BozzlyB Posted June 24, 2011 Author Share Posted June 24, 2011 2008, How many people were so excited and doing cartwheels and backflips over Phantom winning? Thousands. Exciting for Phantom and their fans, but did they deserve the win? Not by a longshot. But was it great for the activity. Definitely. 2009, How many people were excited by Troopers making finals for the first time since the 80s? Thousands. Exciting for them and the fans, but did they deserve to place there? Nowhere near top 12 level that year. But once again, it was definitely good for the activity. Most people who have been around DCI are aware of these things going on. Talk to any staff member, and they will tell you with what judges are going to be present, what placement they will be in that evening. Alot of people can guess almost every single score of every single show within a point based on previous scores. Here's my question, why would anyone continue to follow a competitive activity they felt was unfairly rigged. If I seriously thought this I would have stopped paying attention a long time ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkfdPRphan Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 2008, How many people were so excited and doing cartwheels and backflips over Phantom winning? Thousands. Exciting for Phantom and their fans, but did they deserve the win? Not by a longshot. But was it great for the activity. Definitely. 2009, How many people were excited by Troopers making finals for the first time since the 80s? Thousands. Exciting for them and the fans, but did they deserve to place there? Nowhere near top 12 level that year. But once again, it was definitely good for the activity. Most people who have been around DCI are aware of these things going on. Talk to any staff member, and they will tell you with what judges are going to be present, what placement they will be in that evening. Alot of people can guess almost every single score of every single show within a point based on previous scores. WOW! Sounds like one bitter ex-marcher or staffer who is frustrated where 'his' corps ends up in the scoring year after year. JUST WOW! I guess in a perfect world your's would be the only corps to win......and win......and win....and that would be just fine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stryfe Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Talk to any staff member, and they will tell you with what judges are going to be present, what placement they will be in that evening. Huh. I guess the drum corps people I know just don't have strong enough clairvoyance. I knew this thread would devolve into some kind of conspiracy theory hotbed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterA Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 WOW! Sounds like one bitter ex-marcher or staffer who is frustrated where 'his' corps ends up in the scoring year after year. JUST WOW! I guess in a perfect world your's would be the only corps to win......and win......and win....and that would be just fine? Well, first of all, I don't have a corps. I enjoy almost every single corps performance, every year. I go from the first corps to the last. And while I usually almost always enjoy Santa Clara Vanguard and Cavaliers a little more than the other corps shows, I don't wish for them to win every year, and usually feel they place close the position they should be in. And I honestly don't care what placement the corps get. However, I don't like to see some of the biased judging that tends to go on. i also don't care for trashing by the judges of corps where they don't care for someone on the staff. And this happens all the time. But don't just take my word for it, get to know people, volunteer, work on staff, and you will really see exactly what is going on. DCI is alot more political than you might think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 Ugh here we go again. The only important function of scoring in DCI is to provide spreads. The number doesn't matter, only the spread. If you don't get that then you don't understand DCI judging. Spreads are a function of comparison between one corps and another, so it is IMPOSSIBLE to compare a spread between two corps that are at different shows because they were NOT being compared to EACH OTHER in the scoring process. Can I make this any clearer??? HELP!!! This will bear itself out tonight when Blue Stars beat Scouts impressively, after Scouts came out with a higher first show score than Blue Stars by almost 5 points, at a DIFFERENT SHOW. Count on it. LOL, Can "you" make this any clearer ?? Ok, lets step away from the computer and go enjoy the realities of the seasom....LOL. I'll stick with who I know in regards to scoring, its purpose, who assesses the numbers, how and why......LOL. Yes, thirty-one years and I just dont "get it" ... Geoffrey (I'll stick to comparing scores and get a quasi-accurate read on the season , Like I have been..you can keep telling me Im wrong, and we both will enjoy the season) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 Ugh here we go again. The only important function of scoring in DCI is to provide spreads. The number doesn't matter, only the spread. If you don't get that then you don't understand DCI judging. Spreads are a function of comparison between one corps and another, so it is IMPOSSIBLE to compare a spread between two corps that are at different shows because they were NOT being compared to EACH OTHER in the scoring process. Can I make this any clearer??? HELP!!! This will bear itself out tonight when Blue Stars beat Scouts impressively, after Scouts came out with a higher first show score than Blue Stars by almost 5 points, at a DIFFERENT SHOW. Count on it. So, you were saying ?? Umm, five points ?, I can count on it ?........Yes, like I said. I rest my case. Geoffrey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tito John Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 Ugh here we go again. The only important function of scoring in DCI is to provide spreads. The number doesn't matter, only the spread. If you don't get that then you don't understand DCI judging. Spreads are a function of comparison between one corps and another, so it is IMPOSSIBLE to compare a spread between two corps that are at different shows because they were NOT being compared to EACH OTHER in the scoring process. Can I make this any clearer??? HELP!!! This will bear itself out tonight when Blue Stars beat Scouts impressively, after Scouts came out with a higher first show score than Blue Stars by almost 5 points, at a DIFFERENT SHOW. Count on it. OK, I'm not really disagreeing with you, but it's not quite that simple and there should be a devil's advocate in the house. By your logic, you couldn't have standardized testing at multiple locations if you were testing something that was graded on the curve -- i.e., using spreads. But this isn't testing, you say? OK, then for your point to be perfectly valid, all corps would have to compete against all other corps in every competition. You can't, you say, compare scores unless the competition is head to head. So only shows where all corps were in attendance should be valid. Arguing the other side just for the helluvit, maybe there would be less slotting if there were fewer head-to-head meetings. In fact, if you argue that you only need a few head-to-head competitions and there's no reason not to use all scores, you're pretty much making a case for slotting. But in theory, and assuming perfectly consistent judging standards, there's no need at all for comparing corps who never performed in the same show at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WOOHOO Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) Here's my question, why would anyone continue to follow a competitive activity they felt was unfairly rigged. If I seriously thought this I would have stopped paying attention a long time ago. I guess you don't like the NBA, the NFL, or the MLB then. It makes sense that what is best for the activity may not necessarily totally rewarding the best corps. It's like having multiple major league teams in one city. Is that fair to cities to don't have any? No, but it is best for the activity. Edited June 25, 2011 by WOOHOO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) Isn't the order of team selections in the NFL draft inversely based on their success from the previous season? Yes. In order to give the alleged lower ranked teams a better chance in the future, they are moved to the top for the draft of the best recruits, and teams that win are pushed down lower in the draft selection position. Naturally, under such a system there is much more parity in these sports than the current DCI system that each and every year gives pretty much first dibs to the best marching talent to the same 3 or 4 Corps. No question these top Corps have terrific staffs and are well run organizations. But they start each off season with a great advantage under the current system. And so naturally, The Cadevaliers keep on keeping on. The last 40 years of DCI, one of The Cadevaliers ( BD, Cadets, Cavs ) win the DCI Title 90% of the time. Usually, around once a decade, some Corps breaks through The Cadevaliers hold on the activity, before falling way back ( or disappearing ). Imagine if every year the NFL gave the Patriots, Steelers, Indy Colts the top 100 NFL Draft picks before any other NFL team could draft a recruit. I'm sure if they could get the other teams to agree to it, we'd see these 3 teams dominating the NFL for the next 50 years too. One does not have to " rig the scores " when a system is in place that every year allows the top Corps to draw the best talent that is available. Under such a system, the scores will naturally take care of themselves. The DCI Judges don't need to rig anything when this is the gig. Edited June 25, 2011 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geluf Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 OK, I'm not really disagreeing with you, but it's not quite that simple and there should be a devil's advocate in the house. By your logic, you couldn't have standardized testing at multiple locations if you were testing something that was graded on the curve -- i.e., using spreads. But this isn't testing, you say? OK, then for your point to be perfectly valid, all corps would have to compete against all other corps in every competition. You can't, you say, compare scores unless the competition is head to head. So only shows where all corps were in attendance should be valid. Arguing the other side just for the helluvit, maybe there would be less slotting if there were fewer head-to-head meetings. In fact, if you argue that you only need a few head-to-head competitions and there's no reason not to use all scores, you're pretty much making a case for slotting. But in theory, and assuming perfectly consistent judging standards, there's no need at all for comparing corps who never performed in the same show at all. Pacific Crest for the entirety of the 2000s. Case closed. 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.