2009 Could be Carolina Crown's year

[gellio]

Umm, they won before, and they goot HUGE brownie pts in 1988 with that trip overseas, and a few other things. Almost everyone agrees SCV should've won that show. Judges made up for the error in 1989 (when everyone agrees PR shoul've won!) Madison had all kinds of built-in, insider CI in 1988. It's the only explanation for their win that year. I was there, and I don't recall a thing about Madison's show, FWIW.

Keep trying!

Do you ever actually read what you write before you post? The above statement proves that something inside your head isn't properly functioning. It is absolutely absurd that you think a panel of professional judges would deprive the entire Regiment organization of a win in 1989 to appease for some mistake they made the year before. Do you not see how ridiculous such a statement is?

Re 1988 Finals: I'd take the word of a qualified panel of judges over your word any day. I will say it sure as hell didn't seem like everyone in that stadium agreed that SCV should have won on finals night in 1988. We had NO CI in 1988. No one, even going in to finals week thought we'd win. No one. Brownie points? Where were the "HUGE brownie" points when we came back from Europe and got 4th at DCM? Where were they when Phantom and Star beat us a handful of times after DCM? Where were they when Garfield beat us the only time we saw them before finals? Where were they when SCV and BD beat us all year up until finals? 1988 is a perfect example of judging done correctly. IMO, there were three championship caliber shows that year, all executed on a championship level. The numbers, when added up, fell in our favor. Sure you can say BD should have won that year. Sure you can say SCV should have won that year. Just like you can make a chase for another corps winning in almost every year, including 1989, 1996 and 2008.

Please - think before you type and read your posts before hitting"Add Reply" - you may see how little sense your make.

Edited August 29, 2008 by gellio

[gellio]

True

False. You're even contradicting yourself here, and at the same time misrepresenting CI. CI claims that no one who has not WON will not win until they first make it into the Top 3. But if you actually read ALL of http://www.drumcorpsplanet.com/forums/inde...howtopic=107285 you'd know that. Also, hwo can all of that progress end up being coincidnece? I'm lost on that. What Crown has achieved until now is no coincidence. Someone had to come in 4th...Do you think the judges were ready to put crown ahead of Cavies (yet) even though most of DCP prolly thinks they should have? Nope. Not their turn. Yet. It's building. They're earning street cred. Now they have to be EVEN BETTER next year, JUST TO REMAIN IN 4th PLACE, trust me. Oh, and they have to hope everyone else gunning sucks a little.

you also said: "Phantom did it this year, and that's great. It has nothing to do with competitive inertia."

Phantom proves CI, with their performances at Finals this year. It was a full-stadium effort, b/c PR would NOT have done it, had the audience not DEMANDED it. The fact that PR had won before, and had many years of success ALLOWED the judges the mental freedom to let it happen. Had Crown been in the exact same position as PR, IT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED. Oh, and the judges finally realized that the product BD had out there was akin to Cadets: Amazingly performed cute garbage (IMO )

What? Again - something's not clicking upstairs in your little head.

It *IS* a coincidence that no one has ever won without being in the top 3 previously. How did I contridict myself? You need progress to move up in the ranks. Many corps have done it, and yes, all of them have placed in the top 3 before winning. THAT is coincidence. I never said anything about Crown's achievements being a coincidence. I believe in a post above I sited the reasons why I think Crown is now a championship caliber corps. Hard work and PROGRESS!! Lots of progress!! They may have only placed 4th, but they had a championship caliber product, executed at a championship caliber level. I cannot think of any other 4th place corps in DCI History I can say that about. They had a championship caliber brass line, a championship caliber guard, a championship caliber visual package, a championship caliber musical package, and a darn good drum line. The best 4th place corps EVER, without a doubt, and better than many a 3rd place finishers IMO.

Phantom's win doesn't prove CI. They had IMO the overall best show this year, and the members executed in at the highest level. Their past successes, while obviously playing a part in getting them to the level they were at this year, were not the reason the judges gave them the title. And, I disagree - if Crown had been the best corps on the field on finals night, they would be the 2008 World Champion! I have more faith in the judging community, obviously.

[gellio]

The argument of CI is plain wrong because of it's main conclusion:

"The main conclusion of CI is "No corps can win without first coming in 2nd or 3rd in a prior year."

This is an absolute statement, and says nothing about chance or likelihood. Are you going to sit there and honestly tell me that Crown or Bluecoats or any other corps have a 0% chance of winning if they have never finished in the top 3?

I would definitely agree that their chance is lower because of history, but it being 0% is ridiculous.

Does Vanguard or Madison Scouts have a better shot at winning next year than Crown?

Exactly.

I still do, and will for a while, always believe BD, Cadets and Cavies have the best chance of winning. It's statistics. There's only been 9 years in DCI's history were won of these three haven't won, and Vanguard won 5 of those. It has nothing to do with CI. It has to do with the talent and programming of those organizations - getting the best of everything. I would put my money on one of them winning, and I would not put money on any one else winning (were I betting), but I think the whole CI argument is extremely flawed.

[Newseditor44]

What? Again - something's not clicking upstairs in your little head.

It *IS* a coincidence that no one has ever won without being in the top 3 previously. How did I contridict myself? You need progress to move up in the ranks. Many corps have done it, and yes, all of them have placed in the top 3 before winning. THAT is coincidence. I never said anything about Crown's achievements being a coincidence. I believe in a post above I sited the reasons why I think Crown is now a championship caliber corps. Hard work and PROGRESS!! Lots of progress!! They may have only placed 4th, but they had a championship caliber product, executed at a championship caliber level. I cannot think of any other 4th place corps in DCI History I can say that about. They had a championship caliber brass line, a championship caliber guard, a championship caliber visual package, a championship caliber musical package, and a darn good drum line. The best 4th place corps EVER, without a doubt, and better than many a 3rd place finishers IMO.

Phantom's win doesn't prove CI. They had IMO the overall best show this year, and the members executed in at the highest level. Their past successes, while obviously playing a part in getting them to the level they were at this year, were not the reason the judges gave them the title. And, I disagree - if Crown had been the best corps on the field on finals night, they would be the 2008 World Champion! I have more faith in the judging community, obviously.

I'm calling BS.

Before this year, if I told you that a corps would jump from 15th to 8th with a score of 90.425, what would you have said? None of you has yet to make a legitimate argument that Crown can't win a Championship next year. The idea that they must place in the top 3 before winning is cr#p.

If we've learned anything this year, its that the judges are starting to recognize shows that are designed to entertain, and are awarding based on talent, no reputation. The Blue Devils aren't judged on reputation, rather, because their reputation lands them a talented corps year in and year out. Its that talent that earns them their score.

Edited August 29, 2008 by Newseditor44

[OICMR corps]

I know Gellio is getting upset because he thinks CI implies that Madison didn't "deserve" the win. It doesn't really matter to CI who won in 88. All of the top three had CI so no one was excluded. Gellio, Madison's win was CI-less. Better?

[gellio]

(Ask yourself this: Why DIDN'T Crown get 3rd this year? I have lots of thoughts on it...I'd like yours, and others.)

Three reasons:

1. Phantom Regiment was better than Carolina Crown

2. Blue Devils were better than Carolina Crown

3. Cavaliers were better than Carolina Crown

[gellio]

This logic is so flawed. 36 years is not a long time when trying to come up with theory that states something is almost absolute. I mean, what if one of the top 3 this year would have not had as good as year as they did, and Crown placed higher than them? (This could have very easily have happened, and everyone knows that). If Crown performed the exact same show on finals night and received third instead of fourth, you say they would have a better chance at winning next year? Really? Just think about that.

And 36 years doesn't mean a hill of beans, considering that since 1972 (it's really 37 years) we have had 37 championships, and only 5 of those were not won (or tied) by BD, Cavies, Cadets or Santa Clara (1972, 1975, 1988, 1991 and 2008). It has much more to do with these four corps being consistent at the highest level, then this "so-called" CI.

Edited August 29, 2008 by gellio

[gellio]

Err...one of the top 3 already had an bad year... and crown still only got 4th. Cavies had one of their weakest shows of the decade (i'd put it just above 2007 though) and crown couldnt beat them. For crown to medal next year, you need one of the perennial top 3 to be VERY off, and you need phantom to drop back down to 5th place territory. It could happen, i just wouldnt bet on it. If i had to put odds on who wins...

Cadets 3:1

BD 4:1

Phantom 5:1

Cavies 6:1

BIG GAP

Crown 25:1

etc...

SCV 60:1

Bloo 75:1

after that...no chance really...

I didnt actually do the math to see if this makes any sense at all, but thats about how I see it. That doesnt mean im predicting this order for finals...

This I can agree with. Maybe not the math, but the logic. I've said many times that beating BD, Cavies and Cadets all in the same year is EXTREMELY difficult. Kudos to Phantom for pulling it off this year. It, however, has nothing to do with CI - it's talent and preparation. That's it.

[Newseditor44]

Exactly.

I still do, and will for a while, always believe BD, Cadets and Cavies have the best chance of winning. It's statistics. There's only been 9 years in DCI's history were won of these three haven't won, and Vanguard won 5 of those. It has nothing to do with CI. It has to do with the talent and programming of those organizations - getting the best of everything. I would put my money on one of them winning, and I would not put money on any one else winning (were I betting), but I think the whole CI argument is extremely flawed.

The reason for the statistics being the way they are is because these corps consistently have their pick of the litter when it comes to talent. Not because they are judged differently. From an organizational standpoint, they set themselves up to win, and because of their reputations, they draw the talent. If the Cavaliers came out with a crappy book, and the kids stunk up the field, there is no doubt in my mind they would be scored as such. You are rewarded for what you do on the field. Period.

Crown's growth has allowed them to join the upper tier. As an organization, it is up to them to put the pieces together and do something wth that talent. From what I have seen over the past several years, they have proven they are ready for success.

[gellio]

I know Gellio is getting upset because he thinks CI implies that Madison didn't "deserve" the win. It doesn't really matter to CI who won in 88. All of the top three had CI so no one was excluded. Gellio, Madison's win was CI-less. Better?

I'm not upset. I don't care what anyone says about the win in 1988. Again, it was a close competition with three great shows. Had we placed 2nd or 3rd, I wouldn't be on here saying we should have won. What 1988 proves is competitive inertia is baloney! We had a good show, talent, and it clicked at the right time. That's it. The fact that we placed in the top 3 before had nothing to do with the win in 1988. Nothing!