Why BD won't get a new all time high score

[BRASSO]

With Phantom winning or thereabouts percussion yet positioned in 6-8th place overall, how high a score is the percussion judge willing to give them going on before 5-6 other corps? I doubt 9.9s &10.0s. And if BD is in 3-4th place in percussion then their score relative to Phantom's is going to hold them back from getting 9.9s across the board and gaining the a new DCI high score.

So unless there is a big turn around in their percussion scores, BD won't be getting a new high score at this year's DCI.

It is kind of sad however to be sitting here at Finals Week, where the only on field drama appears to be whether the Blue Devils will secure the highest all time score, or if they'll sweep all 11 captions in winning yet another DCI title tomorrow nite. Even their " B " Corps looks confident and poised to remain undefeated and snare another Title.

The Blue Devils organization's competing brilliance has just sucked all the oxygen out of the room. That said,I 'm looking forward to the old dinosaurs in exhibition tonite ( Star United ). That should be interesting and a crowd pleaser for sure.

Edited August 13, 2010 by BRASSO

[Matt_S]

The scoring system is just fine, it's your understand of the system that is lacking. A 'perfect' score is not meant to indicate a perfect performance. A better term might be 'maximum' score. A 20 simply means that the corps fully met the judging standards.

A perfect example is Magic in 2002. They broke a 99 in Division II, but scored in the 80's when they competed in Division I. The 99 they received in Div II didn't mean that the corps was less than a point from perfection, only that the corps was less than a point off of the standards of the judging. There's a ceiling of sorts, and a 99 only means that Magic was bumping their head on that ceiling.

The same can be applied to Division I. There's a ceiling, and the Blue Devils are bumping their heads against it. Just because World Class is the highest class we have doesn't mean that the standards are infinite. We aren't comparing the Blue Devils to some unreachable ideal of perfection. Just like with the Open Class corps, we are only comparing the Blue Devils to the standards of those sheets, and a maximum score indicates only that they maxed out those sheets.

[bluecoats88]

BD's score last night was actually lower than either Cavies 02 or Cadets 05 quarterfinals scores.

you might also note that BD's score last night was .05 less then their Quarterfinals score last year.

And both the Cavaliers (96.55) and Bluecoats (96.25) scored higher than Crown's second place Quarter finals score from last year which was a 96.10

[fecontra]

You can get perfect scores even if you have drops, missteps, fracks etc. This isn't the tick system. Not sure how this relates to 2008's results.

Ever since a famous person stated it depends on what your definition of " is is " , it seems that any subject can be interpreted to suit your desired result , including the meaning of " perfection".

The other two opinions are seperate items , to be considered independent of each other - look at some other topics and the issues of juding panels , visual design deficiencies , brass competency and etc are all being rehashed ( with re to PR 2008 )

and as to high score - how else can you expect the band community to want to emulate you ( dialing for dollars alert )

DON'T WORRY - you system blue borgs will soon be convincing WGI folks and woodwind players that they should should be showering you folks with bucks to be a part of your incredible vision. ( maybe they'll send bucks to the maroon team also )

and more lack of intellect folks from drumcorps past will continue to lose interest

Edited August 13, 2010 by fecontra

[AmFlag61]

I know, I know, another "Dinosaur" growls from the Fossil bed. But, under the old "tick" system a 99.3 would imply that 150 people ONLY made 7 mistakes during a 12 minute performance. I think (whatever your opinion oh the current 'Judging") you can agree that this a highly unlikely event. God knows what the so-called G7 system (with woodwinds?) will be!

[Matt_S]

The tick system has been dead for as long as I've been alive.

[N.E. Brigand]

A perfect example is Magic in 2002. They broke a 99 in Division II, but scored in the 80s when they competed in Division I. The 99 they received in Div II didn't mean that the corps was less than a point from perfection, only that the corps was less than a point off of the standards of the judging. There's a ceiling of sorts, and a 99 only means that Magic was bumping their head on that ceiling.

A very helpful explanation. Thanks.

[bawker]

The tick system has been dead for as long as I've been alive.

. . .it would be fun to do one "judged exhibition" show with ticks, just to see how it would turn out.

In first place, with a score of 21.55 . . .

[dbc03]

I know, I know, another "Dinosaur" growls from the Fossil bed. But, under the old "tick" system a 99.3 would imply that 150 people ONLY made 7 mistakes during a 12 minute performance.

Sorry, but this is wrong.

Under the tick system a 99.3 would imply that judges only SAW 7 mistakes. There would likely be more that the judges missed.

[fecontra]

The tick system has been dead for as long as I've been alive.

Ah Grasshopper , it is okay - the "objective tick system" was every bit as subjective as today's build up methology.

What is in question is when a perfect score comes from a less than perfect performance , although said performance is rewarded fo what it would have been ( perfection ) if players had been perfect also! ( or how said players related to other previous corps. )

Edited August 13, 2010 by fecontra