KAW Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 The more I read about this proposed, so called, new judging system, and/or hear Michael Cesario talk about it, the more two things come to mind. 1. I can’t think of anyone who is able to talk so much without actually communicating ANY concrete or useful information than Mr. Cesario. 2. This whole effort over the past year—isn’t it a perfect example of the inmates running the asylum? The same people most of us take to be the problem are crafting the whole enterprise totally from the inside. Classically, this is not how innovation happens. Where is the new blood? I can’t help but be pessimistic about the results, especially, as others have mentioned, given the results of the 1st 2 TOC shows. You just reached into my brain and stated exactly how I feel. A few additional thoughts: 1. I was looking at recaps the other night. XYZ was judging. Didn't she judge the corps I was in, in like 1980? Really? She must be like 80? 2. This is our new car, because our old one was, well, old. And it didn't work very well. But this new one is really great and you're going to love it. We've worked on it for over a year now. Yep, the same people that created our old car are building this one too. Yep, its still made in the same factory. Same technology. Yep. But you're going to love it, it's so user friendly! We might change it though, we're not sure. Pictures? Specs? Compare old vs. new? None of those, but you're really going to love it! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cache_Money Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I admit that I'm just blowing this out of my ***, but a cursory reading sounds like there would be more emphasis on the design and instruction, and less emphasis on the performance. That is, "design" replaces "ensemble", and "proficiency" replaces "performance". Since corps shows have evolved towards more designer emphasis and control, it follows that the sheets would evolve and start recognizing and rewarding that more. Was I interpreting correctly? I hope not. If you're correct, it's just a continuation of the trend of shifting the focus away from the performers on the field and towards the designers. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAW Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Michael, I do appreciate you reporting on this because it is an importnat aspect of the activity we all love. However, if DCI isn't willing to actually communicate anything and just use Cesario as a talking head then I'm not sure what the point is. What's the harm is showing the new sheets? Here's the old sheets, here's the new ones. And here is why they are better. Seems pretty simple. We're not talking National Security here, it's drum corps for crying out loud. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 What's the harm is showing the new sheets? Here's the old sheets, here's the new ones. And here is why they are better. Seems pretty simple. We're not talking National Security here, it's drum corps for crying out loud. If we pitch fits and throw tantrums about things we only *assume* are true, then they can easily dismiss us as not having all the information. But if we pitch fits and throw tantrums about actual *facts*, that's harder to take. That said, it's clear DCI doesn't want to mess with documenting and publishing their current judging rules, and I can't blame them since they are in the middle of changing to something new. I'm willing to wait for now and see what the "comprehensive materials ... providing direction on how to properly use the sheets, fully explaining each caption in 'plain English' terms" that will be distributed to us fans early next year look like. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowtown Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 Design captions scare me – I don’t like putting the staff on the sheets Not a fan of comp and rep and don’t like the way they show up now Maybe they will fix this To me, bad design is giving a corps a show that they can not successfully perform. A show that is too difficult and looks/sounds like slop at the end of the year. You need to design to the corps you have and that is not taken into account now In many ways, the tick system addressed this and put the points back on the field with the ‘kids’ (shameless emotionalism calling marchers kids there) If they account for that, than a corps like Pioneer should be able to match Blue Devils in 2 design captions but we all know the sheets won’t show up like that…it would kill the top corps lock on the top slots and really, staffs stick around forever so rewarding staff on the sheets will make placements stale and make the top corps with the top designers even more top-heavy who are we really rewarding in this so called educational youth activity? I dare DCI to do the right thing - 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsubone Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 2. This is our new car, because our old one was, well, old. And it didn't work very well. But this new one is really great and you're going to love it. We've worked on it for over a year now. Yep, the same people that created our old car are building this one too. Yep, its still made in the same factory. Same technology. Yep. But you're going to love it, it's so user friendly! We might change it though, we're not sure. Pictures? Specs? Compare old vs. new? None of those, but you're really going to love it! You realize every car company does that right? They take the same team, and will allow them to design the new car they put out every year, whether it's changed or not. In the same factory, unless it's Detroit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 It is believed by many that the current system has gone about as far as it can go in adequately rewarding corps for what they are accomplishing as they head in the directions the activity is heading, whatever that may be. This prototype system is better set up to change with the times. But isn't this a lot like a "living, breathing Constitution"? If they can't identify what direction they're heading in, how do they know the current system won't reward it? You mean, to properly judge the changes - A&E - they need to rewrite the entire judging system? Isn't that a little extreme? I'm not saying I agree with the current system, but it seems an addition of a simple A&E judging system would solve a lot of the "evolutionary" changes in the activity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 On first glimpse, these captions seem to evaluate the creative results of the designers, but they are intended to go far beyond that How so? Political double-speak for marching band . . .really? And, furthermore, if anything, do we really need to have the designer even more in the forefront of adjudication? If we're just going to start rewarding creative (or navel-gazing) concepts on the sheets that they throw out, we're headed towards 23 "PainSongs for Planet Gaia (in A Light Mixolydian Mode) with a Delicato Reduction in yon B flat Tone Poeme" soon. Hopefully we get some clarification on this . . . Corps performance levels have advanced so far that the corps have outgrown the systems created to reward their efforts. Again, how? You still throw, drum and play for the most part. You get rewarded on what you attempt and how well you execute it and how well it contributes to an overall effect. That holds true from the advent of the "build-up" system on to today, so what kind of different "performance levels" is this talking about? Lots of questions with relatively no answers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMichael1230 Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 It's hard to reconcile the article with the fact that the TOC sheets seem to produce almost identical scores/placements to the old sheets. How much could they really have changed? Mr. Boo - did you get any idea of how much training the TOC judges have undergone on new vs. old sheets? Perhaps the current DCI sheets are bleeding into the TOC judging despite the new caption names? But, the shows being judged were "designed" for the existing sheets and criteria....once the new system is approved and implemented, I assume show design will change also. Geoffrey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Boo Posted July 28, 2011 Author Share Posted July 28, 2011 It's hard to reconcile the article with the fact that the TOC sheets seem to produce almost identical scores/placements to the old sheets. How much could they really have changed? Mr. Boo - did you get any idea of how much training the TOC judges have undergone on new vs. old sheets? Perhaps the current DCI sheets are bleeding into the TOC judging despite the new caption names? Well, the TOC sheets generally produced scores from Houston to San Antonio the next night that were 1.0-1.5 lower...not that it means anything. I can tell you from judges I personally spent time with prior to the Houston show, the music judges have been loading their iPods up with source music being played on the field and have spent hours listening and studying the source music. It's been my impression that the judges are really taking this seriously and have been putting in a lot of their own time to get a handle on the prototype system. I forgot to ask about formal training sessions on the sheets that were being used. 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.