GUARDLING Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I look at this differently. BD looked at the sheets and built a show to a "T" to accommodate those sheets to win. That doesn't sound like much of a risk. Madison, on the other hand (and I'm no honk) took a completely different tack, choosing to appeal to the crowd through their history, sheets (mostly) be darned. That was a bigger risk to placement, IMO. Which makes perfect sense from design....BD was in it to WIN Scouts were in it to hopefully make finals. 2 totally different animals. Scouts went for the reaction off history and nostalgia which worked for them, BD didn't need that to excel. Technically Scouts could have been a hot mess ( they weren't) and still get an emotional reaction. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 So what? So change everything so Corps X wins because it was entertaining irrespective of the achievements of every other corps? I asked previously (didn't I?) about VK. They were wildly entertaining. Does the fact that they were the most entertaining corps at virtually every show they competed at mean they should have won? Or even that they were underscored? I don't think so. Ditto for Bridgemen. And guess what? Ditto for Madison in virtually every year. Your story and much of this discussion feels as if there is some presumption that what's on the field generally isn't entertaining. I don't agree with that at all. Cavies were wildly entertaining. Bluecoats even more so. Cadets had a very entertaining show which happened to include one element that distracted some. Phantom was very entertaining. Blue Stars, etc. It's not as if there wasn't a lot of entertaining going on. Why must we reward the VK, Bridgemen, Madison approach at the expense of all the others? And don't tell it will sell more tickets. Our neighbors don't want to come. Not even for VK. HH but..as we're seeing....technical excellence is apparently not dragging ##### to the seats. yet corps like Madison or VK or Bayonne did. so maybe they didn't win. But they brought in $$. I'm not saying this proposal is the winner. I prefer more the approach DCA is taking with this, and I'm not fully sold on that yet. I think there's a way to incorporate it into the sheets we have now. or they could actually just use the FULL triad of effect Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Your sorta proving my point here. Right, those corps took design chances and scored with audiences. Did they KNOW before hand that they were designing a audience winning show? Probably not, they designed a show and crossed their fingers that the audience would fall in love with it. They took risks that payed off. If those designers had this proposal at their back they would be MORE apprehensive to go against the game and NOT follow the "established playbook". See what I mean? The proposal says. "Sure do what you want... but it BETTER make the audience happy." That's a little threatening... "Well, we were not going to play TWO tunes at the same time with different tempos... but I don't think the audience will dig it... let's just do a company front at gorilla forte, that's safer." If drum corps has managed to make extrememly fan friendly shows in the passed WITHOUT this judging change then it certainly can continue to make fan friendly shows without this judging change. Sure, corps need a reminder on who pays to see them, lets make sure that message gets across in anyway we can but I do not think this proposal does that in the best way that benefits the activity as a whole. This isn't true. If this was true, then I wouldn't be against it! (jk) Well, this is where we disagree... that's fine. I don't think so. I think the risk takers would take the risk. 83 was an off shoot of what they started in 82. Same approach...Cavies took what they mastered in 00 and 01 and added to it in 02. I think the staffs could take those risks and provide shows that come off as more entertaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Then tell me, what was the incentive in the 90's 80's to make fan appealing shows? Was it money? Was it judging? NO, it was just designers wanting to enjoy drum corps. Instead of this silly games with scores, change the designers to corps that are "consistently" not entertaining. I don't think anything will change my mind that this proposal is a bad idea, but if a good enough argument comes along... I"m all ear's and haven't stuck my feet on the concrete on this one. if fans loved your show, they bought more of your stuff....and this was before tour dvds and basically anything more than tshirts at the souvie table. I remember at one point having something like 50 corps shirts. i think I have 6 now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Explanation on dci.org There were two other procedural changes that were approved by the voting membership after all the rules were voted upon. Post-show critiques, when corps staff members used to discuss their productions with the judging community on a periodic basis, have been replaced by more informal pre-show discussion opportunities with the judges. Another change is that corps are now encouraged to send in synopses of their productions prior to the season. They will be shared with adjudicators so they can research the show concepts and listen to source music, allowing them to become familiar with the shows prior to the competitive season. oh yeah that. maybe critique was worth it after all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 They'll be less inclined to do things that have never been done before to entertain the audience. Especially since they there is more security in doing something that has more "expected" outcome. Afterall, who's not going to cheer for a corps in company front? Pretty standard get your butt out of the seat technique! you do realize 12 company fronts for the big push will get old right? you wont see babies burning. i mean when body stuff with drum braks first happened it was cool, people loved it. now everyone does it, they do the same things, and unless the line is really ####### good, it doesnt generate near the response it used to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Okay. So let's start here. And anyone can play. Use the new rule to recast the intent of the effect sheets. Tell me how that exercise would impact last year's programs/results. You don't have to quantify anything. Just tell me who succeeded at "entertainment" and who failed. And tell me (if you like) how that result might have changed the rankings in your opinion. HH if you use the full triad, BD still wins. they had elements of all 3, but focused heavily on one. with a slight shift in focus to the other two thrids, they still win, and it wouldnt have called for radical show design changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Well, I didn't feel that Madisons show last year was all that risky, It seemed to just play to the traditionalist in terms of design. They took something that was already entertaining (The music selection, the Madison Brand, etc.) and brought that back to the field. It worked, nothing wrong that! But, I also want to see a show takes something that might not be entertaining at first glance and MAKE it entertaining. Bottom line, if everyone thinks that Madison was the most entertaining show in 2010... I don't want to see every corps try to be like Madison. What's MORE important is that each corps sticks with its identity. This proposal actual goes against what Cesario was saying about letting each corps' identity shine. If we have entertainment as a judged entity that's just another pressure corps will be competing to be like that one corps that gets the most standing O's. Corps, be yourself! Be your most entertaining self! That's all you need to be to make everyone happy. We DON'T need competition pressures to make this happen, we should be broadening the judging criteria not ADDING to it and making it more convoluted. If we want corps to stop writing for the judges, stop adding categories for them to be judged on! they can be themselves with this...some a lot more than they have been forced to become. and madison did take a risk in the minds of many because it was So different from most other shows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 (edited) I don't think so. I think the risk takers would take the risk. 83 was an off shoot of what they started in 82. Same approach...Cavies took what they mastered in 00 and 01 and added to it in 02. I think the staffs could take those risks and provide shows that come off as more entertaining. I would WANT that to happen, but I still don't know... Edited January 14, 2011 by charlie1223 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie1223 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Thought: What if they judged "Risk" and "Entertainment"? It seems like the idea of risk is something I like to see corps do, because accomplishing something that involves a lot risk is entertaining. So... RISK? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.