Do judges reward corps who are much stronger than the previous season?

[VinnyMac]

Simply put, no they do not.

[Medeabrass]

I'd say the reverse of what the OP said is true. I think there's a little bit of a "you've gotta prove yourself before you get rewarded" thing. I think an "underdog" corps that has been down for awhile or maybe never been "elite" has to prove they're head and shoulders better than a corps who's performing right at their level just to tie that corps.

[soccerguy315]

I'm not quite sure you're understanding.

Say Cadets have a portion in their ballad that doesn't quite make sense to the GE Visual judge. Maybe Cadets are trying to portray a certain meaning that isn't quite coming across as well as possible. The GE Vis judge scores them justly, and comments on the tape supporting his score that he's not getting what Cadets are trying to do. Cadets listen to the tape, their staff realizes they could do a better job conveying the specific intent during the ballad, and they make the necessary changes. The judge sees them again two days later after Cadets have had time to clean a few things and tweak a things. When the ballad is performed, the judge likes the changes and feels Cadets are communicating and conveying their idea much better. Then the judge gives Cadets an improved score because Cadets satisfy the rubric on the sheets better than they did last time the judge saw them.

While judging is mostly about "the now" (if you're not clean you're not getting credit), but as we get later into the season judges will be seeing a show for the third or fourth (or more) time and will have seen/noticed the natural progression of a show: what aspects were tweaked for clarity, what aspects are cleaner and thus read better, etc. As an intelligent, rational person, it would probably be impossible for judges to not take any previous viewing of the show into account when viewing in the now. They will naturally remember what they like about the show, what didn't work, etc. and hope that things are better this time than last. Most times if a corps has a product that is good, and they perform it well, it is to their benefit to see judges multiple times.

But ranking and rating is almost exclusively based on "in the now," and it's natural for judges to take past shows from a season into consideration when judging: when show aspects are cleaner and clearer they read better and thus get more credit.

Using your example, what I am saying is that what Cadets did 2 days ago should have no impact on their score today.

Why should the score a judge gave the Cadets last week matter at all for what score he is going to give them this week?

[perc2100]

Using your example, what I am saying is that what Cadets did 2 days ago should have no impact on their score today.

Why should the score a judge gave the Cadets last week matter at all for what score he is going to give them this week?

In theory I agree with this: the score a judge gave Cadets last week SHOULDN'T have any bearing on the score he gives them this week.

HOWEVER...

Judges can't just pull scores/numbers out of thin air. Instructors demand consistency, and if scores are all over the place (79 Monday, 70 Tuesday, 82 Thursday, 75 Friday, for example), judges would be fired. If a corps is showing marked improvement, but their score is 79.5 on June 27 and, say 79 on July 20, a judge would be fired. Judges often use recent scores as a starting point for a number, but they typically don't live and die by it (for example, say Crown scores an 18.2 July 5, a judge won't automatically 'start' them at that number July 7 and work his way up or down.

Also, remember that an actual score/number doesn't mean much/anything: what matters is 1) placement and 2) spread. We see really high scores some years because judges don't do a perfect job managing numbers and/or corps are well above their competition and justify large spreads (which lead to higher scores). So scores don't matter from week to week, but spreads and placement do.

[Bob984]

If two corps are competitively close, do judges inadvertently reward the corps who has made dramatic improvements from

the year before? Any examples where you can argue this may have or is happening?

Actually, I think the opposite happens.........when a corps has been good for a long time, they tend to get the early season nod, earned or not........

When a new corps "steps it up", it usually takes time before it is fully recognized by the judges.....and they may lose to someone that they are clearly better than......

Not too many years ago, when Crown first really stepped it up, it took 2/3 of a season before it was recognized by the judging community, and I believe they were underscored each season since until last year.....they were the "new kid on the block", and certainly "invading turf"....

The same thing will happen to Blue Stars this year...........

GB