OFFICIAL Atlanta Regional Thread...

[corps-mudgeon]

And by the way, one look at the captions from Atlanta, and it's clear to most intelligent people that can simply read the captions, that there is some very SERIOUS differences of opinion among the judges themselves with the scoring of some of these Corps in competition. So the differences of opinion is most assuredly not confined to just us fans.

Good point.

[7567BC]

You don't know what I know, nor who I know. You only know my comments. You can accept them or reject them as you may. I have no idea your level of knowledge, nor based upon such, would then proceed to tell you that you are "laughably naive." But your reply comments to me, without such knowledge ,make it difficult not to be prompted to call you inexperienced and naive by attacking a poster, instead of responding as to why you believe that the GE Visuals this year of the SCV offer sufficient demand, complexity, creativity, integration, cohesiveness, flow,, etc as to warrant such high GE Visual scores.

I stand by my comment above re. the SCV drill demand and visual this year.

And by the way, one look at the captions from Atlanta, and it's clear to most intelligent people that can simply read the captions, that there is some very SERIOUS differences of opinion among the judges themselves with the scoring of some of these Corps in competition. So the differences of opinion is most assuredly not confined to just us fans.

Well said. Many assumptions are made in these forums and criticisms of posters are generated from them. Disagreement of someones opinion should not lead to a personal attack. Everyone is a judge, but some have years of experience to rely on where others don't. Meaning some posters have a long DC history others is more recent. Personally I value the more experieced as they have a more balanced POV.

I don't like much in the direction DC seems to be headed, From a numbets standpoint I don't GAVA #$%& about scores. That being said, it IS what corps are measured with to provide some definition of progress. What I see though, is a lot of variance in assessment from show to show between a single corps performances and judging slates. Theoretically there is supposed to be little interpretive difference in judging assessment from show to show. There is also supposed to be an overarching criteria that, for a judge, the number does not matter as much as the placement of each corps in a show. That is the base principle in judging; PLACEMENT, not the number itself or the spread (which I see many posters get very revved up about). Whether a corps is close or not [by score to another corps] the placement is what a judge is supposed to get right. The hard part to understand is, as humans, we respond to the number. That is, again, because we use the numbers to give measure to success or failure. It is that way in education and the working world. Same holds in DC.

I try to look logically side to decide if a score a corps receives is indicitive of improvement, coupled with the day's performance. You can be technically good and emotionally down and a performance will reflect it, so should the score. Get the two elements together and a good number should follow. Looking at numbers logically, I struggle with a corps being strong in certain areas for an extended period and weaker in others (which they work on or change) only to see thet numbers given be inexplicably be flip flopped late in the season. It has nothing to do with how hard the kids work (and let's not forget that many of these "kids" are actually adults at 21 years of age and many of them majoring in music in college). at this point of the season at this level of DC, they are ALL working hard.

I would like to see consistency in judging. Are critiques still happening after shows? I don't know but hope so. Would it be possible to require judges to actually teach a corps every few years or so to maintain a certain level of experience, knowing what designers are designing musically and visually. I say this because years ago during a critique, I came to realize a judge I was speaking with, had absolutely no idea how my corps executed some key complex moves. Yet he killed us on his assessment and the "poor technique and quality" of the move. Had he known what he was looking at (which we tried in vain to explain) he might have had a better understanding of the difficulty and the level of execution we were achieving and rewared us appropriately.

Enough today. Thanks for listening.

[vhsmbdm]

Penalties aside, anyone notice that Bluecoats, Cavaliers, and Crown all improved by exactly 0.20 points overall from murfreesboro?

[Triple Forte]

Exactly what reply were you expecting to receive?

At the very least they should acknowledge they received your correspondence. That would be enough for me.

[Nice Guy]

yes, haters, let your vitriol flow

nothing like seeing tissies from supposed adults.

GO BD, YOU ROCK!

LOLOLOL

[chadwick]

Little late in chiming in but what the heck. Went to the show and had a fantastic time...here are a few random thoughts:

* Would love to know the attendance...it was very crowded, even for the earlier performances.

* Spirit - AWESOME....don't understand why they are placing where they are. I would put them much closer to Academy/Glassmen.

* Glassmen - this is a case where I feel you have a VERY talented corps but the program is, frankly, boring. I hate saying that, but that is what I as well as the three people that I went with, felt. The guard though, wonderful (though not a fan of the male guard unis)!

* Madison - THANK YOU. That is one helluva show. The show I am most looking forward to seeing again in Indy.

* SCV - Same kinda feeling I had about the Glassmen.....boring is too harsh, but it is just so slow, very little impact.

* Phantom - NICE!!! Loved the music, the effects of using the tunnels. I thought the guard was on tonight too! They may get the best guard uniform of the year....between them and Madison.

* Crown - LOVED the show. I thought I wouldn't based on what I had read, but I really enjoyed it. So few gimmicks...nice, powerful music, great drill, fantastic guard.

* Cadets - Way to gimmicky. Not a fan of the character and never felt that Cadets pressence you expect. I like that they put the guard in corps uniforms but they get lost....I think they should have gone with a different soldier outfit so they stood out.

* Blue Devils - Sorry, didn't like it. At all. The mirrors - biggest distraction I saw the whole night. Do you have to be somewhere in particular to see the effects of these? I was on the 40/45 in the Club Level...thought this would be the spot to see the effect. The 'music'....um, nope. Except for the beginning, I just didn't like the sound that came from them. The guard, as expected, is a sight to see.

* Retreat....NICE!!! I read over the thread and some felt it was someone from BD that carried over...I think it was someone from Boston, Blue Stars or Madison as it was on that side of the field. I thought it was interesting that all drum majors conducted their corps except for Madison, and they were at the far end.

I wish they could have had this sooner so that more fans would have seen it. The I&E awards seemed to really drag...lots of long pauses between each award.

Crowd Favorites IMO: Cavies, Madison, Spirit, Crown, Phantom

Polite Claps: Glassmen, SCV, Blue Devils

If I Ranked It:

1. Cavies

2. Bluecoats

3. Crown

4. Blue Devils

5. Phantom

6. Cadets

7. Blue Stars

8. Boston

9. Madison

10. SCV

11. Blue Knights

12. Academy

13. Spirit

14. Glassmen

(Didn't see anyone else except for Jersey Surf).

[DutchCousin]

There is an old phrase, "On any given night...;" well, last night SHOULD have been one of those with the Blue Stars on top of SCV if only by tenths.

This past week, if anything, has been shaping a lot of end of the season groupings (minus the Blue Devils) and the Blue Stars and SCV seem to be in thier own little battle.

I just hope for all that is just and right that IF and only IF the Blue Stars continue to progress, clean, and refine thier program that they will reap the rewards in HONEST placement come finals. I said very early in the season that I feel that the Blue Stars have the makings of a 6th or 7th place corps this year and have been very critical of them at times.

Yes, SCV is putting out quite a difficult production with their Bartok show; but last night, the Blue Stars have shown that they are ready to take them on and should have been rewarded in placement.

This

[Bruckner8]

Are there Tuba 1, 2, & 3 parts written into that score?

Yes, yes, and yes.

1 part for the first half (all 16 players playing)

2 parts in the middle

3 parts at the end (bar before chord to the end)

[BRASSO]

Well said. Many assumptions are made in these forums and criticisms of posters are generated from them. Disagreement of someones opinion should not lead to a personal attack. Everyone is a judge, but some have years of experience to rely on where others don't. Meaning some posters have a long DC history others is more recent. Personally I value the more experieced as they have a more balanced POV.

I don't like much in the direction DC seems to be headed, From a numbets standpoint I don't GAVA #$%& about scores. That being said, it IS what corps are measured with to provide some definition of progress. What I see though, is a lot of variance in assessment from show to show between a single corps performances and judging slates. Theoretically there is supposed to be little interpretive difference in judging assessment from show to show. There is also supposed to be an overarching criteria that, for a judge, the number does not matter as much as the placement of each corps in a show. That is the base principle in judging; PLACEMENT, not the number itself or the spread (which I see many posters get very revved up about). Whether a corps is close or not [by score to another corps] the placement is what a judge is supposed to get right. The hard part to understand is, as humans, we respond to the number. That is, again, because we use the numbers to give measure to success or failure. It is that way in education and the working world. Same holds in DC.

I try to look logically side to decide if a score a corps receives is indicitive of improvement, coupled with the day's performance. You can be technically good and emotionally down and a performance will reflect it, so should the score. Get the two elements together and a good number should follow. Looking at numbers logically, I struggle with a corps being strong in certain areas for an extended period and weaker in others (which they work on or change) only to see thet numbers given be inexplicably be flip flopped late in the season. It has nothing to do with how hard the kids work (and let's not forget that many of these "kids" are actually adults at 21 years of age and many of them majoring in music in college). at this point of the season at this level of DC, they are ALL working hard.

I would like to see consistency in judging. Are critiques still happening after shows? I don't know but hope so. Would it be possible to require judges to actually teach a corps every few years or so to maintain a certain level of experience, knowing what designers are designing musically and visually. I say this because years ago during a critique, I came to realize a judge I was speaking with, had absolutely no idea how my corps executed some key complex moves. Yet he killed us on his assessment and the "poor technique and quality" of the move. Had he known what he was looking at (which we tried in vain to explain) he might have had a better understanding of the difficulty and the level of execution we were achieving and rewared us appropriately.

Enough today. Thanks for listening.

Well reasoned observations here with some specific examples of frustration. Particularly interesting was your episodic experience with a judge after a show where you attempted to educate the judge to some complex moves your Corps was doing in a show, but to no avail, as he didn't understand the move as you explained it to him. If this was me, and I was the visual designer I would take the pragmatic approach the next off season and dumb down the demand and complexity, and do a simpler drill that would be a lot easier for marchers to execute and a lot easier for the judge to appreciate. This isn't rocket science here either. It's obvious that in the visual areas, doing a simpler show for the marchers to execute is being rewarded more than a difficult to execute visual show. Staffs in the future that continue to put out visually demanding and complex shows would only have themselves to blame if these shows are not rewarded on the scoring sheets. Good post, 7567BC. I enjoyed reading your observations, analysis, and personal experience as a former Corps staffer.

Edited August 2, 2010 by BRASSO