New High Score at Finals?

[GMichael1230]

Why not? If they are that much better than 2nd place, why not?

I dont see the reasoning for awarding a 100.00 just because it satisfies the "spread"..shouldnt a 100.00 be reserved for a show with not only paramaters that meet the judging criteria but perfection also?? Not arguing, just not understnading the reasoning for it.

Or, I should say, understanding it but not getting it....

G

[corpsband]

I was thinking about this the other night. How much do the 2002 Cavies and 2005 Cadets owe to the 2002 Blue Devils and 2005 Cavies (respectively)? How much should last year's Blue Devils thank Crown for bringing it on finals night (not that BD didn't bring it, mind you).

As much as I'd be bummed to see BD break the record ('cause the show just doesn't move me in any way, shape or form), it is a game of spreads. If the judges deem them to be 2 points ahead of the Bluecoats and the Bluecoats post a 97.9, well then...

There ya' have it.

Not trying to take anything away from any corps, but at the end of the day, scores are just that. I enjoy the 2000 Cadets more than 2005. I enjoy 2004 Cavies more than 2002. I enjoy '94 Devs more than 2009.

This.

In build up judging, very high scores have as much to do with what's beneath the top score as the top score. Great performances by the top of field push the top number up. If the corps beneath you don't push their scores up, that top number will fall right down as the spread has "less to stand on".

So if the 2nd place corps peaks at a 95 and BD still has 2 pt spread on finals night, they get a 97.

[Tez]

I dont see the reasoning for awarding a 100.00 just because it satisfies the "spread"..shouldnt a 100.00 be reserved for a show with not only paramaters that meet the judging criteria but perfection also?? Not arguing, just not understnading the reasoning for it.

Or, I should say, understanding it but not getting it....

G

This is one interpretation of judging I have heard:

Since art is always subjective, perfection is really a gray area. Can someone's tone on the trumpet be perfect?..... good question.

Since many things cannot be quantified as perfect or not..... perfect in drum corps scoring simply can mean the absolute best the adjudicator as ever seen. If every single judge thinks the Blue Devils on finals night have the best drum corps performance they have ever witnessed, then in theory, yes, they could score 100.00

[GMichael1230]

This.

In build up judging, very high scores have as much to do with what's beneath the top score as the top score. Great performances by the top of field push the top number up. If the corps beneath you don't push their scores up, that top number will fall right down as the spread has "less to stand on".

So if the 2nd place corps peaks at a 95 and BD still has 2 pt spread on finals night, they get a 97.

but in 2002, Cavaliers were strong against a "relatively" weak field...shouldnt that score have been lower ? Or is it because they had spreads in all captions the score was high ??

G

[WOOHOO]

I dont see the reasoning for awarding a 100.00 just because it satisfies the "spread"..shouldnt a 100.00 be reserved for a show with not only parameters that meet the judging criteria but perfection also?? Not arguing, just not understanding the reasoning for it.

Or, I should say, understanding it but not getting it....

G

So, you are proposing a "what drum corps judging should be" statement, not a "what drum corps judging actually is" statement.

I guess it would be nice to have it be a score based solely on performance, but that is called the tick system. It is what it is. I don't know if a 100 show will ever happen because the top is too close for that kind of spread, but maybe.

Plus, I think you get it, just don't agree with it

[GMichael1230]

This is one interpretation of judging I have heard:

Since art is always subjective, perfection is really a gray area. Can someone's tone on the trumpet be perfect?..... good question.

Since many things cannot be quantified as perfect or not..... perfect in drum corps scoring simply can mean the absolute best the adjudicator as ever seen. If every single judge thinks the Blue Devils on finals night have the best drum corps performance they have ever witnessed, then in theory, yes, they could score 100.00

interseting...so its not really about the performance, as much as it is about the design ??? So to speak ??

Or how well the unit interprets the design ??

G

[WOOHOO]

but in 2002, Cavaliers were strong against a "relatively" weak field...shouldnt that score have been lower ? Or is it because they had spreads in all captions the score was high ??

G

They were that much better than everyone else that year, and the score reflected that.

[GMichael1230]

So, you are proposing a "what drum corps judging should be" statement, not a "what drum corps judging actually is" statement.

I guess it would be nice to have it be a score based solely on performance, but that is called the tick system. It is what it is. I don't know if a 100 show will ever happen because the top is too close for that kind of spread, but maybe.

Plus, I think you get it, just don't agree with it

Im not proposing anything.......Im just confues by it.....Its easy to say you "get" it and just accept it, but I really find it sorta confusing.

G

no reason, really not to agree with it, if it applies to every unit, theres no reason not to agree with it at all.

[Tez]

but in 2002, Cavaliers were strong against a "relatively" weak field...shouldnt that score have been lower ? Or is it because they had spreads in all captions the score was high ??

G

Yes, it is a fine line. To achieve the highest score possible the competition has to be fairly strong, but in reality this is never not the case in DCI. The second place corps is always well above 95. It is actually more important for the corps to sweep, or nearly sweep all captions to get a really high score (like Cadets in 2005). If they are the last corps to perform, then each judge does not have to leave any room for another corps...... if they are the best, really the judge can put them as high as they want if they think they deserve it. This is what causes the above 99 scores IMHO.

[corpsband]

but in 2002, Cavaliers were strong against a "relatively" weak field...shouldnt that score have been lower ? Or is it because they had spreads in all captions the score was high ??

G

The latter.

Hard to say how much their number would have dropped but you would presume that all the non-20 captions would go down if BD had scored lower.