DCI Judging 101

[Michael Boo]

DCI Judging 101

I've received a few e-mails this week regarding my recaps analyses, asking me what the judges are looking and listening for...and to explain what is inside the judging sheets.

I hope the article linked above helps answer some questions for those who are new to trying to understand the judging sheets, and hopefully might even provide a little more information for those who already have a grasp of the sheets.

This is not meant to be in-depth and comprehensive.

Enjoy!

[Michael Boo]

bump

[Michael Boo]

And I'm going to keep bumping it to get it off page 14 until someone reads it! :)

[CloudFuel]

I thought it was awesome when I read it last night, especially with all of the people questioning the scores (me being one of them). :)

Edited August 10, 2008 by CloudFuel

[Dr.Mickey]

Thank you, Michael Boo. I had just read this on DCI.org before coming over here to see your post. For some people, bumping your own post could be considered shameless self promotion. But in your case, we'll call it "promotion for the greater good."

But seriously, this is a very helpful article. And I love that you have a link to a sample judge sheet. I had heard that the numbers were already filled in before finals week, but it looks like that isn't true.

Nice article.

[YoostaMarch]

Quite frankly, had Phantom lost under the same system with the same judges on the same night, there would be more blame assigned to the judges. PR won, so don't look a gift horse in the mouth. This was truly bizarre numbers management--- I didn't say biased, corrupt or unfair. It was bizarre to have such inconsistencies poring from great corps: one is seen as the greatest visual standard in DCI history (BD's 6 GE Visual judges in 3 days prove this viewpoint); they win high brass all week but hit the ground like a safe in drums and music ensemble. What? BD crapped out in Music Ensemble?

Luckily for PR, the field foot judge either saw previously unknown fault BD or maybe just felt they were overrated Thurs/Fri. That caption (finals) holds the most inconsistent opinion of the world class weekend to the joy of Rockford---again, maybe it was justified. He was down there; we were not.

Drumwise, it played out to little surprise. Yes, both judges have close PR ties. Imagine two former Blue Devils members judging GE Visual and giving last night's numbers. This server would crash.

Oh, where are the "no perfect numbers unless the corps goes last" detractors? Certainly not driving to Illinois today:)

[Michael Boo]

...For some people, bumping your own post could be considered shameless self promotion. But in your case, we'll call it "promotion for the greater good."

...

[mad_scotty]

Michael, I have to tell you I read your column and I was really bothered by it. You did a great job of explaining DCI judging as it was originally designed, and as it was judged at one time, but the gap between how judging is described in the manual and what judges actually do has grown so great that your article was basically nonsense to me. GE categories are all about how the corps "sells" itself? Sure, back in the 80's, but the 80's were a really long time ago. The gap between what corps are "selling" and what audiences are "buying" has grown so great that GE, originally the category built in to describe and affix a score to the "wow moments" in drum corps has become a category so weird and esoteric that I have never met or communicated with a single person who has a fundamental understanding of the captions as they are actually scored (as opposed to the long obsolete rulebook definitions you are trying to pass on as knowledge in your column).

Ge scoring based on the corps selling themselves? It's an absurd concept. The only real way to rate a salesmans ability to sell is to measure who is buying, and how much they are buying. In a performance that means audience impact. How often does the corps that generates the most buzz, the most interest, and the most passionate response even end up in the top 3 in the GE categories, though? 1992, biggest crowd response was Madison, they were 5th in GE. 1993 biggest crowd response Phantom, 3rd in GE. 1995 Madison, one of the biggest crowd responses ever in a show widely considered one of the best all time, 4th in GE. Corpsreps doesn't have the recaps for 2003 and 2007 for me to verify, but Phantom 03 finished in 4th place and Crown 07 in 6th overall, and clearly neither of these performances (both the "best sellers" in their respective years) won GE. These are just some of the more notorious examples, shows that clearly stood out in their years for audience impact but got hammered in GE and lost placements as a result.

DCI has been claiming that audience impact is part of the GE category since its inception, and still describes GE as an evaluation of a corps ability to "sell itself" on the field, but we all know that isn't true, and hasn't been true for decades. Now, maybe DCI is finally starting to turn the corner here, certainly Phantom 08 is an exception to the general rule, the corps that had the biggest impact on finals night won for a change. But I need more of a track record to go one before I'll start to believe that DCI judges are going back to actually judging the shows according to the manual, instead of to their own personal taste. Until then, your article reads as another lame attempt by a DCI mouthpiece to regurgitate a company line that in no way corresponds to what the eye sees and the ear hears. I think a description of the way judges actually judge GE would have been a lot more useful to me, because I've been scratching my head about this one for many years.

[dbc03]

Michael, I have to tell you I read your column and I was really bothered by it. You did a great job of explaining DCI judging as it was originally designed, and as it was judged at one time, but the gap between how judging is described in the manual and what judges actually do has grown so great that your article was basically nonsense to me. GE categories are all about how the corps "sells" itself? Sure, back in the 80's, but the 80's were a really long time ago. The gap between what corps are "selling" and what audiences are "buying" has grown so great that GE, originally the category built in to describe and affix a score to the "wow moments" in drum corps has become a category so weird and esoteric that I have never met or communicated with a single person who has a fundamental understanding of the captions as they are actually scored (as opposed to the long obsolete rulebook definitions you are trying to pass on as knowledge in your column).

Ge scoring based on the corps selling themselves? It's an absurd concept. The only real way to rate a salesmans ability to sell is to measure who is buying, and how much they are buying. In a performance that means audience impact. How often does the corps that generates the most buzz, the most interest, and the most passionate response even end up in the top 3 in the GE categories, though? 1992, biggest crowd response was Madison, they were 5th in GE. 1993 biggest crowd response Phantom, 3rd in GE. 1995 Madison, one of the biggest crowd responses ever in a show widely considered one of the best all time, 4th in GE. Corpsreps doesn't have the recaps for 2003 and 2007 for me to verify, but Phantom 03 finished in 4th place and Crown 07 in 6th overall, and clearly neither of these performances (both the "best sellers" in their respective years) won GE. These are just some of the more notorious examples, shows that clearly stood out in their years for audience impact but got hammered in GE and lost placements as a result.

DCI has been claiming that audience impact is part of the GE category since its inception, and still describes GE as an evaluation of a corps ability to "sell itself" on the field, but we all know that isn't true, and hasn't been true for decades. Now, maybe DCI is finally starting to turn the corner here, certainly Phantom 08 is an exception to the general rule, the corps that had the biggest impact on finals night won for a change. But I need more of a track record to go one before I'll start to believe that DCI judges are going back to actually judging the shows according to the manual, instead of to their own personal taste. Until then, your article reads as another lame attempt by a DCI mouthpiece to regurgitate a company line that in no way corresponds to what the eye sees and the ear hears. I think a description of the way judges actually judge GE would have been a lot more useful to me, because I've been scratching my head about this one for many years.

Emphasis on what you seem to be overlooking

[KevinRomano]

Michael, I have to tell you I read your column and I was really bothered by it. You did a great job of explaining DCI judging as it was originally designed, and as it was judged at one time, but the gap between how judging is described in the manual and what judges actually do has grown so great that your article was basically nonsense to me. GE categories are all about how the corps "sells" itself? Sure, back in the 80's, but the 80's were a really long time ago. The gap between what corps are "selling" and what audiences are "buying" has grown so great that GE, originally the category built in to describe and affix a score to the "wow moments" in drum corps has become a category so weird and esoteric that I have never met or communicated with a single person who has a fundamental understanding of the captions as they are actually scored (as opposed to the long obsolete rulebook definitions you are trying to pass on as knowledge in your column).

Ge scoring based on the corps selling themselves? It's an absurd concept. The only real way to rate a salesmans ability to sell is to measure who is buying, and how much they are buying. In a performance that means audience impact. How often does the corps that generates the most buzz, the most interest, and the most passionate response even end up in the top 3 in the GE categories, though? 1992, biggest crowd response was Madison, they were 5th in GE. 1993 biggest crowd response Phantom, 3rd in GE. 1995 Madison, one of the biggest crowd responses ever in a show widely considered one of the best all time, 4th in GE. Corpsreps doesn't have the recaps for 2003 and 2007 for me to verify, but Phantom 03 finished in 4th place and Crown 07 in 6th overall, and clearly neither of these performances (both the "best sellers" in their respective years) won GE. These are just some of the more notorious examples, shows that clearly stood out in their years for audience impact but got hammered in GE and lost placements as a result.

DCI has been claiming that audience impact is part of the GE category since its inception, and still describes GE as an evaluation of a corps ability to "sell itself" on the field, but we all know that isn't true, and hasn't been true for decades. Now, maybe DCI is finally starting to turn the corner here, certainly Phantom 08 is an exception to the general rule, the corps that had the biggest impact on finals night won for a change. But I need more of a track record to go one before I'll start to believe that DCI judges are going back to actually judging the shows according to the manual, instead of to their own personal taste. Until then, your article reads as another lame attempt by a DCI mouthpiece to regurgitate a company line that in no way corresponds to what the eye sees and the ear hears. I think a description of the way judges actually judge GE would have been a lot more useful to me, because I've been scratching my head about this one for many years.

yup