Recommended Posts

  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Um, what? I'm sure thousands of people beg to differ about the hornline being "disastrous" from beginning to end this year. Posts like these are totally unnecessary and it really makes me sad to see t

I've rekindled my love of drum corps less than 5 years ago after a hiatus of 22 years. We went to finals in 2010. I did not blink when I watched drum corps live. I couldn't travel in 2011 and watched

/

lol, +1 fo sho :thumbup:

Your CI theory reminds me of a joke: A professor was attempting to get his class to understand probability by using a coin flip as a demonstration. The professor asked for a volunteer to come forward, then showed the student both sides of the coin and stated that when flipped there was a 50/50 chance the coin would land on heads. The student nodded with agreement. The professor then proceeded to flip the coin nine times, with the coin landing on heads five times and tails four times. The professor then asked the student if it was now more probable for the coin to land on heads or tails on the tenth flip. The student thought for a moment, then concluded that the coin would be more likely land on tails since heads was up by one. The professor replied not true; the coin still has a 50/50 chance to land on either side because the previous flips are irrelevant to the next flip. The professor then proceeded to flip the coin a tenth time and, by shear coincidence, it landed on its edge! The professor let out a big Uhruph, gave the coin to the student, and left for the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no math whiz...actually about as far from it as someone can get and not be labeled slow...but I get Bruckner's analysis about CI. Are people so invested in being right...so emotionally wrapped up in a belief that drum corps judging is objective...that they'll twist logic into a mental pretzel?

CI analysis reminds me of economics: There is little proof in economics...only tendencies and history. It's often more of a predictive subject, based on human nature. What was often tells us what will be.

I think Bruckner has been more than kind with you people...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no math whiz...actually about as far from it as someone can get and not be labeled slow...but I get Bruckner's analysis about CI. Are people so invested in being right...so emotionally wrapped up in a belief that drum corps judging is objective...that they'll twist logic into a mental pretzel?

CI analysis reminds me of economics: There is little proof in economics...only tendencies and history. It's often more of a predictive subject, based on human nature. What was often tells us what will be.

I think Bruckner has been more than kind with you people...

"Lighten up, Francis." - Sergeant Hulka, from the move Stripes

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am an educated individual with a solid background in music and quantitative analysis. I would like to see the the statistical method or approach by which you have validated your precept of competitive inertia. Have you created your own test for this? If so, what is its validity? If validity has not been measured, then this competitive inertia thing is all hogwash.

With regards to this kind of discussion (this isn't statistics class), there are two basic kinds of validity, face validity and content validity. And they aren't measured, they are correlated.

I just thought you would like to know, my educated friend. :cool:

+++

With regards to the Competitive Inertia theorem: It's an interesting idea, and the guys who postulated it are having fun discussing it and bouncing it off other drum corps guys who like discussing it as well. That doesn't make them Demons, or Angels.

Maybe somewhere in between. :peek:

Edited by wvu80
Link to post
Share on other sites

[NOTE TO OTHERS: Elmo and I know each other; we've met personally]

Let's get back to the fundamental claim of CI, and that is: No corps can win without first coming in 2nd or 3rd. The statistical analysis is in the historical record, and is in the original post.

Yes, yes, yes, and every alcoholic started out by drinking milk. Therefore, if we get rid of milk, we will never have any alcoholics. The first sentence is 100% true and the second sentence is logical based on the first, but has a conclusion which is patently false.

Your sentence would be correct if it said "no corps HAS won without coming in 2nd or 3rd." The fallacy is that you are trying to make a definitive future statement out of historical fact.

Your theory will be proven wrong when Pioneer gets rid of the ugly hats and wins finals next year. :cool:

Edited by wvu80
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's get back to the fundamental claim of CI, and that is: No corps can win without first coming in 2nd or 3rd. The statistical analysis is in the historical record, and is in the original post.

That's all fine and good, but my issue with CI is when particular posters begin using it as a mask to secretly complain about their corps being stuck in 4-7th when they think they should actually be higher.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's all fine and good, but my issue with CI is when particular posters begin using it as a mask to secretly complain about their corps being stuck in 4-7th when they think they should actually be higher.

That isn't an issue with the concept of CI. At all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That isn't an issue with the concept of CI. At all.

From the author of CI himself, regarding 2009:

"My preseason picks, based solely on CI were:

1) Crown would NOT win

2) Cadets would win (Wrong)

3) Phantom would be 5th or lower

4) Bloo would be 4-6 again"

Edited by Room_101
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone know where the thread about the Vanguard Brass Staff went to?

A statistical analysis of DCP posts shows that no post will reach the #1 "most read" position without first being hijacked by non-relevant posts that help propel said post into (first) the third most read post, then eventually, for an unknown period of time, will find it(finally) attaining the second most read position. At which point, without a fully plausible explanation, Boo will point out that C.I. is simply an abbreviation of a C.I.A. plot to deprive said post from further advancing into that coveted #1 position.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.