this "we got screwed" stuff to deflect legitimate criticism of the corps' very real shortcomings during those years. Who knows? But I do know that as it is with any type of fan (short for "fanatic," after all), emotion often clouds reason. I know someone who is still convinced that the Scouts should have won DCI in 1999. Yeah, great show and nice corps and all, but they are out of their minds if they really believe that!

[gellio]

I do think there is a bias in judging, but not just against the Scouts - against everyone except maybe Cavaliers and Blue Devils. Over the last decade, those two have been the most consistent corps and deserve all the praise and championships they have won. But, how can Phantom have placed so unbelievably close to the Cavies several times this year but not beat them once? You mean to tell me the Cavies are just that wee-itty-little bit better than Phantom every single night? That's absurd. That's my problem with judging today. Corps are slotted and there is very little movement on any given night. Yes I know corps like the Blue Stars, Glassmen, and even Madison have surged over the course of the season, but I'm talking night to night shows were corps are so close to each other. We saw that once last year with Bluecoats beating both Cavies and Devils. I can't think of another time I have seen that in years. Judging is not judged on any given night. There exists a bias of expectation as to where corps should be placing and the numbers follow suit.

Just watch - Phantom will be very close to BD and Cavies all three nights this week, but in 3rd place all three nights.

Edited August 7, 2008 by gellio

[cadetzoid]

{I don’t believe that I ever took a position on the existence of a judging bias regarding Madison. What I did propose was the idea that if the judging community, either individually or as a tool of their dci masters, did use scoring as a mechanism to effect the direction of the “activity” then that would constitute unfair and dishonest behavior on their part.

Even in the absence of concrete and specific examples I do think that it would require a breathtaking level of naïveté to believe that there have never been judges who have allowed their biases to interfere with their ability to judge a show fairly and honestly or allow for the possibility that it even happens on a regular basis. The real question is not if bias enters the judging equation but how often it occurs and if one particular corps has suffered disproportionately because of it. Unfortunately for this discussion judges who act according to their biases rarely declare themselves publicly so here we are flailing around trying to come to some reasonable conclusions based on anecdotal evidence and our own, admittedly biased, understanding of drum corps history.

khoutler}

In response to the above quote and this thread:

It think it hard to claim tangible bias without there being something concrete to point to, a lowered placement due to this bias. If you are suggesting bias on the level of the kind we face almost every day, then it is not worth all of these discussions. Example: In the summer, I go only to one snow ball stand because I like it. Two other stands on the same street have that shaved ice kind of cold summer treat, but I like my choice and don't think I'll like the other product any better. I in fact do try the other two because I have been appointed by the city to write an article for the paper titled "American City's Best Snow Ball Stand". I go to the other stands and because I know I already like my usual stand, some bias exists before I even order that shaved ice version of a snow ball cone. I might actually over react to my acknowledgment of bias and go to far "the other way"with my assessment.

Here is what I think does happen with most mature, experienced judges: Example: I usually don't prefer this group to its peers, and jazz is not my favorite type of music. I need to be careful of any bias I bring to the "clip board". To be fair, I also need to make sure I do not over compensate for any "built-in" bias.

Can I or you prove this example fits every judge?... of course not. Flaws and all, a system does exist for any corps to contact several levels of authority over the judges to communicate claims of bias, unfairness, etc.

We often forget that DCI is basically run by the board of directors, which is made of corps directors. A DCI summit (new school for rules congress) where the corps directors and staffs change or don't change many aspects of the activity based on what they feel is important for their individual groups and the activity as a whole, including judging. Again, not a perfect system.

For every corps that may have been slighted some, there have been corps that have been overtly pushed some. For every undeserved tenth, there has been a deserved tenth not given. It think it probably all evens itself out so to speak over time, though not justifying anything unfair, just acknowledging the built in flaws of subjectivity. Judges are human, subject to influence, faillible, and influenceable. Due to this FACT, even without thinking I was being dealt with fairly, I would not turn my back on all of them (judges) due to the assumed bias of some. I would not openly ridicule them as charlatans. I would not stop going to critique. I would not send in innocent Japanese members to make a farce out of the critique system (what message did that send to the Japanese members, much less the judges? What about the lesson to the other corps members as to how to deal with such issues!)

Unprovable, conjecture, draining, not worth it, does make Scouts alumni seem overly sensitive and self empowered to always point a finger somewhere rather than at themselves.

Go Scouts. Good show this summer. Would love to see them in finals. If I were a judge today or tomorrow, I would have them in. But because I love a come-back story, I would need to be careful of my current, understandable, explainable, bias. If I am an experienced and mature judge, I'll deal with bias just fine and be as fair as is humanly possible.

Edited August 7, 2008 by cadetzoid

[rut-roh]

I do think there is a bias in judging, but not just against the Scouts - against everyone except maybe Cavaliers and Blue Devils. Over the last decade, those two have been the most consistent corps and deserve all the praise and championships they have won. But, how can Phantom have placed so unbelievably close to the Cavies several times this year but not beat them once? You mean to tell me the Cavies are just that wee-itty-little bit better than Phantom every single night? That's absurd.

Why? It's not like you can play defense in drum corps. With so many captions being judged every night, and Phantom winning some of those captions against the Cavaliers, it just comes down to how it all plays out when you add the numbers. You think it's absolutely impossible that when taking everything into account that YES, maybe the Cavaliers ARE (or have been) just a bit better than Phantom every night they met this year?? THAT, to me, is absurd that you would think it's impossible.

For the record, they have met 6 times this year, 7 if you include Allentown. Early in the season, when I saw the Cavaliers, they were so freaking clean I was amazed. Phantom was good, but not nearly as clean. Corps make changes, add stuff to the show, new effects, they clean stuff up, everyone knows the deal. Look at the spreads for those 7 match-ups and tell me again why you think it's impossible that maybe the Cavaliers were just better. And that it will be impossible for Phantom to overtake them. I've seen stranger things happen than a corps overcoming a .075 spread during finals week.

6/21 Rockford, IL 1.000 spread

6/27 Normal, IL 1.900 spread

7/12 Denver, CO 2.275 spread

7/19 San Antonio, TX 1.200 spread

7/25 Murfreesboro, TN 0.075 spread

7/26 Atlanta, GA 0.400 spread

8/1-2 Allentown, PA 0.075 spread

By the way, at every one of those shows, Phantom beat the Cavaliers in percussion. Would you say that the judges are biased towards Phantom's drumline, or could it just possibly be that Phantom simply has the better percussion section than the Cavaliers?

Edited August 7, 2008 by rut-roh

[MikeD]

I don’t believe that I ever took a position on the existence of a judging bias regarding Madison. What I did propose was the idea that if the judging community, either individually or as a tool of their dci masters, did use scoring as a mechanism to effect the direction of the “activity” then that would constitute unfair and dishonest behavior on their part.

If the judging community acts at the behest of the DCI powers-that-be in how they come up with scores, that is what they are supposed to do.