Isn't It Time to Revamp the Judging System?

[Bob984]

I have been thinking that it's been quite a long time since we have had a major change in the judging system, as set forth by DCI. I am thinking it is time to change, revamp, alter how a drum corps show is judged these days.

Why? Well, the activity has really changed since the last time it was drastically changed, which was '83-'84? There was also years later when the M&M caption was change to visual, which basically gave equal weight to visual and music. Those are the two major changes I remember off the top of my head. These changes were basically made to keep up with where the activity was heading. Obviously, the drum corps activity has changed drastically again since the early 90's and I feel it's time to tweak the current system again. I feel now with the corps in the top 12 so competitive and even beyond, there needs to be changes made to better clarify who the best corps really are. I am interested in folks feel the same and if so, what changes you would all make, as well. I am brainstorming, so some of these may seem a bit far-fetched. Bare with me.

Here are some of my suggestions:

1. Why are drum corps shows judged 3 different ways during the summer? It makes no sense. We start out with a slimmed down 5 judge panel. Then we enter the 8 judge panel, for most of July. Then, during championships, we have the double panel judging system. Pick one system and stick with it. The double panel I am totally against. For example, does baseball have 2 home plate umpires to call balls and strikes during the World Series? Does Figure skating double up their panels?

2. I feel there needs to be some form of a modified or "new age""tic" system brought back into the activity. With the corps so close and more difficult for the judges to score (leaving room, for example), I feel there needs to be more of a straight forward system, that is much clearer and not so much dependent solely on opinion (yes, there is always opinion, and that is why there are judges). The design of the shows, to say the least, has progressed incredibly far, that we can now bring the "tic" back (in not the same exact form), without having to worry about the shows becoming safer, from a design standpoint or watered down. There needs to be more risk vs. reward. Sort of like figure skating, that would be a good place to start.

3. How should we choose a winner of championships? In other words, why are caption awards tallied over the 3 days of championships, while the actual winning corps is only tallied on finals night? Be consistent and choose one way all the same or the other way. Now say you are in support of the double panels for championships. Wouldn't it be just about the same if we eliminated the double panels and choose the champions just like the captions (on a 3-night aggregate)?

4. Should we change how points are weighted in the scoring captions? I feel there are too many points in the GE caption and that it should break down to more of a 30-35-35 or 30-30-40 system. GE is the most subjective caption and is also the prime example used by George Hopkins to bring in the double panel judging panel. I feel performance and technical should have the most weight.

Anyways, these are some I have come up with. Please be constructive and reasonable and courteous when responding (Yes. I know this is DCP and that is asking a lot). Look forward to seeing your opinions.

Add box six criteria for 19's or above (95th percentile). Especially in effect, add this statement: a corps cannot enter box 6 unless it is determined that show is perceived to have fully engaged the majority of the audience." In the other captions, add terms such as "explores new boundaries in one or more of the following: creativity, innovation, imagination, demand, performance excellence.

GB

[Michael Boo]

I do not buy into the cost-cutting reason for the 5 judging panel. I know that is the reason that was given. But, why are we still flying judges across the country during the 5 panel period? Couldn't we stick to the 8 judge panel and use judges within the region of the show as much as possible?

I was in on the discussion regarding the five-judge panel model when it was first voted in. One reason for the five-judge panel in the early season is that it allows DCI to afford to send judges around the country to sample all the corps and to offer the kind of input that might be too late if only offered at the end of the season. This has gone a long way to eliminate the regional differences fans often complained about in distant years, when corps would come out strong in one region and take a scoring hit when encountering judges from other regions. It's the fairest to the corps and the members to know where they stand according to a national linear scale that is uniform and fair.

[Sam98]

Personally, I'd like to see a return to some kind of a penalty system--take away points for spacing errors, drops, obvious mistakes. It wouldn't have to be all-encompassing, but used in conjunction with credit for difficulty.

[IllianaLancerContra]

I have been thinking that it's been quite a long time since we have had a major change in the judging system, as set forth by DCI. I am thinking it is time to change, revamp, alter how a drum corps show is judged these days.

Why? Well, the activity has really changed since the last time it was drastically changed, which was '83-'84? There was also years later when the M&M caption was change to visual, which basically gave equal weight to visual and music. Those are the two major changes I remember off the top of my head. These changes were basically made to keep up with where the activity was heading. Obviously, the drum corps activity has changed drastically again since the early 90's and I feel it's time to tweak the current system again. I feel now with the corps in the top 12 so competitive and even beyond, there needs to be changes made to better clarify who the best corps really are. I am interested in folks feel the same and if so, what changes you would all make, as well. I am brainstorming, so some of these may seem a bit far-fetched. Bare with me.

Here are some of my suggestions:

1. Why are drum corps shows judged 3 different ways during the summer? It makes no sense. We start out with a slimmed down 5 judge panel. Then we enter the 8 judge panel, for most of July. Then, during championships, we have the double panel judging system. Pick one system and stick with it. The double panel I am totally against. For example, does baseball have 2 home plate umpires to call balls and strikes during the World Series? Does Figure skating double up their panels?

2. I feel there needs to be some form of a modified or "new age""tic" system brought back into the activity. With the corps so close and more difficult for the judges to score (leaving room, for example), I feel there needs to be more of a straight forward system, that is much clearer and not so much dependent solely on opinion (yes, there is always opinion, and that is why there are judges). The design of the shows, to say the least, has progressed incredibly far, that we can now bring the "tic" back (in not the same exact form), without having to worry about the shows becoming safer, from a design standpoint or watered down. There needs to be more risk vs. reward. Sort of like figure skating, that would be a good place to start.

3. How should we choose a winner of championships? In other words, why are caption awards tallied over the 3 days of championships, while the actual winning corps is only tallied on finals night? Be consistent and choose one way all the same or the other way. Now say you are in support of the double panels for championships. Wouldn't it be just about the same if we eliminated the double panels and choose the champions just like the captions (on a 3-night aggregate)?

4. Should we change how points are weighted in the scoring captions? I feel there are too many points in the GE caption and that it should break down to more of a 30-35-35 or 30-30-40 system. GE is the most subjective caption and is also the prime example used by George Hopkins to bring in the double panel judging panel. I feel performance and technical should have the most weight.

Anyways, these are some I have come up with. Please be constructive and reasonable and courteous when responding (Yes. I know this is DCP and that is asking a lot). Look forward to seeing your opinions.

No school like Old School.

Bring back tics. 50% score build up (30% GE, 20% difficulty/analysis). 50% break down (30% marching, 10% horns, 10% drums). Guard drops are penalties.

A big problem w/ society today is reluctance to call a mistake a mistake. Oh- and score everyone on the same sheets. Let the kids really see how they relate to all the other corps.

Flame Shields Up.

Edited June 30, 2010 by IllianaLancerContra

[mobrien]

Brass - Execution & technique - 25 points (18 "execution", and 7 "technique") - two judges, scores averaged

Percussion - Execution and technique - 20 points (15/5) - two judges, scores averaged

Guard - Execution and technique - 10 points (7/3)

Marching - Execution & technique - 25 points (20/5) - two judges, scores averaged

GE Judging (2 judges in the box, scores averaged), broken down into the following subcaptions

- Program Co-ordination (how well do the music and visual programs work together?) - 10 points

- Overall effect (how well does the show connect with the audience) - 10 points

The most subjective aspects of judging would be reduced to 20% of the score, and even then, that 20% would be broken into two specific areas of judgment that could be independent of each other (it'd be theoretically possible to have a show that was very well co-ordinated, but still left the audiences a little cold).

For early season, the doubling up in Brass, Percussion, and Marching could be gotten rid of, giving early season shows six judge panels rather than the nine-judge panels the corps would be seeing starting in mid-July.

[mobrien]

Brass - Execution & technique - 20 points (15 "execution", and 5 "technique") - two judges, scores averaged

Percussion - Execution and technique - 20 points (15/5) - two judges, scores averaged

Guard - Execution and technique - 10 points (7/3)

Marching - Execution & technique - 25 points (20/5) - two judges, scores averaged

GE Judging (2 judges in the box, scores averaged), broken down into the following subcaptions

- Program Co-ordination (how well do the music and visual programs work together?) - 10 points

- Overall effect (how well does the show connect with the audience) - 15 points

The most subjective aspects of judging would be reduced to 25% of the score, and even then, that 25% would be broken into two specific areas of judgment that could be independent of each other (it'd be theoretically possible to have a show that was very well co-ordinated, but still left the audiences a little cold).

For early season, the doubling up in Brass, Percussion, and Marching could be gotten rid of, giving early season shows six judge panels rather than the nine-judge panels the corps would be seeing starting in mid-July.

Edited June 30, 2010 by mobrien

[GGarrett]

How about instant replay?

"The corps will stop for a moment while the judges review that last passage."

ehhhh... OK. Sorry.

[IntheMood]

How about instant replay?

"The corps will stop for a moment while the judges review that last passage."

ehhhh... OK. Sorry.

Here is just an idea on the table. I would bring back the tic system for drops and spacing issues. the Corps will have 3 challenges a year to question the judges when it comes to drops and spacing issues. They would indeed go to instant replay to settle the disagreement.

How about giving the Corps a list of 5 drill moves that all Corps must preform. These moves will be judge on how well they execute these moves.

Have a list of different drill moves and rate these moves. For example a z-pull will be worth x amount of points. A company front will be worth x amount of points.

Dean

[BRASSO]

2 part system.... a) Compulsories and B) Field Show Performance

In the Compulsories, each Corps section performs similar prearranged 2-5 minute exercises..ie, Brass does chords, various fundamentals of brass playing that a brass judge will score..... Guard does similar equipment useage exercises that all the Corps will similarly be judged upon.... same with percussion, pit. No visuals .No GE... not here in The Compulsories component of the 2 part judged system of the Corps. The benefit of The Compulsories component is that each Corps is judged on similar things, not dissimilar things. As a result, it would lessen, at least in part, in the subjective nature of the judging we have before us today. The challenge in The Compulsories as I see it is 1) where it would be conducted and 2) when. If we could find a practical answer to this, then it could be of a great benefit.

Part B).... The Field Show Performance. Nothing changes here. We would simply add the Compulsories score ( perhaps 20% of the overall score ) to the Field Show Performance score ( maybe 80% of the overall score ) and we have the Corps score.

Anyway, just a thought.

Edited June 30, 2010 by BRASSO

[crfrey71]

I was in on the discussion regarding the five-judge panel model when it was first voted in. One reason for the five-judge panel in the early season is that it allows DCI to afford to send judges around the country to sample all the corps and to offer the kind of input that might be too late if only offered at the end of the season. This has gone a long way to eliminate the regional differences fans often complained about in distant years, when corps would come out strong in one region and take a scoring hit when encountering judges from other regions. It's the fairest to the corps and the members to know where they stand according to a national linear scale that is uniform and fair.

So it wasn't all about saving money. Interesting. I still think having the field judges on in the early part of the saving is as important, so they know where to improve right away, as far as technicals go. But, that's my opinion.