What am I missing?

[ShortAndFast]

2008 may have been the perfect example. I think BD was CLEARLY cleaner than Regiment last year, and for that matter, so were the Cavi's, but Regiment had a much better total package that connected... with the audience and the judges. What we will never know is how a different panel might have seen things. I do think the judges got it right, but this is where the bg questions come into play about the judging system. Are we judging cleanliness? Are we judging GE? What exactly is GE? IMO, I don't think there is a perfect judging system.

Well, if you mostly pay attention to visual elements, then BD was indeed clearly better. 15 of 15 visual judges during championships put BD over Phantom.

OTOH, we also have music captions on the sheets, and BD was not clearly better than Phantom in those. Generally, the brass judges liked BD, while the percussion, ensemble and music effect judges liked PR.

Given those caption splits, the championship was decided by spreads and math. I think each judge focused on getting the right answer in his/her own caption, and it just worked out to a narrow victory for Phantom. But that's what the judging panel does - assigns scores based on the language on 9 different sheets. There is no perfect judging system, but this isn't a bad one and it generally gets the right answer IMO.

So, sure, you could have found a panel to put BD on top by a small margin. That wouldn't have changed the fact that Phantom had "the show" that everyone would be talking about from 2008 for years to come. There are plenty of seasons where a lower-placing show has overshadowed the actual champion in people's memories and discussions.

[pags]

You're certainly on to something here.

I've been around long enough to have taken notice of how consistently Lance reacts to criticism of BD. He likes sarcasm and beating up straw men, for sure. I've even argued with him in a chat room and he's gone as far as to tell me that my experiences with the Blue Devils were just me "seeing what I wanted to see" and nothing more.

I don't mind people having strong allegiance toward any corps, as long as they're willing to engage in thoughtful, civilized discussion on the topic at hand. In this very thread, we have Lance asking for someone to give him specific examples of years where BD was given a gift in placement, but yet, when the topic of BD's chairs came up, rather than finding a logical justification, the defense was "well those others corps have done it, too" in a sarcastic manner.

I love supporting my corps in any way I can, but I learned a long time ago to take any criticism they receive with a grain of salt. I must admit I wonder about fans of corps who are more violently offended by criticism than alumni.

A big part of the problem is that simply referencing chairs for THIS year is not answering Lance's question. It doesn't explain how BD is being given a score they didn't fully earn. THAT is what Lance was asking for.

And concerning the poster who referenced BD's placements over the last 15 years...that is a good start, but those placements don't really answer the question one way or another either. You have to also look at the corps that placed around them, watch THEIR shows as well, and determine if BD should have been given a higher/lower score than that corps.

It's incomplete to simply look at BD's performances and say they did/did not earn the score they got. We may want to think that a corps is judged completely and solely on it's own against the "ideal" of whatever is on the sheets, but they are also ranked and rated against one another. And since we're asking for examples, I'll give a few, with some of them being recent discussions we've had:

Exanple #1

2008. Quarterfinals. Blue Devils get a perfect 20.0 in Visual Ensemble. This discussion comes up a number of times, both specifically and in general...does a corps ever really deserve a "perfect" score? Now, if someone were to go back and look at the video, they'd probably find something where they could create the justification that Blue Devils shouldn't have gotten a perfect score, and therefore were given a "gift" of sorts. However, at that same competition Carolina Crown got a 19.7 in Visual Ensemble as well. In relation to THAT, the judge felt that Blue Devils were clear step better and gave them the only score left that could convey that. Now, you can claim that that's bad numbers management, and you may very well be right, but that does not justify that Blue Devils weren't better or didn't earn the score they were given relative to the competition around them and the scores available for the judge to use.

Example #2

2008. Semifinals. Blue Devils get 20.0's in both Visual Performance and Visual Ensemble. Again, the debate raged about whether they were truly "perfect". But the bigger driver behind the score was the fact that The Cavaliers got 19.8's in both captions so when the Blue Devils went on and were a clear step better, the judge awarded the only score remaining that fully coveyed that perception.

Thus, it is not enough to look at BD by itself and say they were favored/unfavored by the judges. You also have to look at the show products surrounding them to at least help in making that opinion to begin having ANY validity. And the same can be said for any corps that wins a given show, let alone the championship as a whole.

Edited July 13, 2009 by pags

[Phantom1701]

I don't mind people taking swipes at me. I react to bizarre criticism of most corps, but I have no problem admitting that my affinity with BD causes me to react more strongly in those cases. I at least appreciate Phantom1701 for having the fortitude to talk to me, and not about me. That's at least thoughtful and civilized.

I don't like a lot of recent Cavies shows, but I would be just as offended if I saw anybody saying they haven't earned their placements, which is exactly what Phantom1701 was saying.

Again Lance you are guilty of misinterpreting what I have said and trying to put words into my mouth that I didn't say. As a forum MOD you should be much more careful about these sorts of things.

Let me be VERY clear on this point so that you don't miss it this time, because I think you actually have many reading this thread believing that I said something that I didn't.

EVERY corps EARNS their score in that these kids work so unbelievably hard, regardless of what uniform they suit up in, and they are judged according to their work. What I AM saying is that it is my belief that many DCI JUDGES have a special affinity, appreciation, or outright bias towards BD that transcends most other corps. So whether that translates into a judge giving them the benefit of the higher score or even scoring another corps below them in their caption, I think is a very real possibility. Now, would I say that BD maybe didn't earn that score even in a case like that, NO. The reason being is that judging is a subjective thing anyway, so what the judge scores is DCI gospel. Nothing added or taken away, by anyone. So by definition corps earn what they earn and that's that. Do they earn their exact score without any sort of bias whatsoever on the part of the judges, well obviously I don't think that is always the case and THAT is the point I am trying to make.

Now have any other corps benefited from judging bias in the past, ABSOLUTELY including my beloved PR. How about this for objectivity? I think Pipitone and Prosperie scored PR's drumline higher last year by a few ticks each and even scored the other lines a bit lower in order to give PR a chance at the title. If you look deep in the scores that was a big differential and had they scored BD even .1 each higher each BD would again have won the title. The minute the recap was posted last August that is the first box I looked to and wasn't at all surprised at what I had seen in the way of differentials.

Does that mean PR's drumline didn't earn what they got, of course not. They were amazing last year as is BD most every year, but you could look at that and maybe say that others earned more than they were given credit for by Prosperie and Pipitone. Either way bias existed, imo.

So to wrap this up it is simply my belief that BD has made many fans of the DCI judging community and it reflects in the way they score them versus other corps year in and year out. Does that make BD bad, no. Does that mean they didn't work hard or earn their success, no. It just means that judges like what they have seen and over the years and show their appreciation for those achievements when writing down their scores. It's just my opinion, but I'm entitled to it.

Nation of Brass probably made the case more eloquently than I did, but I would never say these kids didn't earn something they got. But as long as judging and placing drum corps performances relies on the subjectivity of individual judges there will always be an opportunity for bias to creep into the scores.

[Silver_King]

As a person who marched a pee wee herman show last year, I take offense to that.

Okay, it wasn't really a pee wee herman show. It just had the big adventure theme song in it.

BTW, the magic word of the day is "Sheila"

i loled at this and then got to the last line and fell over.

[a marching trumpet]

BD's dont do much for me either, in my opinion the bd's are like yall have said are the darlings of DCI, Their show this year are boring and just not capturing me, in my view alot of the guys who marched for the bd's that think they should win were well to be frank had a silver spoon up his or her's ### in that they hardly did any hard HARD drill and never had any exciting music that really moved you or anything in my view. Because I mean you cant win if your drill isnt very exciting, and you cant hope to win if the music doesnt move anyone. Now they are good marchers but the drill isnt very hard, and the music is boring, so why should they win?

[pags]

Again Lance you are guilty of misinterpreting what I have said and trying to put words into my mouth that I didn't say. As a forum MOD you should be much more careful about these sorts of things.

-snip-

EVERY corps EARNS their score in that these kids work so unbelievably hard, regardless of what uniform they suit up in, and they are judged according to their work. What I AM saying is that it is my belief that many DCI JUDGES have a special affinity, appreciation, or outright bias towards BD that transcends most other corps. So whether that translates into a judge giving them the benefit of the higher score or even scoring another corps below them in their caption, I think is a very real possibility. Now, would I say that BD maybe didn't earn that score even in a case like that, NO. The reason being is that judging is a subjective thing anyway, so what the judge scores is DCI gospel. Nothing added or taken away, by anyone. So by definition corps earn what they earn and that's that. Do they earn their exact score without any sort of bias whatsoever on the part of the judges, well obviously I don't think that is always the case and THAT is the point I am trying to make.

-snip-

So to wrap this up it is simply my belief that BD has made many fans of the DCI judging community and it reflects in the way they score them versus other corps year in and year out. Does that make BD bad, no. Does that mean they didn't work hard or earn their success, no. It just means that judges like what they have seen and over the years and show their appreciation for those achievements when writing down their scores. It's just my opinion, but I'm entitled to it.

Nation of Brass probably made the case more eloquently than I did, but I would never say these kids didn't earn something they got. But as long as judging and placing drum corps performances relies on the subjectivity of individual judges there will always be an opportunity for bias to creep into the scores.

But again, YOU have not provided any specific examples. Whether you stated it directly or not, the phrasing you previously chose to use implies a disagreement with the scores the Blue Devils has gotten in the past or is presently getting. To state that judging bias is resulting in a higher score IS stating that they didn't "earn" the score they got because that means that bias/preference (whether in small or large part) led to a score rather than someone judging objectively against the criteria they were given and in relation to the other performances surrounding them.

In essence, you finally admitted what Lance was driving at this whole time. And again, you haven't provided examples substantiating your theory, which is what Lance asked for about a half-dozen times. In the absence of examples where the Blue Devils were clearly, objectivelybelow a certain corps and yet were scored higher, then all your comments really do is reveal a bias on YOUR part, not the judges'.

Now, I'm not saying you're not entitled to your bias. many people here have an affinity toward one corps another. But it seems like your reasonsing is that if the scores don't match your preference, then it MUST be judging bias.

Edited July 13, 2009 by pags

[Plan9]

You know all these post about "Judge friendly", "West Coast inflation", etc are all a bunch of bull because they're all just excuses to justify why one corps is over another corps. Reasons why someone is scoring .10 over someone else. Blah blah blah.

It boils down to design, staff and talent. The entertainment value. the show's potential impact and how it's delivered no matter how accessible OR unaccessible the show is the fans. "the Blue Devils, The Cavaliers, The Cadets, and recently Phantom Regiment." <--- are the ones than can sell the heck out of their program. You can feel the confidence when you watch these corps. When you watch them rehearse, the staff treats the members with respect like the job they need to do in order to be on the top, will be done. In the bottom echelon of corps, it's like pulling teeth sometimes in order to get them to understand corrections or changes.

No matter what your taste is, the judges will award points to the corps that can throw it down on the field. Our job as fans is to enjoy it. And if you're expecting corps to deliver the shows they've been known for over the last 10 or 20 years, then you're just being selfish to your taste. Stop being so over analytical. Grab your beer at the parking lot. Eat your nachos. Chill and enjoy the ride.

Spot on!

I would add that Crown this year is pushing hard to enter this realm. But to hang with this group it's truly a matter of design momentum....the design teams need to consistently bring it for several years in a row. This could be the problem with PR this year. PR followed an epic story that simply connected in 08, with a darker version that (at least up to this point) is much more difficult to make BIG on the field. So if they fail to make top 3, they risk losing the momentum. An example might be the way that Hopkins strayed with his design in 07 & 08, then returning in 09 with "So they want classic drum corps, do they? I'll give them CLASSIC drum corps, on speed!" He realized that his "experiment" could cost them momentum, so he returned to the Cadets roots. Crown on the other hand is going down the same road as Cadets but with a few "BDesque 08" moves (not claiming BD invented them, they just used them most recently). Crown's show is off the charts in a number of ways, but (IMO) they didn't follow through with their guard design, to me they seem like an afterthought. In contrast, Crown 07 is pure genius in guard integration.

BD on the other hand is still "out there" not taking the audience for granted. IMO their design team believes that the DCI audience (and judging staff) desires and is capable of appreciating a more sophisticated approach. The quiet middle section in 1930 (with Piano Variations) is an example of this....sometimes Less is More. Like it or not, BD 08 & 09 are not your father's drum corps in terms of design.

[Phantom1701]

But again, YOU have not provided any specific examples. Whether you stated it directly or not, the phrasing you previously chose to use implies a disagreement with the scores the Blue Devils has gotten in the past or is presently getting. To state that judging bias is resulting in a higher score IS stating that they didn't "earn" the score they got because that means that bias/preference (whether in small or large part) led to a score rather than someone judging objectively against the criteria they were given and in relation to the other performances surrounding them.

In essence, you finally admitted what Lance was driving at this whole time. And again, you haven't provided examples substantiating your theory, which is what Lance asked for about a half-dozen times. In the absence of examples where the Blue Devils were clearly, objectivelybelow a certain corps and yet were scored higher, then all your comments really do is reveal a bias on YOUR part, not the judges'.

Now, I'm not saying you're not entitled to your bias. many people here have an affinity toward one corps another. But it seems like your reasonsing is that if the scores don't match your preference, then it MUST be judging bias.

You and Lance are trying to win an argument by asking me to produce that which you know full well cannot be produced. Even if I do give you an exact year, exact caption instances, you would just conclude in the end that it is just my opinion anyway and the judges saw it differently. So going down that path is a non-starter, but it's a clever way to try and slam the door on an argument that you don't like.

But I can believe, despite your protesting to the contrary, that the overall results on a year-over-year basis demonstrate in-and-of-itself a wholesale bias towards BD on the part of judges. Again, this is just my opinion and I am entitled to it. If you don't like it I'm sorry. Stop posting and the thread will go away faster.

[crfrey71]

To answer the OP question. What you are missing is great drum corps. Your opinion and thoughts are just that, your opinion. That's fine and dandy.

My question is this? What difference will it make to you if BD wins, The Cavies, or the Cadets? I mean really, a week after championships, will it really matter? Just enjoy drum corps and give the corps credit. Opinions welcome. It's fine to agree or disagree with the judges. Life goes on.

[whitedawn]

imo, bd got a california-sized gift at finals in 2007.