Perfect scores.

[tommyfromhowardst]

I think that any BD fan who was at finals in 08 would contest your opinion that its "pre judged".

PR wasnt even looking like a top 3 corps a few weeks before finals and look what happened.

Also,

take a look at some recaps and see how many times a winning corps does not win a specific subcaption such as percussion or colorguard etc.

it happens quite a bit.

Tasty, It wasn't my opinion that shows are pre judged--it was the opinion of the spectators sitting next to me at DCI Finals. I simply showed up to witness the ack ack. My opinion on the matter is a simple question--why do spectators feel as they do regarding corps placement? There were at least 15 people and 8 or 9 corps represented in the patrons sitting around me and although the conversation was not heated, there was an attitude of wtf, nothings really going to change. Their spirit was down trodden to say the least. Hell, I was the one standing up and clapping, whistling as loud as possible! (I'm a good fan) There was no excitement as to the outcome of the evenings activities. This is where opinion turns to fact. These people were jaded.

I have a few friends that are judges and they tell me to forget the tick. Not because it sucked but because that's just the way it is. They also feel that some at DCI have their heads in a position not to see the sun anymore. People just do not seem so happy about DC these days. You think it's just me??? HA!! Read all the happy threads on DCP. I am not convinced DC has reached nirvana just yet.

I am willing to help, though. I started a drumline here in Chicago called the NightHawks about two years ago. We had up to 20 at a rehearsal for a while. I tried to get the old school guys and the new school guys together. Ages 18-64. It worked out for close to a year but summer hit and everyone spread out to the four corners. So we put it on hold for a while. (People lost jobs, moved, etc.) But the direction we were going was good. Everyone liked the music and style we were developing. I'm sure we will fire it up again. But right now I don't know what else to do. So here I sit.

(My hat is off to every corps director out there--it is NOT an easy job!!)

Edited September 15, 2009 by tommyfromhowardst

[tommyfromhowardst]

Because they do not meet the criteria in Box 5, yet. To earn a sub-caption 100 you have to first meet the box 5 criteria and then be deemed better than every other drum corps that evening. It's certainly possible to perform well enough in June to earn a Box 5 score, but we all know that's rather unlikely. Possible, but unlikely.

By the way, welcome to the forum DCALugnut! Pleased to meet you.

[CorpsBuff]

Because they do not meet the criteria in Box 5, yet. To earn a sub-caption 100 you have to first meet the box 5 criteria and then be deemed better than every other drum corps that evening. It's certainly possible to perform well enough in June to earn a Box 5 score, but we all know that's rather unlikely. Possible, but unlikely.

A perfect explanation, thank you!

[DCALugnut]

By the way, welcome to the forum DCALugnut! Pleased to meet you.

Well, thanks very much. It's a pleasure to engage in friendly conversation about drum corps performances and the judging process.

[pvt_cairns]

this whole thing is off the rails. the scores are the scores and nobody is gonna change it. we may not all agree but that's how shows are judged. listen to peashey. he's been at this forever.

Ahh but that's exactly what's been done. I realize that the scoring system is what it is. I also realize that it's probably better then the tick system. Not logicaly or mathmatically, but add the human element in and all sorts of other issues and the achivment system looks like gold. However it is far from perfect.

The tick system (and I'm guessing here) was done away with because either enough people wanted it changed, or a vastly improved system was available or perhaps a combination of both. DCA runs on a slightly different scale then DCI which is different then BOA etc. And at some point someone will come up with a better scoring system and that will be used.

In my opinion (as insignificant as it is) the judges got the rankings right. And now I understand why perfect scores are given. I just don't agree with it. I just don't like putting a cap on a score when the highest number dosen't equal a control for perfect. One: because corps may not be fully awarded for their performance, and Two; that perfect 10 should mean something more then you were just better then that corps that night.

But then again as Tom so insightfully pointed out. I'm not a judge. And unless I slip into an alternet universe, or someone at DCA bumps their heads very hard I won't ever be. But to simply say "it is what it is" won't accomplish anything, and perhaps I will talk to my local corps director, maybe he's got some great idea for how to fix the few inequalities that our current system has. Maybe not, but if it's never discussed nothing will change. Thanks Tom for your insight and experiance and efforts to get the system to where it is today.

Edited September 16, 2009 by pvt_cairns

[hairbear]

Ahh but that's exactly what's been done. I realize that the scoring system is what it is. I also realize that it's probably better then the tick system. Not logicaly or mathmatically, but add the human element in and all sorts of other issues and the achivment system looks like gold. However it is far from perfect.

The tick system (and I'm guessing here) was done away with because either enough people wanted it changed, or a vastly improved system was available or perhaps a combination of both. DCA runs on a slightly different scale then DCI which is different then BOA etc. And at some point someone will come up with a better scoring system and that will be used.

In my opinion (as insignificant as it is) the judges got the rankings right. And now I understand why perfect scores are given. I just don't agree with it. I just don't like putting a cap on a score when the highest number dosen't equal a control for perfect. One: because corps may not be fully awarded for their performance, and Two; that perfect 10 should mean something more then you were just better then that corps that night.

But then again as Tom so insightfully pointed out. I'm not a judge. And unless I slip into an alternet universe, or someone at DCA bumps their heads very hard I won't ever be. But to simply say "it is what it is" won't accomplish anything, and perhaps I will talk to my local corps director, maybe he's got some great idea for how to fix the few inequalities that our current system has. Maybe not, but if it's never discussed nothing will change. Thanks Tom for your insight and experiance and efforts to get the system to where it is today.

One of the advantages of having been a member of a "hotdog corps" when I was a kid was the fact that we didn't care one bit about the tick system. Quite honestly, my Jr. corps considered itself blessed above all others when we began with 100 points and managed to retain 19 of them by the time we arrived at the opposite side of the field! If There would have been a "build-up" system in place, in those days, well then we would have prayed to all that was holy that the judges gave us credit for tying our shoelaces correctly!

When human beings are part of the system, just about EVERYTHING is subjective.

When you lose a game or a contest, you have to live with it. When you win, you have to live with that too. and you have to live with the derision from the guy who placed just below you. LOL!!!

The first place corps is happy... because they won! The tenth place corps is happy too.... because they made it into the night show. Everyone ELSE ...... has "issues"!

Please take none of the above seriously. It's very late and I am tired and old.

As a public service, I have attempted to inject a bit of humour into this thread. And now:

Back to the debate at hand

Edited September 16, 2009 by hairbear

[elphaba01]

Ahh but that's exactly what's been done. I realize that the scoring system is what it is. I also realize that it's probably better then the tick system. Not logicaly or mathmatically, but add the human element in and all sorts of other issues and the achivment system looks like gold. However it is far from perfect.

The tick system (and I'm guessing here) was done away with because either enough people wanted it changed, or a vastly improved system was available or perhaps a combination of both. DCA runs on a slightly different scale then DCI which is different then BOA etc. And at some point someone will come up with a better scoring system and that will be used.

In my opinion (as insignificant as it is) the judges got the rankings right. And now I understand why perfect scores are given. I just don't agree with it. I just don't like putting a cap on a score when the highest number dosen't equal a control for perfect. One: because corps may not be fully awarded for their performance, and Two; that perfect 10 should mean something more then you were just better then that corps that night.

But then again as Tom so insightfully pointed out. I'm not a judge. And unless I slip into an alternet universe, or someone at DCA bumps their heads very hard I won't ever be. But to simply say "it is what it is" won't accomplish anything, and perhaps I will talk to my local corps director, maybe he's got some great idea for how to fix the few inequalities that our current system has. Maybe not, but if it's never discussed nothing will change. Thanks Tom for your insight and experiance and efforts to get the system to where it is today.

"Perfection":

"IF" and it's a mighty big "IF" the much maligned "Tick System" we resurectedby DCI , the "Execution" scores would most likely plummet. As a result the overall "Feelgood" stratospheric numbers of the competitors would also head south, and "Reality" would kick in. It would not "Look As Good" to "Win" with 89+ as it does with a 98+.

Being a very old witch, and a "Fossil" I well remember Blessed Sacrament and the Chicago Cavaliers winning "Nationals" with numbers that nowhere nearly approached the fantasyland tallies of today. The "90" that the 1961 Undefeated Chicago Cavaliers tallied at VFW Nationals was seen as "Unreal".

I also remember the old Connecticut Hurricanes winning DCA in 1969 with a 79+. A very far cry from the "99" Reading was awarded this season past.

Just an old witch ranting.

Elphaba

WWW

[DCALugnut]

Perhaps this would be a little easier if, instead of thinking of 100 as a "perfect" score we just think of it as the highest number the scoresheet allows.

It's just another number in Box 5 that a judge can use to differentiate between all of the groups that meet the Box 5 criteria.

With that said though, it's not exactly just any number. It's the unbeatable number. I do believe that 100 should not be used before the last group of the evening. Of course, that didn't happen at DCA so please don't think I'm trying to manufacture a controversy or anything. I'm just sayin'.

[Bob Cole]

you want the tick back?

Then you have not read all these threads... but you're welcome to your opinion... thankfully, it will NEVER happen... by the way, how many shows have YOU judged? With winter guard and drum corps and marching bands I must have done maybe 400... you? Have you judged 8 DCA Championships? Oh and have you been chief judge training other judges for an entire state? Have you been chief visual judge for DCA, selecting, clinicing and critiquing other judges? Have you caught young judges erasing and added ticks to make the score comes out right? hmmm... I have done all these things... You?

A little full of yourself, aren't you Tom?

I'm happy you have all these "credentials." It's too bad all the fans mean nothing to you.

That's one problem I have always had with "some" corps. Some seem to be performing for the judges and ignoring the audience. At least it seems that way to me.

But, my opinion must not count for much. I'm just a long time marching member and fan. I pay for the tickets to go see the shows and support my local corps (and other musical organizations). I obviously don't have all your "credentials."

By the way, I would also like to see some combination of the "buildup" form of judging, along with some return of the "tick". Although I also marched in the old "tick" days, I wouldn't want to see those dark ages come back. But, some additional emphasis on execution would be my preference. Judge the corps on their musicality, but also recognize execution.

[Bob Cole]

Ahh but that's exactly what's been done. I realize that the scoring system is what it is. I also realize that it's probably better then the tick system. Not logicaly or mathmatically, but add the human element in and all sorts of other issues and the achivment system looks like gold. However it is far from perfect.

The tick system (and I'm guessing here) was done away with because either enough people wanted it changed, or a vastly improved system was available or perhaps a combination of both. DCA runs on a slightly different scale then DCI which is different then BOA etc. And at some point someone will come up with a better scoring system and that will be used.

In my opinion (as insignificant as it is) the judges got the rankings right. And now I understand why perfect scores are given. I just don't agree with it. I just don't like putting a cap on a score when the highest number dosen't equal a control for perfect. One: because corps may not be fully awarded for their performance, and Two; that perfect 10 should mean something more then you were just better then that corps that night.

But then again as Tom so insightfully pointed out. I'm not a judge. And unless I slip into an alternet universe, or someone at DCA bumps their heads very hard I won't ever be. But to simply say "it is what it is" won't accomplish anything, and perhaps I will talk to my local corps director, maybe he's got some great idea for how to fix the few inequalities that our current system has. Maybe not, but if it's never discussed nothing will change. Thanks Tom for your insight and experiance and efforts to get the system to where it is today.

Hear hear!

I'm also an old timer form the "tick" days. Things sucked, but you knew when your scores varied from week to week you were having an on day or an off day. And, yes, of course "ticking" is subjective on the judges. So is today's form of judging. As long as judges are human, judging will be subjective. I have no problem with that. Over the course of an entire season it balances out.

In the 70's corps were judged mostly on execution. There were small buildup categories for "Effect". But, today's system is infinitely better because it recognizes the musicality and entertainment value of the corps performance. Difficulty will be recognized because more difficult shows will tend to be more musical and entertaining. Not always, but usually.

However, today's judging system does not recognize pure execution, except as it affects the musicality and entertainment of the show. I feel that is a disservice and not enough incentive to perfect your craft. I would like to see the addition of some "teardown" categories for each caption, in addition to the "buildup" categories. Sort of like judging in the 70's, but with the emphasis totally reversed.

I don't feel that a "perfect" score should mean the best of the night. Although judging is somewhat subjective, the judges are skilled professionals who try their best to be objective. Scores should mean something over the course of the season. A way to measure your progress. Plus, if a total 100 means a "perfect" show, which I think it should, then a score of 98 means that only 20 "mistakes" were made over the course of the show. I find that hard to believe, with 150 kids out there performing for 13 minutes.

When I was a percussionist in the late 60's/early 70's, there was a big competition going on between my drum line and another famous drumline of the era. Our instructor felt that percussion lines should be part of the music, not just rhythm, be entertaining in their own right and show off their musicality and difficulty. As a result, we always got highest marks in the small buildup categories (GE percussion and one other, I think). But, execution was always our challenge, because we were playing more difficult music than many other corps out there. Our big competition of the time had an instructor who felt that execution was paramount. So, they always played simple music, but EXTREMELY cleanly. In the judging of the time they beat us almost every time. We were proud of what we did, but always wanted to be recognized for it.

That's why I say, keep the emphasis on musicality and entertainment, but bring back some judging on pure execution, too.

I thought that some of the corps at this year's DCI left a lot to be desired in execution, compared to others. But, I don't think the scores completely reflected that.