ShortAndFast Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 My gripe is with the judge who gave an PERFECT score to an IMPERFECT run. I think you've answered the question yourself. A 20.0 does not indicate that the run was perfect, or it was the best guard ever, or any such things. It means that the judge put the 2nd place guard pretty high in Box 5, but then felt that BD had earned (at least) an 0.3 spread over them. The judge's responsibility is to rank and rate correctly, and it seems like he did both here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissaStar Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 There were two other guards in 29.0+ territory - that doesn't exactly support the hyperbole. I am assuming you mean 19.5+, as the guard score (not the entire visual score) is out of 20. My statement was more opinion than fact, but close is relative when we are talking a .9 spread between 1st and 4th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byline Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 I think you've answered the question yourself. A 20.0 does not indicate that the run was perfect, or it was the best guard ever, or any such things. It means that the judge put the 2nd place guard pretty high in Box 5, but then felt that BD had earned (at least) an 0.3 spread over them.The judge's responsibility is to rank and rate correctly, and it seems like he did both here. Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NakedEye Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Yeah they do happen. That's because the performer made an error in technique and wrapped the flag around itself. Spinning a sailed flag is ineffective and looks silly. Therefore its an error. I know we're not on the tick system, but this should be reflected in the execution sub-category. Once again, it is only an error if the timing becomes altered by it. Most of the potential for it to happen comes from just being a human being. You can literally have your positioning off one inch from what you normally do, and the pole can collide with the silk during a direction change. However, if if the performer is still on count with everything, there is absolutely nothing to deduct for. It may not look as pretty, but the work is still being performed within an acceptable variance. EVERYBODY hates it happening and they always correct it at the first available opportunity. If it gets wrapped right before a toss, you're screwed. Now if someone has this issue every single time they do a certain move, then yes, they are doing something wrong with technique, but that situation certainly doesn't apply to the Blue Devils. Their training is impeccable. If points were deducted for everything that looks "ineffective and silly," half of the body movement done by horn lines would result in massive point loss..lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
byline Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Hear, hear, John! Thanks for the superb explanation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowtron Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 (edited) I don't know why DCI can't get this right. It didn't affect the outcome this year, but you're limiting the competitiveness of the activity when each judge is forced into giving .2, .3 spreads. I did not agree with the HNC percussion score but I'm not going to blame the judge for it. It takes guts to put a corps exceedingly high/low like that, especially if he felt it was justified. One of these years we're going to have 3 really tight corps that have a chance of winning. Are you going to give corps #3 a 19.7 and leave the remaining room for the other two? What happens if #3 is the best and you have to squeeze in between a 19.4 and 19.7??? There is nothing wrong with lowering scores as a whole. Say, introduce a Box 6 which is 9.5 and above, which only a couple top corps at finals will achieve. Screws DCPs historical comparisons , but allows for a more competitive finals night. Edited August 10, 2009 by Shadowtron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccerguy315 Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 If points were deducted for everything that looks "ineffective and silly," half of the body movement done by horn lines would result in massive point loss..lol +1... goofy horn lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob-UK Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 This premise ensures that only the last corps on will get a chance of scoring a 10 - which means for the rest of the corps, the score is not really out of a possible 100. It also means that corps lower down, with an exceptional section (e.g. Blue Star's Colorguard) cannot really earn the credit they deserve for fear of not leaving enough space for groups above them........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Once again, it is only an error if the timing becomes altered by it. Most of the potential for it to happen comes from just being a human being. You can literally have your positioning off one inch from what you normally do, and the pole can collide with the silk during a direction change. However, if if the performer is still on count with everything, there is absolutely nothing to deduct for. It may not look as pretty, but the work is still being performed within an acceptable variance. So which is better? The guard that completes the routine without a single sail? Or the one that completes the same routine identically but for sailed flags? If you say they're the same, you either lying or missing the obvious. Without respect to BD's guard score, the point on sailed flags indicating imperfection is legit. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 I don't know why DCI can't get this right. It didn't affect the outcome this year, but you're limiting the competitiveness of the activity when each judge is forced into giving .2, .3 spreads.I did not agree with the HNC percussion score but I'm not going to blame the judge for it. It takes guts to put a corps exceedingly high/low like that, especially if he felt it was justified. One of these years we're going to have 3 really tight corps that have a chance of winning. Are you going to give corps #3 a 19.7 and leave the remaining room for the other two? What happens if #3 is the best and you have to squeeze in between a 19.4 and 19.7??? There is nothing wrong with lowering scores as a whole. Say, introduce a Box 6 which is 9.5 and above, which only a couple top corps at finals will achieve. Screws DCPs historical comparisons , but allows for a more competitive finals night. Liking this thinking. HH 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.