2010 Rankings

[Fran Haring]

in all the years i marched we went on in prelims by coin flips at the DCA meetings. you didn't go on in order of rankings and for the most part they got it right. if the best corps went on 1st the scores were lower. but it worked. i agree with you 100%.

IMO, there were several times when the scores and placements were completely out of whack, under the old "blind draw" prelims system.

[donincardona]

IMO, there were several times when the scores and placements were completely out of whack, under the old "blind draw" prelims system.

this is where we disagree fran.

[BOSMarcher]

OK, THIS is what I can't understand. The purpose of the preliminaries is to pick the final ten and set them to appear in reverse order of their preliminaries finish at the finals the next day. Preliminaries is the ONLY level playing field of the season...ALL ELEVEN CORPS THE SAME NIGHT, THE SAME FIELD IN THE SAME CONTINENT, THE SAME WEATHER, THE SAME JUDGES.

It should make no difference if the Bucs go on first in preliminaries and the MBI and Empire fith and eighth.

Do judges really need to see the corps in ANTICIPATED order? Or do they have enough confidence in themselves to take the boxes and ranges and place the corps in proper order as they see them perform? If we need to get the corps to perform in the proper "rung on the ladder" (slot?) in prelininaries, then we don't need judging at all.

I maintain that the DCA judges I know (many of whom also judged Garden State Circuit shows where they saw some corps only once or twice) could take the 11 Open Class corps in ANY order and get them right for finals. The judges' scores don't need to be "validated" against slots. Let's give these professionals credit and let them have a fully open mind and fully open score sheets when they step on the field.

This was the one place where the tick system had a more objective fundamental base..........at least IN THEORY.

If we were using the tick system I would agree with you, but since we do not, I do not think it would be very accurate if everyone was in random order. I just got to thinking that if I was a judge, I would have a hard time remember where to put groups that are sepparated in ability by several other corps. Something would get messed up. Now, if we did what DCI did and did random draw in groups of three, I think that could work.

[donincardona]

If we were using the tick system I would agree with you, but since we do not, I do not think it would be very accurate if everyone was in random order. I just got to thinking that if I was a judge, I would have a hard time remember where to put groups that are sepparated in ability by several other corps. Something would get messed up. Now, if we did what DCI did and did random draw in groups of three, I think that could work.

as a judge you rate each corps on it's own merits. never mind what another corps does. it dosen't matter. in a regular season show you don't have the corps slotted. it seems to work fine there. i just think if you put them in order your telling the judge what to do.

[BOSMarcher]

as a judge you rate each corps on it's own merits. never mind what another corps does. it dosen't matter. in a regular season show you don't have the corps slotted. it seems to work fine there. i just think if you put them in order your telling the judge what to do.

Nevermind... I was not implying that you wouldn't rate a corps on their own merits. I think DCA does an excellent job at doing this. MBI in 08 was a great example and Alliance last year was a great example. Both groups improved significantly over their initial seeding.

[BOSMarcher]

Or even from a negative outcome.... the Hurcs last year went from being tied for second to fourth from Prelims to Finals. I think it works just fine.

[JoeDz]

If we were using the tick system I would agree with you, but since we do not, I do not think it would be very accurate if everyone was in random order. I just got to thinking that if I was a judge, I would have a hard time remember where to put groups that are sepparated in ability by several other corps. Something would get messed up. Now, if we did what DCI did and did random draw in groups of three, I think that could work.

Then in addition to walking around with headsets and commenting, perhaps the judges need to carry a board with a grid for their caption where they can place scores and comments and refresh themselves as they go along.

If the Bucs went on first last year, they would NOT have scored a 20 in percussion......they couldn't...... and maybe they shouldn't.

I believe that we have too much emphasis on what a first week score should be (remember the Wildwood response to Bucs score?)

It seems like we plan the season so that the winning corps at Finals night gets as close to 100 as possible. Not all corps improve the same amount (or percentage) during a season.

Why not let the scores fall where the JUDGES feel they should at the time of the contest, whether a corps scores 90 in Wildwood or wins with 89 in Rochester? Let's not FORCE scores into the corps...let's let the corps go out and earn their scores.

OR.......maybe just score the contest on judges ranking their caption with strictly ordinals. Then low score would win with 1.0 being a perfect score for that contest . (Scoring is already "relative.") Surely that would be easy, even with 11 corps.

(Here's the edit: Ordinals is UNFAIR because it does not recognize gaps between 1 and 2 and 2 and 3, etc. It would be patently unfair)

Edited August 5, 2010 by JoeDz

[Fran Haring]

this is where we disagree fran.

Yes, we do.

[BOSMarcher]

Then in addition to walking around with headsets and commenting, perhaps the judges need to carry a board with a grid for their caption where they can place scores and comments and refresh themselves as they go along.

If the Bucs went on first last year, they would NOT have scored a 20 in percussion......they couldn't...... and maybe they shouldn't.

I believe that we have too much emphasis on what a first week score should be (remember the Wildwood response to Bucs score?)

It seems like we plan the season so that the winning corps at Finals night gets as close to 100 as possible. Not all corps improve the same amount (or percentage) during a season.

Why not let the scores fall where the JUDGES feel they should at the time of the contest, whether a corps scores 90 in Wildwood or wins with 89 in Rochester? Let's not FORCE scores into the corps...let's let the corps go out and earn their scores.

OR.......maybe just score the contest on judges ranking their caption with strictly ordinals. Then low score would win with 1.0 being a perfect score for that contest . (Scoring is already "relative.") Surely that would be easy, even with 11 corps.

You making some interesting points. I think most judges do keep their past scores handy on sheet of paper, but it still makes it difficult to remember the quality of a group that performed an hour or so ago when making a comparison.

[Kyoti]

If the Bucs went on first last year, they would NOT have scored a 20 in percussion......they couldn't...... and maybe they shouldn't.

Turn your point around, what if a corps does deserve a 20, or a 19.8, and they go on first in a random draw situation. Do they NOT get it because the judge has 10 more groups that he or she theoretically has to leave room for? Even if they earned it?