The "Tick" System

[Piper]

I completely agree.

I marched during the "tick system" years (in a local-circuit junior corps and then a DCA corps).... and IMO, far too often one judge's "tick" was another's "no mistake there."

Oh boy oh boy does Fran ever speak the truth. We were always taught (snare drummer) to stare right down the judges throat. Whoever blinks first wins or loses depending what side of the drum you were on. We usually lost. Good times.

[MarimbasaurusRex]

Clearly a late toss and catch would be an error. Movements that are not exactly identical (timing or body wise) between members is easy to see, and would be an obvious tic. The real issue is not many guards these days do a lot of unison movements. So the real issue is how do I apply a tic when everyone is doing something different at the same moment.

In my opinion, that was one of the biggest creative limitations associated with the tick system. Everyone doing something different might be read as a whole bunch of ticks even if it produced a desired effect. But, IMO a redefinition of the tick could fix that. If there is any question, meaning if you have to ask if it's an error, then it's not a tick. Simple as that, it puts the focus on clear mistakes that anyone, not just an expert, could see or hear.

Also agreed with the poster who said that for drummers ticks can be a better measure than other systems. I still use ticks as a teaching tool. The kids get into the challenge of "beating the judge" and it can be an effective measure of progress. But, unless you see the same judge every day, it gets into all kinds of inconsistencies. A roll that's clean to one ear might be a little dirty to another. So, I think those kinds of things shouldn't be ticked at all in competition. But, bouncing a stick across the field or totally dumping on a featured lick should count.

The old tick system wasn't good. It wasn't consistent or objective. I knew that the day Rod Goodhart sat down on the Bridgemen's drum major podium and played along with his pencil on the back of the clipboard through most of the show. He was obviously enamored with the line, convinced they weren't going to tick and wasn't even looking for dirt. And Rod was a great judge! But, I think they threw the baby out with the bath water and a re-tooling of the system might have been a good alternative.

Also want to add that one of my gripes with the current system is that it puts so much emphasis on design, in effect judging the staff almost more than the corps itself. I teach an indoor drum line and the vast majority of commentary from judges is show design related (many of whom also judge DCI). When BD goes on the field, are they judging the corps or are they judging Wayne Downey and company? Obviously, show design is an important aspect of the whole package. But, I'd like to see more of the score in the hands of the performers. Yes, BD would probably still win, but it might give other corps with less bejeweled designers more of a fighting chance.

Edited August 21, 2010 by MarimbasaurusRex

[Piper]

In my opinion, that was one of the biggest creative limitations associated with the tick system. Everyone doing something different might be read as a whole bunch of ticks even if it produced a desired effect. But, IMO a redefinition of the tick could fix that. If there is any question, meaning if you have to ask if it's an error, then it's not a tick. Simple as that, it puts the focus on clear mistakes that anyone, not just an expert, could see or hear.

Also agreed with the poster who said that for drummers ticks can be a better measure than other systems. I still use ticks as a teaching tool. The kids get into the challenge of "beating the judge" and it can be an effective measure of progress. But, unless you see the same judge every day, it gets into all kinds of inconsistencies. A roll that's clean to one ear might be a little dirty to another. So, I think those kinds of things shouldn't be ticked at all in competition. But, bouncing a stick across the field or totally dumping on a featured lick should count.

The old tick system wasn't good. It wasn't consistent or objective. I knew that the day Rod Goodhart sat down on the Bridgemen's drum major podium and played along with his pencil on the back of the clipboard through most of the show. He was obviously enamored with the line, convinced they weren't going to tick and wasn't even looking for dirt. And Rod was a great judge! But, I think they threw the baby out with the bath water and a re-tooling of the system might have been a good alternative.

Also want to add that one of my gripes with the current system is that it puts so much emphasis on design, in effect judging the staff almost more than the corps itself. I teach an indoor drum line and the vast majority of commentary from judges is show design related (many of whom also judge DCI). When BD goes on the field, are they judging the corps or are they judging Wayne Downey and company? Obviously, show design is an important aspect of the whole package. But, I'd like to see more of the score in the hands of the performers. Yes, BD would probably still win, but it might give other corps with less bejeweled designers more of a fighting chance.

I'll go with that. Sometimes instructors get spotlighted more than the corps.

[drumno5]

I have made my views on this available on other Forums, so I approach this not as an Advocate but a Seeker. I would like the views of those who marched under "Ticks" (Boo & Olin, are you out there?), those of you who march or have marched under the current system, and maybe MORE importantly, those of you who were there for the transition & how you feel about that change, as well as how you feel it impacted you/your Corps.

Marched and taught under the tick system (pre and post DCI) and under the build up systems. Ticks served us well in their day, identifying excellence and recognizing the achievement of many great and enduring groups. But the activity has grown. Modern shows are way too complex and sophisticated - there's just too much going on - to be evaluated by a guy with a clipboard and a pencil listening for cracked notes, out of time paradiddles or looking at heels at a halt.

Not trying to start a riot, and no disrespect for anyone or their opinion. .Just my $.02, fwiw.

Fred O.

[BC82Sop]

I marched 79, 80, and 81 Spirit and 82 Blue Devils.  The tic system was still in place when I marched Spirit and also in 1982. In 1982, we beat Madison's old hornline score that year that had been set in 1975 before finals and had a record horn score with only three tics at finals.  If I am not mistaken, the horn caption was the first to do away with the tic system.  I know scoring a 95.25 as we did in 1982 at finals with the tic system still in place was what we shot for all winter and season long. The execution judges sometimes varied between sides and within captions, however, I can tell you as a horn line member and marcher, it gave us a sense of accountability and I know we felt we had control.  In Spirit, one of our marching instructors told us to get the first 30 seconds of the show flawless and the execution judges will go easier on us. In BD we were told the same thing.  We worked to get the first 30 seconds flawless and both times we saw the numbers go up. 

Edited November 26, 2020 by BC82Sop
I wanted to add more information.

[GUARDLING]

The Tic system was a hot mess and just as now opinion. There was little to no accountability back then and proved pretty much nothing. Nothing consistent and what some called exciting when a corps could jump or fall many spots one day to the next, others would say impossible and shows one judge to another...just opinion..I  also taught and  judged under both systems.

[Poppycock]

The tic system is dead. Please don’t dig up bones! 

[JimF-LowBari]

3 hours ago, GUARDLING said:

The Tic system was a hot mess and just as now opinion. There was little to no accountability back then and proved pretty much nothing. Nothing consistent and what some called exciting when a corps could jump or fall many spots one day to the next, others would say impossible and shows one judge to another...just opinion..I  also taught and  judged under both systems.

Not only judges but I competed with 3 Senior circuits. DCA execution driven, ICA GE and show driven (Empire Statesmen started there), and RCA which had a lot of the really lesser corps so LOT of leeway with what was ticable 

[Continental]

3 hours ago, GUARDLING said:

The Tic system was a hot mess and just as now opinion. There was little to no accountability back then and proved pretty much nothing. Nothing consistent and what some called exciting when a corps could jump or fall many spots one day to the next, others would say impossible and shows one judge to another...just opinion..I  also taught and  judged under both systems.

I remember looking at some of the contest scores on Fromthepressbox.com and seeing ridiculous jumps/drops between prelims and finals held on the same day.  

[Continental]

3 hours ago, GUARDLING said:

The Tic system was a hot mess and just as now opinion. There was little to no accountability back then and proved pretty much nothing. Nothing consistent and what some called exciting when a corps could jump or fall many spots one day to the next, others would say impossible and shows one judge to another...just opinion..I  also taught and  judged under both systems.

Do you remember if there was much controversy when scoring moved away from the tick system or was it generally accepted without issue?  I don't remember and of course we didn't have the internet back then.

I remember one rule change that I was not aware about before the tick system was abolished.  In '80 guard members were allowed to retrieve equipment they had dropped as opposed to waiting for a judge to come by, pick it up and hand it back to them.

I wasn't aware of the rule change when I went to see Key to the Sea that year.  During one show I saw a guard member drop a rifle and pick it back up.  My first thought was "Are you crazy!!!!! That's a major penalty!"