Matt_S Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 This is the point where the slotting theory always seems to explode. It's easy to complain that corps are slotted. It's far more difficult to articulate where the placements should have been different. "You would prefer another champion? A more deserving champion? Then name the champion! I grow tired of asking this, so it'll be the last time. Where is the slotting occurring?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mingusmonk Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 and the compelling evidence for the existence of slotting comes from????1. folklore? 2. urban legend? It's ok...I have plenty of time to wait for the evidence to present itself. Still waiting. You might take notice (maybe ) that I have never made a comment on wether slotting exists or not. I just commented on the statistical usefullness of one set of data. So if you are looking for an argument from me ... keep waiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
va9590jm Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 Forget SCV, look at Pac Crest. And Mandarins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 Been playing with DCP's Statistics page this afternoon, comparing head to head records. I don't know if this actually amounts to anything, but I'll toss it out there. I looked at total-season records, and noted the following - -For every single corps, their winning % against corps who finished lower than them is higher than their winning % against corps who finished ahead. Usually dramatically so. Which would suggest that there wasn't a whole lot of deviance for individual corps from their final resting places. 1 Phantom Regiment Overall Record: 151-26 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 0-0 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 151-26 2 Blue Devils Overall Record: 168-2 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 16-1 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 152-1 3 Cavaliers Overall Record: 183-11 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 8-11 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 175-0 4 Carolina Crown Overall Record: 168-40 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 2-31 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 166-9 5 The Cadets Overall Record: 165-34 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 8-34 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 157-0 6 Bluecoats Overall Record: 149-56 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 1-54 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 148-2 7 Santa Clara Vanguard Overall Record: 106-62 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 3-62 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 103-0 8 Blue Stars Overall Record: 116-128 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 0-92 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 116-36 9 Blue Knights Overall Record: 111-106 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 13-96 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 98-10 10 Boston Crusaders Overall Record: 123-101 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 14-99 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 109-2 11 Glassmen Overall Record: 115-118 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 10-117 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 105-1 12 Madison Scouts Overall Record: 64-143 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 1-124 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 63-19 13 Crossmen Overall Record: 58-145 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 4-140 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 54-5 14 Colts Overall Record: 71-125 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 19-121 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 52-4 15 Spirit Overall Record: 54-140 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 15-140 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 39-0 16 Troopers Overall Record: 27-141 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 0-139 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 27-2 17 Pacific Crest Overall Record: 21-118 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 1-108 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 20-10 18 The Academy Overall Record: 14-107 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 1-106 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 13-1 19 Mandarins Overall Record: 7-110 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 1-110 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 6-0 20 Pioneer Overall Record: 0-179 Against Higher-Finishing Corps: 0-179 Against Lower-Finishing Corps: 0-0 Out of 3800 inter-corps matchups for 2008, corps beat higher-finishing corps 117 times. The big skewers, though, are Phantom upsetting BD on the final night, Crown pushing past Cadets in the 2nd half of the season, and Blue Stars moving up in the last few weeks. Those rather large caveats aside, you can pretty much look at head to head record and accurately predict where each corps was going to end up. (It had Phantom as a 3 seed, which is where they started the final week.) (Also, this is clearly with the benefit of hindsight as well - a whole season's worth of data. But it is interesting that the corps were pretty well defined as to where they stood as a whole throughout the season.) Anyways, like I said, I know there are lies, #### lies and statistics, but it's more fodder for the beast. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 random show order wont change results. and not having scores til any point after the first show is worthless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfrontz Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Troopers, Pacific Crest, and Academy placed in order of performance at all major shows last summer. Phantom could only climb one spot at a time Finals week.Can it every be proven? Probably not, but there's enough examples out there for the appearance. PERFORMANCE ORDER MATTERS. In 1996, Phantom performed in the 3rd place slot and tied for 1st. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84skyrydr Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Performing a couple of thousand miles apart may have had something to do with that, too. When they were in Dubuque they were pretty rough. They did a great job cleaning and changing their show to place as they did. They earned it, but west coast scores always seems higher in the beginning of the year. Then when they get together the slotting begins. Scores seem to be all over the place until they feel it is correct. Some seem to jump 5 or 8 points over night others drop the same. I don't believe any show is performed with those kind of improvements over night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastbreak Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 MikeN Thank you for your analysis presented. Being a coach in several high school sports, you can toss out the old saying,"That's why the game is played" in some cases. I will always take those odds in knowing that a team lower than me in the standings has very little chance of beating me on any given day. In the top 4-5 corps, there is some movement between one another, but WOW when you look at Boston, Vanguard, Cadets, Bluecoats. Only 4 losses between them to a corps that finished lower than them. What does this prove? It's in the eye of the beholder, but I love the odds! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 and the compelling evidence for the existence of slotting comes from????1. folklore? 2. urban legend? It's ok...I have plenty of time to wait for the evidence to present itself. Looking back to the 1970s, it is plainly obvious that scores varied more rapidly and in larger increments than they do today. Just review prelims vs. finals, where corps used to move three places from one day to the next. There's your proof that....um....well....that scores varied more back then. Tom will get the last laugh on this point, though, as there is no "evidence" of whether scoring variability was caused by judging or by performance quallity....and if it was judging, whether that would reflect absence of slotting, or inconsistencies/inaccuracies in judging. Likewise, looking at corps "rankings" from day to day across the season tells us nothing about slotting (especially when they don't all perform each day). Bottom line is that there is no way to "prove" slotting is or isn't taking place. It is an opinion call, based on whether you agree with the judges or not. Now, for those who wish to discuss such opinions.... It is my opinion that slotting is more prevalent today than 30 years ago. Bear in mind, though, that the overwhelming majority of competitive outcomes are judged correctly, and that placements come out looking similar from show to show because the corps pretty consistently earn the same relative rankings from one day to the next. However, having had the luxury of witnessing successive shows on tour over the past 20 years, I have noticed that the more a performance varies from one show to the next, the more likely it is to be judged inaccurately (IMO) by scoring it more in line with recent results - thus the phrase "judging inertia". I don't believe there is a solution to judging inertia. However, the results of our most recent title battle demonstrate that judges are reacting to changes in relative quality between corps, albeit belatedly IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cymbal_steve Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Please don't use the word inertia. It's like saying beetlejuice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.