Cavaliers Marching Technique

[alto92]

I'm with you, shaners.

Even in their championship years, the other top corps looked much better, on the individual member level. I'm actually kind of surprised anyone wants to argue differently. To me, that fact illustrates the notion that judges have moved away from judging individual technique with as much weight as they used to. That, and the elimination of uniform inspection and 'marching and maneuvering' as a caption. Judging emphasis has shifted to coordination of elements, clarity of form, and transitions (of form). The Cavaliers do all of those things well, which is why they've won.

I'm not saying it's not at all important and the Cavaliers don't look as good as a lower tier or younger group - I'm comparing them to top corps, which is splitting hairs anyway.

Edited July 29, 2009 by alto92

[ouooga]

youre right, but show me any cavaliers dvd, and ill show you many differences in technique/posture/body carriage from person to person.

Many of these issues which most other corps do not have.

What you're seeing is the difference between angle and effort. The Cavaliers' marching style is based hugely on an effort basis more than it is on angles.

One corps' style will be to have a pass through with the toe "one inch off the ground", and that would be an angle thing. Every member, on every pass through, will always have their toe at the exact same height.

Cavaliers, and a few other corps, instead define the foot on the pass as something like "one third between your ankle and your knee". Well, if every member does that, it is correct, but since no two members have the same distance between their ankle and their knee, it's not going to look the same visually. But you can't argue that the members are not doing the same thing, since they are all doing the one third rule. (that's an example. I've had the style taught to me, but it's been a few years).

The same thing can be seen in corps that do dance vs. straight visuals. If one corps says kick your leg at a 45 degree angle, and another corps says kick your leg as absolutely high as it will go, the first one will have all 45 degree angles, and the second corps will have people with legs all over the place but the same amount of effort put into the move. Both are right. (I'm leaving my opinion out of which one looks better)

Judges know how to look for the difference, and judge accordingly.

[rosski47]

And if you saw a guy walking quickly down the sidewalk, on his toes with his knees straight, that wouldn't seem funny to you?

God and or/nature gave us knees for a reason. To circumvent the natural function of the joint seems a little counterintuitive to me.

First off, I would be confused as to why that man is walking backward down the street.

Then I would realize that moving backwards on the balls of your feet makes the most sense for balance.

Or were you talking about going forwards?

Because if you were then you have a definite misconception of how the technique works.

[Feathers Up]

And if you saw a guy walking quickly down the sidewalk, on his toes with his knees straight, that wouldn't seem funny to you?

God and or/nature gave us knees for a reason. To circumvent the natural function of the joint seems a little counterintuitive to me.

That's the point. Read my post. Almost every "straight leg" technique has a slight bend in the knee with the feet not too far from the ground. Some call it "gliding". More in common to how you walk. I'm not talking about running either. Just a natural walk. Also, I'm pretty sure with "bicycle" you still have the toes up. When you "walk", you don't really lift and bend the knee that much.

Edited July 29, 2009 by Feathers Up

[alto92]

What you're seeing is the difference between angle and effort. The Cavaliers' marching style is based hugely on an effort basis more than it is on angles.

One corps' style will be to have a pass through with the toe "one inch off the ground", and that would be an angle thing. Every member, on every pass through, will always have their toe at the exact same height.

Cavaliers, and a few other corps, instead define the foot on the pass as something like "one third between your ankle and your knee". Well, if every member does that, it is correct, but since no two members have the same distance between their ankle and their knee, it's not going to look the same visually. But you can't argue that the members are not doing the same thing, since they are all doing the one third rule. (that's an example. I've had the style taught to me, but it's been a few years).

The same thing can be seen in corps that do dance vs. straight visuals. If one corps says kick your leg at a 45 degree angle, and another corps says kick your leg as absolutely high as it will go, the first one will have all 45 degree angles, and the second corps will have people with legs all over the place but the same amount of effort put into the move. Both are right. (I'm leaving my opinion out of which one looks better)

Judges know how to look for the difference, and judge accordingly.

That's an interesting take. I think in the end, though, the Cavies seem to have inconsistencies person to person because they apply this principle to a leg lift that's too high to allow uniformity without regard to the height of the marcher. For some reason though, and maybe it's the technique, they clean up from up top really well. Lower the height of the foot on the pass through and I think you'll get the best of both worlds. SCV seems to have adopted a modified version of the technique and is cleaner than they have been in years. Having Sly on staff and and easier visual book helps, though.

Edited July 29, 2009 by alto92

[luvah]

I think the Cavies marching technique simply facilitates their really difficult drill--ie running through the drill--I agree w/ the guy that said they found a way to homogenize technique so it looks good with any step size.

The ones that stand out to me as having excellent individual marching technique are the GLASSMEN. They always have 45 seconds of drill facing backfield, not for musical purposes, just to show off their technique.

[luvah]

Glassmen march facing backfield to show off posture and bearing as well as marching technique--I don't think anyone does it better

[mobrien]

That's the point. Read my post. Almost every "straight leg" technique has a slight bend in the knee with the feet not too far from the ground. Some call it "gliding". More in common to how you walk. I'm not talking about running either. Just a natural walk. Also, I'm pretty sure with "bicycle" you still have the toes up. When you "walk", you don't really lift and bend the knee that much.

If you live in a older city you do. Lifting the toes and planting the heel is what keeps you tripping and dumping your groceries when walking down the sidewalk.

The impetus for most walking actually comes from the center and hip rather than the knee and heel (the lower leg is often simply swinging from the hip until planted), so from that standpoint, you're correct re: "natural" and straight leg (though no one walks on his toes except for my brother in law, who looks pretty flippin goofy when he does it). But when you're talking about moving quickly, in such a way as to minimize bounce in the upper carriage, it makes no sense not to use the natural shock absorption of the knee. Both concepts embrace the natural technique, but one seems better suited to the demands of of the particular sport.

All this imho, of course.

[corpsband]

I guess that the entire DCI field visual judging community over the past decade just is not as perceptive as you. You should give them some pointers.

I think they're being judged on consistency of technique performer to performer and many observers (myself include) are viewing consistency of appearance performer to performer. If the technique is based on the individual geometry of each marcher, there's no way to get a uniform visual appearance; heights will be all over the place. It's kind of like saying use your natural step size instead of an 8-5. Timing and technique may be perfect but distance will be a mess. I certainly prefer the straighter leg approach -- I think it gives a uniformity of appearance that bicycle never can. But that's just a preference and clearly DCI thinks so too.

Edited July 29, 2009 by corpsband

[JayM]

As far as what's most natural, I think it's important to look at the back foot as it begins to come forward. When a person walks forward, the back foot rolls up almost completely from heel to toe, and it is that last push from your ball and toes that propels you forward and keeps the motion smooth.

The Cavaliers don't define the knee bend; it is a result of rolling up the back foot completely. At the peak of the roll-up, the foot should be in essentially the same position it would be when attacking the backwards march. Cavalier marching technique is essentially "exaggerated walking. I'm not sure the staff ever defined it that way, but that's how I've always interpreted it.

The backward technique is easily more natural than the alternatives. I'm not sure there's really a counter-argument to be made, but be my guest.

euponitone: I would never teach Cavalier technique to high school kids. There are less variables to clean with straight-leg technique.

alto92: Do you think the 2003 Santa Clara Vanguard had better foot technique than the 2003 Cavaliers?

edit: I forgot to add, there's a good video on the Fan Network with slow motion video of a bunch of stuff, including some Cavalier marching technique (and an out-of-step Cadet ).

Here's the link: http://v2.thefannetwork.org/?network_id=1&...&mode=viral

Edited July 29, 2009 by Jayzer