What happened to the scores?

[Jimisback]

It's hard to accept some of these scores when certain corps 'ahem', are 2 pointing their next closest corps to stay in 1st place. To me, BD is way too high or the corps below them are not close enough in terms of points. I really don't see that big of a gap between the corps. Granted I'm not a judge so I'm guessing that gap will close in the next couple weeks.

Did you look at the graph?

[BDCorno]

It's hard to accept some of these scores when certain corps 'ahem', are 2 pointing their next closest corps to stay in 1st place. To me, BD is way too high or the corps below them are not close enough in terms of points. I really don't see that big of a gap between the corps. Granted I'm not a judge so I'm guessing that gap will close in the next couple weeks.

It's basically inevitable as they inch closer to 100. Everyone has their opinion, but all bias aside I think the scoring is about right at this time. Doesn't mean the most entertaining show is getting the highest score. In fact, for me it's buried in the middle of the pack.

[Frogman87]

I just wanted to address the concerns re/mid-level corps stalling or regressing score-wise. It's likely more a function of human nature than anything. When I was in brass judge training years back, we did an exercise in which we watched a number of shows. They were a from wide variety of proficiency levels and styles. All of us were asked to rank and score the shows. Once we were done, they put the scores onto the board in a large grid. What we found was that there was far less disagreement on scoring/ranking of the better groups in comparison to the lesser quality performances. As the quality of the group waned, the rank and rate was increasingly inconsistent amongst the judging group. It was illustrative in that it's more difficult to judge and score "the field" than it is the big powerhouses.

My theory is that regional shows involving mid-level corps tend to over-score those groups...not always, but more often than not. When we get to the middle of the season and more groups get together from around the country, it gets even more complicated. In anticipation of seeing groups not previously evaluated, the baseline numbers will tend to start lower. The judge has to account for and leave room for unexpected scoring. If unseen groups end up not exceeding the seen groups in quality, then those scores will tend to drop overall. Being as it is that there is little dispute over the best groups, those numbers can tend to escalate, leaving a huge gap between the two sets of groups. On the surface, it appears the judges think a group has not improved, when it's clearly not the case. In reality, it's a natural part of the season. Once all have been seen in head-to-head conditions, a normalization of scores should ensue.

We've seen a substantial jump in scores among the top groups, and you'll likely have the mid-level groups seeing rapid inflation of their scores over the next week or so. It's all part of the process. Particularly for groups going through a "slump" at this time, it's important that their staffs keep the focus on personal improvement and not the scoreboard. All the performers can control is their own personal performance level...it will be rewarded, but persevering through the midseason blahs is an important part of the process...

Thanks for this explanation. You make some valid points for sure.

My hope is that all 23 WC corps will be objectively evaluated throughout the season and if a corps is able to "catch" and pass another then that will happen and "perceptions" from earlier in the season won't prevail. I realize there is a big difference between the top 4-5 and quite honestly the rest of the field. I would say especially 8 or 9 down should certainly be open for some people to emerge from all through the spread of corps. This is what will make the season more fun. For instance I thought it very interesting that Glassmen's score from Friday puts them ahead of Madison and both within striking distance of Blue Knights. While the corps sitting 13-18 are within striking distance of the 11-12 slots. I hope there is the potential for alot of movement yet to come.

[Jimisback]

At least 14 dropped in score. Come on people. This ain't right as they say in the south. And after one show? Go ahead and love it and make excuses. I just don't know.

[BDCorno]

Thanks for this explanation. You make some valid points for sure.

My hope is that all 23 WC corps will be objectively evaluated throughout the season and if a corps is able to "catch" and pass another then that will happen and "perceptions" from earlier in the season won't prevail. I realize there is a big difference between the top 4-5 and quite honestly the rest of the field. I would say especially 8 or 9 down should certainly be open for some people to emerge from all through the spread of corps. This is what will make the season more fun. For instance I thought it very interesting that Glassmen's score from Friday puts them ahead of Madison and both within striking distance of Blue Knights. While the corps sitting 13-18 are within striking distance of the 11-12 slots. I hope there is the potential for alot of movement yet to come.

Thx. A strong year for sure, a lot of the bubble corps are putting on a strong push. Seems to be vigorous battles going on all over the place. Keeps it exciting, that's for sure.

[BDCorno]

At least 14 dropped in score. Come on people. This ain't right as they say in the south. And after one show? Go ahead and love it and make excuses. I just don't know.

Someone needs a hug! [not that I'm offering! ;-)]

[Jimisback]

Thx. A strong year for sure, a lot of the bubble corps are putting on a strong push. Seems to be vigorous battles going on all over the place. Keeps it exciting, that's for sure.

Well the judging does for sure.

[Jimisback]

7 out of 23 improved. BS I call.

[CrunchyTenor]

Jimmy, several explanations have been offered, including:

1) Small/Full judging panels

2) Larger slate of competing corps

3) New reads for certain judges of individual corps

4) Mid-season show changes

5) Weather, and other factors that can affect a corps' performance.

If these aren't enough to satisfy your curiosity, I suggest you do a little investigation of your own. There's a neat website called From The Pressbox. Go to the "DCI History" section, pick a few random dates, and do a score comparison over several seasons. A lot of the more recent years will even have recaps available for most, if not all, the shows.

You'll find that this is not an unusual phenomenon. But there's nothing like seeing it with your own eyes to validate it

Have fun!

Garry in Vegas

PS The tick system may not be your best solution. Scores could vary widely based on the judging association, AL sheets, VFW sheets, etc. Case in point: in 1972 at the DCI Evaluation Show in Stockton, VK got a 47.45. I believe the judges came out from the CSJA on behalf of DCI. The next night, after an all-night bus ride back to Anaheim, we got a 70.90 at the California State VFW Championships, using local SCJA judges. Were we really 23 points better overnight? What do you think?

[hrnguy500]

Did you look at the graph?

Yes, I did. I take it your question refers to my "I don't see that big of a gap between corps." Actually, I do see it on the graph, yes, but I really don't see how it can actually exist when I compare shows in the top 5. Therefore, my "I don't see..." is not in regards to the graph.